Instincts

The Tangential ...
Posts: 3
Joined: 2010-05-12
User is offlineOffline
Instincts

"God is not Man's creator...God is Man's creation."
Love, hate and survival are all instincts. God is not an instinct, God is taught. Without the human imagination, God does not exsist. Instincts are real, every living creature has them. While God is unique only to man. By this logic, God is nothing more than another fable in the ancient storybook known as The Human Imagination."

                                                                                                                  for more...  www.theparallel.wordpress.com


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2929
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
Errr, welcome? The

Errr, welcome?

 

The Christian God is certainly taught.  You could argue that the supernatural in general seems to pop up all by itself though.

 

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


Blake
atheistScience Freak
Posts: 991
Joined: 2010-02-19
User is offlineOffline
The Tangential Rationalist

The Tangential Rationalist wrote:

"God is not Man's creator...God is Man's creation."

 

What are you talking about dude?  It says in the Bible that God created man.  That's the definition of god, isn't it?


Quote:
Love, hate and survival are all instincts. God is not an instinct, God is taught.

 

Don't be crazy man, none of those are instincts; love comes from God, so how can love be an instinct if God is taught?  God knowledge, and the knowledge of evil, comes naturally through the original sin of eating the fruit of knowledge- that which is embodied in all people and can be forgiven only through the blood of the lord.

 

Quote:
Without the human imagination, God does not exsist.

 

Dude, imagination comes from God... how can God be created from it?

 

Quote:
Instincts are real, every living creature has them.

 

The qualities are imbued by God; if that's how you define instinct, go for it.

 

Quote:
While God is unique only to man.

 

This is crazy talk- you talk to animals man?  FYI all animals believe in God.

 

Quote:
By this logic, God is nothing more than another fable in the ancient storybook known as The Human Imagination."

 

God is the source of imagination, if you are claiming imagination is the source of god, your logic is circular.  Therefore, God must exist.


The Tangential ...
Posts: 3
Joined: 2010-05-12
User is offlineOffline
Expected

In terms of supernatural I believe that has to do with dimensions. As for the rest of the comments. This is exactly what I expected. See first, you need to believe that God truely exsists, which I don't. The Bible does not define anything because it is a book of contradiction and plagiarism. No I do not talk to animals, how can you prove animals believe in god. I don't see them praying or writing fairy tales. Their God is Nature. Guess why...because nature is proven. If God doesn't exist then he isn't the source of anything. Which means every prophet was either a con artist or a schizophrenic. The Bible said "God created man" it also said that the earth is only a few thousand years old, 2 people created all of the human species(incest?), a talking snake tempted a woman made out of a rib. Noah's Ark was a rip off of the epic of gilgamesh...the list goes on. If you people are going to dispute me than you're gonna need to use a more credible source than the bible.lol  God did not exist before man's creative mind thought him up. Dinosaurs were animals, they weren't even in the Bible, why because the writers of the bible never discoverd them. Now don't you think a speciecs that was around for millions of years deserves a place in the bible. But wait, the Earth is only a few thousand years old, not a million. Ooops, guess the bible made a mistake. The ancient chinese knew about dinosaurs. You know what they called them??? DRAGONS!!! I have read and am re-reading the Bible, it is still a ridiculous book, although if you like wild fairy tales I'd recommed it. Although for thosands of years men, women and children have been dying because of these fairy tales and who they are about. Fact.


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2929
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
The Tangential Rationalist

The Tangential Rationalist wrote:

In terms of supernatural I believe that has to do with dimensions. As for the rest of the comments. This is exactly what I expected. See first, you need to believe that God truely exsists, which I don't. The Bible does not define anything because it is a book of contradiction and plagiarism. No I do not talk to animals, how can you prove animals believe in god. I don't see them praying or writing fairy tales. Their God is Nature. Guess why...because nature is proven. If God doesn't exist then he isn't the source of anything. Which means every prophet was either a con artist or a schizophrenic. The Bible said "God created man" it also said that the earth is only a few thousand years old, 2 people created all of the human species(incest?), a talking snake tempted a woman made out of a rib. Noah's Ark was a rip off of the epic of gilgamesh...the list goes on. If you people are going to dispute me than you're gonna need to use a more credible source than the bible.lol  God did not exist before man's creative mind thought him up. Dinosaurs were animals, they weren't even in the Bible, why because the writers of the bible never discoverd them. Now don't you think a speciecs that was around for millions of years deserves a place in the bible. But wait, the Earth is only a few thousand years old, not a million. Ooops, guess the bible made a mistake. The ancient chinese knew about dinosaurs. You know what they called them??? DRAGONS!!! I have read and am re-reading the Bible, it is still a ridiculous book, although if you like wild fairy tales I'd recommed it. Although for thosands of years men, women and children have been dying because of these fairy tales and who they are about. Fact.

