NationStates Jolt Archive

Nice first post.

WRONG!

Conan, what is best in life?

Conan: To crush yer anemies, to draive them before you, und to hear za lamentations of zer vimmen.

Close one Bwabwaasaa (I don't remeber your name and I can't see it on the post screen, sorry).

What do you mean, wrong? 42 is THE answer and you know it.

But by "blowing him off" in that manner, you gave tremendous credence to his position, particularly since you now describe your view as ratifying the interpretation he was attributing to you.
His "position" is a non belief in God. My choosing not to play his game does not give his "position" anything tangible.

Earlier, you pitched your religion and some book, meaning you want us to take you seriously about important things. If you want us to do that, your credibility and consistency as a thinker is very much of consequence.
You can believe whatever you wish to believe, as we all have free will. I can only share what I believe to be true, not only in my mind, but in my heart. If you choose not to believe, that is your choice. I am certainly not going to try and beat you into submission, or try and trick you. I only know what I feel in my heart to be true and if that fails me in your credibility test, then so be it.

By what I've seen recently in my life i.e. George Bush's so called Relgious attitude and the influence he claims it has on his policies, the overall hypocrisy of Christians I've seen, and the holier than thou attitude they present...then I want no part of Christianity or any other religion for that matter. I believe that some higher power created things. That's all I believe in when it comes to religious matters. As for treating others with respect, not stealing, not killing, etc. that's common sense and just plain decency something no one needs religion to accomplish.

Wow, straight from the heart.

No, Atheism is, specifically, a lack of faith. A definitive belief there's no god would be something like anti-theism

Nonsense.
The philosophical laws of non-contradiction, and the principle of the excluded middle, don't allow for fence sitting; you either think he exists, or you think that he doesn't. Suppositions do not allow you to suspend judgement indefinately. Your thinking must inevitably fall to one side or the other, whether you recognize that, or not. If you reject someone's opinions of a deity, passively, or aggressively, you still have made a definative choice. Definative choices, imply definative beliefs -Otherwise you'd be constantly changing religions, and beliefs -You'd be wavering after everyone suggested something new. Essentually, you'd be the most gullible person alive.

It's impossible to believe in nothing, and you don't believe in something because you think it's false. -That's contradiction!

Atheists to some degree, (some less, some more) hold the belief that God doesn't exist, it's still a belief -not certainty. And beliefs without certainty, are a matter of faith. No matter how you want to twist the definition.

Nonsense.
The philosophical laws of non-contradiction, and the principle of the excluded middle, don't allow for fence sitting; you either think he exists, or you think that he doesn't. Suppositions do not allow you to suspend judgement indefinately. Your thinking must inevitably fall to one side or the other, whether you recognize that, or not. If you reject someone's opinions of a deity, passively, or aggressively, you still have made a definative choice. Definative choices, imply definative beliefs -Otherwise you'd be constantly changing religions, and beliefs -You'd be wavering after everyone suggested something new. Essentually, you'd be the most gullible person alive.

It's impossible to believe in nothing, and you don't believe in something because you think it's false. -That's contradiction!

Atheists to some degree, (some less, some more) hold the belief that God doesn't exist, it's still a belief -not certainty. And beliefs without certainty, are a matter of faith. No matter how you want to twist the definition.
Lol, that's what he's been advocating all along.

Only less eloquent.

You can believe whatever you wish to believe, as we all have free will. I can only share what I believe to be true, not only in my mind, but in my heart. If you choose not to believe, that is your choice. I am certainly not going to try and beat you into submission, or try and trick you. I only know what I feel in my heart to be true and if that fails me in your credibility test, then so be it.

This reminds me of something I read about advice and command.

An advice - the advice-giver has no control over the outcome.

For example: "I would advise you to quit smoking cause it may cause lung disease someday."

A command - the command-giver has control over the outcome.

For example: "I would advise you to quit smoking cause I may beat your face to a pulp, my friend."

So perhaps the love from the Christian God is not all unconditional. Whenever I get the message from Christians about choosing to believe, I always wonder if it is a real choice, or a mere semblance of choice.

