 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Saul Luizaga wrote:
>> I think an Atheist maybe would be too rational for a situation like
>> this, and try to find a reasonable solution being cold thinking and
>> maybe endangering the child,
>
> Oh. So only someone who believes in God is capable of being irrational?
>
> Wow. Just .... wow.
>
> I can't figure out whether you're insulting yourself or atheists more. :-)
>
Rhetoric answers that assumes too much about me, and I'm the insulting
part here? I wrote Athesit can love and love is irrational on extreme
doses, so yes Atheists can and will go irrational at some point in their
lifes, see? you didn't read the fine print... :-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Saul Luizaga wrote:
>> I think an Atheist maybe would be too rational for a situation like
>> this, and try to find a reasonable solution being cold thinking and
>> maybe endangering the child, when actually the best solution is go
>> more with your feelings on that small time interval. I'm not saying
>> Atheist can't love.
>
> Here, it certainly sounds like what you're saying is "I love my child
> more than you love yours, because I'm willing to pray to my God for my
> child's welfare and you're not." Have I got that straight?
Sorry, nope.
> If not, what am I missing?
This question denotes wisdom because you are willing to search and learn
contrary to Patrick that only writes "you are deluding yourself you are
being a moron, for your own sake STOP!!!".
On the subject, I think that quality of love depends on each person,
I've known of religious persons that made great religious leaderships
while their family suffered horribly, is not religion, is you and you
alone. If you correct your child on the measure of his/her mistakes, are
kind but not spoiling and other good principles like that I think that
is love, we know what love is, all humans do also we have a sense of
right and wrong, so I think people that will go to hell is the ones that
deliberately go wrong and against love or twist love in a sick way(9/11
kinda of stuff).
> Do you think atheists are cold-hearted?
A little, just a little but I don't say ALL, maybe, just maybe most of
them, because I don't actually know the entire Earth population, so is
mostly kinda of a little pretentious assumption of me.
> That they don't have feelings?
man, hehe, I don't know why you keep saying thighs like that of me.
> That it's irrational to attempt to move the car without divine
> intervention?
is irrational anyway that is why faith helps and was more like lifting
the car in flames kinda thing, and every adult person knows the
consequences of such an act, but also I'm not saying an Atheist wouldn't
do it, I'm saying he/she MIGHT be too rational about it. I'm also saying
religious/spiritual persons will try to find a logical solution that
actually will work but in this case, as people write/tell about it was
in a situation like: alone in a road or in a place where she couldn't
ask/get help or find a good solution that would actually worked. I don't
say I'd do the same, may I'd be too rational about too, I don't know
what I'd do in such a horrible situation, all I can think of is saving
the child the best way possible, I think you think that too and every
human for that matter.
> Would you consider yourself cold-thinking and rational if you got in
> this situation, prayed to God, still weren't able to move the car, and
> you didn't try to invoke the Force from Star Wars? Why not? You've
> *seen* Yoda lift an entire X-wing fighter. (I'm completely serious with
> this question. Why wouldn't you try praying to Zeus, Satan, and then
> using the Force?)
>
Not just pray to God, God helps the one that helps him/herself, He does
the part you can't do to get to your goal and it depends on the belief
of your faith, George Lucas actually beliefs in The Force, I believe The
Force is God intervention, the Bible states if you have enough faith you
could do wonderful thing, but without love you'd be nothing, so is not
only faith is also the "big L" necessary for good deeds.
Once a long time ago, maybe 15-20 years ago I heard of a Holy man in a
Country with lots of desert that he could take an ordinary cup, fill it
with sand from the desert, invert the cup, let the sand fall and the
sand would stop falling until he turned the cup straight up again,
people said he was a man of lots of faith.
I understand why Atheists probably will never see the way
religious/theists see things, faith in God is completely irrational
because God doesn't manifest in rational ways, all I can say is what
Jesus said, "be happy those who belief without seen".
Don't expect I say you: "OK, you say you are trying to understand me so
you want a rational proof of God, here it is, now belief". The way to
God is that, A WAY, A PATH to follow and on some point, He will come to
you. The Bible states that if you CHALLENGE God to come to you He will,
he has give you free will and wont disrupt the deal unless you want it so.
