Religulous
- Started
- Last post
- 72 Responses
- sigg0
*gets popcorn
- vitamins0
I think the best way to become a atheist is reading the bible.
- ukit0
Random observation - if you watch Maher for a while and then David Duchovny in Californication (where I'm guessing he pretty much plays himself), it's like they were separated at birth. Same mannerisms, attitude, etc
- georgesIII0
@ vitamins,
Nobody forced you to believe the lie,
Do you get angry at your parent for convincing you the tooth fairy existed?I watched religulous and found it quite entertaining, but now placing it on a piedestal like it is not a biased and carefully mounted documentary is a little too much for me, the same goes when I watch biased religious docs,
my motto has always been live and let live, I've never been bothered by fundies but somehow in the US you managed to let them gain enough power to be the minority which has and will rule your way of life,
You should wake up but not by attacking the people who have faith in a god because of the few extremist one,
- gramme0
"You 'have faith' that there exist things that leave no mark or their existence on the world, yet are continuous in their potential to affect the real world.. This is somewhat of a word game - existence can and in everday usage is, defined as something having qualities or affecting such that can be perceived.."
I didn't say that God's existence, or the rest of the spiritual realm, leaves no mark on the world. By tangible, I'll go with the Oxford definition of "perceptible by touch" and add sight, sound, or smell to the equation. God cannot be touched, seen, heard, or smelt. The effects of his existence can be seen, but faith is required to believe such an idea. He did come to earth in human form (Fact: Jesus lived. Faith: He is who he claimed to be, i.e. the Son of God, deity incarnate.). He remains in spirit (i.e., the Holy Spirit, or third person of the Trinity), but Jesus the man is in heaven. (I realize there are several faith-based statements there, but bear with me).
Whether I wish to find evidence of God in this world or not is somewhat irrelevant: He reveals himself at his discretion.
My original statement, again, was not regarding whether God exists or not. Of course I believe that, as anyone whose been snooping around here longer than six months knows. My point, yet again, was that one can make faith-based statements about God's Existence, and maintain perfect harmony with logic. That was the only point I set out to make, but of course you lulled me into making others along the way. ;)
"I say, both that your citing of these effects reduces your 'faith' to a hypothesis, basing it upon this 'evidence', and also that this hypothesis is unproven, given that the true causes for all the evidence shown by religious people of their gods' existence and actions in the world are, one by one, shown to have a scientific, logical basis."
My faith has been forged by direct and secondary experience of the divine, and tested by logic. It can hardly be called a hypothesis, because it involves experiences, vividly real ones, which I can't prove to you using any sort of scientific construct. Not that logic is an ultimate filter, mind you; I've been saying all along that human logic is too limited to be trusted with major conclusions about Life, Happiness, and Everything.
It is true that many things once considered mystical have indeed been found to belong firmly in the physical. From my perspective this is a good thing; it pares away the unnecessary metaphysical chaff that people have assigned to various faiths over the millennia. But I have yet to see the fundamental "true causes" behind Christianity (or any other monotheistic religion) uncovered by science or logic. The things which have been "uncovered" have been myths like the Shroud of Turin, or the figure of Mary in central America that weeps blood, etc. What I think you may be referring to are religious superstitions which have been shown, via scientific investigation, to be farcical.
- oh
my
fucking
godneowe - There's a god for that?gramme
- are you new, neowe ? We always do this, at great length every few months... : P We like it.mikotondria3
- It's in his name. He's neo-plural. Post-singular.gramme
- i don't even know where to start with thisscarabin
- oh
- neowe0
who let gramme out of his cage?
- I helped
:)mikotondria3 - me too a few...Miesfan
- hi five !!111!1!!1mikotondria3
- I helped
- lukus_W0
"please explain as this seems completely baseless."
Well - that was one of the points that was made in the book .. it struck a chord at the time and I remembered it.
The book dissects the classic elements and ideas that are common throughout myths and legends across history - and also talks about possible places these myths may have originated; citing African folklore as a defining source .. and also drawing parallels between the stages that a human has to pass through (physiologically) and the distinct stages that the 'hero' needs to pass through in various traditional mythologies.
