-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Atheism
- Thread starter Disco08
- Start date
Back to arrogance again. I think that Foxy telling us that some dude called Jonah was eaten by a whale but then days later emerged unharmed is simply silly. Foxy would say that it must be true because the OLd Testament is true and that it is the word of god.
That's arrogant to me.
However for me to say its crap and couldnt have happened and that the OT is a book of fairy tales and that god doesnt exist; well I am sure that Foxy sees that as arrogant.
That's arrogant to me.
However for me to say its crap and couldnt have happened and that the OT is a book of fairy tales and that god doesnt exist; well I am sure that Foxy sees that as arrogant.
Six Pack said:
Thats not arrogant to me. If Jay was saying "I cannot believe how you foolish people refuse to accept the truth of the Jonah tale, how many times do you need God to rap you on the head to get the idea" that would be arrogant. Likewise if he were to say "I'm fine for all you monkey loving people to believe in your evolution fairy tale, I will be at the hand of God after Judgement Day because I have seen the light and am worthy, so enjoy Hell
" would be arrogant.Same spin to evolution would be saying "anyone who believes the Bible must be simple because even the most basic of assessments shows its full of fairy tales even a 6 year old would not believe".
Nothing wrong saying "I believe this, and disagree with this". Its when you have to denegrate those who disagree with you simply because they hold a contrary view that you are getting arrogant IMO.
jayfox said:
If you consider yourself an honest Christian, I challenge you to look at those sites and give me your honest opinion as to whether or not they fit into the category of lying for God or not. At best they are deliberately misleading - a form of lying that God should surely abhor.
Sidestepping the issue is also intellectually dishonest and God would surely abhor that too. Up for the challenge Jayfox?
jayfox said:
As I've said, if I think an argument is poor I say so. And give reasons why I think so. I wouldn't say that was arrogant - that's tough-minded thinking.
I've conceded that it's just possible God exists. But show me the evidence. Is that arrogant? I'd answer no.
I wouldn't concede intelligent design is even remotely possible as there is so much evidence that contradicts it. It's a farce, and those who claim that it is any form of science are either lying for God consciously - and I have no doubt many do - or don't know enough about science and are essentially mislead and ignorant.
If you want to participate in the Atheism thread, you better have your arguments together, because I'll tell you when they are not up to scratch. Is that arrogant? I don't think so, but you seem to.
On the other hand, you and tt2 say things like "I don't have any evidence apart from what is written in the Bible and what I feel, but I know I'm right". Is that arrogant?
Thanks for sticking up for me rosalita.
I do believe religion is the refuge for the weak minded. Muslim, christian, Hindu, whatever. Blindly following an ancient superstition with no rational basis. A escape route or cop out for all life's difficult questions and problems, 'god did it, god intended it, I'm going to god when I die' etc etc. Put it all down to god.
I have no religeous friends, well very few, I have a friend who is a half-arsed Hindu Indian, I can't relate to religeous people. I have Aborigional friends who kind of believe in their legends and dreamtime etc, I tell them I think its all horsesh!t.
I had a guy I worked with once who I got on well with, he went born again and turned into a zombie. All over.
These individual examples are beside the point though. I believe god is a fairytale and religion is either the cuase or excuse for the worst deeds that humans are capable of.
This is my view. I'm not the first who is held them. Some of the greatest thinkers had thought the same.
I might be wrong though. Religeous fundamentalists will never say that. There is still that tiny kernel of doubt, like when the Tiges are 38 points down at the 7 minute mark of the last Q ar Football Park, and you think "we're gone.....but if we can just steal a couple of quick goals...'.
.
I do believe religion is the refuge for the weak minded. Muslim, christian, Hindu, whatever. Blindly following an ancient superstition with no rational basis. A escape route or cop out for all life's difficult questions and problems, 'god did it, god intended it, I'm going to god when I die' etc etc. Put it all down to god.
I have no religeous friends, well very few, I have a friend who is a half-arsed Hindu Indian, I can't relate to religeous people. I have Aborigional friends who kind of believe in their legends and dreamtime etc, I tell them I think its all horsesh!t.
I had a guy I worked with once who I got on well with, he went born again and turned into a zombie. All over.
These individual examples are beside the point though. I believe god is a fairytale and religion is either the cuase or excuse for the worst deeds that humans are capable of.