Nonsense.
The philosophical laws of non-contradiction, and the principle of the excluded middle, don't allow for fence sitting; you either think he exists, or you think that he doesn't. Suppositions do not allow you to suspend judgement indefinately. Your thinking must inevitably fall to one side or the other, whether you recognize that, or not. If you reject someone's opinions of a deity, passively, or aggressively, you still have made a definative choice. Definative choices, imply definative beliefs -Otherwise you'd be constantly changing religions, and beliefs -You'd be wavering after everyone suggested something new. Essentually, you'd be the most gullible person alive.

It's impossible to believe in nothing, and you don't believe in something because you think it's false. -That's contradiction!

Atheists to some degree, (some less, some more) hold the belief that God doesn't exist, it's still a belief -not certainty. And beliefs without certainty, are a matter of faith. No matter how you want to twist the definition.

Okay, hold up here. First of all, Nihilism. Secondly, anything not Theism is Atheism.

This reminds me of something I read about advice and command.

An advice - the advice-giver has no control over the outcome.

For example: "I would advise you to quit smoking cause it may cause lung disease someday."

A command - the command-giver has control over the outcome.

For example: "I would advise you to quit smoking cause I may beat your face to a pulp, my friend."

So perhaps the love from the Christian God is not all unconditional. Whenever I get the message from Christians about choosing to believe, I always wonder if it is a real choice, or a mere semblance of choice.
I am not exactly sure where you are coming from, but I have offered no advice, nor have I made any commands.

Whether you choose to believe or not, whatever choice you make will be real.

I am not exactly sure where you are coming from, but I have offered no advice, nor have I made any commands.

Really? You didn't give the advice that we should read some fellow's book, or convert to your religion?

(I can't get to sleep, so I'm back)

Really? You didn't give the advice that we should read some fellow's book, or convert to your religion?

(I can't get to sleep, so I'm back)
You must be confusing me with another poster.

His "position" is a non belief in God. My choosing not to play his game does not give his "position" anything tangible.

His position was pointing out that in your view, a "forgiven" serial killer could get into heaven whereas an atheist could not. You later admitted that was, in fact, your view. He was making a point, and you blew it off. I think he's unnecessarily abrasive, but he wasn't the one playing some kind of game there.


You can believe whatever you wish to believe, as we all have free will. I can only share what I believe to be true, not only in my mind, but in my heart. If you choose not to believe, that is your choice. I am certainly not going to try and beat you into submission, or try and trick you. I only know what I feel in my heart to be true and if that fails me in your credibility test, then so be it.

In no way did I say that what "feel in your heart" is what impacts your credibility. Rather, it is the cogency of your statements that I take issue with. And I notice you still don't really answer any of that.

You must be confusing me with another poster.

My apologies, I'll go back and look.

My apologies, I'll go back and look.
No problem. :)

No problem. :)

So you don't advise that people read the book by this Matthew guy (post #972) and you don't advise that people convert to your religion?

You used phrases like "if only they would" do this thing or that, they get some kind of reward or heaven. It really does come off as advice.

Bear in mind, I'm not saying you can't give advice, but you said you haven't given any.

Whether you choose to believe or not, whatever choice you make will be real.

So, back to my point, we still haven't addressed the issue of how you can "do your best" to follow rules that you've said you don't really know. You've said yourself you don't feel inclined to even learn what they are. How is that doing your best?

Let me try to answer this as simply as possible. Throughout my life, I have gone through all the phases. I started out with religion and as I grew older, I turned towards being agnostic, and settled in comfortably as an atheist. The further away from God I got, the worse my life became. It was a very painful experience. The pain lingered and endured and then I finally surrendered. I found my way back to God and my life has changed immensely. I like who I am today and the people around me are much happier, and so am I. My spirit was almost snuffed out and today it is alive and well thanks to God.

Um...in the pursuit of a "simple" answer, you've evaded the question completely.

Just so I know where our miscommunication lies, can you paraphrase for me what my question was, so I know how you view what I'm asking?

Which doesn't address the point. Why can you ignore the vast majority of Mosaic law in favor of the ten that you've judged as more relevant?

What if everybody just obeyed the laws that they found "simple"?

I'm not trying to be rude, but you haven't really answered the questions. You've said you do your best to follow the "spinoff" rules, yet you've admitted you don't really know what they are. Isn't that lack of trying?

