Who is going to hell? An argument for the Bible, Religion and God.

[f3lix]

Libertarians want to get out of everyone else's business and not contribute to nation-building.

[Dent]

Science versus Religion - YouTube

Science versus Religion - YouTube

I didn't like how Dawkins came together with the Supreme Jew Lord at the end, a lot of words put into his mouth. Although there is a little common ground.

I hate him even more today for raising Dawkins' blood pressure here
BBC Religion & Ethics - Dawkins and Sacks in 'anti-semitic' row
Kremlin is there a post here on your beliefs?

[Mr. Blonde]

Kremlin is a cultural jew, like most of them in America and the UK.

These jews go to bar mitvah's, generally (although I don't think Kremlin does this much) succumb to family pressure to marry another jew (jdate etc.), still engage in the cultural aspect of the holiday and maybe go to temple, but they pretty much do it out of tradition out of actual belief in the Jewish God of the Torah.


Cultural Judaism is something I take issue with, for obvious reasons, but I generally take issue with anybody who is a bit too proud of their cultural heritage. Especially one that refers to themselves as "the chosen ones".

[thekremlin]

I'm sorry, what is it you take issue with, that I'm not jewish enough or too jewish?

[DDTempest]

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

Kremlin is a cultural jew, like most of them in America and the UK.

These jews go to bar mitvah's, generally (although I don't think Kremlin does this much) succumb to family pressure to marry another jew (jdate etc.), still engage in the cultural aspect of the holiday and maybe go to temple, but they pretty much do it out of tradition out of actual belief in the Jewish God of the Torah.


Cultural Judaism is something I take issue with, for obvious reasons, but I generally take issue with anybody who is a bit too proud of their cultural heritage. Especially one that refers to themselves as "the chosen ones".

So now you hate cultural heritages too? What's next? Thanksgiving? Do you hate Halloween Blonde?

[Dent]

Originally Posted by DDTempest

So now you hate cultural heritages too?

nono just the opposite, the more culture you get down you as a person (and the more bison chili you cook) the better you are.

try this recipe out

Originally Posted by thekremlin

I'm sorry, what is it you take issue with, that I'm not jewish enough or too jewish?

You're being accused of lip service I think.


Edit :

Jonathan Sacks and Richard Dawkins at BBC RE:Think festival 12 September 2012 - YouTube

Jonathan Sacks and Richard Dawkins at BBC RE:Think festival 12 September 2012 - YouTube

Rabbi :
Why would an infinite creator, that by definition likes nothing, create a universe? short answer is MEMEMEMEME

[Mr. Blonde]

I just realized while thinking about BDH ( <3 ) that he basically did the exact same thing that happens in the Amish Rumspringa. It goes two-fold with with the genius of "absolute forgiveness" if asked of Jesus/god in Christianity. Somebody can actually go out and experiment with crime, fornication, and drugs, and still come back, empty and hollow inside like the rest of us, with open arms to a religion they think will complete them, and they often convince themselves that it has.

I have always realized the silliness in, say, a serial murder-rapist asking for forgiveness on his deathbed and being granted it, but tonight's realization just made it that much easier to see how people can be so emotionally duped by the delusion of absolute forgiveness by a patriarchal deity.

I bet that feels so good; to experience many of the "sins" of the world and once you have tired of it, still be able to convince yourself you are loved by a god and then pretend like you're pious. No wonder Christianity is so popular.

[THEINCREDIBLEdork]

Today, I was playing Borderlands 2 on my sweet gaming rig when my mom says "come downstairs it's time for dinner" to which I replied with my usual "Fuck off, mom let me finish this round!" (it's funny because modern games do not have rounds, but her stupid fundie mind cannot handle this concept, so I put it lightly for her.) The stupid bitch gets pissed off at this and says "YOU WILL NOT TALK TO YOUR MOTHER THAT WAY!", to which I reply "FUCK YOU MOM I'M AN ATHEIST GOD ISN'T REAL NO TRUE HOMINIM AD ABSURDUM QED" she had it at this point and said "THAT'S IT!!!! I'M TAKING YOUR COMPUTER AND PHONE! YOU'RE GROUNDED!" the fundie bitch said I could read books in this time, because that was constructive or some shit, but I knew that she really wanted me to read her bible. I had had enough, so I grabbed all the essentials, a two liter of mountain dew, a couple bags of doritos, and my cell phone and climbed out of my window that night. I ran to some woods near my house where I will live until I can find permanent dwellings where I won't be oppressed.

