Polytheish vs. Monotheism , Capitalism vs. Communism

[chequita guevara]

I was trying to make it easier to see. Since you saw it, it worked.

[Spiffor]

This thread had a huge troll potential. Too bad the OP was too blatant about it. But anneshm has now shown his potential.

Next time, I'm sure his troll will be GLORIOUS

[aneeshm]

My personal attutude is that of a pure agnosticism : I don't know whether God exists , and I don't really care .

[General Ludd]

Originally posted by Cort Haus

As an agonistic, I know there is a god. It's the definition which is open to discussion

Well, that's a position, but it is a theist position, and not at all agnostic. You just haven't decided on the details.

Maybe I should rephrase that to be more clear. As an Agonistic, I know there isn't a god, but I do believe in god. What people argue about is not god, but the semantics surrounding god.

God isn't an entity or being. God is the universe, and the reason everything is what it is. You can call it miracles or probability, destiny or chaos theory, intervention or physics, the words and rhetoric are all different but they mean the exact same thing.

Beyond that, when you read religous texts you should never be interpreting them as a literal truth, they are myths, fables, and stories, which dohave a core of truth or meaning to them (as all stories do). The similiarity between the devout religous and athiests is that they both interpret religious texts as literal truths, and that is what inevitably makes them arrogant / fanatic ******.

[Kuciwalker]

God isn't an entity or being. God is the universe

Then why call it god, if you already have a perfectly useful and accepted term for it?

[General Ludd]

What people argue about is not god, but the semantics surrounding god.

Originally posted by Kuciwalker

God isn't an entity or being. God is the universe

Then why call it god, if you already have a perfectly useful and accepted term for it?

Case in point.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by General Ludd
Case in point.

Well, that was too easy. It's Kuci after all

[Kuciwalker]

I know it's a semantic argument, from your PoV. I'm saying that your side is idiotic.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Heresson
hm, in communistic Poland not only there were no food comitees, but also there was no food.

(perhaps because there were no food comitees?)

This reminds me of a doco. The reporter was interviewing some guy in Romania, and he said, "When we were under communism we had no money but we had plenty of food. Now we have money we don't have food."

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Next time, I'm sure his troll will be GLORIOUS

I think Osweld did a better job.

[Odin]

Originally posted by aneeshm
My personal attutude is that of a pure agnosticism : I don't know whether God exists , and I don't really care .

[Odin]

Originally posted by General Ludd

God isn't an entity or being. God is the universe, and the reason everything is what it is. You can call it miracles or probability, destiny or chaos theory, intervention or physics, the words and rhetoric are all different but they mean the exact same thing.

That would be pantheism, particularily similar to the pantheism of jewish philosopher Baruch Spinoza.

[Kuciwalker]

It's also inane.

[quantum_mechani]

Originally posted by Bill3000
Polytheism > Monotheism because having one god is boring.

QFT

If you are going to have a religion where a deity has to actually manifest and meddle with the universe, at least make it interesting.

[Az]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
I know it's a semantic argument, from your PoV. I'm saying that your side is idiotic.

Kuci