 |
| Register | Login | |||||
 |
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
|
| Register | Login | |||||
|
Main
| Memberlist
| Active users
| Calendar
| Chat
| Online users Ranks | FAQ | ACS | Stats | Color Chart | Search | Photo album |
|
| | ||
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - - Posts by Jomb |
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 |
| User | Post | ||
Jomb Deddorokku                   Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
honestly, I've never heard of Jack Thompson. He must not be that loud if I cant hear him  |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku  Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| The older generation is always going to be fearful and distrustful of the new media they did'nt grow up with. They don't "get it" usually, and so many will assume it is worthless and/or harmful. But the content of the games should'nt be shocking, it's really nothing new, we've seen it all before. Tell the kids not to play video-games, have them go read books instead. Maybe they'll choose Shakespeare and read about murders, adultery, whoring, etc. But somehow if they get it from Shakespeare instead of GTA that is applauded and they get patted on the back |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| Someone who commits suicide can also be a martyr, but it is not necessarily so. Have any of you seen the famous photo of the monk who set himself on fire in protest of China occupying Tibet? That was a suicide and a martyrdom in one. But the girl I went to school with who killed herself was not a martyr, she was just an escapist. Even if you die for a cause you still might not be a martyr if no one knows about it. If your death motivated no one, then in my book you still are'nt a martyr. | |||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| Heh, on a side note, now that Silent Hill has been brought up.. I have a little nephew, about 6 years old who loves PS2. He kept insisting I let him play Silent Hill, saying he was old enough and was'nt scared of anything. I finally let him play it for alittle while while I was watching him. He got to the part at the beginning where you first get the radio and the monster comes after you. He started crying in terror and ran away. He's never asked to play one of my games again |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| All good morals requires is the ability to empathize with other people. Having empathy has nothing to do with religion.
When a person has no empathy for other people but still behaves in a moral way simply because they fervently believe in their religion, we are in serious danger from them. What happens when some event happens to them which shakes up their belief? When that crutch falls away there will be nothing to prevent them from acting out in potentially dangerous ways. Or, what happens when their belief system gets hijacked by fanatical madmen? Then we get suicide bombers. The strongest system of right and wrong is one which is internal to the person and not religion based. "I think theists and atheists both have good support for their beliefs but neither of them can fully disprove the other" Is it really that one cant be disproved, or is it that one group refuses to accept the facts? |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| What's there to explain? It's a matter of faith, right? So facts are irrelevant, or so I've been told. | |||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| Although I cant DISPROVE with 100% accuracy that no "God" exists, the likely-hood looks very low, probably below 10% chance. But when reasoning things out, you dont try to prove a negative, you try to prove a positive. So I'd look for signs of God to prove it exists. God has'nt spoken to me and I have'nt seen God, so I can rule out my own senses. I have'nt seen any photographic or video evidence of God's existence. Considering that he is supposed to be all-powerful and all-knowing, this is very baffling. You'd think he'd simply communicate with people and tell them what he wants or why he made them, but he does'nt do that so i consider that circumstantial evidence of his non-existence. Maybe he died? But that would contradict him being all-powerful. Why would there only be one god? Would'nt he get lonely and create a second god? Being all-powerful that would appear to be something he'd be capable of. Being all-powerful and all-knowing, why would'nt he just create the world perfectly at day 1, eliminating the need for evolution? Too much does'nt add-up with the concept of God.
It's much simpler to see the writing on the wall if you take a particular religion as opposed to the generic concept of a "God", most all religions contradict each other, so we know for a fact that most of them have to be wrong, though this still leaves the possibility that one is actually true. But taking any particular religion and comparing its version of history with the facts we have available shows us that either our facts are wrong or the religion is incorrect. The only religion which makes sense is that a being or beings which we have no concept of, and have idea why they did it, created life and/or the universe. Then he (they) vanished. Either they died or just went somewhere else. This is effectively the same as Atheism for all intents and purposes because you cant worship being or beings you have no information about at all. (edit - as an aside, I also cant disprove that a giant pink elephant lives in the center of the Earth and is in control of the weather, but that does'nt mean I should believe it.) (edited by Jomb on 10-18-06 07:12 PM) (edited by Jomb on 10-18-06 09:05 PM) |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| Silvershield - How is going by the best set of facts and theories currently available arrogance? I'm not claiming that everything we know in science is perfect and absolute, probably much of it is wrong or over-simplified, but it's the best we got right now. I don't believe in god because i see no hard compelling evidence of god, but i'm not of such an arrogant attitude as to INSIST FERVENTLY that there are no gods. If a God appeared here on Earth and starting doing God-type things I'd go with the new evidence. Just because some things are very complicated or unlikely does'nt really prove anything. If I were to roll a trillion sided dice and come up with a random number, say it came out 13. The chances of that happening were astronomically low, but at the same time it had to be one number and no matter which one it was it would have defied the odds. That does'nt make it the will of "God". As an Atheist I'm not claiming that I can perfectly understand the universe, I'm just claiming that I will go by the best available facts when attempting to do so, and encourage investigation of things we dont understand in the hopes of better understanding them, rather than writing it off as "the incomprehensible will of god".