EDIT: I've gotta get to bed. Canuck, you seem like a nice enough sort, but if you want me to take you seriously, please try to look at these questions a little more closely before you answer.
Let me try to answer this as simply as possible. Throughout my life, I have gone through all the phases. I started out with religion and as I grew older, I turned towards being agnostic, and settled in comfortably as an atheist. The further away from God I got, the worse my life became. It was a very painful experience. The pain lingered and endured and then I finally surrendered. I found my way back to God and my life has changed immensely. I like who I am today and the people around me are much happier, and so am I. My spirit was almost snuffed out and today it is alive and well thanks to God.

BTW, thanks for your kind words. I have enjoyed the discussion with you.

Let me try to answer this as simply as possible. Throughout my life, I have gone through all the phases. I started out with religion and as I grew older, I turned towards being agnostic, and settled in comfortably as an atheist. The further away from God I got, the worse my life became. It was a very painful experience. The pain lingered and endured and then I finally surrendered. I found my way back to God and my life has changed immensely. I like who I am today and the people around me are much happier, and so am I. My spirit was almost snuffed out and today it is alive and well thanks to God.

BTW, thanks for your kind words. I have enjoyed the discussion with you.

Not to be unkind here, but what you've written is not an answer to my question. What do you feel my question is, in your words?

Um...in the pursuit of a "simple" answer, you've evaded the question completely.

Just so I know where our miscommunication lies, can you paraphrase for me what my question was, so I know how you view what I'm asking?
Actually, I have answered the questions in one form or another over the posts. If people at least followed the 10 basic simple rules, this world would be a much better place to live.

Everyone seems to want to complicate it by trying to follow all the other rules and they end up breaking the major ones. I can blame the various religions for that.

Think about EVERYBODY following the 10 simple rules. Can you imagine the results? I can.

I find atheists are really agnostics with too much pride.

I've been trying to think of a way to say no to that statement but I can't think of any way lol. That is a very creative way to put it and I believe that you are correct in making that assumption.

Actually, I have answered the questions in one form or another over the posts. If people at least followed the 10 basic simple rules, this world would be a much better place to live.

Everyone seems to want to complicate it by trying to follow all the other rules and they end up breaking the major ones. I can blame the various religions for that.

Think about EVERYBODY following the 10 simple rules. Can you imagine the results? I can.

What characteristic of "Thou shall not make graven images" is somehow more major than "Don't eat this or that?"

In no form have you addressed why you feel its valid to cherry pick scripture and laws based on your personal inclinations of whats "simple" and "important", and disregard your Gods laws that you have judged as less relevant.

Is your judgement of a law's relevance greater than your God's?

Also, you haven't addressed why you think a law that says "This is going to be your god, and you can't have any others" is not very clearly within the realm of religious dogma.

I've been trying to think of a way to say no to that statement but I can't think of any way lol. That is a very creative way to put it and I believe that you are correct in making that assumption.

Of course, it would also mean that people who do not believe in the eater of socks, the cheerful fairy and Mr Hankey the Christmas Poo are being too full of pride ;)
Which technically of course is true. Maybe they all do exist, and we should therefor build houses of worship and and reorganise our daily schedules to allow time to pray to them just in case.

Think about EVERYBODY following the 10 simple rules. Can you imagine the results? I can.

Sure. Since the first commandment excludes freedom of religion, my country would have to lose its Constitution.

Also, morality would be based on a (partial, arbitrarily emphasized) set of rules, rather than a sincere and well-deliberated judgement of one's own motivations and consequences.

It would take all the freedom and thought out of living.

Be careful of imagining utopias. People tend to forget to imagine the price tag.

EDIT: It just occurred to me. If everybody followed your 10 rules, Mary could not conceive with anybody but her husband (without a lot of specious rule backpedalling). So, maybe some things would be better.

Of course, it would also mean that people who do not believe in the eater of socks, the cheerful fairy and Mr Hankey the Christmas Poo are being too full of pride ;)
Which technically of course is true. Maybe they all do exist, and we should therefor build houses of worship and and reorganise our daily schedules to allow time to pray to them just in case.

