Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Max White]

I'm not saying demons cause it, I'm saying (if you need it in science terms) when in the garden of eden, we could not get sick, we were immune to everything, sin caused us to become uimmune, when they eat the fruit, they gained life AND death, AND death.
I dont belive "sin" in of it self kills, it allows for it
A man who gets killed is no more a sinner then you or I
We all sin, they are not caused by Satan, us humans of our own free will keep on sinning.

Wait... Waaaaait. Hold on.
Are... are you a creationist? Do you take the book of Genesis literally?

[Starver]

IIRC the turtle is female and became a parent recently.

Given how sea-turtles don't tend to be so parental about the eggs, star turtles may also be exceptional in that the fathers attend the hatchings.

(I don't recall any other in-canon situaton that can actually clarify the situation either way.)

The more interesting question is how the elephant knows when to lift it's leg to let the sun pass through.

(Its).  After the first few times of being burnt they now work to a rhythm?  Maybe that's why the Fifth Elephant fell off, when they were all star elephant calves..?  I must re-(re-re-)read that sometime.

For me I don't see atheism[1], and agnosticism[2] as quite so unmixable. 

I didn't mean to imply they were unmixable. There is definitely some overlap between agnostics and soft atheists. It's just that they have a different emphasis. Atheists have more or less made up their mind, while agnostics haven't or don't think they can.

As I often say, I class myself as agnostic, atheist and apatheist.

A hard-agnostic, because I don't think there's any definite proof (either way!).  A really godless universe experience could just be a hands-off God with a good investment in a fire-and-forget universe.  And if the clouds opened and a glaring vision started to talk to me about things that only I and a creator should know then it could just as easily be Sufficiently Advanced Aliens.  Or I'm in a Matrix simulation and it's a feature.  Even if I "woke up dead", and saw the afterlife, it could be a Sufficiently Advanced Matrix.  Or I'd just come out of one and was still too woozy to understand.

For atheism, I'm implicit about it, not explicit.  Soft not hard.  Weak not strong.  My discussion viewpoint has sometimes therefore been in contradiction to hard-line disbelievers (to whom I sometimes even appear to be theologically-minded) as well to those who wield their own flavour of theism with fervour (to whom I may appear to be at least at the level that Dawkins himself is perceived to be).  To be honest, you get more of the latter being unreasonable than the former, but that's just a personal tally.

And then, finally, I also live my life as well/badly as I do without a regard for whether there is a deity.  I consider Pascal Wagerians to be foolhardy (any deity that exists should recognise such a bet-hedging manoeuvre from half an eternity away!) and cannot imagine what I can do other than "my best, in general" to improve my own chances of favourable treatment should there be a Judgement Day for me at all..  Which is not to say that it's a cert that I get a through-pass to either the Elysium fields or  the Asphodel Meadows, and may still end up in Tartaras for my (co-existent) fatalistic opinion that everything is probably pre-ordained because the universe runs on pure determinism, thus falling down on the "doing my best" bit.


And another four replies.  You're talkative tonight, you lot.

[Wolfy]

I'm not saying demons cause it, I'm saying (if you need it in science terms) when in the garden of eden, we could not get sick, we were immune to everything, sin caused us to become uimmune, when they eat the fruit, they gained life AND death, AND death.
I dont belive "sin" in of it self kills, it allows for it
A man who gets killed is no more a sinner then you or I
We all sin, they are not caused by Satan, us humans of our own free will keep on sinning.

Wait... Waaaaait. Hold on.
Are... are you a creationist? Do you take the book of Genesis literally?

No, but I do believe the story tells us what happen more or less, we humans gain the knowledge of life and death and just live and die
Was it a fruit? I don't know

Heck I for some reason in vision a tower with zombies ever where and a book called the secret of life, which happesn to be death.

[Starver]

Because Pratchett is always fucking right, dammit! Even when he is presenting a subjective view, he is objectively right.
In that way, he is a lot like a girlfriend, except a lot hairier.

Except for beneath his hat, I must point out.  Although this is, of course, off-topic, but I doubt anyone'll notice in the current noise.

[Askot Bokbondeler]

I'm not saying demons cause it, I'm saying (if you need it in science terms) when in the garden of eden, we could not get sick, we were immune to everything, sin caused us to become uimmune, when they eat the fruit, they gained life AND death, AND death.
I dont belive "sin" in of it self kills, it allows for it
A man who gets killed is no more a sinner then you or I
We all sin, they are not caused by Satan, us humans of our own free will keep on sinning.

Wait... Waaaaait. Hold on.
Are... are you a creationist? Do you take the book of Genesis literally?

yeah, i'm kinda waiting for some other christian to show up, i've kinda lost hope on this one, and the spelling is unbearable.

[Wolfy]

"lost hope in me"
What do you hope for in a believer? I admit I may not be right, I admit you may be right

What more can you hope for?
You ask me a question and I answer them and I dont give you the answer you want? or what?