JDavis - I'm not really that scatologically oriented Something to consider - if there is a God as put forth in the Bible, he is not a good god, I'd go so far as to say he is a cruel and evil god. He is all-knowing and all-powerful, right? So he knows way ahead of time how you will turn out and whether or not you will go to hell. Knowing full well that some people will end up in eternal suffering, he still creates them, apparently out of a twisted desire to see people suffer. He also seems to have a disturbing hang-up on people bowing down and praising him endlessly, is he that low in self-esteem? Why create billions of people who follow the "wrong" religions, causing them to go to hell? Why not, at the very least, tell each person directly that if they dont convert to whichever branch is the right one, that they will suffer eternal torment? It's not like that would be great effort for an all-powerful all-knowing being. I do think that all religions have lessons in them which can be useful and helpful to people, when viewed as mythology and fables, not when taken literally as historical fact. Jesus, for example, had many wise things to say, though I dont believe he was supernatural. |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku  Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| It does'nt really matter to me if some people consider me an agnostic, I still consider myself to be an Atheist, because based on the facts presented to me i cant believe in god. I'd have to put the likelyhood at less than 1% that god exists as put forth in any religion known to man, in my estimation. It's not a matter of faith, it's simply an exercise in rational thought. Rational thought is open to change if the evidence changes, that's all.
Silvershield -"Why doesn't it make it the will of God? I'm kind of just calling you out on this point for the sake of the argument but, honestly, if the Christian God exists as Christians say He does, would that random number not be His will? Regardless, though, I'm not quite certain I see what point you're trying to make with this. " My point was simply that unlikely things happening does'nt necessarily prove God exists because in many circumstances only unlikely things can happen. Chalking everything up as the intervention of god is kind of silly to me. "It's all a matter of free will. Simple. Free will is among God's greatest gifts to humanity, if not the absolute greatest, and though God certainly "could" defy that principle of free will, He chooses not to. He gives you and I the free will to choose whatever system of beliefs that appeals to us, and He gives each of us the same signs and symbols in daily life; people interpret those experiences differently, and so end up on different life paths. You are understanding your own free will, your own free choice, as the cruel work of God. It is not. " How do you know this? Why do you think that God gave us free will? Does'nt this directly contradict god being all-knowing? If god is truly all-knowing then he'd know every single choice each of us is going to make millions of years before we were born. This would make it his choice to intentionally create people who were going to hell. It might make a little more sense to me if god was not all-knowing or all-powerful. "Even if you don't wish to believe in my Lord as a supernatural being, it is best that you understand that the His greatest teaching was that we as humans should treat one another kindly. It's that simple. I'm not some Bible-thumping fundamentalist who will tell you that you're going to Hell because you're not a Christian, but I will tell you that you are going to Hell if you are a bad person." I dont understand this as the teaching of god, but i do agree with treating each other kindly. Does'nt religion itself sometimes drive a wedge between people and prevent this from happening though? "And, so, I continue to question why any atheist would continue to be an atheist when no proof against a god exists" circumstantial evidence against god exists, but its impossible to get direct evidence when the term god is defined very loosely. If i told you that the core of the earth is filled with chocolate, would you have to believe me because you cant prove me wrong conclusively? It does'nt work that way if we are to be rational beings. We have no way to currently dig to the center of the earth to find out with 100% certainty that it's not chocolate, so by your reasoning we should just have faith that there is chocolate down there somewhere. Or if I said out there somewhere in a distant solar system is a mirror planet to earth where we all have twins living and doing the exact same things we do here, there is no way to prove with 100% certainty that that is not so. To be rational you go with things that you can prove conclusively to be true, or have strong circumstantial evidence of. "In every moment of my life I see God" One question - What does he look like? Beard or no beard? white robes? Halo? "As I remarked to MathOnNapkins, it's insulting that you paint all believers as simple mindless drones who have become what they are because they have been brainwashed as children." No to be intentionally insulting, but there is some truth to people being products of their upbringing. If there was one correct religion, would'nt people naturally develop into it based on the facts of nature? What we have is people born into Christian areas of the world almost always becoming christian, people born into muslim areas of the world almost always following islam, people born in hindu areas almost always turn out hindu, etc. the logical explanation for this is that people are very srongly influenced by their upbringing, in a sort of brainwashing (strong word though, but the basic idea seems to apply) "You just have to take plenty of "mundane" experiences and understand that they have greater meaning." Why would you assume they are anything other than mundane or chance occurances? anyone- Why is it that god supposedly gives us free will so we can choose freely to worship and have faith in him? How does that make sense? Why does god care if we have faith in him or not? How does he benefit from this? Other than having a low self-esteem, i cant imagine a situation where a supposedly higher being would want a flock of lesser being going around praising and worshipping him. explain this to me, its yet another thing i consider circumstantial evidence against there being a god (as put forth in the bible). |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| "I'm not trying to label you for the sake of being malicious"
I did'nt think you were, no offense taken. This is the first religion topic I've ever read where the actual definitions of Atheist and Agnostic were vigorously debated So there is something new, I guess!
