Theists ; Time to grab a clue...

redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Theists ; Time to grab a clue...

For f**k sakes.

Just "Think about it"

Not just some of it.

All of it...

 


Ciarin
Theist
Ciarin's picture
Posts: 778
Joined: 2008-09-08
User is offlineOffline
Not all theists are

Not all theists are creationists.


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Ciarin wrote:Not all theists

Ciarin wrote:

Not all theists are creationists.

Then they're not all doing it right...


Ciarin
Theist
Ciarin's picture
Posts: 778
Joined: 2008-09-08
User is offlineOffline
redneF wrote:Ciarin

redneF wrote:

Ciarin wrote:

Not all theists are creationists.

Then they're not all doing it right...

That's not what your mom said last night.


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Sorry to disappoint you.But

Sorry to disappoint you.

But I don't knee jerk like you people...


Ciarin
Theist
Ciarin's picture
Posts: 778
Joined: 2008-09-08
User is offlineOffline
What have I knee-jerked too?

What have I knee-jerked too?


Thunderios
atheist
Posts: 261
Joined: 2010-12-26
User is offlineOffline
But if God didn't even

But if God didn't even create the universe, why would he be worthy of praise? Why would we even acknowledge the existence of this being, if he let us suffer through billions of years of evolution before we would be able to see it? A God that doesn't take care of his creation isn't a very responsible one...
I don't know what you believe, though Laughing out loud


Ciarin
Theist
Ciarin's picture
Posts: 778
Joined: 2008-09-08
User is offlineOffline
Why does a god have to

Why does a god have to create stuff to be worthy?


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13667
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
Ciarin wrote:redneF

Ciarin wrote:

redneF wrote:

Ciarin wrote:

Not all theists are creationists.

Then they're not all doing it right...

That's not what your mom said last night.

THAT was a Kelso burn. Ouch.

In all seriousness though, as far as I am concerned, anyone who believes in a super natural power might as well believe in creationism because if this alleged being has unlimited power, then it can "poof" things into existence. So creationism isn't outside an omi-god's power.

I am not saying you personally believe it, but it makes as much sense as anything else a person my claim about a disembodied brain with no brain and magic super powers. Why not believe it, after all "God can do what he wants".

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13667
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is onlineOnline
Ciarin wrote:Why does a god

Ciarin wrote:

Why does a god have to create stuff to be worthy?

Good question, if god is not required to make things worthy, then there is no need for a god. Maybe WE as humans without realizing it, most of humanity anyway, falsely make meaning about labels, titles and religion, when the reality is that they are assigning meaning, not the artificial labels they cling to.

Reality scares most people. The truth is that life IS meaningless, not your life here and now, but in the context of the history of biology and the universe, it is. No matter how famous or moral, good or bad, any individual may be, the entire species will go extinct and none of us will be remembered and the universe will continue on without us.

We work within social norms in a given society because our species evolved to cooperate. And meaning is what the individual makes for themselves in the here and now. 

Facing our finite existence is not negative. Just because you know the movie will end, doesn't mean you don't go and see it. Just because you go to a sporting event knowing one team will win and the other will lose and the game will end, doesn't mean you wont go.

All recognizing our finite existence means, is that you don't assign reality to magic or superstition. Much like knowing lighting is charged particles, and not the product of Thor, doesn't mean your life, here and now, cannot be what you find meaning in.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


100percentAtheist
atheist
100percentAtheist's picture
Posts: 679
Joined: 2010-05-02
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:In all

Brian37 wrote:

In all seriousness though, as far as I am concerned, anyone who believes in a super natural power might as well believe in creationism because if this alleged being has unlimited power, then it can "poof" things into existence. 

 

Might, but not necessarily.  Say, Jesus is my friend, he is my neighbor in the sky, he and his father evolved from ancient gods, who existed a long time ago before the universe (in some other universe probably, or they were the universes themselves).  When I play in a casino, I know that I can calculate my chances to win more or less accurately, but for me the chances come to 50/50, win or lose.  Here is where the gods come and help me or casino sometimes.  Their influence, though entirely within the width of the multiplicity function (thermodynamic accuracy, small in other words), means a lot for me.  So I can respect them and bend my knees before them.    


Thunderios
atheist
Posts: 261
Joined: 2010-12-26
User is offlineOffline
100percentAtheist

100percentAtheist wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

In all seriousness though, as far as I am concerned, anyone who believes in a super natural power might as well believe in creationism because if this alleged being has unlimited power, then it can "poof" things into existence. 