This is my view. I'm not the first who is held them. Some of the greatest thinkers had thought the same.
I might be wrong though. Religeous fundamentalists will never say that. There is still that tiny kernel of doubt, like when the Tiges are 38 points down at the 7 minute mark of the last Q ar Football Park, and you think "we're gone.....but if we can just steal a couple of quick goals...'.
.
Well when I was a child, I believed everything in the Bible as God's Word passed down to us.Disco08 said:I'm sure from the people you come in contact with's perspective it counts for plenty.
You obviously know a bit about The Bible from your upbringing. What do you think of stories like Noah's Ark and The Garden Of Eden. Real or metaphoric?
Now... I'm a little more worldly. A lot I find, are opinions and observations of the writers ie The Gospels. Does that make it "The Truth"? ..unsure.
Now information comes that there are more gospels, the Dead Sea Scrolls, etc. they may be contradictory to the Church's historical teachings. There maybe coverups by the Church to "protect' its standing. Some is "Illusional" (some Delusional?).
I must profess to believing in some "Being", unsure as to what though, I'm still figuring myself out ;D let alone one of the worlds biggest questions.
Belief and Faith, I envy those that have it unreservedly.
But I'd rather try to practice ("Christian values" ? ) every day rather than once a week, ie worshipping on a Sunday, going to Mass and for the rest of the week not really putting my religious beliefs into practise.
Not saying I succeed by any means, I'm only human 8) .
Those that can and do, well there are some exceptional people, aren't there? Good luck to them.
I have friends who are practising Catholics, some are Uniting church, even one from Ghana who is Muslim.
They have their beliefs which I honour and respect.
Hope they reciprocate.
rosy23 said:
No problem Rosy. I'd be happy to give you an answer once you have given me an answer to these questions which I asked you previously -
Quote from: rosy23 on August 18, 2008, 01:32:31 pm
I simply don 't believe you're genuine or you wouldn't behave the way you do on here.
[/quote]
Those who post on here regularly know that I am genuine. Answer me this - Why would anyone spend this much time debating about something that they aren't actually genuine about? And how would they know so much about it if they hadn't studied it for years as a foundation for living their life?
Quote from: rosy23 on August 18, 2008, 01:32:31 pm
An advantage of being agnostic is not being blinkered to other people's beliefs and being free to respect the fact that many religions are "the" religion to the people who believe in them.
[/quote]
Do you respect that my religion is "the" religion to me then?
evo said:
Nan's are soft and will give you a hug regardless.
Do you tell the boss when he's being a *smile*? Or when Mrs Bevo has put on a kilo or two? ;D
I take you point though. In general it's definately the best policy.
I always liked that Jim Carrey flick Liar, Liar for that reason. It's not always easy to tell the truth.
evo said:
Lucky you.
Were you always though?
You would not tell your boss what you thought of him in all instances.
Or maybe you would and that's why you are your own boss?
evo said:
Actually I would probably tell my wife(tactfully) as I'd likely still get a hug like Nan.
Not so sure I'd tell my boss if she was fat though.
Tiger74 said:Thats not arrogant to me. If Jay was saying "I cannot believe how you foolish people refuse to accept the truth of the Jonah tale, how many times do you need God to rap you on the head to get the idea" that would be arrogant. Likewise if he were to say "I'm fine for all you monkey loving people to believe in your evolution fairy tale, I will be at the hand of God after Judgement Day because I have seen the light and am worthy, so enjoy Hell
Same spin to evolution would be saying "anyone who believes the Bible must be simple because even the most basic of assessments shows its full of fairy tales even a 6 year old would not believe".
Nothing wrong saying "I believe this, and disagree with this". Its when you have to denegrate those who disagree with you simply because they hold a contrary view that you are getting arrogant IMO.
Excellent post 74. Very well said.
tigersnake said:
There is a fair bit of documented evidence to support our beliefs, historical records and archaeological findings to back up places, races, events etc. as well. Let alone the experience of the individual which is the most important piece of evidence.
How do you know if someone has an itch? They can tell you that it is there but just because you can't see it or have any hard evidence for it doesn;t mean it doesn't exist. A very simple and imperfect analogy but we all put faith in things we can't see or control at times.
tigersnake said:
This could be the reason that you think that Christians are weak minded. I know heaps of Christians including AFL footballers, leading scientists, Doctors, Lawyers, etc. Are all of these people weak minded?
