Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10
41
General Religious Discussion / Re: A Question for Atheists:
« Last post by dennis on Today at 06:35:14 PM »
I wonder if dennis realized that he actually did answer my question, despite his attempt to establish a rationale for not answering it.

It is obvious if you look closely at said rationale; he declared that the nature and attributes of such an entity must be identical to his god otherwise it would be philosophically, spiritually, and logically ridiculous.  Yet it is clear that it is not philosophically ridiculous, because philosophy often uses such questions as tools to help people think.  It is equally clear that it is not logically ridiculous, because it is inherently illogical to argue that an analogy is invalid unless it refers to something which is identical to the thing being discussed.  The whole point of analogies is that they use things which are not identical as the thing being discussed in order to make a point.

So we're left with "spiritually ridiculous".  But we were not discussing this in terms of spirituality to begin with, so this is actually irrelevant, and now all three legs of his justification have fallen off, leaving only the statement that making such a comparison is ridiculous.  This obviously is his personal opinion, because it is not shared by the people actually asking the question.  So, if he finds it personally ridiculous to make such a comparison, it is reasonable to question why that is.  However, the reason is evident from his post - because he states that such questions are ignorant, willful, provocative, etc.

However, all of these boil down to his opinion, that the person asking it is being ignorant, willful, provocative, etc.  In short, he finds it offensive to be asked this question.  And that is what makes the answer obvious.  He is offended because of the idea that his god might be compared to something completely imaginary.  In short, he is disturbed by this comparison, and therefore would be disturbed by someone who came to him talking about having a personal relationship with Hamlet, or with the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or with Zeus - because he does not believe that any of those are supernatural beings like his god.

So, thanks for the answer, dennis.  I'm especially thankful that you made it into a puzzle for me to unravel, as I enjoy solving puzzles.  But since we both know what the answer is now, perhaps you could refrain from the posturing and hyperbole and simply admit that you find people talking about imaginary stuff as if it's real to be disturbing?

1. I am not disturbed, I just tend to ignore it. This based on experience because the questions usually come from people who want to provoke and argument, not promote discussion.

2. You are confusing spiritual and imaginary.
42
General Religious Discussion / Re: Why create good and evil?
« Last post by junebug72 on Today at 06:31:27 PM »

Quote
Why were A&E not told about good and evil/right and wrong?
Why was it necessary to have the existence of good and evil, if presumably no part of Yaweh's creation was going to experience it?

[] It was never about a distinction between good and evil since evil (and sinfulness) did not exist.
[] Mankind was made in the image of God. (A mind that can conceive and create)
[] But as the created being, mankind had to be somehow less than God.
[] The relationship between Creator and Created set up is one of obedience (to God) by (our) choice
[] There had to be at least ONE thing in existence that is required to make obedience a choice. (free will - yeah I know...) but logic demands one thing as a minimum
[] God set a really small thing as the choice.
[] That small thing is 'don't think you can and should be equal to me' by knowing what I know. (And he was proven right because we have been bothered by all the hell that was released upon this earth ever since)
[]  God knew we would not resist (omniscience) , but he had a perfect plan in place
... you know the story from there.

Seems familiar to the story of Persephone eating the fruit of hades.  So mankind suffers. 

Dennis what of the first woman that god created for Adam?  She was not submissive enough so god made Eve from his rib so she would always be inferior/submissive.
 
Genesis 1:
26 And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

43
General Religious Discussion / Re: A Question for Atheists:
« Last post by dennis on Today at 06:28:36 PM »
Dennis, thanks for your reply.  It appears that you thought I made up a god like the Flying Spaghetti Monster in my example. Perhaps a bit of research is in order:

Quote
Ahura Mazda
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Ahura Mazda (/??h?r??mæzd?/;[1]), (also known as Ohrmazd, Ahuramazda, Hourmazd, Hormazd, and Hurmuz, Lord or simply as spirit) is the Avestan name for a higher divine spirit of the old Iranian religion (predating Islam) who was proclaimed as the uncreated spirit by Zoroaster, the founder of Zoroastrianism. Ahura Mazda is described as the highest spirit of worship in Zoroastrianism, along with being the first and most frequently invoked spirit in the Yasna. The literal meaning of the word Ahura is light and Mazda is wisdom. Zoroastrianism revolves around three basic tenets - Good Thoughts, Good Words and Good Deeds.