Might, but not necessarily.  Say, Jesus is my friend, he is my neighbor in the sky, he and his father evolved from ancient gods, who existed a long time ago before the universe (in some other universe probably, or they were the universes themselves).  When I play in a casino, I know that I can calculate my chances to win more or less accurately, but for me the chances come to 50/50, win or lose.  Here is where the gods come and help me or casino sometimes.  Their influence, though entirely within the width of the multiplicity function (thermodynamic accuracy, small in other words), means a lot for me.  So I can respect them and bend my knees before them.    

I think Brian is right, there. Why go through all the hardship of creating a universe that doesn't seem created, when you can just poof things into existence? Unless you have a very low self esteem, and just want to hide in the background. But that would be a flaw (are we assuming a flawless god, or a much more fun god like they used to think them up?).


100percentAtheist
atheist
100percentAtheist's picture
Posts: 679
Joined: 2010-05-02
User is offlineOffline
Thunderios

Thunderios wrote:

100percentAtheist wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

In all seriousness though, as far as I am concerned, anyone who believes in a super natural power might as well believe in creationism because if this alleged being has unlimited power, then it can "poof" things into existence. 

Might, but not necessarily.  Say, Jesus is my friend, he is my neighbor in the sky, he and his father evolved from ancient gods, who existed a long time ago before the universe (in some other universe probably, or they were the universes themselves).  When I play in a casino, I know that I can calculate my chances to win more or less accurately, but for me the chances come to 50/50, win or lose.  Here is where the gods come and help me or casino sometimes.  Their influence, though entirely within the width of the multiplicity function (thermodynamic accuracy, small in other words), means a lot for me.  So I can respect them and bend my knees before them.    

I think Brian is right, there. Why go through all the hardship of creating a universe that doesn't seem created, when you can just poof things into existence? Unless you have a very low self esteem, and just want to hide in the background. But that would be a flaw (are we assuming a flawless god, or a much more fun god like they used to think them up?).

 

Let's say that god is god, and we don't know much about him (or them).  I don't see why god should be assumed to be "flawless", or "omnipotent", or anything else.  A simple answer would be 'we don't know'.   What if it is very hard to be god and 'poofing' things into existence is not as simple as some may think?  Imagine heavenly bureaucracy that needs to be passed by a god to get a permit for poofing something into existence, and this heavenly bureaucracy has all the eternity to consider the case.  

 

P.S.: Brian is of course right....

 


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3139
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Ciarin wrote:Why does a god

Ciarin wrote:

Why does a god have to create stuff to be worthy?

He has to destroy stuff too. Any god needs a big carrot and a big stick. There needs to be the promise of a big upside for believing, otherwise Pascal's wager is not worth taking.

 

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


Ciarin
Theist
Ciarin's picture
Posts: 778
Joined: 2008-09-08
User is offlineOffline
Pascal's wager isn't worth

Pascal's wager isn't worth taking regardless.

 

Not all gods have been omnipotent, universe creators. It's not like the only god concept is the christian one. srsly guys...


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3139
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Ciarin wrote:Pascal's wager

Ciarin wrote:

Pascal's wager isn't worth taking regardless.

 

Not all gods have been omnipotent, universe creators. It's not like the only god concept is the christian one. srsly guys...

A religious belief is not going to be popular without extreme reward/punishment. So you have a minor god with minor power. Why not go big? Get the big reward with an all powerful god?

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


Ciarin
Theist
Ciarin's picture
Posts: 778
Joined: 2008-09-08
User is offlineOffline
Quote:A religious belief is

Quote:
A religious belief is not going to be popular without extreme reward/punishment.

 

Evidence?


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
100percentAtheist

100percentAtheist wrote:

Let's say that god is god, and we don't know much about him (or them).  I don't see why god should be assumed to be "flawless", or "omnipotent", or anything else.  A simple answer would be 'we don't know'.   What if it is very hard to be god and 'poofing' things into existence is not as simple as some may think?  Imagine heavenly bureaucracy that needs to be passed by a god to get a permit for poofing something into existence, and this heavenly bureaucracy has all the eternity to consider the case.  

The 'perfect' BS, is apologetics.