[Repugnant Abomination]

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

I just realized while thinking about BDH ( <3 ) that he basically did the exact same thing that happens in the Amish Rumspringa. It goes two-fold with with the genius of "absolute forgiveness" if asked of Jesus/god in Christianity. Somebody can actually go out and experiment with crime, fornication, and drugs, and still come back, empty and hollow inside like the rest of us, with open arms to a religion they think will complete them, and they often convince themselves that it has.

I have always realized the silliness in, say, a serial murder-rapist asking for forgiveness on his deathbed and being granted it, but tonight's realization just made it that much easier to see how people can be so emotionally duped by the delusion of absolute forgiveness by a patriarchal deity.

I bet that feels so good; to experience many of the "sins" of the world and once you have tired of it, still be able to convince yourself you are loved by a god and then pretend like you're pious. No wonder Christianity is so popular.

I think you've either missed the point or are oversimplifying. I don't think many thoughtful Christians are saying that after a life full murder, rape and theft that a person can just say, on his death bed "My bad! Sorry. I won't do that stuff anymore. Please let me go to heaven now." Most would probably say that you have to mean it -- not because you're motivated by avoiding punishment, but because you genuinely feel bad because you disregarded the Moral Law and feel ashamed and want to make it right.

Hitchen's remarked that Pascal's Wager is insulting to God, because if he really is God of course he'd know that this hypothetical person didn't really believe in him. The same logic applies to God's forgiveness.

[Mr. Blonde]

Can you oversimplify a fictional deity?

[Repugnant Abomination]

Can you oversimplify the plot to a movie? A novel? Can you oversimplify a concept or an idea? Can you oversimplify the Greek gods or the monotheistic God?

The answer to all of these questions is yes.

[Saint DH]

You can't oversimplify God: he's a prick asshole, fuck him. That's about as simple as you can get and its spot on (if he were real, but he's not).

[DDTempest]

Originally Posted by Dirty Harry

You can't oversimplify God: he's a prick asshole, fuck him. That's about as simple as you can get and its spot on (if he were real, but he's not).

Can you oversimplify DH?

"FUUUUUUCCK!"

Yep.

[Mr. Blonde]

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

Can you oversimplify the plot to a movie? A novel? Can you oversimplify a concept or an idea? Can you oversimplify the Greek gods or the monotheistic God?

The answer to all of these questions is yes.

Sorry Repug but you are just spouting apologist nonsense. I wonder what your intentions were digging this up in the first place. Yes, movies and pretty much everything else can be oversimplified. It's called a summary. And summaries are by very definition the most brief and correct overview of a subject. Sorry I can't get all Aquinas with you.

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

I think you've either missed the point or are oversimplifying. I don't think many thoughtful Christians are saying that after a life full murder, rape and theft that a person can just say, on his death bed "My bad! Sorry. I won't do that stuff anymore. Please let me go to heaven now." Most would probably say that you have to mean it.

So we're going by "what many thoughtful Christians are saying" now? Whatever moderate/liberate religious school of thought is in the present is how things go in the afterlife? This is the fundamental problem with religion -- endless interpretation.

Let me rephrase for you:

Somebody can actually go out and experiment with crime, fornication, and drugs, and still come back, empty and hollow inside like the rest of us, with open arms to a religion they think will complete them, and they often convince themselves that it has. (CONVINCE IS A KEYWORD HERE)

I have always realized the silliness in, say, a serial murder-rapist asking for forgiveness, MEANING IT, on his deathbed and being granted it.