One more curious "fact": some people affirms seen San Martin praying in
the middle of the air,on his knees, because he was on sucha God's grace,
so is not a proven fact but if you dare to take this as a fact for a 2
minutes you see there is no reason why he has to be "flying" to be in
God's grace but that's the way God works. People claims he was alone in
his cell on pray time of the day. But fairy tail at the end, right?
fine, so be it.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Saul Luizaga wrote:
>> Free will.
>
> Just so you know, that's a very pat answer. Perhaps you should think
> about this more deeply, and give a response (if only to yourself) that
> actually makes a little more sense.
>
> Would "free will" be the same answer as to why people pray to be cured
> of prostate cancer but not be mad at God that they got cancer in the
> first place? If so, what decision did they make that gave them cancer of
> their own free will?
>
I should think it more deeply? are you sure is not the other way around?
Cancer and other stuff is part of Nature, how it works.
As I stated on another post is IMO good to ask God for a cure because
God helps you complete your goal when you have done all you can.
God leaves nature alone until He see fir to intervene, this is what
theists/religious people have deducted (nobody can't tell how God thinks
or act, we deduct from facts attributed to Him/Her/It) over time.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Saul Luizaga wrote:
> This question denotes wisdom because you are willing to search and learn
> contrary to Patrick that only writes "you are deluding yourself you are
> being a moron, for your own sake STOP!!!".
Yes. That's why I said I'm an atheist, but not like Patrick. For one thing,
I've accepted that irrationality is not always bad.
>> Do you think atheists are cold-hearted?
>
> A little, just a little but I don't say ALL, maybe, just maybe most of
> them, because I don't actually know the entire Earth population, so is
> mostly kinda of a little pretentious assumption of me.
I think so. You seem to leap from "you don't believe in my god" to "you're
cold and rational." There's no basis for that belief except uninformed
prejudice. I suspect confirmation bias in your observations of your atheist
friends: that when they act cold and rational, you attribute it to their
atheism, while when they act irrational, you attribute it to normal humanity.
Not unlike the way many people attribute personal failings to their own
sinful nature and personal successes to God.
>> That they don't have feelings?
> man, hehe, I don't know why you keep saying thighs like that of me.
I quote:
> I think an Atheist maybe would be too rational for a situation like this
[...]
> being cold thinking and maybe endangering the child [...] the best
> solution is go more with your feelings on that small time interval
I took that to mean you thought the atheist would be less willing to try to
move the car via brute force. You say "they're too rational and cold
thinking and more likely to endanger the child". How am I supposed to
interpret that?
In any case, there's documented evidence of desperate people lifting cars
off their children. There's no documented evidence of divine intervention
lifting cars off of children. That means trying to lift your car yourself is
*more* rational than praying to God for help.
>> That it's irrational to attempt to move the car without divine
>> intervention?
>
> is irrational anyway that is why faith helps and was more like lifting
> the car in flames kinda thing, and every adult person knows the
> consequences of such an act,
OK. It seems to me like you're making statements much more exagerated than
you mean them to be. My personal suggestion is to phrase more of your
comments as questions rather than statements.
Plus, I can *easily* imagine an atheist nerd trying to use The Force to lift
the car. Completely irrational, and less likely to work than actually trying
to lift the car with brute force.
> Not just pray to God,
Well, no. Pray to god to give you the strength, obviously. Because, you
know, no proper religious person would think that God would manifest in ways
that could really only be explained by supernatural intervention. Of course
he won't lift the car *without* someone trying desperately to move it with
brute force, any more than he'd actually cure a disease that non-believers
get better from also.
> the Bible states if you have enough faith you could do wonderful thing,
Actually, it states that if you have even the tiniest spec of faith, you can
move mountains. There really isn't a question of "how much faith is enough."
> I understand why Atheists probably will never see the way
> religious/theists see things, faith in God is completely irrational
> because God doesn't manifest in rational ways,
Sure he does. He stopped the sun in the sky for three days, he turned the
Nile to blood, he flooded the entire world, bombed Sodom and Gomorrah,
parted the Red Sea, raised the dead, cast the evil eye on a fig tree, ....
He just stopped doing that sort of thing when the camera was invented.
> Don't expect I say you: "OK, you say you are trying to understand me so
> you want a rational proof of God, here it is, now belief". The way to
> God is that, A WAY, A PATH to follow and on some point, He will come to
> you. The Bible states that if you CHALLENGE God to come to you He will,
> he has give you free will and wont disrupt the deal unless you want it so.
And I have. And he didn't. What do you say to that? That I opened my heart
to him in the wrong way?