The basic premise of the Abrahamic god legend is based on the philosophy "He who has absolute power to giveth, is he who has the absolute power to taketh"

So, if you adopt both these philosophies:

1- "He who has absolute power to giveth, is he who has the absolute power to taketh"

2- Finite regress

 

Then you are 'logically boxed' in, to come 1 conclusion.

The Abrahamic god is a 'given'.

 

That's a fucking retarded 'logic'...

 

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3139
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Ciarin wrote:Quote:A

Ciarin wrote:

Quote:
A religious belief is not going to be popular without extreme reward/punishment.

 

Evidence?

How many people believe in gods with heaven and hell vs. yours?

 

Do you worry that your method of belief is similar to people committed to insane asylums? If you method of belief was only based on evidence, wouldn't this lead to a more sound mind? That could be the up side to being atheist.

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


Ciarin
Theist
Ciarin's picture
Posts: 778
Joined: 2008-09-08
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:Ciarin

EXC wrote:

Ciarin wrote:

Quote:
A religious belief is not going to be popular without extreme reward/punishment.

 

Evidence?

How many people believe in gods with heaven and hell vs. yours?

How many believed in gods like mine before christianity?

Fun fact: hinduism is the 3rd most popular religion and doesn't have a heaven or hell. Maybe a billion people isn't popular to you.

 

So where's that evidence? Or was this merely your opinion?

 

Quote:

Do you worry that your method of belief is similar to people committed to insane asylums? If you method of belief was only based on evidence, wouldn't this lead to a more sound mind? That could be the up side to being atheist.

 

Not worried at all.


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3139
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Ciarin wrote:How many

Ciarin wrote:

How many believed in gods like mine before christianity?

Christianity took over in a lot of places because it promised a lot more and had a more powerful god. The evolution of God, an invisible friend more powerful than ever.

 

Ciarin wrote:

Fun fact: hinduism is the 3rd most popular religion and doesn't have a heaven or hell. Maybe a billion people isn't popular to you.

The reincarnation/karma thing is pretty much the same thing. If I understand it right, you get to some paradise with your invisible friend by leading a bunch of successively more 'holy' lives instead of just one. Heaven on the installment plan.

I don't see substantially how it's different than Catholic, Protestant or Islam. Do what the religious authorities tell you, so you'll get a better life after death. If you don't things get worse.

If I'm wrong why not enlighten us on how Hinduism is different. But I don't see how your religion can compete in the marketplace without promising paradise for being a good member.

 

 

 

Ciarin wrote:

Quote:

Do you worry that your method of belief is similar to people committed to insane asylums? If you method of belief was only based on evidence, wouldn't this lead to a more sound mind? That could be the up side to being atheist.

 

Not worried at all.

 

Neither is anyone in the asylums.

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


Ciarin
Theist
Ciarin's picture
Posts: 778
Joined: 2008-09-08
User is offlineOffline
Except for the paranoid ones.

Except for the paranoid ones.

 

Still waiting on that evidence....


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3139
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Ciarin wrote:Except for the

Ciarin wrote:

Except for the paranoid ones.

 

The paranoid ones are on the outside. One needs to be paranoid about real things, if one is paranoid about imaginary things, one belongs in the asylum.

Ciarin wrote:

Still waiting on that evidence....

I'm waiting on an explaination of how your religion doesn't essentially have a heaven and hell, you just don't call it that.

Let't face it, religion is a business, how can your religion have 1 billion members if they don't think their getting as good a deal as the other religions?

 

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


Ciarin
Theist
Ciarin's picture
Posts: 778
Joined: 2008-09-08
User is offlineOffline
I'm going to assume you have

I'm going to assume you have no evidence for that claim, and I'll just consider it your opinion because you were brought up in a society that favours a christian god, therefore that's the only god you will consider to be a god. Feel free to prove my assumption wrong if you ever come up with evidence for your claim.


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Ciarin wrote:Fun fact:

Ciarin wrote:

Fun fact: hinduism is the 3rd most popular religion and doesn't have a heaven or hell. Maybe a billion people isn't popular to you.

That's not a fun fact.

That's a scary fact.

That you think it gives hinduism some kind of veracity, is simply retarded.

 

Here's a 'fun fact' : What's popular is not always right, and what's right is not always popular.

 

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Hey could some old schooler

 

explain to Red what he's up against with Ciarin? Am sure she's not a typical theist. Isn't she pagan? Anyone?