I bet that feels so good; to experience many of the "sins" of the world and once you have tired of it, still be able to convince yourself you are loved by a god and then pretend like you're pious. No wonder Christianity is so popular.





In effect, you're in support of a person wanting true reconciliation for whatever terrible things they did (let's add child rape in, that's pretty relevant), they still get to go to heaven. That's fucking retarded. It doesn't work in criminal court, there is no reason it should work in the afterlife.

[Repugnant Abomination]

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

Sorry Repug but you are just spouting apologist nonsense. I wonder what your intentions were digging this up in the first place. Yes, movies and pretty much everything else can be oversimplified. It's called a summary. And summaries are by very definition the most brief and correct overview of a subject. Sorry I can't get all Aquinas with you.

How does pointing out that you can oversimplify a work of fiction make me an apologist? You said something questionable and I pointed it out. What you were doing was not summarizing, it was caricaturing. And oversimplifying.

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

So we're going by "what many thoughtful Christians are saying" now? Whatever moderate/liberate religious school of thought is in the present is how things go in the afterlife? This is the fundamental problem with religion -- endless interpretation.

Yes, thoughtful Christians. You always write with fundamentalists in mind. There are plenty of those. But there are also more nuanced, intelligent people who practice branches of Christianity that embrace science and have a non-literal interpretation of stories in the Bible they consider allegorical, like Genesis.

Furthermore, what's wrong with endless interpretation? There are many subjects outside of theology that are endlessly debated and interpreted: literary theory, philosophy, law, etc...

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

Let me rephrase for you:

Somebody can actually go out and experiment with crime, fornication, and drugs, and still come back, empty and hollow inside like the rest of us, with open arms to a religion they think will complete them, and they often convince themselves that it has. (CONVINCE IS A KEYWORD HERE)

People convince themselves of things every day even outside religion. We've all probably convinced ourselves we're better people than we really are.

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

I have always realized the silliness in, say, a serial murder-rapist asking for forgiveness, MEANING IT, on his deathbed and being granted it.

In the context of an all knowing, all loving God, why is that silly? I think you're viewing that scenario through a human perspective. Perhaps some things are unforgivable to a person, but that's not what we're talking about here.

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

I bet that feels so good; to experience many of the "sins" of the world and once you have tired of it, still be able to convince yourself you are loved by a god and then pretend like you're pious. No wonder Christianity is so popular.

I think a lot of Christians would say it doesn't feel good at all. I bet a lot would say they feel ashamed by cheating on their husband, stealing from their neighbor, or murdering that stranger for money. But that they're also grateful beyond words and completely humbled by a God that could actually forgive them for it if they are sincere and changed. Honestly, your examples are so oversimplified, dripping with disdain and sarcastic that it's hard to seriously engage you without thinking it's a waste of time.

[Mr. Blonde]

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

I think you're viewing that scenario through a human perspective. Perhaps some things are unforgivable to a person, but that's not what we're talking about here.

This sums up why you and I cannot ever have a rational discussion about this. You write as if you can know the mind of god (which thus far the only things we know of "god" has written by humans). Enter interpretation.

[Repugnant Abomination]

I'm not claiming to know the mind of God. What I'm saying is that the concept of God we're talking about in this context is more capable of forgiveness than humans.

Maybe we should just let it go though (until next time).

[Mr. Blonde]

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

Honestly, your examples are so oversimplified, dripping with disdain and sarcastic that it's hard to seriously engage you without thinking it's a waste of time.

That's fine, I'm pretty done with having this conversation with you. Sorry but I've graduated from the whole "let's talk about god as if it's possible he exists" stage, and I've expressed elsewhere I'm pretty sad that you have regressed so much -- even though you like to play it as if "I'm just asking questions here. Just trying to discuss theology" as if you aren't CLEARLY starting to come around to fully (if you haven't already) accepting a deity exists.