"You're absolutely right - when every possibly outcome of a specific scenario is unlikely, and then the actual outcome turns out to be one of those unlikely options (because it has to be), nothing at all is proven." Well, that is the exact argument many theists (more particularly Christians, as they are the only ones who've attempted to convert me) use when trying to get me to their point of view. "And, I don't think that human free will and God's omniscience are mutually exclusive, but it involves a great deal of juggling with the concept of time and space and predestination and all that erudite stuff. I've explained it to myself in a very convoluted, roundabout way, but, to simplify, just because God knows what we will do in a given situation doesn't mean that He made us do it. Imagine that He is so infinitely familiar with each and every one of us humans that He could flawlessly predict our behavior even millenia before we were born; that doesn't mean that He caused us to behave in whatever way we do, but that He "saw it coming" just based on His knowledge of our individual personalities, etc. Or, justify it to yourself in whatever way makes the most sense to you. Heh heh. " Even if he did'nt make us act the way we did, he made us knowing that we'd behave that way, which in my books would be the equivalent of setting a wild animal loose on the freeway knowing it'd just get run over. If you have to juggle logic around and come up with some odd justification, does'nt that bode ill for the concept of god? Where in the bible is this logical gymnastics located? What else could justify it? "You subscribe to the widespread belief that religion historically causes more harm than good. Corrupt people, misinterpretation of Scripture according to a specific agenda, and similar things all cause harm, but devotion to the essential tenets of most any religion causes absolutely no harm at all. You're saying that, since people have used religion as a pretense through which to do evil, religion is itself bad; that is a fallacy, as far as I can see. " But all those corrupt people and all those evil people got away with it only because of their ability to hi-jack a religion. Take away the religion and you've taken away their greatest tool. Many of those historical tragedies may have played out differently or not happened at all. That all this stuff happened so readily in the past makes it clear that it's going to keep happening over and over again. Even if the people responsible are not true believers (though many of them claimed to be, and who are we to say they were'nt?), they acted under the guise of religion. "I don't think God is defined loosely at all. He is a supernatural being who is responsible for the world as we know it; different religions will tack different additions onto that basic idea, or will qualify it differently, but that's the base of it. " That is god under the most generic and loosely defined terms, but no religion I'm aware of keeps it that simple. They all have much greater detail in what god is, how many gods there are, where god is located, what he looks like, gender, things he's done, etc. Many of these details can be completely and thoroughly disproved. This calls the whole religion into question in my book, because when something is presented as the complete and infallible word of god, then some of it is conclusively shown to be lies, that makes the whole thing very suspicious at the very least. "Absolutely you will see a greater concentration of a specific religious group in an area that has predominately followed that religion for generations. I won't deny for a second that the tendency is for people to be more inclined to that belief system that they are first exposed to. I only object to the implication that I am personally Christian because of my upbringing alone, because it directly includes the notion that I am irrational and brainwashed; I would generalize that same idea to other individuals, as well, in pointing out that there is no hard and fast rule that will determine what any specific person will be, because everyone comes to their ultimate faith (or lack thereof) in a different way. " Much of what people consider religion is actually culture, I'd even go so far as to say that all of religion is simply culture, and we are basically brainwashed into the culture we are born with. For example, I celebrate christmas simply because it's a custom in the US, not because of religious fervor. Maybe a better example is hair. Arm pit hair. When i see a woman with arm pit hair, i'm not the slightest bit attracted by it, actually kinda repulsed. But why would that be? It's perfectly natural... But in my culture its considered ugly and i'm a product of my culture in this sense. There are other cultures that see it differently, and even though I think they are wrong in my heart, logically I know that they are probably right because it actually is natural. Though some people will go against their culture, those people are exceedingly rare. And before you say that it makes no sense then for me to be an atheist (or agnostic if like), because the US is christian... actually it makes lots of sense because our country has 2 dueling identities based on the people who founded it. You have the puritans tradition (christians) and the democratic tradition (old world free-thinkers getting ideas from places like ancient greece) together though they are very commonly at odds with each other. "I don't know how I would answer this sufficiently, except to say that God's ways and God's ideas are so far beyond the capacity of humanity as to appear totally illogical or incomprehensible. Like I've stated previously, that sounds absolutely like a cop-out, but that's what faith is about. " OK, so how can you say he wants us to have faith in him or that he gave us free will if you also think he is so illogical and incomprehensible that we cant know what he's thinking? |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| "The issue here is that you continue to understand God as if He adheres to the same rules and the same logic that define humanity"