> One more curious "fact": some people affirms seen San Martin praying in
> the middle of the air,on his knees, because he was on sucha God's grace,
Yep. And some people think they're Napoleon too. Note that I'm not saying
this in a belittling way, but for me to change my life based on "I once
heard someone saw some guy floating in mid air" is a bit much, don't you think?
> so is not a proven fact but if you dare to take this as a fact for a 2
> minutes you see there is no reason why he has to be "flying" to be in
> God's grace but that's the way God works.
OK, let's even grant the possibility that he really was praying in the
middle of the air. Let's even say he can do it on demand, and scientists
can't explain it.
Why does that have anything to do with God?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Saul Luizaga wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>> Saul Luizaga wrote:
>>> Free will.
>>
>> Just so you know, that's a very pat answer. Perhaps you should think
>> about this more deeply, and give a response (if only to yourself) that
>> actually makes a little more sense.
>>
>> Would "free will" be the same answer as to why people pray to be cured
>> of prostate cancer but not be mad at God that they got cancer in the
>> first place? If so, what decision did they make that gave them cancer
>> of their own free will?
>>
> I should think it more deeply? are you sure is not the other way around?
Yep. I already thought about it deeply and have come to my own conclusions.
> Cancer and other stuff is part of Nature, how it works.
I thought nature works how God wants it to work?
I'm just confused how "free will" comes into your child being pinned under a
car. I don't think any child says "This morning, I choose to get pinned
under a locked car." Where does "free will" come into the situation?
I mean, it was "miraculous" that everyone got off the plane in the river
alive, but it wasn't "miraculous" that the plane crashed in the first place?
It was "free will" that the plane crashed?
> God leaves nature alone until He see fir to intervene,
How do you know?
> this is what
> theists/religious people have deducted (nobody can't tell how God thinks
> or act, we deduct from facts attributed to Him/Her/It) over time.
This is the bit I don't follow. You "attribute" facts to God? Isn't it,
therefore, the people attributing those facts that determine how God
behaves, and not God itself?
Notice how any time you actually *measure* the facts attributed to God, God
fails to manifest? It's only when you look after the fact, and say "might
God have done this, knowing what we know about what we think of God?" and
then the answer comes out?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Saul Luizaga wrote:
> I don't believe, and you missed me again, I because I believe in God
> know everything, I don't even know why you and Darren keep saying that
> of me, I too say "I don't know" but if something indicates a exceptional
> fact and is "safe" to say belongs to God, I give credit to Him.
That, I think, is the primary difference.
> And you are wrong!!! I have being A LOT more respectful to everything
> you and Darren have wrote that you both have bein with me,
I believe you're reading disrespect into my disagreement. Regardless of
Patrick's feelings, I don't disrespect you. I merely disagree with you. I'm
also hearing the same tired old statements that don't make any more sense
from you than they did the first 100 times I heard them. But that statement
isn't being disrespectful - it's just a fact.
The whole "if only you'd open your heart, God would fill you" bit is
disrespectful because it implies willful ignorance on the part of the person
you're talking to. But since I understand you don't intend it as
disrespectful, you should understand that I don't intend my statements as
disrecpectful.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Elliott wrote:
> Ah, yes. But, then "Be Well" isn't all that common in as the final
> statement on long tirades about how evil, vile, god hating, monstrous,
> murderous and damned you are.
Yep. But then, Saul hasn't been like that. You're projecting onto him as
much as he's projecting onto you and I.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> He's also The guy who defined man and woman. ;)
No he isn't. Once you leap from "the creator of the Big Bang" to "the guy
who tells you how you run your life", that's when I get annoyed.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Elliott wrote:
> not the least being self contradictions,
At least one highly religious person I had an opportunity to interact with
for hours at a time face to face has convinced me that self contradictions
aren't a problem in religion. As long as you're being irrational, why stick
with modus ponens?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New <dne### [at] san rrcom> wrote:
> nemesis wrote:
> > He's also The guy who defined man and woman. ;)
>
> No he isn't. Once you leap from "the creator of the Big Bang" to "the guy
> who tells you how you run your life", that's when I get annoyed.