Philosophy in general? Fuck yes, I love having those talks with you, particularly because you are so knowledgeable on the subject, even though we disagree. Mind you I have never taken a single philosophy class in my life, so not only am I late to the game but have just been building a solid foundation. Philosophy is the next step after coming to a pretty solid conclusion on religion, particularly one siding with atheism, and will be with us for all of humankind's existence.

That being said, I am pretty firm in the stance that no philosophical or theological talk will ever sway me to turn to religion. I'm set, bro. Come at me when you have evidence and then we can talk. I'm not militant anymore. There is absolutely nothing theists can provide (other than verifiable, scientific evidence) that I can even look at and not see it's nonsense. Call that close-minded if it makes you feel better. But in my view, the very definition of close-mindedness is turning to attractive ideas with spectacular claims but zero evidence.

Am I still going to read religious works and explore religion? Am I going to continue to marvel at the human need to believe in nonsense? Of course.

Am I going to subscribe to any of these beliefs without solid, physical evidence? Of course not.

(And of course, even if the Christian god or Hindu gods or whatever it is you think is the "real" one these days, DID exist, and proved it -- I'd spit on their feet and gladly burn. I'd rather die than bend my knee and prostrate for anything/one -- ethereal or mortal.)

[THEINCREDIBLEdork]

Please don't get blonde all brave and worked up about this.

[THEINCREDIBLEdork]

So I was standing in a rather large line at my local Wal-Mart today behind a couple families that I know from when I went to church with my family in year younger. It was the only register open so there wasn't much of another option to get my 12 pack of Mountain Dew for a party I was heading to. I was wondering why the line was going nowhere when I decided to poke my head up front to see what the holdup was. It was a little old lady who didn't have enough for her groceries and she was trying to talk the cashier into letting her get away with being short. This struck me as odd until I found out she was a mere $0.21 short of her purchase. Now all these families were just staring and there was even two making fun of her. I walked up and handed my soda to the cashier, handed him a $5 and told her to keep the change. One of the middle aged women (I knew these people, so I also knew that they all make over 6 digits) grabbed her kid and yelled very loudly, "See that man? He's acting just like Jesus wants us to." For some reason this set me off, so I turned around. I haven't shaved in awhile so I'm rocking some nice scruff, a Slayer shirt, and gym shorts, so it must have been a nice sight. Very loudly, I said "Like Jesus? Ma'am I'm an atheist who makes minimum wage and I was the one who stepped up to help her? Your hypocritical Christianity is an inspiration to us all." As I stormed out, a couple of the cart boys started to whistle and cheer, soon shoppers joined in and even the cashier. I gave a wave and went off with a feeling of accomplishment.

[Repugnant Abomination]

Originally Posted by Mr. Blonde

That's fine, I'm pretty done with having this conversation with you. Sorry but I've graduated from the whole "let's talk about god as if it's possible he exists" stage, and I've expressed elsewhere I'm pretty sad that you have regressed so much -- even though you like to play it as if "I'm just asking questions here. Just trying to discuss theology" as if you aren't CLEARLY starting to come around to fully (if you haven't already) accepting a deity exists.

Philosophy in general? Fuck yes, I love having those talks with you, particularly because you are so knowledgeable on the subject, even though we disagree. Mind you I have never taken a single philosophy class in my life, so not only am I late to the game but have just been building a solid foundation. Philosophy is the next step after coming to a pretty solid conclusion on religion, particularly one siding with atheism, and will be with us for all of humankind's existence.

That being said, I am pretty firm in the stance that no philosophical or theological talk will ever sway me to turn to religion. I'm set, bro. Come at me when you have evidence and then we can talk. I'm not militant anymore. There is absolutely nothing theists can provide (other than verifiable, scientific evidence) that I can even look at and not see it's nonsense. Call that close-minded if it makes you feel better. But in my view, the very definition of close-mindedness is turning to attractive ideas with spectacular claims but zero evidence.

Am I still going to read religious works and explore religion? Am I going to continue to marvel at the human need to believe in nonsense? Of course.