My point is this - If god adheres to our logic and makes sense then there are too many logical inconsistancies for him to be real. But, if god does not follow our logic and cant be known, then all religions are wrong because god is incomprehensible and they claim to comprehend. "Science and technology have inflicted just as many, if not more, atrocities as religion has. The nuclear bomb, chemical weapons - hell, even just swords and guns - are all products of science. Scientific progress is a great thing, and it is overwhelmingly used for good, but in order to destroy its capacity to create bad, you would need to destroy science totally - would it be worth the loss? " Got to disagree here on many points. First off, science is the only reason there are 6 billion people here on earth, because through things like medicine and modern agricultural techniques, more people live longer and have food to eat, to the tune of billions of people. No nuclear war or scientific catastrophe has caused a death toll anywhere near that figure. Additionally, science has made life much much easier for us to live (try living wild in the woods with only stone tools for awhile and you'll appreciate this). Without science we simply could'nt exist like we are now. Religion has been the motivation for some good charity works, but I'm not convinced it outweighs the times that it's been used to mistreat or murder people of different ethnicities. Additionally, the world could go on with very little difference without religion. We'd all still live basically as we do right now. "Would you care to provide a specific example of which of God's attributes can be "completely and thoroughly disproved"? " where to begin... I'll use only christian examples since you are christian, but the same sort of problems come up with any religion i know of. Garden of Eden - There is a talking snake, we know snakes lack vocal cords or the capacity for speech. There are only 2 humans, one male and one female, this is not a viable breeding population and could not survive in the long run. It is claimed that the world was created as we see it now in about 1 week, we know this to be not possible and out of touch with the facts. It also sets the age of the earth to be much younger than we now know it to be. When Noah supposedly saved all the animals from the earth being completely submerged in water, he is missing many types of animals which we know exist today, but they do exist so obviously such a thing never happened, or are we to assume he sailed literally around the world and collected all these animals in a wooden man-powered vessel and somehow fit them all in the boat and did it quick enough to prevent their drowning? Man was said to be created in the image of god, but we now know that man has changed form over time, so does that make gods form something like a homo habilus and we evolved past god? Somehow I dont think that is what the bible had in mind. "Religion and culture are absolutey intertwined, but I think you are wrong when you identically equate the two. And I also think you are incorrect in stating that it is "normal" for you to be an atheist because of our country's history - even those "old world free-thinkers" were overwhelmingly religious, or at least religiously affiliated, if only because atheism was so uncommon (and perhaps even taboo) at that point in time. Your atheism does not stem from some great tradition of atheism in America, but from a personal dissatisfaction with religion for whatever reason; you are proof that upbringing cannot be generalized to explain every person's religious opinions. Likewise, I am myself very religious, and my parents raised me that way, but both my older and my younger brother have stopped attending church and are not very religiously-inclined at all. And you can bet that they were brought up alongside and identical to me. " Being religious and being religiously affiliated are 2 very different things. On paper one would think I was a christian because my grandmother is and had me baptised in her church. Most of the founding fathers were more strongly free-thinkers than christians. Many had serious doubts or were out-right agnostics. The ideas they exp (edited by Jomb on 10-22-06 09:37 PM) (edited by Jomb on 10-22-06 09:39 PM) |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| (sorry for the late reply, when i last tried to come here the site appeared to be down)
"Who are you to make the unilateral judgement that all of science's benefits have made up for its faults? And, likewise, that all of religion's benefits have not made up for its faults? You speak as if religion plays only a minimal part as far as creating good in the world, at least in relation to the bad that it does, but can you not consider every single good deed, both great and small, that has ever been done in the name of religion? Every single sick person who has been cared for, every single starving person who has been fed, every single oppressed person who has been defended, all because of religion? You can't easily quantify that. " I'm but one man I actually believe that much of science has caused problems (with the environment, etc.), but it seems clear as day that we simply could'nt exist as we do now without science. In the case of science its very tangible and easy to see, I would think. In the case of religion its very intangible, who's to say that the people currently doing good works would not simply have done the same good works without religion because they are fundamentally good people? On the other side of the coin you could argue that the bad things may have happened anyway and would have simply used a different excuse. I dont think people would be fundamentally different if they never had religion in their lives, I say this because I'm not fundamentally different without it. But i know for a fact that our lives would be very different without science, its much sketchier with religion.
