Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 232 233 [234] 235 236 ... 370

Author Topic: Atheists  (Read 404246 times)

Andir

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Atheists
« Reply #3495 on: April 23, 2010, 12:14:16 pm »

Which Is what I said is asinine.  The idea that you MUST accept their answers when your's can't be proven.
What nonsense. Nobody here ever said that.
Quote from: Soren Kierkegaard
If I am capable of grasping God objectively, I do not believe, but precisely because I cannot do this I must believe.
Nobody?

Edit: Also...
When we run out of logical answers, the only ones we can turn to are the illogical, in this case it is the implication of a higher power. Does it make sense? no, not really. But what other answer is there?
To which the answer is you can't answer it, so why do you?
« Last Edit: April 23, 2010, 12:23:32 pm by Andir »
Logged
"Having faith" that the bridge will not fall, implies that the bridge itself isn't that trustworthy. It's not that different from "I pray that the bridge will hold my weight."

Siquo

  • Bay Watcher
  • Procedurally generated
    • View Profile
Re: Atheists
« Reply #3496 on: April 23, 2010, 12:28:45 pm »

Nobody?
Yes, you are misinterpreting the quote on purpose.
Logged

This one thread is mine. MIIIIINE!!! And it will remain a happy, friendly, encouraging place, whether you lot like it or not. 
will rena,eme sique to sique sxds-- siquo if sucessufil
(cant spel siqou a. every speling looks wroing (hate this))

Andir

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Atheists
« Reply #3497 on: April 23, 2010, 01:04:08 pm »

Nobody?
Yes, you are misinterpreting the quote on purpose.

So what you are saying is that quotes are pointless unless taken from the same century?  Because interpreting a quote for something other than it's direct wording would be changing that quote.
Logged
"Having faith" that the bridge will not fall, implies that the bridge itself isn't that trustworthy. It's not that different from "I pray that the bridge will hold my weight."

Siquo

  • Bay Watcher
  • Procedurally generated
    • View Profile
Re: Atheists
« Reply #3498 on: April 23, 2010, 01:33:41 pm »

So what you are saying is that quotes are pointless unless taken from the same century?  Because interpreting a quote for something other than it's direct wording would be changing that quote.
What did you say about my mother?!?!


You mean like that? ;)
Logged

This one thread is mine. MIIIIINE!!! And it will remain a happy, friendly, encouraging place, whether you lot like it or not. 
will rena,eme sique to sique sxds-- siquo if sucessufil
(cant spel siqou a. every speling looks wroing (hate this))

Andir

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Atheists
« Reply #3499 on: April 23, 2010, 01:50:12 pm »

It would be like taking a Jefferson quote where he said "Year of our Lord" and using that as proof that he wanted to found a Christian Nation... go Glenn Beck.

Also, what you did.  By assuming that nobody in the 19th Century was "smart" enough to imagine a world without a creator that they must have all had belief of some type.
« Last Edit: April 23, 2010, 01:51:44 pm by Andir »
Logged
"Having faith" that the bridge will not fall, implies that the bridge itself isn't that trustworthy. It's not that different from "I pray that the bridge will hold my weight."

silverskull39

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Atheists
« Reply #3500 on: April 23, 2010, 02:45:40 pm »

Quote
Edit: Also...
When we run out of logical answers, the only ones we can turn to are the illogical, in this case it is the implication of a higher power. Does it make sense? no, not really. But what other answer is there?
To which the answer is you can't answer it, so why do you?

Because I want to.

Also, I'd rather die believing in god and find out there isn't one than die believing there is no god and finding out there is one.
Logged
Quote
Quote
Quote
Dwarf fortress threads can sound so.... unethical
it would be unethical if this wasn't the bay12 forums
Bay12: A short, sturdy forum fond of !!science!! and derailment.
Quote
Now back to your regularly scheduled thread derailment.

fenrif

  • Bay Watcher
  • Dare to be stupid.
    • View Profile
Re: Atheists
« Reply #3501 on: April 23, 2010, 02:51:06 pm »

But then you have the problem of "what if it isn't your god" I mean, theres been ALOT of gods and goddesses over the years. What if it was a god noone had ever worshipped? What if it was one of the minor greek demigods like hercules?

I'd rather take my chances with atheism. At least that way if i die and it turns out Apollo is the true god, he wont be pissed I was worshipping some other false idol.
Logged

Andir

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Atheists
« Reply #3502 on: April 23, 2010, 02:54:04 pm »

Edit: Also...
When we run out of logical answers, the only ones we can turn to are the illogical, in this case it is the implication of a higher power. Does it make sense? no, not really. But what other answer is there?
To which the answer is you can't answer it, so why do you?

Because I want to.

Also, I'd rather die believing in god and find out there isn't one than die believing there is no god and finding out there is one.
Any benevolent god would forgive you for not believing as you have no evidence of it's existence and it was the one that gave you none.  Meeting a God that wasn't forgiving? ... I'd rather be plant food.

Fearing retribution in death is the same as fearing retribution in life.  It's not a life I'd want to live and not a life I'd want my god to have me live.
Logged
"Having faith" that the bridge will not fall, implies that the bridge itself isn't that trustworthy. It's not that different from "I pray that the bridge will hold my weight."