It is very sad that some people use religion as a tool to help them with an evil agenda but God is more angry at them for their evil deeds than anyone. He has a perfect standard remember so anything short of that is unacceptable, let alone "the worst deeds that humans are capable of."tigersnake said:
It is your view and you are entitled to it. No-one on here is trying to take your opinion away from you. We may not agree with it but that makes for interesting debate.tigersnake said:
antman said:
It's lucky you are so patient, isn't it?
I am probably not the person to give you an educated account as to whether those websites are being intellectually dishonest or not as I do not have a scientific background like Djevv does. I could look at them like any other person does but my opinion may not be as accurate as Djevv's. Why don't you ask him to do it instead?
The only thing that I will say is that if those sites are deliberately misleading people, then it would be abhorrent to God. Why don;t you show me where you think that they are deliberately misleading people.
This is probably a decent example, if you can beleive Dawkins is actually capable of answering the question posed which it seems reasonable to assume he is given he discusses it at length in one of his books.
"In September 1997, I allowed an Australian film crew into my house in Oxford without realizing that their purpose was creationist propaganda. In the course of a suspiciously amateurish interview, they issued a truculent challenge to me to ‘give an example of a genetic mutation or an evolutionary process which can be seen to increase the information in the genome’. It is the kind of question only a creationist would ask in that way, and it was the point I tumbled to the fact that I been duped into granting an interview to creationists – a thing I normally don’t do, for good reasons. In my anger I refused to discuss the question further, and told them to stop the camera. However, I eventually withdrew my peremptory termination of the interview, because they pleaded with me that they had come all the way from Australia specifically to interview me. Even if this was a considerable exaggeration, it seemed, on reflection, ungenerous to tear up the legal release form and throw them out. I therefore relented.
My generosity was rewarded in a fashion that anyone familiar with fundamentalist tactics might have predicted. When I eventually saw the film a year later, I found that it had been edited to give the false impression that I was incapable of answering the question about information content. In fairness, this may not have been quite as intentionally deceitful as it sounds. You have to understand that these people really believe their question cannot be answered."
Comparing these two sites would also provide numerous possible examples:
http://www.answersingenesis.org
http://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au/
"In September 1997, I allowed an Australian film crew into my house in Oxford without realizing that their purpose was creationist propaganda. In the course of a suspiciously amateurish interview, they issued a truculent challenge to me to ‘give an example of a genetic mutation or an evolutionary process which can be seen to increase the information in the genome’. It is the kind of question only a creationist would ask in that way, and it was the point I tumbled to the fact that I been duped into granting an interview to creationists – a thing I normally don’t do, for good reasons. In my anger I refused to discuss the question further, and told them to stop the camera. However, I eventually withdrew my peremptory termination of the interview, because they pleaded with me that they had come all the way from Australia specifically to interview me. Even if this was a considerable exaggeration, it seemed, on reflection, ungenerous to tear up the legal release form and throw them out. I therefore relented.
My generosity was rewarded in a fashion that anyone familiar with fundamentalist tactics might have predicted. When I eventually saw the film a year later, I found that it had been edited to give the false impression that I was incapable of answering the question about information content. In fairness, this may not have been quite as intentionally deceitful as it sounds. You have to understand that these people really believe their question cannot be answered."
Comparing these two sites would also provide numerous possible examples:
http://www.answersingenesis.org
http://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au/
Disco08 said:
You know, he would get a lot more respect from Creationists if he dropped the superiorority complex and granted their interview requests. Surely a man of his immense knowledge and resources could make any Creationist look like a fool in such discussions. Do that a few times and it would end the requests for interviews I would imagine. Unless they actually are asking questions that he actually struggles with....
This clip of him 'struggling' to answer their question is used often by creationists yet like I said, he discusses it at length in one or more of his books. Why would you think he isn't capable of answering in this case and why exactly do you think he needs the respect of creationists? His work is roundly criticised by them despite the fact he's a leading expert in the fields he's discussing.
There's a clip somewhere of him discussing evolution with a creationist. He certainly makes him look like a complete fool. I'll try and find it later to see what you think.
There's a clip somewhere of him discussing evolution with a creationist. He certainly makes him look like a complete fool. I'll try and find it later to see what you think.