"A great deal of the Bible is metaphor and/or parable." right, thats exactly what I believe about the bible to. Many christians do not believe this though. But then it comes down to wondering which parts are metaphors and which are not. If you read the bible without any preconceived ideas about it being fact or fiction, it comes off similar to the mythologies of other religions. This is why I consider it to be mythology. How can we say any given part of it is fact while other parts are fiction? I'm unaware of any part of the bible outlining which parts are actuall facts versus which parts are fables. Do we assume the whole thing is absolute truth as put forth by the word of god? Or do we accept that its not literally true and is more about the life lessons within the mythology? Once you accept that some of it is not literally true, that makes the rest of it suspicious when taken as literal truth. "First, you say yourself that those early Americans were agnostic, not atheist; in that sense, we "might" have a tradition of agnosticism, but I can't imagine that we have any sort of long-standing, prominent tradition of atheism. At least not to such an extent that a great deal of people would be influenced to atheistic beliefs by it. On the contrary, most American atheists come to their beliefs because of exasperation with religion, as some sort of rebellion, or for many other reasons, but I would strongly doubt that many say, "Hey, America has long been renowned as a great force for large-scale atheism, I think I'll join the club." " I've never considered myself as joining a historical club of american atheists. But there clearly is a strong history of free-thinking within the founding fathers of our country. It is from a stance of being a free-thinking man that i've come to my Atheism. By your definition though, I'm actually Agnostic, like most Atheists, probably including some of the founding fathers. Washington was a free-mason and took part in ceremonies worshipping the goddess. Much of the layout of our capital was based on free-mason principles. Our founding fathers were not fundamentalist christians by any stretch of the imagination. "That said, the point remains that there is no reliable way to "predict" the faith a person will follow. As I've said, my brothers and I were all raised in the same way, all grew up in the same country, but we all have different beliefs. On a large scale, people might tend towards the religion that is most prevalent around them, but I am speaking of individuals." Actually there is a very reliable, though not 100% accurate way of predicting religion. That is, predict it based on the religions in the area the person is from. Just because something is only 99.5% or more accurate and not absolutely 100% accurate in every case does not invalidate it. It's obvious to me that religion is an exp |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| I really hope there is some change in the air, because I'm sick of being represented by a bunch of crooks and yes-men. I hold the current republican party responsible because they are the ones with all the power right now, there is no check on them. It's hilarious to me when things go wrong and the first response of this administration is to try to find some way to pin it on the democrats. But the problem with that is that the Democrats are not in power and have'nt been in a long long time. If at least one chamber of congress become Democratic I'll be happy that there will now be some kind of balance of power. Maybe that will cut down on the arrogance and the corruption, at least a little bit. | |||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| "Then, of course, you can ignore science for the moment and just refer to politics. Hasn't politics caused immeasurable harm throughout history? Yet, nobody would suggest that all of the world's governments should be abolished or anything like that. One reason being, government's intent is to organize people for their greater good, but individuals who gain power through government can twist that; likewise, individuals who gain power through religion are what cause the harm normally attributed to religion itself. "
Actually, that is a very good example, Politics and Religion are very similar in more ways than I think you were implying I'd go so far as to say that there is a fine line between politics and religion and the two can be interchangable if care isn't taken to seperate them. I actually would'nt really mind if the world's governments were abolished and we all just lived as individual people with no country. But I'm a realist and know that that isn't ever going to happen
"How do you know you are not fundamentally different without religion? Obviously, you know how you are as a non-religious person, but you don't know how your personality, lifestyle, behavior, etc would change if you were religious. " Because at one time I was a Methodist. I was born as one and lived as one for a decade or so, but then realized it was all just like when my parents told me about Santa Claus as a child. The only thing different in my life is I dont attend church or claim a religion anymore. "There is no recourse in this case except to outright declare that those Christians who take the Bible as word-for-word, literal truth are wrong. But I don't see how it is necessary or logical to assume that: just because parts of the book take the form of allegory rather than literal narrative, the remainder of the book must follow suit. There is no reason whatsoever to draw that conclusion. " Right, there is no reason to draw the conclusion that any of it is actual literal truth without evidence, especially when parts are known to be untrue. There is no reason to draw any conclusion at all, including that the parts that are convenient to you, or the parts that you like, are literally true. "I take issue with the fact that atheists and agnostics are continually drawn as "free thinkers" while religious people are contrasted and thus implied to be "non-free thinkers." We've addressed this before: having a specific philosophical belief does not automatically make you a free thinker, nor does having a different belief make you some sort of sheep. Many of the world's greatest philosophical minds were/are religious - many of them were/are Christian, in fact - and I don't understand how you can presume that they are not "free thinkers." Likewise, even the typical Christian person in the Western world today is not just blindly following religion; most people rationally and specifically assess their beliefs. They are all free thinkers. " In my case that is how I became an Atheist, through exercising free-thinking. Not everyone is a free-thinker, and not all