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist

Atheistextremist wrote:

 explain to Red what he's up against with Ciarin?

Oh, I already know what I'm dealing with, with her.

They're a dime a dozen...

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3139
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Ciarin wrote:I'm going to

Ciarin wrote:

I'm going to assume you have no evidence for that claim, and I'll just consider it your opinion because you were brought up in a society that favours a christian god, therefore that's the only god you will consider to be a god. Feel free to prove my assumption wrong if you ever come up with evidence for your claim.

My claim is that a religion can not be popular without heaven and hell. Here is the definition of Nirvana:

"Nirvana is the supreme state free from suffering and individual existence. It is a state often referred to as "self realization" or "God realization". It’s the ultimate religious goal of all Hindus. The attainment of nirvana breaks the otherwise endless rebirth cycle of transmigration. Hindus call this nirvana "eternal bliss". However, no one can describe in words what nirvana is. It can only be experienced directly."

 

Eternal Bliss sure sounds like heaven. If I don't go along with the rules I get to be a cow or worse.

Until you enlighten us on how your religion doesn't have it's own version of heaven and hell(as a means to control people), I stand by my claim.

 

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


Ciarin
Theist
Ciarin's picture
Posts: 778
Joined: 2008-09-08
User is offlineOffline
redneF wrote:Ciarin

redneF wrote:

Ciarin wrote:

Fun fact: hinduism is the 3rd most popular religion and doesn't have a heaven or hell. Maybe a billion people isn't popular to you.

That's not a fun fact.

That's a scary fact.

That you think it gives hinduism some kind of veracity, is simply retarded.

 

You're projecting. Nobody said anything about hindusim having veracity just because it's popular.

 

Quote:

Here's a 'fun fact' : What's popular is not always right, and what's right is not always popular.

 

 

It's a good thing you're attacking that strawman, otherwise we'd have nothing to talk about.


Ciarin
Theist
Ciarin's picture
Posts: 778
Joined: 2008-09-08
User is offlineOffline
redneF

redneF wrote:

Atheistextremist wrote:

 explain to Red what he's up against with Ciarin?

Oh, I already know what I'm dealing with, with her.

They're a dime a dozen...

 

Yes, there's just so many of us running around here.


Ciarin
Theist
Ciarin's picture
Posts: 778
Joined: 2008-09-08
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:Ciarin wrote:I'm

EXC wrote:

Ciarin wrote:

I'm going to assume you have no evidence for that claim, and I'll just consider it your opinion because you were brought up in a society that favours a christian god, therefore that's the only god you will consider to be a god. Feel free to prove my assumption wrong if you ever come up with evidence for your claim.

My claim is that a religion can not be popular without heaven and hell.

 

It's actually your opinion. And you're trying to justify that opinion because the most popular religions have a heaven and hell. Hinduism doens't have a heaven or hell yet it's popular, but you think it has extreme reward/punishment like a heaven or a hell so it counts.

 

It's fine to have an opinion, just don't claim it as fact.


Ciarin
Theist
Ciarin's picture
Posts: 778
Joined: 2008-09-08
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

explain to Red what he's up against with Ciarin? Am sure she's not a typical theist. Isn't she pagan? Anyone?

 

My guess is he has a chip on his shoulder. He sees my theist label and all rational thought goes out the window. I suspect he's a new atheist and so has to "prove" his atheism by going off the deep end with theists, hence all the 1 on 1 debates.

 

This is all speculation and conjecture on my part.


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Ciarin wrote:redneF

Ciarin wrote:

redneF wrote:

Ciarin wrote:

Fun fact: hinduism is the 3rd most popular religion and doesn't have a heaven or hell. Maybe a billion people isn't popular to you.

That's not a fun fact.

That's a scary fact.

That you think it gives hinduism some kind of veracity, is simply retarded.

 

You're projecting. Nobody said anything about hindusim having veracity just because it's popular.

Then what was your fucking point, in telling us that there are a billion hindus except to cast the aspersion that it's 'believable'?

 

 

 

Ciarin wrote:

redneF wrote:

Here's a 'fun fact' : What's popular is not always right, and what's right is not always popular.

 

 It's a good thing you're attacking that strawman, otherwise we'd have nothing to talk about.

It's a good thing I don't rely on your authority to tell me if your pissing in my ear, or it's raining...

