Blogs

I just found out what an Ontological arguement was...

I faked being sick from work today because I didn't feel like going, so I decided to learn some philosophy!! Yay! And I finally figured out what this "ontological argument" was, and boy, is it ridiculous! Mind games, delusional mind games. It's sad to know that people were so delusional as to come up with an idea like that. You could create any number of imagined things! Even Thomas Aquinas knew this argument was bunk! An ontological argument seems to be the loophole of all loopholes. Kinda like saying that "since in the Bible it says God is real, and the Bible is never wrong, then God is real! ZOMG so easy."

StMichael's picture

Ahh, wonderful...

Let nothing trouble you, let nothing make you afraid. All things pass away. God never changes. Patience obtains everything. God alone is enough.

Saint Teresa of Avila

Also, the Carthusian motto:

"Stat Crux Dum Volvitur Orbis"

The Cross Stands While The World Turns

StMichael's picture

Theist spotting

Apparently, my true nature as a theist was spotted. Oh, darn, my game is up...

skeptic griggsy's picture

The definitive refutation of the free will argument

Iruko makes the Meslier-Martin-Lamberth argument that if Heaven is so good , why not Heaven on Earth? Nelson Pike adumbrates that we would be robots if we could not do wrong and therefore, we would not be moral beings.But the same would have to true in Heaven! So, theists special plead that God has to have epistemic distance from us, the hidden god and we have to pass horrendous tests. No rational being cares for worship , so the epistemic distance argument is wrongheaded.The tests are excrutiating at times .Parents put thier children into as safe and good as places as possible without tests.So God is less than a good father .A loving god would not have tempted mankind with the tree.If being a moral being is right , then moral beings should have a knowledge of right and wrong.

WolfinWolfsClothing's picture

Rapture.

Anybody know when the last day will be? I heared from a lot of fundamentalist preachers that it was supposed to be Jan 1st, 2001 (new millenium and all, although I also heared 1/1/2000) and that clearly didn't happen. Is there a date in the bible? Are there any hints/clues to the last day? I want to make sure I stock up on batteries and soap, and that my rations don't go out of date. I am not a christian, so Jesus is going to judge me, and earth will (apparently) be a pretty bad place to be, so I want to try and provide my family with a comfortable few last days before we burn for eternity. My nephew, Johnny, is as smart as a whip (he's 11 now) and suggested that I convert so we can all go to heaven, but unfortunately I refuse to, as I work on Sundays, enjoy wine and cigarrettes, have tattoos, and I had a vasectomy so I wouldn't pass my genes on (psychological problems run in my family, and I don't want my kids to suffer.) to any children. If anyone has some good information about the scheduling of the Rapture, I would be interested. Are there any signs to look for? Is the Almighty waiting for humanity to do something in particular? Also, after me and my family have been doomed to the lake of fire, can we 'cut loose' at that point, or should we try to keep it together? We are all decent people -- we are polite, we vote, we volunteer (I work for the YMCA), and we obey the laws of our government and community. I just want to know when and how bad this thing is gonna be for us -- the Loma Prieata earthquake was about a 6 on a 'scary' scale of 1 to 10.

WolfinWolfsClothing's picture

Webster, not Robertson

This undertaking of the onus of definition is a common tactic amongst the evangelical crowd. Simply put, they would much rather the world hear their message than the truth, so they co-opt legitimate, cogent disciplines (ie evolution, philosophy, skepticism, life, history, sciences of all kinds, et cetra) and terms, redifining them to suit their desires. Evolution becomes "Man from Monkeys", History is liberalized and granted irrefutability through any text, and Biological Life apparently neccesitates a non-physical component called a "Soul

This is, of course, completely rediculous. Rediculousness is expected of theists --those who simultaneously entertain contradicting truths; this is one of the corner-stones of any theistic religion. However, this practice of hijacking arguments has a far more dangerous implication of hypocracy for the superstitious community; that is, while they quote any number of versions of biblical scripture as indesputable and supremely authoritative on the definitions applied to the faith, they fail to recognize the legitimacy of far more concrete refference material -- namely, the dictionary. The theistic religious community has been renowned for taking liberties with definitions in order to facilitate their manipulation of thought and propagandizing. By undermining the authority of the dictionary, and controlling the implications of specific language, they have created an economy of the dichotomy of meaning, and rendered confusing and doubtful the specific and lucid meanings of important terms.