How you go from "guy who defined man and woman" to "guy who tells you how you
run your life"? If you were born a banana would you demand free will to mean
you could choose to be a grasshopper instead?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
andrel wrote:
> Ah, 'teach' may be the important word here. Most people I have met are
> not from churches that teach missionary actions. Apart from the Jehovah
> witnesses that come to the door (must be 9 years since I saw the last
> one). Catholics here tend to not take serious anybody from the ranks of
> bishop up. I have yet to meet a Muslim that has taken it's faith serious
> enough to even know how to explain his faith to an infidel. In short,
> all religious persons I know personally that are serious about their
> faith and every church they are in are not of the missionary type.
> Remember, I live in the Netherlands.
And that, my friend, is likely precisely why it harder to take people at
face value for me than it is for you. The ones like you talk about, even
if they may be a slim majority in the US, and I am not that certain of
that, are most definitely "not" the sort you ***see*** doing most
charity work, or seeking to help people, etc. There is a bias, even
among many liberal church goers in the US, that when someone opens a
soup kitchen, one of the first questions isn't, "How many people did it
feed?", but, "Do they preach to them before they let them eat it?" At
best, the ones like those you are used to, try real hard to avoid
thinking about that question, but if asked, can't honestly reply that it
didn't occur to them. Remember I live in the good old US of A-hole here.
--
void main () {
If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
if version = "Vista" {
call slow_by_half();
call DRM_everything();
}
call functional_code();
}
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Saul Luizaga wrote:
>> This question denotes wisdom because you are willing to search and
>> learn contrary to Patrick that only writes "you are deluding yourself
>> you are being a moron, for your own sake STOP!!!".
>
> Yes. That's why I said I'm an atheist, but not like Patrick. For one
> thing, I've accepted that irrationality is not always bad.
>
He is putting words in my mouth and you are letting him? Yeah, I do
think believers delude themselves, but that is not the same as saying
that irrationality is always bad. For one, its impossible to avoid
anyway. My problem is, he seems to want it both ways. To pat you on the
back for "getting" how irrationality is OK, while claiming to admit that
we "can" feel things, then insisting that the only reason we can is
because god is hiding in the closet "prompting" us how to act while we
are thinking irrationally, or something. The cognitive dissonance
involved is just more than I am willing to put up with, especially when
he starts claiming that I don't have friends of family that can "love
each other like a theist can!" Its especially more than I am willing to
put up with because..., well, frankly I post a lot of several science
blogs, and there isn't one argument, assertion, wiggling claim, half
hearted attempt to seem sympathetic, while not being so, or supposition
that Saul has come up with that hasn't been tried there, multiple times,
as though they where all brand new, no one has heard them before, etc.
Heck, at least once a week, sometimes, some new person shows up on some
blog entry about something, to proclaim, "You all need to read the
Bible, because you obviously never did before." After the 30th time or
so, if gets old, and you just want them to come up with something that
a) is new, and b) hasn't dissolved, at some point into them making the
same assertions, over and over, while ignoring everything you or anyone
else in the thread said, as though we all just never heard "them" say it
the first 2-3 times either. Though, I admit, the funniest ones are the
ones that we manage to back into a corner, where they admit they believe
it all due to it being "comforting" to them, but they don't find it
logical either, as though belief in god is like me deciding not to get
out of bed when I wake up, and instead deciding to stay under the covers
for a few more minutes, despite having things I need to do that day.
--
void main () {
If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
if version = "Vista" {
call slow_by_half();
call DRM_everything();
}
call functional_code();
}
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> Patrick Elliott <sel### [at] npgcablecom> wrote:
>> But seriously... Spending 5 pages calling them everything from the
>> antichrist, to a mass murderer, to a liar, and so on, is all "fixed" by
>> adding "Best Regards" to the end...?
>
> God Bless you. :)
>
> It's not like most Christians or religious people are ignorant, it's that most
> of humanity is ignorant (yet still deserving of salvation). Most atheists are
> ignorant too and just enjoy it as an excuse for an orgiastic life of sex, drugs
> and consumerism, not like they care for the scientific method or any such crap.
> I guess filling the mistery of our apparent senseless existence with material
> pleasures is roughly about as good a way as filling it with prayers and
> requests to invisible beings. Human nature...
>
> Still, I understand that many of those who seek spiritual comfort are those that
> are the most persistent on a life of sin, lies, cheating, violence. Who can
> deny them to seek forgiveness for their acts, in spite of repetitive failure?
>
>
Umm. Putting it at the beginning doesn't help either, sorry..