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


Ciarin
Theist
Ciarin's picture
Posts: 778
Joined: 2008-09-08
User is offlineOffline
redneF wrote:Then what was

redneF wrote:
Then what was your fucking point, in telling us that there are a billion hindus except to cast the aspersion that it's 'believable'?

 

Try following the conversation first before jumping in and spouting irrelevant drivel. Try to figure out why you're the only one to think I was trying prove hinduism(a religion I don't believe in) is somehow correct based on the size of it's population.

 

 

 


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Say something cogent, say

Say something cogent, say what you mean, mean what you say, and stop your intellectually dishonest backpedaling...

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Chuckle

Ciarin wrote:

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

explain to Red what he's up against with Ciarin? Am sure she's not a typical theist. Isn't she pagan? Anyone?

 

My guess is he has a chip on his shoulder. He sees my theist label and all rational thought goes out the window. I suspect he's a new atheist and so has to "prove" his atheism by going off the deep end with theists, hence all the 1 on 1 debates.

 

This is all speculation and conjecture on my part.

 

Welcome back, BTW. Hope all's been well with you.

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


Atheistextremist
atheistSilver Member
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5102
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Well

redneF wrote:

Atheistextremist wrote:

 explain to Red what he's up against with Ciarin?

Oh, I already know what I'm dealing with, with her.

They're a dime a dozen...

 

Fundy christian numbskulls certainly are a dime a dozen but carefully considered alternative lifestylers like Ciarin and Eloise are their own people.

 

 

"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Ciarin wrote:EXC

Ciarin wrote:

EXC wrote:

Ciarin wrote:

I'm going to assume you have no evidence for that claim, and I'll just consider it your opinion because you were brought up in a society that favours a christian god, therefore that's the only god you will consider to be a god. Feel free to prove my assumption wrong if you ever come up with evidence for your claim.

My claim is that a religion can not be popular without heaven and hell.

 

It's actually your opinion. And you're trying to justify that opinion because the most popular religions have a heaven and hell. Hinduism doens't have a heaven or hell yet it's popular, but you think it has extreme reward/punishment like a heaven or a hell so it counts.

 

It's fine to have an opinion, just don't claim it as fact.

Don't state your opinions as fact, when they conflict with Hindus themselves.

Hinduism doesn't have any 'Heavens or Hells?

Debate this site, and STFU with your posturing, till you win the debate with them.

http://www.hinduwebsite.com/hinduism/h_death.asp

 

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


Ciarin
Theist
Ciarin's picture
Posts: 778
Joined: 2008-09-08
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist

Atheistextremist wrote:

 

Welcome back, BTW. Hope all's been well with you.

 

 

 

Thanks. Things are going ok, I'm in Tennessee now, unfortunately.

 

I came back because Sapient posted on AN about RRS, which I had forgotten about.


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist

Atheistextremist wrote:

redneF wrote:

Atheistextremist wrote:

 explain to Red what he's up against with Ciarin?

Oh, I already know what I'm dealing with, with her.

They're a dime a dozen...

 

Fundy christian numbskulls certainly are a dime a dozen but carefully considered alternative lifestylers like Ciarin and Eloise are their own people.

It's not her spiritual or philosophical beliefs that I was alluding to being ' a dime a dozen'...

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3139
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Ciarin wrote: It's actually

Ciarin wrote:

 

It's actually your opinion. And you're trying to justify that opinion because the most popular religions have a heaven and hell. Hinduism doens't have a heaven or hell yet it's popular, but you think it has extreme reward/punishment like a heaven or a hell so it counts.

 

Well what did the definition of Nirvana just say? Extreme Bliss.

From Wikipedia Naraka:

"Hinduism
A large central panel portrays Yama the god of death (often referred to as Dharma) seated on a throne; to the left stands a demon. To the right of Yama sits Chitragupta, assigned with keeping detailed records of every human being and upon their death deciding how they are to be reincarnated, depending on their previous actions.Naraka in Vedas, is a place where souls are sent for the expiation of their sins. It is mentioned especially in dharmaśāstras, itihāsas and Purāṇas but also in Vedic samhitas,[1][2] Aranyakas[3] and Upaniṣads.[4][5][6][7] Some Upanisads speak of 'darkness' instead of hell.[8] A summary of Upaniṣads, Bhagavad Gita, mentions hell several times.[9] Even Adi Sankara mentions it in his commentary on Vedanta sutra.[10] Still, some people like members of Arya Samaj don't accept the existence of Naraka or consider it metaphorical.