Grakelin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Stay thirsty, my friends
    • View Profile
Re: Atheists
« Reply #3503 on: April 23, 2010, 03:14:54 pm »

Apollo isn't fucking benevolent. He will kick your ass.
Logged
I am have extensive knowledge of philosophy and a strong morality
Okay, so, today this girl I know-Lauren, just took a sudden dis-interest in talking to me. Is she just on her period or something?

silverskull39

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Atheists
« Reply #3504 on: April 23, 2010, 03:21:32 pm »

since when did I declare I believed in any specific god? I said I believe in a higher power, not that I'm christian/catholic/or any other religion. That aside, it's more a matter of personal preference than of fearing retribution. Just because I would rather not be smitten (smoted? smited?) by an angry deity doesn't necessarily mean that I'm going to bend over backwards to please them. It's kind of like saying I'd rather not get stung by bees. Do I like getting stung by bees? obviously not. Am I going to drastically change my life to avoid such a stinging? Not unless I'm deathly allergic.

Also, for the sake of the discussion I'd like to bring in the following quote for discussion;

   
   " Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
    Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
    Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
    Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"

what say you, bay12ers?


Logged
Quote
Quote
Quote
Dwarf fortress threads can sound so.... unethical
it would be unethical if this wasn't the bay12 forums
Bay12: A short, sturdy forum fond of !!science!! and derailment.
Quote
Now back to your regularly scheduled thread derailment.

Grakelin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Stay thirsty, my friends
    • View Profile
Re: Atheists
« Reply #3505 on: April 23, 2010, 03:38:02 pm »

Hi, welcome to every page on this thread. We are very glad that you offered us a new redrudging of everything that has been said before. Your ability to repeat the same 'checkmate' logic where there can only be one conclusion to every statement you bring forward, while ignoring previous points and comments which debate those conclusions, is very refreshing. Glad to have you on the board.

The reasoning that a deity might be unwilling to prevent evil has been heavily discussed, and it is apparent that, at the very least, malevolence is not the only possible conclusion.

Granted, a lot of this thread boils down not to a debate between Theism and Atheism, but instead to a debate between Christianity and Atheism. Rather than actually tackle the possibility of a deity as a whole, many of the debaters here prefer to take Biblical beliefs, attempt to prove their fallacy through logic (which is silly and meaningless, because there are a plethora of interpretations about the Bible amongst people who follows its teachings in the first place), and then claim that because they have 'disproved' Christianity, they have disproved the idea of a God.

Why does a God necessarily have to be omnipotent? Could it have not created the universe, wound up the clock, and set us on our way? Maybe it doesn't interfere because it likes to spectate? Maybe it doesn't interfere because it can't, whatever power it had has been spent on creating the universe? Maybe it doesn't interfere because it would rather leave us to do our own thing? Of course, many mathematical theorists speculate that the entire course of the universe has already been predetermined, and that if there was an intellect or a computer powerful enough, they could equate everything that will ever happen.

One of the things not covered here, as far as I have seen, is where the universe began. It is easy (and probably true!) to cite the Big Bang Theory. Except that the Big Bang Theory indicates that something had to exist in the first place, in order to be scattered across the cosmos. So where did this come from? This is the big mystery, one which the Hadron Collider is investigating. I doubt that we will find any answers to the divine by throwing out random puffs of logic. Instead, we have to look to our own studies of the universe for the answer. We have to keep discovering things, and try to figure out the answer in a scientific manner. Science and religion are not opposed. Science and organized religion might be, due to the loss of power a religious institution might have if they risk everything they and their people believe in being false.

To me, the nature of the universe itself seems to indicate that some form of deity must exist, or existed at one point. Everything has an equation, after all, and if everything has an equation, that means there is perfect order to it. Yet, at the same time, it is completely chaotic, completely unpredictable. This, to me, imprints on my mind the idea of a God.
Logged
I am have extensive knowledge of philosophy and a strong morality
Okay, so, today this girl I know-Lauren, just took a sudden dis-interest in talking to me. Is she just on her period or something?

chaoticag

  • Bay Watcher
  • All Natural Pengbean
    • View Profile
Re: Atheists
« Reply #3506 on: April 23, 2010, 03:47:55 pm »

I can't say that it does the same to me. Besides, the idea that the universe can be calculated as such is debatable, since by observing quantum particles, you change them, seeing that the only way to measure anything is by throwing particles at it.
Logged

Grakelin

  • Bay Watcher
  • Stay thirsty, my friends
    • View Profile
Re: Atheists
« Reply #3507 on: April 23, 2010, 03:52:21 pm »

That's the problem with the ability to calculate the universe, though: There are endless possibilities. You have to take everything into account.
Logged
I am have extensive knowledge of philosophy and a strong morality
Okay, so, today this girl I know-Lauren, just took a sudden dis-interest in talking to me. Is she just on her period or something?

Andir

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Atheists
« Reply #3508 on: April 23, 2010, 04:06:23 pm »

Why can't everything have just existed without something creating it?
Logged
"Having faith" that the bridge will not fall, implies that the bridge itself isn't that trustworthy. It's not that different from "I pray that the bridge will hold my weight."

Andir

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Atheists
« Reply #3509 on: April 23, 2010, 04:09:05 pm »

Also, for the sake of the discussion I'd like to bring in the following quote for discussion;

   
   " Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
    Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
    Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
    Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"

what say you, bay12ers?
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=34795.msg832502;topicseen#msg832502
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=34795.msg823444;topicseen#msg823444
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=34795.msg552938;topicseen#msg552938
http://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=34795.msg1109566;topicseen#msg1109566
Pick one.
Logged
"Having faith" that the bridge will not fall, implies that the bridge itself isn't that trustworthy. It's not that different from "I pray that the bridge will hold my weight."
Pages: 1 ... 232 233 [234] 235 236 ... 370