Ahura Mazda first appeared in the Achaemenid period (c. 550 – 330 BCE) under Darius I's Behistun Inscription. Until Artaxerxes II (405–04 to 359–58 BCE), Ahura Mazda was worshiped and invoked alone. With Artaxerxes II, Ahura Mazda was invoked in a triad, with Mithra and Apam Napat. In the Achaemenid period, there are no representations of Ahura Mazda other than the custom for every emperor to have an empty chariot drawn by white horses, to invite Ahura Mazda to accompany the Persian army on battles. Images of Ahura Mazda began in the Parthian period, but were stopped and replaced with stone carved figures in the Sassanid period.

I did not make him up!  If you believe the ancient documents,  He is the one that created the world.  He is the one who created the first trinity - along with Mithra and Apam Napat.

It is very strange that this religion existed hundreds of years before Christianity, Christianity is modeled after it, and yet you insist that Christianity is the one that is real.

See how strange that sounds? :(

The criticism/suspicions about Christianity is understandable.

The request for me to deny/explain/justify another 'god' (cartoon or otherwise) is usually dismissed because to ask the question is usually just wilful/spiteful/ignorant etc as I said.

But given your stature on this forum, I will endeavour to explain more fully.

I know nothing about the Mazda God. I don't know anyone who does. I have never encountered it nor had reason to contemplate it.

How can I possibly defend it or explain something I know nothing about?

I don't have perfect knowledge about my God either, but I have sufficient to argue the case.

If you are suggesting that I should have eliminated every god that 'existed' every where in the world forever, then that would be a double standard.

Scientists don't eliminate every possible competing theory before postulating theirs as the best explanation. And they don't even pretend to understand that other theory fully. A chemist and biologist may be exploring the same phenomenon from different perspectives without fully understanding the other, even though they are both looking at the same cell or whatever.

Mazda may well be a perfectly sensible, choice. And if my choice fails me at any time then I may well investigate the alternative. Many people have done that and switched religions.

You see, I may have explored Christianity more fully than other religions. And that is a function of the culture that I grew up in. I recognise that and I am skeptical enough to be in the lookout for inconsistencies, but until it does, there really is no LOGICAL reason to go elsewhere.

Hope that makes sense


44
thanks for the non-answer, I thought a "scholar" like yrself would jump on this, a bit more up to date than anselm's argument, the cosmological argument...etc that seems to be as far as you are prepared to go in your "quest", just find old, very old (and done to death) arguments to confirm yr biases.
45
General Religious Discussion / Re: 10 Atheist Commandments
« Last post by eh! on Today at 06:12:19 PM »
"(I have a heap of threads to respond to, so I don't want to pick a fight here with this one as it addresses too many topics. All of the comments I make I have already made elsewhere, so I won't keep regurgitating old arguments. Having said that, I am keen to see you comments...)"

I like the way dennis builds in his standard disclaimer, ie in so many words;


here is my opinion, I won't argue for it, because it's right, because it's my opinion, therefore is right, because it's my opinion......

I will just be insulting and pretend I don't know I am being insulting and  I won't respond to any comments because I have already given my opinions that are right, because they are my opinions.

what a jerk.
46
Had a look thanks.
For the sake of transparency, I did not click on any of the links. (But I recognise some topics)

-- so many, where to start (I am a bit time-poor at the mo_)
-- no ABOUT page, so I don't know who they are (source credence)
-- and I worry about motive when the PayPal button emerges (whether you are evangelist/ apologist or atheist)

It is accepted by me and most around here that there are two sides to the same story and simply gathering all the evidence in one place does not change the weight of evidence.

I am a bit lazy, but I am pretty sure if irrefutable evidence emerges about the existence of Jesus, I'd hear about it on the 6PM news.)

I know you (or Nam) are going to say that my response is proof that I am not willing to change my mind, but that is purely because you won't accept what I said on good faith. But I have a few other threads where I owe comments, and that is taking my time right now.
47
couldn't resist being childish, is that your world view and your truth, act the fool.
48
General Religious Discussion / Re: 10 Atheist Commandments
« Last post by Nam on Today at 06:05:01 PM »
Now those might be ok on a courthouse lawn.

Minus his edits?

-Nam
49
General Religious Discussion / Re: The Ethics of Slavery and the Bible
« Last post by Nam on Today at 06:03:28 PM »
I do not believe the Hebrews did anything that is described in their teachings. I think they made most of all of it up to make them look "tough" to other Nations surrounding them.

-Nam
50
^^^Sorry, couldn't resist.
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10