[fqllve]

A hard-agnostic, because I don't think there's any definite proof (either way!).  A really godless universe experience could just be a hands-off God with a good investment in a fire-and-forget universe.  And if the clouds opened and a glaring vision started to talk to me about things that only I and a creator should know then it could just as easily be Sufficiently Advanced Aliens.  Or I'm in a Matrix simulation and it's a feature.  Even if I "woke up dead", and saw the afterlife, it could be a Sufficiently Advanced Matrix.  Or I'd just come out of one and was still too woozy to understand.

My thing with agnosticism is that... while it is distinctly possible that there's a deity, given the evidence we have at hand about religions it seems highly unlikely that it's any of those deities. They're just so highly anthropomorphized that I find the chance exceedingly small. You'd just expect that a deity that's so highly involved in human affairs to have left some kind of evidence. Plus the religions are so much more logical and consistent if explained as cultural systems, folktales, and myths as opposed to distorted (or verbatim) contact with deities. So while I'll technically admit the possibility that religions could be correct (to some degree) I find that possibility to be negligible.

Deism, on the other hand, is a completely different story. Agnosticism about deism makes a lot more sense to me than it agnosticism about Christianity. But since most people aren't talking about deism when they talk religion, I find it's easier to just refer to myself as an atheist, as I functionally am.

[Wolfy]

Thats sort of how I feel but with why there is a God, I dont think evreything would fit the way it dose if there was no God, all of these laws of physics etc?

they happen to work all over?
I just feel like it was made by SOMETHING intelligent, may be a turtle, may be aliens (in a which came first the chicken or the egg way)

[Askot Bokbondeler]

"lost hope in me"
What do you hope for in a believer? I admit I may not be right, I admit you may be right

What more can you hope for?
You ask me a question and I answer them and I dont give you the answer you want? or what?

your interpretation of the scriptures is too literal, too detached from my interpretation of facts, that i don't know how to talk with you. i ask you one question and you reply to a different one. we don't use the same dictionary and our discussion would develop into a semantic one rather than morals\metaphysics

[fqllve]

Thats sort of how I feel but with why there is a God, I dont think evreything would fit the way it dose if there was no God, all of these laws of physics etc?

They work because we wouldn't exist to ask why if they didn't.

But I can understand that position.

[XXSockXX]

Given how sea-turtles don't tend to be so parental about the eggs, star turtles may also be exceptional in that the fathers attend the hatchings.

Right, no sex was mentioned, only the hatching of the eggs. Have to re-read that at some point too.

As I often say, I class myself as agnostic, atheist and apatheist.

I never bothered much with agnosticism since all concepts of a deity seem so obviously man-made to me.
I would see myself as an explicit atheist, not a strong one, since you cannot really defend such a position to the end.
I grew up as an atheist, without a fear of judgment or a promise of heaven, so I lead a pretty apatheistic life as well. I do venture into anti-theistic territory sometimes, when political or other important decisions are made based on religious arguments. I also find any imaginable god rather something I'd be opposed to than glad about its existence.

Damn, I get a lot of 504 errors, must be the end of the world or something...

[Wolfy]

"lost hope in me"
What do you hope for in a believer? I admit I may not be right, I admit you may be right

What more can you hope for?
You ask me a question and I answer them and I dont give you the answer you want? or what?

your interpretation of the scriptures is too literal, too detached from my interpretation of facts, that i don't know how to talk with you. i ask you one question and you reply to a different one. we don't use the same dictionary and our discussion would develop into a semantic one rather than morals\metaphysics

I could not help but notice you use "interrelation for me and "facts" for you...

I cant ask you questions but you can ask me?

Semantics  are not facts 9in the sense of they are not "right" we each could reach  diffident thing of a sentence

How ever I want to point out, almost none of my things have been literal, i dont belive the fruitis a furit per say, i dont belive sin causes you to die, I don't believe it took 7 days for the world to be made, in fact show me one place I've used it "litarly"
All of my post have been giving what I think happens and why it happens based on the books, very little of it is "litral" the bible is not that, you cant use it that way, but your trying to make it seem like I am, so since your saying I am show me how I am as I disagree, in fact I'd go far as to say if the book is meant to be taken literal then I'm screwed, as its impresive how much of it I dont.

[MagmaMcFry]

Spoiler: Really long post vs. Wolfy (click to show/hide)

Statement 0 (straight from the Bible): God exists.
Statement 1 (also from the Bible): God is omniscient.
Statement 2 (also from the Bible): God is omnipotent.
Statement 3 (also from the Bible): God created the universe.
Statement 4 (concluded from 1 and 3): When God created the universe, God was omniscient.
Statement 5 (specialization of 1): God knows the past, present and future of every imaginable universe.
Statement 6 (specialization of 2): God could have created every imaginable universe.
Statement 7 (concluded from 3, 4 and our existence): From all the universes God could create, God created this one.
Statement 8 (concluded from 5, 6 and 7): God knowingly chose to create this universe so this past, present and future would happen.
Statement 9 (concluded from 8): God decided all our actions.
Statement 10 (concluded from 9): We have no free will.

Wrong, once again, you misuse the bible
Statement 7 is where you fail most, where at all dose it say he did not create them all? and only made ours?