Yeah, Flawless Cowboy or somebody was on here pitching Pascal's Wager a few pages ago.

Also, the eater of socks has formed a strategic alliance with Scientology, so you can reach both through the same website. Synergy, they call it.

What characteristic of "Thou shall not make graven images" is somehow more major than "Don't eat this or that?"
I explained this before. God wants everyone to know that He is the one and only God. The other rules didn't make the Top Ten.

In no form have you addressed why you feel its valid to cherry pick scripture and laws based on your personal inclinations of whats "simple" and "important", and disregard your Gods laws that you have judged as less relevant.
Like I stated earlier, the 7 deadly sins and 7 heavenly virtues are certainly difficult enough, but certainly they help with following the basic rules.

Is your judgement of a law's relevance greater than your God's?
I believe that if God wanted to elevate certain "laws" to greater relevance, then there would have been 12 or 25 (pick a number) of Commandments. I think that God would be extremely pleased if all the people of the world followed the 10 simple rules.

Also, you haven't addressed why you think a law that says "This is going to be your god, and you can't have any others" is not very clearly within the realm of religious dogma.
What I truly meant as religious dogma is the fact that say one religion says you can't drink alcohol and another says you can. Another religion states that you have to pray x number of times per day while others open their doors once a week. So on and so forth. Total confusion and too many wars have been fought over religious differences. I do not think God is amused.

I throw it back to you once again....imagine the whole world following JUST the 10 basic rules. The world would be an incredibility different place to live?

I explained this before. God wants everyone to know that He is the one and only God. The other rules didn't make the Top Ten.


Why? You know better than God what should be a rule and what shouldn't? God can make a rule that you don't feel you need to follow, because you aren't so inclined? Thats not doing your best. [/QUOTE]


Like I stated earlier, the 7 deadly sins and 7 heavenly virtues are certainly difficult enough, but certainly they help with following the basic rules.


What do the 7 deadly sins have to do with the fact that you conveniently and actively choose to ignore entire sections of your god's word? How do you even judge them as being less important when you've admitted you don't know what they are? This has nothing to do with the 7 deadly sins.


I believe that if God wanted to elevate certain "laws" to greater relevance, then there would have been 12 or 25 (pick a number) of Commandments. I think that God would be extremely pleased if all the people of the world followed the 10 simple rules.


So basically, you know better than your God, or Moses himself, (who spoke with your God and delivered both your big 10 and hundreds of the others, and judged them all as important) as to which of your Gods rules you're allowed to ignore? I think the world would be much better if everyone followed the traffic laws, but I don't believe they thus come from some kind of God.


What I truly meant as religious dogma is the fact that say one religion says you can't drink alcohol and another says you can. Another religion states that you have to pray x number of times per day while others open their doors once a week. So on and so forth. Total confusion and too many wars have been fought over religious differences. I do not think God is amused.


Okay, you've superimposed a lot of your assumptions and interpretations on to your God. It really sounds like you don't follow his rules, you just invent him as following yours.


I throw it back to you once again....imagine the whole world following JUST the 10 basic rules. The world would be an incredibility different place to live?

Already answered, but I'll reiterate:

In my country, our fundamental rights would be damaged, since the first commandment destroys freedom of religion.

On a more meangingful note, an oversimplified, truncated, and arbitrarily chosen list of rules would supplant people's capacity to develop and excercise truely deliberated morality.

It would reduce human virtue to mere religious dogma. You talk about religion making x wrong and y right as a bad idea. Well, all your 10 rules are is the same principal.

Sure. Since the first commandment excludes freedom of religion, my country would have to lose its Constitution.
The 10 Commandments were around a lot longer than your Constitution.

Also, morality would be based on a (partial, arbitrarily emphasized) set of rules, rather than a sincere and well-deliberated judgement of one's own motivations and consequences.
God's rule is not "sincere"? And there are motivations not to break the rule and serious consequences for doing so.

It would take all the freedom and thought out of living.
I would imagine that the world would be based more on true equality, rather than the empty words in your Constitution?

Be careful of imagining utopias. People tend to forget to imagine the price tag.
Why? The rewards are great, unless of course you don't believe, whereby you are back to square one?