 

He's was just being sarcastic Tangent, he is an atheist.

Also, it helps a great deal if you use line breaks in your text, it is hard to read as is.

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


Blake
atheistScience Freak
Posts: 991
Joined: 2010-02-19
User is offlineOffline
The Tangential Rationalist

The Tangential Rationalist wrote:

This is exactly what I expected.

 

I could tell that much; I didn't want to let you down.  You seemed so bright eyed and bushy tailed, ready for action!

But really... you won't find very much of that here.  Almost all of us are atheists.  Most of the theists here aren't Christian.

 

It's like going to a PETA forum and saying "Hey guys, I have an idea:  Lets not eat meat."

 

We're kind of... already on the same page.

I've never read any of Richard Dawkins' books (although I appreciate the fact that they exist) for that very reason.

 

mellestad wrote:

He's was just being sarcastic Tangent, he is an atheist.

 

This is not incorrect.


Atheistextremist
atheist
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5134
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
Hi Tangent

 

The Tangential Rationalist wrote:

...how can you prove animals believe in god. I don't see them praying or writing fairy tales. Their God is Nature. Guess why...because nature is proven...

 

D'ye think the beasts really think of nature as god? You'd agree, I'm sure, that the critters don't think about god at all but just happily go about their godless business?

 

 

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


The Tangential ...
Posts: 3
Joined: 2010-05-12
User is offlineOffline
Clarified

Gotta love sarcasm. I'm so used to debating the faith bound and hearing responses like that.lol It's kinda hard to pick sarcasm out of text sometimes. But now that I know I can chill and hopefully exchange ideas with like minded people for a change. I could definetly use some logical minds to relate to. Like an atheist think tank.lol Anyway for anyone interested check out these 2 sites. on facebook search tangential rationalism and theparallel.wordpress.com it's much eaiser than me copying and pasting everything.  Oh and I'm reading Dawkins' The God Delusion. Fantastic book so far. Also "Why Evolution is True" by Jerry A. Coyne. And for a good laugh. "The Case For Faith" by Lee Strobel


mellestad
Moderator
Posts: 2929
Joined: 2009-08-19
User is offlineOffline
The Tangential Rationalist

The Tangential Rationalist wrote:

Gotta love sarcasm. I'm so used to debating the faith bound and hearing responses like that.lol It's kinda hard to pick sarcasm out of text sometimes. But now that I know I can chill and hopefully exchange ideas with like minded people for a change. I could definetly use some logical minds to relate to. Like an atheist think tank.lol Anyway for anyone interested check out these 2 sites. on facebook search tangential rationalism and theparallel.wordpress.com it's much eaiser than me copying and pasting everything.  Oh and I'm reading Dawkins' The God Delusion. Fantastic book so far. Also "Why Evolution is True" by Jerry A. Coyne. And for a good laugh. "The Case For Faith" by Lee Strobel

 

You know, there is a saying about that, I forget how it goes though.  The basic message is that it is impossible to tell a really sarcastic rant about religion from a non-sarcastic rant about religion.  Once you hit a certain level of absurdity, you can't even make fun of it anymore.

Everything makes more sense now that I've stopped believing.


kayoubi
Superfan
kayoubi's picture
Posts: 28
Joined: 2008-05-03
User is offlineOffline
What's that one fake church

What's that one fake church website? It's some sarcastic humor deal but I don't recall the name of it. I remember reading an article off it, at any rate, in regards to book burning (I was blown away when I heard that public law enforcement was actually letting people do this kind of crap in the streets on Harry Potter release dates).

 

The article was seriously pissing me off, and I started thinking of the crazy, crazy theists I had met before who really did think the same way (some of them being in my family) and I was pretty upset. Then I saw the Jesus thongs being advertised at the bottom and felt much better.

'Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition. God wants you to go to war.'


Jeffrick
High Level DonorRational VIP!SuperfanGold Member
Jeffrick's picture
Posts: 2446
Joined: 2008-03-25
User is offlineOffline
kayoubi wrote:What's that

kayoubi wrote:

What's that one fake church website? It's some sarcastic humor deal but I don't recall the name of it. I remember reading an article off it, at any rate, in regards to book burning (I was blown away when I heard that public law enforcement was actually letting people do this kind of crap in the streets on Harry Potter release dates).

 

The article was seriously pissing me off, and I started thinking of the crazy, crazy theists I had met before who really did think the same way (some of them being in my family) and I was pretty upset. Then I saw the Jesus thongs being advertised at the bottom and felt much better.

 

 

             Try www.landoverbaptist.com

"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."

VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"

If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?


butterbattle
ModeratorSuperfan
butterbattle's picture
Posts: 3945
Joined: 2008-09-12
User is offlineOffline
Welcome to the forum. Have

Welcome to the forum. Have fun, and don't take Blake too seriously. 

The Tangential Rationalist wrote:
God is not an instinct, God is taught.

Well, not entirely.

Many people have instinctual reasons for believing in God, and there are many characteristics of God that appeal to our instincts. Depending on the religion and the God, the concept can appeal to obedience to an authority figure, having a friend, having a parent, responsibility, guilt, fear/security, etc. If a religion did not appeal to people's emotions and instincts at least to an extent, then the masses would never buy it.

Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare


kayoubi
Superfan
kayoubi's picture
Posts: 28
Joined: 2008-05-03
User is offlineOffline
Jeffrick wrote:kayoubi

Jeffrick wrote:

kayoubi wrote:

What's that one fake church website? It's some sarcastic humor deal but I don't recall the name of it. I remember reading an article off it, at any rate, in regards to book burning (I was blown away when I heard that public law enforcement was actually letting people do this kind of crap in the streets on Harry Potter release dates).

 

The article was seriously pissing me off, and I started thinking of the crazy, crazy theists I had met before who really did think the same way (some of them being in my family) and I was pretty upset. Then I saw the Jesus thongs being advertised at the bottom and felt much better.

 

 

             Try www.landoverbaptist.com

 

Yeah, that one!!! Awesome.

'Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition. God wants you to go to war.'


Presuppositionalist
Theist
Presuppositionalist's picture
Posts: 344
Joined: 2007-05-21
User is offlineOffline
The Tangential Rationalist

The Tangential Rationalist wrote:

"God is not Man's creator...God is Man's creation."
Love, hate and survival are all instincts. God is not an instinct, God is taught. Without the human imagination, God does not exsist. Instincts are real, every living creature has them. While God is unique only to man. By this logic, God is nothing more than another fable in the ancient storybook known as The Human Imagination."

                                                                                                                  for more...  www.theparallel.wordpress.com

I have an question about your eloquent argument for the proposition that religion is acquired from one's elders. It seems that on your theory, it must have been taught to me, and before that to my father, and before that to my father's father, and so on. But at some point we arrive at the first man to have religion. How was he taught it? Perhaps he acquired it from his environment, or perhaps it was an instinct. But if the former, then I could have acquired it just as well; and you reject the latter in your eloquent argument.

Q: Why didn't you address (post x) that I made in response to you nine minutes ago???

A: Because I have (a) a job, (b) familial obligations, (c) social obligations, and (d) probably a lot of other atheists responded to the same post you did, since I am practically the token Christian on this site now. Be patient, please.


Atheistextremist
atheist
Atheistextremist's picture
Posts: 5134
Joined: 2009-09-17
User is offlineOffline
There's some more sarcasm for you, Tang.

Presuppositionalist wrote:

The Tangential Rationalist wrote:

"God is not Man's creator...God is Man's creation."
Love, hate and survival are all instincts. God is not an instinct, God is taught. Without the human imagination, God does not exsist. Instincts are real, every living creature has them. While God is unique only to man. By this logic, God is nothing more than another fable in the ancient storybook known as The Human Imagination."