free-thinkers are religious or not religious. If you sat down and honestly contemplated the nature of the world as you know it, meditated on the different religions in the world, then made a decision based on the FACTS of the religions, then you came by your way of life through free-thinking. Most religious people did not do this, most of the people I know who claim a religion dont really care about it. Thats harsh to say, and i dont mean it as insulting, but in all honesty it's just not important to them or something they give much thought. Kinda like how some people just dont really care about politics or sports, etc. Most people attend a church because that's one of the only churches in their area, or because that's the church their family attends and their family would be disappointed if they did'nt attend it. I dont think at all that the majority of religious people are blindly following their religion, though there are some, just for most of them its whats expected of them and they do it without thought, but also without an extreme amount of devotion. --------But, if after deep thought on all the other religions in the world, you just happened to come to the conclusion that the one you were already involved with is the true one, that is one hell of a coincidence, isn't it? Thats what I'd call ethnocentrism
"I am from a town called Emerson, New Jersey. By a rough estimate, 75% of the people from my town are religious. My brothers are also from Emerson, New Jersey. Of the three of us (my brothers and I), I am religious, and they are not. That is, 66% of the children in my family are non-religious, while 33% are. And we all come from the same place. The numbers are a near-inverse of what they "should" be. That's not "99.5% accuracy." " In census I'm considered a Christian because I was a long long time ago. What's your point? My point is this, take a good hard look around, how many white american teenagers are becoming Hindus? Do you even know 1? How many white american teenagers are considered Christian? Almost all of them I'm willing to wager. Go to Delhi, how many Indian teenagers are converting to Wiccan? Probably none. How many are considered Hindus? Probably the majority of them. This is the kind of correlation you get with something which is cultural in nature rather than fact-based. But, the people in Delhi believe in the principles which make a Steam Engine work the same as we do, because that is fact based. See the difference? "The fact remains, you are placing all the responsibility for a person's religious beliefs on their upbringing and their environment. As I've been saying, while I will not deny for a second that those factors play a major role, they are hardly the end-all. Innumerable personal factors determine what faith a person will follow, and you are wrong to simplify it to a simple case of blind devotion to a specific religion just because a person's parents belong to that religion. Just as often, a person is introduced and indoctrinated to a religion by his parents, but ultimately comes to rationalize and accept that faith on his own terms and of his own accord. Very few people, if any, are raised in a religion and go through life without questioning it at all. "" I'm not coming off clearly enough then. I did'nt say your culture predicts your religion with 100% accuracy, just that it is the single most important factor and is accurate almost every time. Parents are not the only part of culture, peers also count. I'm willing to wager that most people do question their religion from time to time but dont really follow through with their doubts. Because its more a social function of attending church and would hurt them more than help them to follow through with their doubts. "The other explanation is that the Messiah that I believe in was confined to a particular geographical region during His time on Earth, and His teachings spread in such a way that they reached some areas of the world and not others. Or, the specific cultures that did not accept Christianity were structured such that the teachings of Christ did not appeal to their established cultural sensibilities. They are not "ignorant fools" or "Satanic," nor are they generally all worshiping my God in different ways; instead, religion was so deeply tied to culture that the two could not be separated, eliminating the potential for any sort of conversion or "enlightenment" to occur. " But, if the teaching were divine words straight from god, would they not be the absolute truth and easily be recognized as such by most anyone who read them? Regardless of which culture people belong to are'nt they still the creations of god? All religion is deeply tied to culture, it is culture
But to tie in with an earlier point, you were previously saying that theism was essentially all the same because its a general belief in god, but now you're saying that many of those other religions are not worshipping the same god as you. So are they still theists? Since they are'nt worshipping the same god as you, one of you has to be wrong, why do you think its they that are wrong? (edited by Jomb on 10-28-06 08:07 PM) |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| Asking that question of someone who is REALLY into music is going to cause their head to explode trying to narrow it all down to just one! I simply cant do it anymore, I have too many bands I like equally. But I will say that several years ago my favorite artist was Captain Beefheart & His Magic Band, and their album Trout Mask Replica was my all time favorite album. It still is, but now it has to share that title with at least a dozen other albums.....
Maybe instead there whould be desert island list of albums you'd take with you? |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| I wont be believing your dream until the aliens contact us shortly
But, it would be cool to actually get to explore space with real humans, and possibly set up settlements on other planets. |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| "Religion and politics can both act as tools through which people can gain power and influence others, but your silly rhetoric that they are nearly identical is nonsense.
Government may do plenty of harm, but is an absolutely necessary evil. Anarchy does not work in practice, at all. " I don't think it's nonsense, because politics and religion have very similar means and ends, and some politicians from the past tried to become gods, and religious leaders commonly try to also be political leaders. I think they are both just aspects of culture. Yes, it's too bad about Anarchy, it may not work, but I'd probably attempt to live under it if I had any choice in the matter, how much worse could it really be?