EDIT: It just occurred to me. If everybody followed your 10 rules, Mary could not conceive with anybody but her husband (without a lot of specious rule backpedalling). So, maybe some things would be better.
They are not my 10 rules. :)

Well I must be hitting the sack. Thanks for the challenge that you provided.

The 10 Commandments were around a lot longer than your Constitution.

Right, that's how progress works. Better ideas supplant old ones as people learn to move on.


God's rule is not "sincere"? And there are motivations not to break the rule and serious consequences for doing so.

Ah, but if his rules (or in your case, the one's that you've personally cherrypicked, since you like to edit your god) are superimposed unilaterally, it is not sincerely practiced by those who would have chosen otherwise.


I would imagine that the world would be based more on true equality, rather than the empty words in your Constitution?

I know you've refused to learn about your god's history, but if you want to make statements like that, you should. Check into your god's history with slavery in the Old Testament, if you want to take about true equality, or the "empty" Constitution. Or does your God change over time, becoming less imperfect?


Why? The rewards are great, unless of course you don't believe, whereby you are back to square one?


The fact that you think belief is square one is your defining trait, and explains a lot here. For some of us, belief is preceded by deliberation, which is preceded by discovery, which comes after learning the relevant information, like your God's activities in the Old Testament.
[/QUOTE]


They are not my 10 rules. :)

You're the one choosing to emphasize them and exclude the ones you don't like or don't bother to be aware of. Please don't lecture others about how their choices are "real", if you're going to avoid responsibility for the 10 rules that you wish to impose on the world.

Well I must be hitting the sack. Thanks for the challenge that you provided.

No problem, have a good rest.

Its nothing personal, but your mentality (not all religious mentality, but the one you've exhibited) inhibits human development.

I don't expect to change your views to any degree. I just want others to see where your views lead. You've done admirably there, so thanks.

I am not exactly sure where you are coming from, but I have offered no advice, nor have I made any commands.

Whether you choose to believe or not, whatever choice you make will be real.

For the first point, I should mention that when wars get started or abortion doctors get killed, that the agent bringing about God's Will is human. Divine intervention "through" believers, which from a socio-emergent perspective is hard to distinguish from divine intervention "by" believers.

As for the bit about real choice. A semblance of choice is a "choice" given where one alternative is actually impossible to select. For example: "If you don't lick my boots I can blow her brains out. It's your choice!"

You obviously do not know of which you speak.
I don't know John 3:16?

You will never be able to escape that: as long as someone believes in jesus, the person will have everlasting life.

So says John 3:16.

Try to deny it and you end up making your god mad.

You don't want to do that, do you?

IMHO, the 10 simple rules are
...more than 10. There are 613. Why do you hate the jews?

I blew him off due to his overbearing demeanor.
So you lied.

Quelle suprise.

Atheists to some degree, (some less, some more) hold the belief that God doesn't exist,
No, not all of them do. People who have never heard of god are atheists, yet they do not hold the belief that god doesn't exist.

I've often come to the same conclusion.
But, Atheism is much more of a faith than doubt.
They believe there is no "God" ( which is often the case, not very multicultural, but who am I to judge ).

No, i'm an atheist, and i don't "believe" there is no God. I *know* there is no god. Just as i *know* there is no Easter Bunny, Santa Claus, or stable, good-looking heterosexual women who find ginger men attractive and have an IQ above room temperature.

http://www.johnberman.com/pics/funny/not_this_shit_again.jpg

Actually, I have answered the questions in one form or another over the posts. If people at least followed the 10 basic simple rules, this world would be a much better place to live.
So you state, but haven't shown.

And please demonstrate how "visiting the sins of the father to the 3rd and 4th generations of those who hate me" (Ex 20:5) is just.

For the love of (a non-existent) god this thread's reached 70 pages and you still can't agree on a definition of atheism!

This thread deserves to be archived for its sheer pointlessness.

I tried that with him. I found it didn't work, no matter how calm or how many times I explained things to him. So I got out the rock. Figured it couldn't make things any worse.
Oh but it has. You are now the proud owner of a one-month forum ban.

This thread is now locked because it is too long for anyone to follow and has degenerated into pages of flamebaiting. Those who wish to discuss atheism without further interference, are welcome to do so in a new thread.