                                                                                                                  for more...  www.theparallel.wordpress.com

I have an question about your eloquent argument for the proposition that religion is acquired from one's elders. It seems that on your theory, it must have been taught to me, and before that to my father, and before that to my father's father, and so on. But at some point we arrive at the first man to have religion. How was he taught it? Perhaps he acquired it from his environment, or perhaps it was an instinct. But if the former, then I could have acquired it just as well; and you reject the latter in your eloquent argument.

 

Presup, d'you think culture had to be presented to the first man, complete in all its particulars? Complete language, complete laws, complete social morality, complete football teams? Or do you think it might have evolved? In the case of religion through animism and anthropomorphism through to the 'higher' levels we see today? I'd argue that the more sophisticated believers of today are honing their beliefs in order to stay a step ahead of the dubious. The godly are scarcely to be seen searching for possible proof the universe was created by a godless force but they know all about it now, don't they? Would you agree their defense of god is evolving to survive in a hostile environment?

 

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


Presuppositionalist
Theist
Presuppositionalist's picture
Posts: 344
Joined: 2007-05-21
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist

Atheistextremist wrote:

Presup, d'you think culture had to be presented to the first man, complete in all its particulars? Complete language, complete laws, complete social morality, complete football teams? Or do you think it might have evolved? In the case of religion through animism and anthropomorphism through to the 'higher' levels we see today? I'd argue that the more sophisticated believers of today are honing their beliefs in order to stay a step ahead of the dubious. The godly are scarcely to be seen searching for possible proof the universe was created by a godless force but they know all about it now, don't they? Would you agree their defense of god is evolving to survive in a hostile environment? 

That is an intelligent, clear point you've made, and I will clarify it even more with an analogy. Science has made a great deal of progress since the time of the ancient Greeks. Each theory verified by the scientific method was correct, within a delimited context. As the context expanded, truths were found within new, broader contexts of knowledge. For example, as you're aware, Newton's laws work very well within the context of macroscopic objects moving at normal speeds, but more richly detailed theories become necessary in other contexts. What we learn from this process is that systematic, smooth change is the unmistakable mark of truth. And, as you so correctly noted, this is what we find in theology.

Q: Why didn't you address (post x) that I made in response to you nine minutes ago???

A: Because I have (a) a job, (b) familial obligations, (c) social obligations, and (d) probably a lot of other atheists responded to the same post you did, since I am practically the token Christian on this site now. Be patient, please.


v4ultingbassist
Science Freak
v4ultingbassist's picture
Posts: 601
Joined: 2009-12-04
User is offlineOffline
Presuppositionalist

Presuppositionalist wrote:
And, as you so correctly noted, this is what we find in theology.

 

HAHAHAHA

 

The scientific community works to better the collection of knowledge.  When theories oppose, they investigate to find out which, if either, is right, and then come to a consensus.

 

You want me to believe all theologians and consequently religions work together to figure out who is more right?  You've got to be fucking kidding me.


jonusb2 (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
However mean your life is,


Skyzersdad
Skyzersdad's picture
Posts: 61
Joined: 2010-07-13
User is offlineOffline
Presuppositionalist wrote:

Presuppositionalist wrote:

Atheistextremist wrote:

Presup, d'you think culture had to be presented to the first man, complete in all its particulars? Complete language, complete laws, complete social morality, complete football teams? Or do you think it might have evolved? In the case of religion through animism and anthropomorphism through to the 'higher' levels we see today? I'd argue that the more sophisticated believers of today are honing their beliefs in order to stay a step ahead of the dubious. The godly are scarcely to be seen searching for possible proof the universe was created by a godless force but they know all about it now, don't they? Would you agree their defense of god is evolving to survive in a hostile environment? 

That is an intelligent, clear point you've made, and I will clarify it even more with an analogy. Science has made a great deal of progress since the time of the ancient Greeks. Each theory verified by the scientific method was correct, within a delimited context. As the context expanded, truths were found within new, broader contexts of knowledge. For example, as you're aware, Newton's laws work very well within the context of macroscopic objects moving at normal speeds, but more richly detailed theories become necessary in other contexts. What we learn from this process is that systematic, smooth change is the unmistakable mark of truth. And, as you so correctly noted, this is what we find in theology.

Excuse me!?  So O wise one, why is there one "science" and thousands of mutually contradicting theologies?  One science that can be (and is) constantly tested and verified by reality and thousands of theologies that can't be?