"Well, if you were a "good person" when you were a Methodist and have not changed at all in that respect, more power to you. I've never said that the only way to be righteous and virtuous is to claim a religion. " no, you never did claim that, but you did say that I'd be a different person with religion, but I dont feel any different than when I had it. "The reason I have to draw a conclusion, and to read certain parts of Scripture as I do, is faith. It all leads back to faith. In order to understand true spirituality and religion, you need to step outside your empirical nature and realize that we do not rely on the scientific method to form our beliefs. If to you that means we are stupid and irrational, I guess that's your opinion (and I don't mean to put words in your mouth when I say that, I'm just making a generalization). " I dont think you are stupid and irrational, most religious people are'nt. They just dont bother to question it, because its tradition and custom.. you know, culture
Everybody is influenced by their culture, even me
The problems happen when people get caught up in their culture and believe it's vastly superior to everybody else's. That everybody else should be just like them. "As I continue to reiterate, religion is not about factual evidence. If I sat down and sought every bit of factual evidence I could that proves my religion, and refused to remain Catholic if I could not collect enough empirical proof, then I would not be Catholic anymore (and likely nobody else on Earth would, either). Searching oneself and considering one's religion does not mean seeking proof for it, but assessing it emotionally and intellectually and getting that feeling that it's just "right." " Right, it's about culture (or faith if you like). But free-thinking is about stepping outside your culture and analyzing things with logic and facts. This is why so many people referred to as "Free-Thinkers" are Agnostics or Atheists. "Maybe the next time the census comes around, you should correct that. " Maybe I will, I dont really consider it a high priority though, it makes no difference to me what the government thinks I am... "How many call themselves Christian, or how many are Christian? " Calling yourself Christian is all thats necessary to be a Christian in most people's eyes. Because most people are'nt really that into their religion to care if people are fakes in it or not. "Jomb, I'm not disagreeing with you that religion largely stems from cultural bias. I never tried to argue against that. My argument is and has continually been that, while a solid majority of people will follow the religion that their environment endorses, it is irresponsible to imply that any given individual is a mindless sheep who is of whatever religion his parents and peers exposed him to. You originally implied that I am Catholic because that's how I was raised, without acknowledging that I (and plenty of other people) have consciously decided that, while my upbringing is x, I also personally believe in x. " I'm not saying people are mindless sheeps, only that for the vast majority of people their religious affiliation is simply an exp And I should reiterate that culture can be a good thing, the Earth would be one dull place if everyone had the same culture. The trick is to have tolerance for other viewpoints and enjoy the differences rather than become scared by them. "Are you saying that the true word of God would be so clearly and undeniably true that nobody could possibly deny it? Because most religion relies on its inability to be proven, and something of such magical effect would clearly prove God, no? " Yes, that is exactly what I'm saying, if a writing were truly divine then it would be obvious to everyone who read it that it was true and there'd be no serious doubt. To my way of thinking, the fact that religions rely on inabilty to be proven and the need for faith, is one of the strongest bits of circumstantial evidence AGAINST them being true. After all, that is the sort of things which con-men traffic in. "First, how does religion being tightly connected to culture make it equivalent to culture? " Because in ever respect I can think of, religion is identical to culture. It is not the entire culture, just one large branch of it. "Second, this is getting off track. I was originally, and still am, referring to Christianity above all else. I can't speak for anything else, really, except maybe Judaism. Partly because I don't know enough about many other religions. " But, I'd argue that since you dont know much about other religions, how do you know they are wrong? Most of them pass the same litmus test you were giving your own religion, that they cant be 100% disproven. "For those that worship a different god than the Christian God, the conclusion is simple: I am right, they are wrong. What else could I possibly think? And, before you ask: no, I have no empirical proof. It's about faith. " This is exactly the sort of arrogance which allows religions to be used to wage wars, after all, we're right and they are wrong, so we need to make them see it our way. Why are we right without evidence? Why are they wrong without evidence? Because of faith, which both sides have. Not that you'd personally do that, I dont consider you violent. "That should just be the sentence I brand the end of every post with: It's all about faith. Because, I feel like that's the only way to answer most of these questions." It is the only way to answer religious questions short of actually having some hard evidence. But it's really the equivalent of saying "because my family tradition says this is the right way, as does my culture, and not wanting to disrespect my heritage I'll follow suit." |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| I got a DVD burner from wal-mart only to open it up and see that the packaging had clearly been taped back together and was not sealed. The recorder did'nt work. It's bullshit to just put something back in the box that does'nt work and pretend like it's new. | |||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| EmuZWin is the best one in my opinion.... but if you have'nt seen this shit before you will be disappointed. I sure was, Spectrum sucks
I think Atari 2600 totally kicks Spectrum's ass, which is not much of a reccommendation. |
|||
|
Jomb Deddorokku Since: 12-03-05 From: purgatory Last post: 5910 days Last view: 5910 days |
| ||
| "As far as the means...a government ensures that security and well-being by drafting and enforcing laws. A religion ensures salvation by drafting and suggesting regulations and guidelines. Are they similar in that sense? Sure, I suppose, but only superficially. "
The politics is very similar to religion debate is rather interesting, I think. You have to consider such things as the way people lived in ancient times, where in many nations the religion WAS the government and vice versa. Or the Roman emperors or Egyptian Pharoahs who insisted they were infact Gods. Seperating the 2 is a somewhat modern concept. But it's probably a whole new thread