Am I going to subscribe to any of these beliefs without solid, physical evidence? Of course not.

(And of course, even if the Christian god or Hindu gods or whatever it is you think is the "real" one these days, DID exist, and proved it -- I'd spit on their feet and gladly burn. I'd rather die than bend my knee and prostrate for anything/one -- ethereal or mortal.)

That's all well and good I suppose. I didn't think I could change your mind, and whether you believe it or not my mind isn't completely changed or set firmly either which way. I just don't agree with your materialist point of view; science doesn't have the tools to deal with all of reality, because not all of reality is measurable in the empirical sense.

[Mr. Blonde]

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

I just don't agree with your materialist point of view; science doesn't have the tools to deal with all of reality, because not all of reality is measurable in the empirical sense.

We don't yet, because we're only a few thousand years into civilization.

"It has often and confidently been asserted, that [SCIENCE PROBLEM THAT SEEMS IMPOSSIBLE TO SOLVE] can never be known: but ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science."

- Charles Darwin

"Yet", of course, is something you cannot deal with because you are only going to be alive another 50 or 60 years or so, if you are lucky. We won't be able to discover and measure everything about existence in our lifetime, so you are attaching yourself to an idea that seems to give you a better answer RE: closure.

That's what is happening, and I wonder if you even realize it.

[Repugnant Abomination]

I disagree. Here's why:

If God created the universe, that means he would exists outside of space and time. If God exists outside of nature, how could we ever hope to prove his existence empirically with science when science is for explaining the natural world?

Since we're quoting people...

"science simply cannot (by its legitimate methods) adjudicate the issue of God's possible superintendence of nature. We neither affirm nor deny it; we simply can't comment on it as scientists...Science can work only with naturalistic explanations; it can neither affirm nor deny other types of actors (like God) in other spheres (the moral realm, for example)...

...Forget philosophy for a moment; the simple empiricists of the past hundred years should suffice. Darwin himself was agnostic (having lost his religious beliefs upon the tragic death of his favorite daughter), but the great American botanist Asa Gray, who favored natural selection and wrote a book entitled Darwiniana, was a devout Christian. Move forward 50 years: Charles D. Walcott, discoverer of the Burgess Shale fossils, was a convinced Darwinian and an equally firm Christian, who believed that God had ordained natural selection to construct a history of life according to His plans and purposes. Move on another 50 years to the two greatest evolutionists of our generation: G. G. Simpson was a humanist agnostic. Theodosius Dobzhansky a believing Russian Orthodox. Either half my colleagues are enormously stupid, or else the science of Darwinism is fully compatible with conventional religious beliefs—and equally compatible with atheism, thus proving that the two great realms of nature's factuality and the source of human morality do not strongly overlap." - Stephen Jay Gould

[thekremlin]

Senor Chang Gay! - YouTube

Senor Chang Gay! - YouTube

[Dent]

Originally Posted by Dent

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination
Finally, the belief in God can be rational, in the epistemological sense of the word.

Does that mean that anything can be rational, in the epistemological sense of the word.? can you give some insight into this?

^

Originally Posted by Repugnant Abomination

I disagree. Here's why:

Hitchens schools a Muslim on free speech - YouTube

Hitchens schools a Muslim on free speech - YouTube

Edit : lots of reps and thanks to anyone that can cut those 5 seconds out of the vid and upload it


Edeet2 : Stephen Hawking did a three part series for Discovery recently, he's another person that things the god hypothesis can be answered by science, you're welcome

The Meaning of Life - YouTube

The Meaning of Life - YouTube

Part 1 - The Meaning Of Life

Stephen Hawking's Grand Design - Key to The Cosmos - YouTube

Stephen Hawking's Grand Design - Key to The Cosmos - YouTube

Part 2 - Key To The Cosmos

Stephen Hawking's Grand Design - Did God Create The Universe ? - YouTube

Stephen Hawking's Grand Design - Did God Create The Universe ? - YouTube

Part 3 - Did God Create the Universe?