The thing that I found interesting, was the idea that that notions of story have developed through necessity (to explain the physical and psychological changes that humankind goes through). I hadn't really considered this before on any pseudo-deep level.
Anyway, I'm rambling a bit - my point probably still seems fairly baseless. But, in the little amount of time I've lived so far - I know from experience that self-adoration doesn't usually lead to the best things .. and looking for things outside of ourselves to appreciate usually leads to better. I suppose, I basically think that some religions or spiritualities can provide a good a blueprint for living.
--
"imagination is healthy, yes. projecting something you don't understand into an external being that you can talk to is called crazy."
Yeah well, I agree - but many millions of people don't :)
- FearOfDeath, fear of the dark, fear of each other.mikotondria3
- there's a difference between self adoration and taking responsibility for one's own lifescarabin
- I don't know, maybe. But I do know that society largely teaches us to think we're each individually the most the important things in the universe.lukus_W
- important things in the universe.lukus_W
- I completely agree we should each take responsibility .. we should choose for ourselves. I see what you're saying.lukus_W
- vitamins0
I'm more upset with people trying to convince me with Christianity since college only to leave me more confused. I'm not just basing my opinions from Religulous, but from other resources on the biography of Jesus, and God's from around the world. I'm still doing some personal investigation to satisfy this void in me that wants answers. I have to be honest here, that the more i'm finding out, the more childish, superstitious and outrageous Christianity is sounding to me.
- gramme0
*Life, the UNIVERSE, and Everything.
Sheesh... some Douglas Adams fan I am.
- mikotondria30
..these "effects of his existence..", that CAN be seen, heard, felt, etc, can ALL be explained by another, more rational cause. Always.
What is it, about which you have faith that it is unexplainable by any cause other than this nebulous concept of an imperceptible mind you call god ?
Any answer must be corroborated by a proof that it could ONLY have been caused by your entity - remember it's you that have the faith, not I. If I can come up with a cause that ISN'T your singular, omnipotent, omnipresent, universe-creating lord of all, then I've won, and you must choose something else.
Just saying I have to have faith that certain aspects of the universe are as they are because you've decided that your god did it, and nothing else could have is invalid - that's literally just making it up as you go along.
Just one thing, please..
- moldero0
this is how i see it (its only my opinion so it dont mean shit, dont get mad if my opinion doesnt match your own, its mine and not yours, your free to have your own and I respect that)
if there was a god and he told me, "look dude, dont do this, do that, dont worry about a thing, and every little thing, is gonna be alright " ide listen to the guy, because well, hes god and he probably knows his shit. As far as i know religions are made by a man, and are lead by a man, and we people, dont know shit. why would i choose to follow some dude who read some book written by some other dude. ide follow a god, but i wont follow a man.and another thing;
Life after death? for what? what makes us asshole people so special that this world isnt good enough for us, that if were "good" were owed life after death somewhere, whether its 20 virgins or fly around being angels in heaven, or come back as an ant (cause come on what are your chances to come back as an eagle or a tiger or something on top of the food chain again) if there was a god, dont you think it would be a slap in his face if you said to him "thanks for this food, animals, trees, ocean, air, sky, beauty, love, family, but im an unappreciative little cunt and all this just isnt good enough for me so i hope you have something better lined up for me when I die, thanks anyway man."
- DrBombay0
Unicorn flies thru thread.
- gramme0
I'll get back to this once I've justified a few more of my billable hours.
- ukit0
Only criticism I have with "discuss religion with intelligent Christians"...
If I told you I worshipped the Flying Spaghetti Monster or that the Easter Bunny was real, would you demand a serious debate between academic equals? What about over Scientology? Mormonism?
Why is Christianity worthy of debate but not others? At some point it's all just "religion" and trying to debate it all is pointless, the debate would be over in five minutes. The thing is that most religious people are not basing their belief on reason, but on personal feelings/ culture and other things.
- yeah, it's pointless .. because they're never ever going to come round to the idea that God doesn't exist.lukus_W
- scarabin0
probably a good idea if i stay out of this thread.
have fun, guys.
- cerberus0
oh, and the "Virgin" Mary was no virgin.