WolfinWolfsClothing's picture

Linda from Valle D'Osta asks a question.

"Dear Mr. Repucci, most of the Atheists I have met are moral relitivists -- why is that? As a Christian woman, my morals aren't subjective and are clearly defined in the bible...are all Atheists beholden to a moral code?"

Thank you and God Bless,

Linda Valle D'osta, Georga.

Kant is a good place to start. Incidentally, did you know that the statistical data on the subject would suggest that atheists are more moral than any other religious group in the US? The prisons are full of christians and muslims -- but very few atheists wind up incarcerated.
Utilitarian Humanism is my credo. There isn't a system of ethics that does not address the golden rule in any religious or social body -- everybody has roughly the same moral code, and that code pre-dates a religious usurpation (thanks, Hammurabi!) with it's roots firmly in secular rule of society. Morals aren't relative just because they aren't handed down by god on stone tablets -- and moral relitivism is a dangerous proposition. Do not murder, do not rape, do not steal, do not lie...theses are moral tennants that we can all agree upon, regardless of superstitious belief. Moreover, I would claim that the Judeo-Christian God is the least moral entity in existence, were he to actually exist. God slaughters innocent babies, and damns them to an eternity of torture. God gambles for Job's soul with Satan. God, time after time, sacrifices the many for the benefit of the few in the old testament, encouraging the Jews to slay the Philistines down to every last man, woman, and child. Why doesn't your god act in a moral fashion, if he is so concerned with morality? Even the president of the USA isn't above the law, yet because Yahweh is a Tyrant, who will marshall his tyrany for eternity, unchecked by any body politic or rival deities, is above admonition or rebuke for his evil.

WolfinWolfsClothing's picture

Get OFF the Bus!

People aren't growing 'less tolerant' of christians...the data states that you have this backward. In fact, christians are becoming less tolerant of the rest of the world. Biblical literalism/fundamentalism is in the middle of a boom right now; christians are alienating themselves from the rational community and rejecting modernity at an alarming rate. According to NBC's Dateline, there are 70 MILLION evangelical christians in this country now...the catholic church is more moderate and accepting of the scientific/social community of today that the average evangelical, non-denominational christian. Catholics aren't biblical literalists, and the Vatican has been a proponent of evolution and the old earth theory for 20 years now.

WolfinWolfsClothing's picture

Jesus the Man -- Good enough for Me!

jakeWrote:
Do you know what a dispensation is? The Mosaic Law had under its Law the provisions against relations with a woman while she was menstruating and not eating pork or wearing mixed linens etc. But, the question is "Are we in that same dispensation today" "Do those same laws apply to us today?" The answer is no. We are not under the Law any longer. We are under Grace, ushered in by Jesus who brought Grace and became the fulfillment of the Law. Do you understand?
Secondly, how can you be a big fan of Jesus unless you accept Him as God? His teachings were that He was God in the flesh--so either He actually was and is or He is a lunatic. There is no middle ground when you consider who Jesus actually claimed to be--that is--God manifest in the flesh.

WolfinWolfsClothing's picture

The fall of Man...?

THE MESSIAH!!!!!!!Wrote:
I have some problems with the belief that an all knowing all all caring God would set human beings up to fail. He put the tree of knowledge of good and evil up knowing that ultimately our human curiosity would get the best of us.

LouisWrote:
A minor correction. Curiosity had nothing to do with the fall -- Satan, the only respectable character in the first few chapters of Genesis, explains the Tree of Knowledge very well, by explaining to Eve that if she eats the fruit, she will have knowledge of good and evil, and in that respect, be as god. HE IS NOT LYING HERE.

Syndicate content