In Puranas like Bhagavata Purana, Garuda Purana and Visnu Purana there are elaborate descriptions of many hells. They are situated above Garbhodaka ocean.[11]

Yama, Lord of Justice, puts living beings after death for appropriate punishment, for example, in boiling oil. Even Mukti-yogyas (souls eligible for mukti or moksha, liberation), and Nitya-samsarins (forever transmigrating ones in Dvaita theology) can experience Naraka for expiation.[12] After the period of punishment is complete, they are reborn on earth[13] in human or animal bodies.[14] Therefore neither naraka nor svarga[15] are permanent abodes."

 

So the difference is your 'hell' is not permanent you can get out eventually?

A large religion can not have many dedicated followers with using a big carrot and a big stick. It's the only way to get people to go along with such ridiculous claims.

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


Ciarin
Theist
Ciarin's picture
Posts: 778
Joined: 2008-09-08
User is offlineOffline
I don't have a hell, btw.  

I don't have a hell, btw.

 

I think your opinion is flawed cause it doesn't take into account the popularity of past religions, and it assumes people only believe in these religions because of a reward/punishment. I'd contend that some believe because that's what they're told to believe, some believe because it makes them feel good, some believe because they're convinced of it's validity. I reckon very few people believe because of pascal's wager, meaning they want to avoid punishment. I will concede that there might be people who believe because of a reward after death, but since many religions have this reward, they would need something more by which to choose.

 

In any case you have no study or peer reviewed paper that indicates religions are popular because of their reward punishment. I think this doesn't really have much to do with thinking only an omnipotent creator god is the only god worth worshiping.


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Ciarin wrote: In any case

Ciarin wrote:

 In any case you have no study or peer reviewed paper that indicates religions are popular because of their reward punishment.

Which is a mealy mouthed way of not admitting your opinion was never worth more than sh1t...

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


Ciarin
Theist
Ciarin's picture
Posts: 778
Joined: 2008-09-08
User is offlineOffline
redneF wrote:Ciarin

redneF wrote:

Ciarin wrote:

 In any case you have no study or peer reviewed paper that indicates religions are popular because of their reward punishment.

Which is a mealy mouthed way of not admitting your opinion was never worth more than sh1t...

 

I don't think his opinion was never worth more than a shit. I'm fine with his opinion, I just disagree with it.


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Ciarin wrote:redneF

Ciarin wrote:

redneF wrote:

Ciarin wrote:

 In any case you have no study or peer reviewed paper that indicates religions are popular because of their reward punishment.

Which is a mealy mouthed way of not admitting your opinion was never worth more than sh1t...

 

I don't think his opinion was never worth more than a shit. I'm fine with his opinion, I just disagree with it.

That's pure bullshit.

You were attacking him as if he was simply making naked assertions, and that he was simply using circular reasoning.

 

You simply have ZERO grounds to assert that Hinduism does not have any concepts like 'Heaven and Hell', so you're talking through your ass.

Ciarin wrote:

I'm going to assume you have no evidence for that claim, and I'll just consider it your opinion because you were brought up in a society that favours a christian god, therefore that's the only god you will consider to be a god. Feel free to prove my assumption wrong if you ever come up with evidence for your claim.

 

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


Ciarin
Theist
Ciarin's picture
Posts: 778
Joined: 2008-09-08
User is offlineOffline
redneF wrote:That's pure

redneF wrote:

That's pure bullshit.

Is it?

Quote:

You were attacking him as if he was simply making naked assertions, and that he was simply using circular reasoning.

 

Negatory Ghost Rider. I wasn't attacking him. He wasn't making naked assertions, he was claiming his opinion as fact. His opinion is understandable, but isn't fact. I don't think he was using circular reasoning(and I'm beginning to think you don't actually know what circular reasoning is). I happen to disagree with his opinion.

 

Quote:

You simply have ZERO grounds to assert that Hinduism does not have any concepts like 'Heaven and Hell', so you're talking through your ass.