--
void main () {
If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
if version = "Vista" {
call slow_by_half();
call DRM_everything();
}
call functional_code();
}
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Patrick Elliott wrote:
>> Ah, yes. But, then "Be Well" isn't all that common in as the final
>> statement on long tirades about how evil, vile, god hating, monstrous,
>> murderous and damned you are.
>
> Yep. But then, Saul hasn't been like that. You're projecting onto him as
> much as he's projecting onto you and I.
>
I didn't say he was like that. I even **specifically* said so. How about
both of you stop putting words in my mouth...
--
void main () {
If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
if version = "Vista" {
call slow_by_half();
call DRM_everything();
}
call functional_code();
}
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> Patrick Elliott wrote:
>> not the least being self contradictions,
>
> At least one highly religious person I had an opportunity to interact
> with for hours at a time face to face has convinced me that self
> contradictions aren't a problem in religion. As long as you're being
> irrational, why stick with modus ponens?
>
Yes, well.. Its when they then insist that you don't know what "you" are
talking about because its so damn obvious that god is "both" a plate of
spaghetti and a magic hat, at the same time, that things really go down
hill for everyone not "in the know". lol
--
void main () {
If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
if version = "Vista" {
call slow_by_half();
call DRM_everything();
}
call functional_code();
}
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Elliott <sel### [at] npgcablecom> wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
> > Patrick Elliott wrote:
> >> not the least being self contradictions,
> >
> > At least one highly religious person I had an opportunity to interact
> > with for hours at a time face to face has convinced me that self
> > contradictions aren't a problem in religion. As long as you're being
> > irrational, why stick with modus ponens?
> >
> Yes, well.. Its when they then insist that you don't know what "you" are
> talking about because its so damn obvious that god is "both" a plate of
> spaghetti and a magic hat, at the same time, that things really go down
> hill for everyone not "in the know". lol
LOLz. Look at the atheists making fun of their fav subject and here I am still
feeding them! Really, what would you do with your boring vulcan/madonna dual
lifes if there was no one you could mock of? probably commit suicide to see if
they were right...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 18-Jan-09 21:43, Patrick Elliott wrote:
> andrel wrote:
>> Ah, 'teach' may be the important word here. Most people I have met are
>> not from churches that teach missionary actions. Apart from the
>> Jehovah witnesses that come to the door (must be 9 years since I saw
>> the last one). Catholics here tend to not take serious anybody from
>> the ranks of bishop up. I have yet to meet a Muslim that has taken
>> it's faith serious enough to even know how to explain his faith to an
>> infidel. In short, all religious persons I know personally that are
>> serious about their faith and every church they are in are not of the
>> missionary type. Remember, I live in the Netherlands.
>
> And that, my friend, is likely precisely why it harder to take people at
> face value for me than it is for you. The ones like you talk about, even
> if they may be a slim majority in the US, and I am not that certain of
> that, are most definitely "not" the sort you ***see*** doing most
> charity work, or seeking to help people, etc. There is a bias, even
> among many liberal church goers in the US, that when someone opens a
> soup kitchen, one of the first questions isn't, "How many people did it
> feed?", but, "Do they preach to them before they let them eat it?" At
> best, the ones like those you are used to, try real hard to avoid
> thinking about that question, but if asked, can't honestly reply that it
> didn't occur to them. Remember I live in the good old US of A-hole here.
There are a few soup kitchens and that sort of thing in this country,
but hardly visible. You have to be homeless to know where they are, I
guess. Is there one in the town (140000 inhabitants) where I live? I
don't know. Do we have homeless people here? Sometimes I see one or two
in the summer, I think they have now migrated to the warmer Amsterdam.
Indeed our difference in experience with religious people could be
influenced by the difference in social system.
I have never been in a soup kitchen, but I assume I will be in something
similar in the near future (my sister is involved in one for (mainly)
illegal immigrants). When I am there I'll check the level of preaching.
It is related to a church. I am not sure which one, could be a born
again-ish type.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 18-Jan-09 22:06, Patrick Elliott wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>> Patrick Elliott wrote:
>>> not the least being self contradictions,
>>
>> At least one highly religious person I had an opportunity to interact
>> with for hours at a time face to face has convinced me that self
>> contradictions aren't a problem in religion. As long as you're being
>> irrational, why stick with modus ponens?
>>
> Yes, well.. Its when they then insist that you don't know what "you" are
> talking about because its so damn obvious that god is "both" a plate of
> spaghetti and a magic hat, at the same time,
I think the pastafarians might take that as an insult to his holy
noodleness.