Aha, but I never specified that God created this universe only, it isn't necessary to conclude Statement 10.
Also, if "misusing the bible" refers to applying correct logic, then I must be correct (not, as you state, wrong). Can you show me where else I'm "wrong"?

You also assume that god knowing of all possible universes, means ours is premeditated, for all we know its not, we have free will, he dose not decide, he just can see "past" this universe, and past this "derision" if you will and see all choices we ever could make, it dont mean he knows we will make this one or that one, or if he dose, it dont mean he makes us pick it
we still pick it

Even if there is one unversed, it don't mean he picks because nothing says he dont see all the pathways and we pick which ever we want, heck there could be an ifnite amount of paths and he could still see them all



An example, my mom KNEW I would pick the new guitar, cause she knows me so well, she knew before it happen, and saw it coming, dose that mean she picked for me? NO

Well, God differs from your mom that he picked the version of you that picked the guitar, and not the version of you that didn't. So God decided to make you so you pick the guitar, effectively deciding whether you pick the guitar or not. Your mom can't do that.

heck it could be like time travel, he sees the future, say a caveman goes in to the future and sees GW become president, it dont mean he picks for us

A time traveller sees the future. God picks out the future.

Since you say that no-one knows if he exists, you concede that there is no evidence for God.
In that case, why do people know about him? Who was the first person to believe in God, and why did he start believing? Since there is no evidence, he must have made it all up.

this logic fails so bad
No one knew at one time if the world was round, why did people believe it was not? who was the first person to think it? and why did thet? since there is no evinced of it (to them back then) it must be made up
Correct? of course not.

At first, people looked at the ground, and seeing that it certainly looks flat, they took that as evidence that the whole world is flat (and since nobody had contrary evidence, they were fine with believing that).
Then, people started taking closer looks at the moon, the sun and the stars from different points on Earth, finding evidence for the fact that the world is actually round. Smart people accepted the evidence (Babylonians, Mayans, Galileo etc). Others refused to accept.

See how those people always have had a good reason to think stuff? Now see how this doesn't apply to God?

Just because you cant prove something dont mean its made up

Sure it does.

We cant prove that there is life on other planets
Why do people know about life on other planets? who was the first person to? and why?
no evinced? made up

Well, since there is life on our planet, and since there are other planets, it is only natural to believe that other planets have life too. A few centuries ago, people generally believed that there was life on every planet (also the moon), since all planets with testable inhabitation status (read: Earth) were inhabited.

Thats sort of how I feel but with why there is a God, I dont think evreything would fit the way it dose if there was no God, all of these laws of physics etc?

they happen to work all over?
I just feel like it was made by SOMETHING intelligent, may be a turtle, may be aliens (in a which came first the chicken or the egg way)

Okay, you say it was something intelligent. But why in the world would that be exactly the narcisstic split-personality no-sense-of-priority devil-blaming eccentric-rule-inventing vengeful-but-all-forgiving christian God?

[Askot Bokbondeler]

"lost hope in me"
What do you hope for in a believer? I admit I may not be right, I admit you may be right

What more can you hope for?
You ask me a question and I answer them and I dont give you the answer you want? or what?

your interpretation of the scriptures is too literal, too detached from my interpretation of facts, that i don't know how to talk with you. i ask you one question and you reply to a different one. we don't use the same dictionary and our discussion would develop into a semantic one rather than morals\metaphysics

I could not help but notice you use "interrelation for me and "facts" for you...

I cant ask you questions but you can ask me?

Semantics  are not facts 9in the sense of they are not "right" we each could reach  diffident thing of a sentence

How ever I want to point out, almost none of my things have been literal, i dont belive the fruitis a furit per say, i dont belive sin causes you to die, I don't believe it took 7 days for the world to be made, in fact show me one place I've used it "litarly"
All of my post have been giving what I think happens and why it happens based on the books, very little of it is "litral" the bible is not that, you cant use it that way, but your trying to make it seem like I am, so since your saying I am show me how I am as I disagree, in fact I'd go far as to say if the book is meant to be taken literal then I'm screwed, as its impresive how much of it I dont.

i used "interpretation" for me too, read again. i used "interpretation of scriptures" for you because by mentioning the bible you admit that you base your metaphysical beliefs on what it says, literally or interpreted, and i used "interpretation of facts" for me because as an atheist i don't have a book to tell me what's the underlying mechanics of the world. i also didn't mean to say you interpret the bible literally, just more literally than it requires for me to still have hope of having an interesting conversation that does not devolve into discussing semantics

[Thecard]

Right.  I follow what the Bible says, but I also think I can talk with God through prayer, and so I trust my feelings about God instead of just blindly following the Bible.
Also, I think it's pretty obvious God created us using science as a tool.  But that's just how it seems to me.


Also, with the whole controlling the future thing, I don't think God is controlling the future.  Sure he knows what will work out best for me and everyone else, but he isn't making me do it.  He's just encouraging it.

Also, Wolfy, I know you aren't very good with English, but could you please try to remember it's spelled "does" and not "dose"?  It's just killing my OCD.