"Religion requires great sacrifices of time and resources in terms of devoting time to worship, donating monetarily, etc...as it is objectively a "detrimental" activity, at least practically speaking, I can't imagine why people would just blindly follow it if they have no vested interest and sufficient belief in it. Like, those people that don't take religion too seriously also don't spend much time and money on it, while the opposite is true for those who are serious adherents. My point is, it is unlikely that most rational, practical people just follow it blindly because "they just do." Instead, those people who honestly believe in their religions do so actively rather than passively, because they go so far as to take action by making sacrifice. " No, these are not usually detrimental activities when you get down to it. There are great rewards in the praise of other people about how good a person you are, sometimes there are tax breaks involved, some people meet people through their religious activities, which is a social reward for them beyond anything specifically about being completely devoted. But yes, on a whole most people are'nt that committed to their religion to go too far out of their way, in my observations. But that does'nt stop them from claiming a religion or being taken seriously as a member of that religion. "So many people who are referred to as "free-thinkers" are non-religious because religion has become increasingly demonized in the modern West. Christians are seen as stupid rednecks, or their priests as pedophiles, or as any number of other silly stereotypes. " I dont think thats it at all, you yourself admitted that based only on hard facts you could'nt follow a religion, and thats the kind of thinking and tough choices a person may have to face when they engage in serious free-thinking. Not that those stereotypes are completely valid, but they get reinforced when you go to redneck country (I've lived there before actually) and find tons of ignorant people screaming about how christian they are while simultaneously breaking just about every commandment. "But it makes a difference to me when someone like you, who says they're Christian only because they were born into it even though they have no personal attachment to it, commits acts that are harmful to the greater Christian reputation. Because people then attach such acts to the Christian label rather than to the individual person. " Why would you care? I dont claim to be a christian in my daily life, i dont attend church, i dont do things in the name of a church, etc. My grandma keeps my name registered at her church because it makes her feel better, and quite frankly it does'nt matter to me. I figure making an old lady feel good is worth something, while going to her church and insisting i'm not a member and must have my name removed would just make her feel bad for no reason. It affects me not one bit. "Then "most people" are wrong. " You have a elitist view on who is a christian and who isn't. By your very strict definition, a very small percentage of the people currently thought of as christians actually are. Out in society it does'nt work like that though, if you claim to be one you are. that's how it works with the statistics and census, etc. Plus the fact that a very large portion of people saying they are christian dont regularly attend church, but just about everyone still considers them christian. "People who are whatever religion they are because they were born into it are going about it all wrong. People who were born into that religion but then later accepted it on their own have the right idea. Also, I don't see why it's necessary to "try out different religions" before deciding on one. I don't drink alcohol, and my friends always say that I should at least try it before deciding that I don't want to; but, I point out that it's not about me searching for whatever lifestyle is "most fun," but about recognizing the one that I think is right. As with religion, I don't feel obligated to try my hand at every world religion before I am entitled to choose one, because I feel like the one I have now is the one that fits me and the one that is true. " It's not necessary, because almost nobody does this and yet they are still accepted as whatever religion they are. But if you were seeking truth and wisdom honestly, and not simply reflecting your culture, you'd be trying every religion you could before making any final decisions. It's not about which is "most fun" it's about which is "most true", or "most wise", or whatever you're looking for in religion. "That's a fallacy. Like I said, a major concept within religion is that of faith; a person who believes in a religion does so without concrete evidence, and is so "proven" as a devout believer. But any writing that is so magical and supernatural that it is the obvious work of God would defy that necessity of faith and, in so doing, defy a cornerstone of what Christianity is. " I dont consider this a fallacy, if a god wrote something down, it would be absolute truth and would cut through all the bullshit instantly for anyone who read it. It would'nt be ambiguous and easily interpreted in thousands of conflicting ways. Why is faith in a book important to your religion? Other than because its written in the same book that demands the faith. I repeat, why would a being which is vastly superior to us in every way care whether we had faith in it or not? That would matter to it how? "It's an unfortunate coincidence (for lack of a better word) that con-men use such methods, but in no way does it prove that religion is itself a con. The former does not indicate, either directly or indirectly, the latter. " No it does'nt completely prove anything, but it is yet another chunk of circumstantial evidence on the mountain of circumstantial evidence against such a thing actually being true. "I know they are wrong because my personal belief in the Savior would immediately discount a great majority of those world religions that don't include Jesus. " Why? Maybe they never met Jesus but did meet X(whoever is divine in their religion), perhaps X is also a god and the 2 are both true and valid. This scenario is no less plausable than either of them being true. Or, maybe god appeared to them in a different form and set up their religion (afterall, god is incomprehensible and cant be understood) "Believing that "we" are right and "they" are wrong is perfectly fine. Believing that we need to forcibly convince "them" to accept our beliefs is not. Jesus' idea of evangelization extends only to preaching and encouraging, not to violently converting. " Without proof to back up your claim it comes off more as arrogance and hubris to say definitively that you are right and they are wrong. religions dont always use outright violence to spread, there are many areas of the world where i've read accounts of people being coerced to convert using such means as with-holding medical aid or cutting them out of business if they dont change their religion. "No, I disagree totally. My family tradition may be Catholic, but I am not Catholic because of my family tradition. My ex-girlfriend's family tradition may be Presbyterian, but she is not Presbyterian because of her family tradition. In fact, she's not Presbyterian at all, she is Catholic. So, it's not strictly family tradition. People who are not "true" believers, as I've outlined above, may adhere to their religions in order to please their relatives, but people who are strong in their beliefs have personal rather than familial reasons." OK, so you both were born into a christian society and both continued as christians without any honest attempts to understand other religions and i'm supposed to believe it has nothing to do with your culture and is just an amazing coincidence? |
| Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 |
| Acmlm's Board - I3 Archive - - Posts by Jomb |