> that things really go down
> hill for everyone not "in the know". lol
>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Elliott wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>> Saul Luizaga wrote:
>>> This question denotes wisdom because you are willing to search and
>>> learn contrary to Patrick that only writes "you are deluding yourself
>>> you are being a moron, for your own sake STOP!!!".
>>
>> Yes. That's why I said I'm an atheist, but not like Patrick. For one
>> thing, I've accepted that irrationality is not always bad.
>>
> He is putting words in my mouth and you are letting him?
I said nothing of the sort. I simply said I'm not like you. :-)
I suppose one reading of what I said might imply I agree with him, but that
wasn't my intention.
> The cognitive dissonance involved is just more than I am willing to put up with,
especially when
> he starts claiming that I don't have friends of family that can "love
> each other like a theist can!"
Yes. That part is rather insulting.
> as though they where all brand new, no one has heard them before, etc.
Agreed. Sometimes it seems like Saul is actually interested in
conversation, and sometimes it seems like he's interested in converting.
Usually it's pretty easy to tell which is which by counting questions vs
assertions.
> Though, I admit, the funniest ones are the
The funniest ones for me are the ones that feel they have to help their
deity in his work, like *they* can show me the way to religion better than
their own God can. Funny, and annoying. :-)
> as though belief in god is like me deciding not to get
> out of bed when I wake up, and instead deciding to stay under the covers
> for a few more minutes, despite having things I need to do that day.
It's that whole "free will" bit that explains evil in the world.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> Darren New <dne### [at] sanrrcom> wrote:
>> nemesis wrote:
>>> He's also The guy who defined man and woman. ;)
>> No he isn't. Once you leap from "the creator of the Big Bang" to "the guy
>> who tells you how you run your life", that's when I get annoyed.
>
> How you go from "guy who defined man and woman" to "guy who tells you how you
> run your life"?
We call it Proposition 8, making it impossible (for example) for one man to
designate another man as the person to make emergency medical decisions for
him, requiring him to choose a female instead.
Sharia is pretty harsh on homosexuality as well.
If you want your god to "define" man and woman without assigning any roles,
I'm cool with that too. Sadly, I don't believe there are many people who
think God cares about which is a man and which is a woman that doesn't also
believe that some combinations deserve punishment.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> The "first cause" argument is that every effect has a cause, and hence
> for the universe to exist, something before the universe must have
> caused it, and hence God exists.[1]
Huh. Looks like maybe the universe didn't need a first cause after all.
http://bite-dose.com/science/did-dark-energy-give-us-our-cosmos/
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> I believe you're reading disrespect into my disagreement. Regardless of
> Patrick's feelings, I don't disrespect you.
Dear friend, this words are not necessary, I already have this
consideration to you. And for what is worth you have been only
disrespectful once, Patrick many, and you corrected your question and
asked nicely again, that implicitly have an apology an I accept it
gladly, I offer the same an apology if I have being disrespectful with
you or Atheism in 1 or more occasions.
Best regards and luck to us all :-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Got a new term for you. Tragical. Its like a miracle, but when god does
stuff that's bad, because he "works in mysterious ways". lol
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-vhyqx_Duc&feature=channel
Think I am going to have to keep up with this guys videos.
Tell you the truth, I don't think we are "that" different. About the
only difference I can see is that, maybe, you are one of those that
think that given "some" ground can benefit our position. I once thought
that might be true, then I realized that, in reality, the people
fighting the hardest for beliefs are basically impervious to evidence in
most cases, without causing their whole world view to shatter like a
chandelier, and so talking to them is pointless, once you figure out
that they have put themselves in the unassailable position of stating,
"There is no evidence, ever, that would sway my belief.", and, anyone
willing to listen, isn't part of the problem in the first place. You
give ground to people who "could be" persuaded, but only as much as
needed. You never do so with someone that refuses to even acknowledge
the possible flaws, or lack of knowledge, inherent in their positions.
And, frankly, he claims I called him a moron. No, confusing "ignorant"
with "stupid" is moronic. Had he opted to take the definition for what
it "means", instead of inflating it into something worse... But, as they
say, better to say nothing, than erase all doubt.