 

Wrong again. Hinduism varies depending on the type of hinduism you're referring to. In general Hinduism does not have a heaven or a hell. The only religions that have this are christianity and islam. What some of them believe can be likened to a temporary heaven or hell in a loose sense as in "place of punishment" or "place of reward". For his claim to work, Hindus would all have to believe in heaven and hell, and they'd have to be hindu for that reason, which he hasn't shown to be true.

http://hinduism.about.com/od/basics/a/heavenandhell.htm

http://www.hafsite.org/resources/q_a_booklet#Heaven

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Hindus-946/2010/8/Interview-Questions.htm - Atheist Hindu

 

So...you're talking out your ass...again.


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3139
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Ciarin wrote:I don't have a

Ciarin wrote:

I don't have a hell, btw.

I just showed you the description of Naraka, where Hindus believe one goes to be tortured for their sins. So you have a special politically correct version of Hinduism without hell?

 

Ciarin wrote:

I think your opinion is flawed cause it doesn't take into account the popularity of past religions, and it assumes people only believe in these religions because of a reward/punishment.

Expectation of a reward/punishment is all that can possible motivate anyone to do anything. What other motivation can there possible be? Isn't this pretty much a given in psychology? The scientists assume that all behaviors are motivated by expectation of reward/punishment. Can you provide a counter example?

Ciarin wrote:

I reckon very few people believe because of pascal's wager, meaning they want to avoid punishment.

They need the fear of Naraka(aka Hell), to make people feel fearful if the want to leave the religion. Hell is used to maintain belief in individuals that were indoctrinated.

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca


Ciarin
Theist
Ciarin's picture
Posts: 778
Joined: 2008-09-08
User is offlineOffline
EXC wrote:Ciarin wrote:I

EXC wrote:

Ciarin wrote:

I don't have a hell, btw.

I just showed you the description of Naraka, where Hindus believe one goes to be tortured for their sins. So you have a special politically correct version of Hinduism without hell?

 

Ciarin wrote:

I think your opinion is flawed cause it doesn't take into account the popularity of past religions, and it assumes people only believe in these religions because of a reward/punishment.

Expectation of a reward/punishment is all that can possible motivate anyone to do anything. What other motivation can there possible be? Isn't this pretty much a given in psychology? The scientists assume that all behaviors are motivated by expectation of reward/punishment. Can you provide a counter example?

Ciarin wrote:

I reckon very few people believe because of pascal's wager, meaning they want to avoid punishment.

They need the fear of Naraka(aka Hell), to make people feel fearful if the want to leave the religion. Hell is used to maintain belief in individuals that were indoctrinated.

 

This is all conjecture on your part. You can attempt justify your opinion all you want, but I'm not going to accept your opinion as fact unless you bring me some evidence. The fact that you've gone on so long in this discussion without presenting any leads me to believe you have none. Also, I think you're under the impression that I'm hindu. I'm not. If I'm incorrect, then my apologies.


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Ciarin wrote: You can

Ciarin wrote:

 You can attempt justify your opinion all you want, but I'm not going to accept your opinion as fact unless you bring me some evidence...

 

 

 

 

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


redneF
atheistRational VIP!
redneF's picture
Posts: 1971
Joined: 2011-01-04
User is offlineOffline
Christianity really is

Christianity really is insane, isn't it?

 

10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDHJ4ztnldQ&feature=related

 

I keep asking myself " Are they just playin' stupid, or are they just plain stupid?..."

"To explain the unknown by the known is a logical procedure; to explain the known by the unknown is a form of theological lunacy" : David Brooks

" Only on the subject of God can smart people still imagine that they reap the fruits of human intelligence even as they plow them under." : Sam Harris


EXC
atheist
EXC's picture
Posts: 3139
Joined: 2008-01-17
User is offlineOffline
Ciarin wrote:This is all

Ciarin wrote:

This is all conjecture on your part. You can attempt justify your opinion all you want, but I'm not going to accept your opinion as fact unless you bring me some evidence. The fact that you've gone on so long in this discussion without presenting any leads me to believe you have none. Also, I think you're under the impression that I'm hindu. I'm not. If I'm incorrect, then my apologies.

The fact is all major religions have a reward/punishment system for some afterlife. Any religion that does not is insignificant without fanatical adherents. I've showed you the wikipedia writups that prove it for one religion. Do you need more sources? Just google the name of the religion and 'hell' or 'heaven'.

 

I don't know what your religious beliefs are, but I do know if your religion doesn't have heaven and hell, this religion would be a tiny minority without fanatical adherents. Am I wrong? So what are the rewards and punishments in your faith?

 

“Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful.” Seneca