That still doesn't mean he isn't do "some" respect for everything else
he does in his life, even to help others. It just means that he is the
reverse of an idiot savant. Instead of having one thing he does very
very well, and everything else poorly, he does everything else rather
well, and one thing very very poorly. Most of us have that handicap, in
one fashion or another. Mine is that I couldn't play a sport, or
apparently even a game of chance, without losing, even with loaded dice.
I am an idiot at it. Its a common affliction in nerds. His... is
similarly common. But, there is a difference between ignorance,
stupidity and willful blindness. The first is curable, the second
incurable, and the third, takes a great deal of practice. The first step
is to deny you have a problem at all, or could be bad at it.
--
void main () {
If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
if version = "Vista" {
call slow_by_half();
call DRM_everything();
}
call functional_code();
}
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
nemesis wrote:
> Patrick Elliott <sel### [at] npgcablecom> wrote:
>> Darren New wrote:
>>> Patrick Elliott wrote:
>>>> not the least being self contradictions,
>>> At least one highly religious person I had an opportunity to interact
>>> with for hours at a time face to face has convinced me that self
>>> contradictions aren't a problem in religion. As long as you're being
>>> irrational, why stick with modus ponens?
>>>
>> Yes, well.. Its when they then insist that you don't know what "you" are
>> talking about because its so damn obvious that god is "both" a plate of
>> spaghetti and a magic hat, at the same time, that things really go down
>> hill for everyone not "in the know". lol
>
> LOLz. Look at the atheists making fun of their fav subject and here I am still
> feeding them! Really, what would you do with your boring vulcan/madonna dual
> lifes if there was no one you could mock of? probably commit suicide to see if
> they were right...
>
Favorite? Yeah, if by "favorite" you mean "only". Its kind of like
arguing that "insert religion of your choice"'s favorite subject is
"everyone that believes something else" too.
In response, from PX Myers to yet "another" case of "Oh no, atheists
have bus signs now!", and more specifically the ever popular, "There
probably isn't any god, so stop being an ass." Umm, well, the last bit
isn't *quite* phrased that way, but...:
""There's probably no God" is an accurate summary of the atheist
position. There's no virtue to be found in iron-clad certainty, and it
is no sign of weakness that a statement might allow for acceptance of
evidence in contradiction. People like Warner, however, think that
certainty is a necessity.
...
Let's leave certainty to the oleaginous evangelists, the jingoistic war
mongers, and the other con artists selling us bogus solutions to
imaginary problems. A little uncertainty, a little willingness to accept
that deeper knowledge might change our minds, is a good thing.
...
As far as the last part of the slogan…yes, I find it very reassuring
that I am not reliant on the whims of some all-powerful cosmic tyrant.
I've read the Bible, and his god is not a very nice anthropomorphic
hallucination: murder, war, rape, threats of eternal torment, and
micro-management of trivial aspects of human behavior seem to be his
modi operandi. I am relieved that I am not under its thumb, although it
is still worrisome that so many imagine that they are, and act as if
this evil puppetmaster were pulling their strings.
The message of atheism is personal responsibility. You cannot blame your
wickedness on a rebellious ancestor with an appetite for apples. You
cannot say the devil made you do it. Your actions are not dictated by
invisible deities whispering in your ear. Your actions have
consequences, and they are *your* actions." <- emphasis mine
--
void main () {
If Schrödingers_cat is alive or version > 98 {
if version = "Vista" {
call slow_by_half();
call DRM_everything();
}
call functional_code();
}
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Elliott wrote:
> Got a new term for you. Tragical. Its like a miracle, but when god does
> stuff that's bad, because he "works in mysterious ways". lol
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8-vhyqx_Duc&feature=channel
>
> Think I am going to have to keep up with this guys videos.
I've watched some of his stuff. He's pretty funny.
This guy's pretty good too, altho less funny:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQBDGMj2h-c
> Tell you the truth, I don't think we are "that" different.
I try not to be off-putting. You don't seem to care whether you're
off-putting. I think that's the main difference in our approaches.
> think that given "some" ground can benefit our position.
I don't give any ground. I just don't feel the need to alienate people who
aren't attacking me. :-)
> and so talking to them is pointless,
... if you're trying to change their mind, yes.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Patrick Elliott wrote:
> The message of atheism is personal responsibility. You cannot blame your
> wickedness on a rebellious ancestor with an appetite for apples.
Well, I don't, but that's because I'm from the other side of the family. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
Why is there a chainsaw in DOOM?
There aren't any trees on Mars.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
