The God Delusion

[MOBIUS]

Originally posted by Terra Nullius

More to the point,.. why shouldn't you respect someone who believes in fairy tales?

I do, in much the same way as I respect children.

[Whaleboy]

Whaleboy, you're wasting your time - if these donkeys still think that attcking Iraq was a good idea, you'll never get them to admit that their God doesn't exist (though I'm sure you'd get them to say that other gods don't exist... ).

True, but then history has already vindicated all of us who were opposed to the Iraq war all along, and I honestly think that history will laugh at fundamentalist Christians.

Why post a troll thread about the book in a forum where you feel alot of the people haven't read the book if you feel this way?

How is it a troll thread? I was asking a quite reasonable question. That is, unless you think critical questions about religions are automatically trolls. I'd hazard a guess that this is precisely what you think; what worries me is that you take yourself seriously when doing so .

Generalization of diversity, caricaturing others peoples into one mental image, making a negative image of others peoples thought without including the diversity and the validity of others peoples thoughts....

that are the first step to any kind of hate process...

Edit: yep, it's look like the same process of the rationalization of racism

While I think he's over-simplifying, certainly I'd have included more detail, he hits the nail right on the head that a fundamentalist (or American Taleban) when faced with superior arguments and evidence* would rather bury their heads in a bucket of sand. We're talking about people who've been indoctrinated by people using cynical marketting tactics on the one hand, or their equally ignorant parents on the other. Logic, reason and common sense doesn't stand a chance. That's, imho, the point MOBIUS was making.

More to the point,.. why shouldn't you respect someone who believes in fairy tales?

That person should be accorded the same respect as any other person, where "respect" is bought and sold without prejudice, based upon that persons actions.

Their views, on the other hand, are a different matter.

We have to get away from this loosely regurgitated relativism that people seem to have of "each idea/belief is as valid as any other". I call bull****. An idea backed up by arguments, evidence, reason and rationality is much stronger and much more deserving of respect than an idea backed up by delusions, fantasy, ignorance and dishonesty.

So people have a psychological attachment to ideas. Life is not about locking people in rubber rooms and paying them respect for their differences. We all have to survive on a planet and in a society where life is tough, work is hard, the rewards are tremendous, and the scenery is staggeringly beautiful. I'm not an absolutist who believes in "right and wrong and that's that",
but I do know that knowledge and wisdom is inherently better than ignorance and idiocy. That is why I applaud scientists, historians, writers, artists and other users of logic who promote empirical knowledge, and why I stand against those people who seek to ****** this progress.

*As a percentage, how many posts in this thread are actually serious arguments as opposed to "waah waah, they're not believing my bull****"? Jon Miller's made some interesting points which I applaud, and Elok can always been relied on to provide a decent debate (which I value far more than the idea of him agreeing with me ), but who else among the theists?

What's interesting also is the number of people in between, say agnostics or "mild" atheists who seem strangely critical of strong atheism. Can someone explain this to me?

[Terra Nullius]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
An idea backed up by arguments, evidence, reason and rationality is much stronger and much more deserving of respect than an idea backed up by delusions, fantasy, ignorance and dishonesty.

OK,...

So fantasy has no place in the life of the modern man.

... That is why I applaud scientists, historians, writers, artists and other users of logic who promote empirical knowledge, ...

Artists and writers?!!

We're all empiricists now!

[Whaleboy]

So fantasy has no place in the life of the modern man.

I'd prefer to use the word superstition. And no, superstition has no place in the life of modern (or any) man.

Artists and writers?!!

I did have to think for a minute or so before including this. Consider the artist Michaelangelo Caravaggio. A Christian man as was par for the course when he lived in Italy at the end of the 16th - early 17th century. His work was incredibly introspective, the first time I can think of that an artist would with almost scientific rigour, pick apart his own twisted personality and present self-honest art. Self-knowledge.

I don't need to tell anyone that there are intellectually honest writers, scientific writers, and intellectually dishonest writers, as well as a load of superstitious ones too. But then, you get the odd creationist physicist or geologist now and again. Ignore artists and writers if you like, since not everyone will agree with my reasons for including them, and it's entirely beside the point.

[Jon Miller]

You know, Whaleboy, that most Christians are not creationists?

I am very confused about why this is so often used to attack Christianity. I think that people who use this are still thinking in the 19th (and early 20th) century.

JM

[Whaleboy]

JM that's very surprising and not something I'd previously considered, so thanks for bringing it to me .

If we accept it as true, and my feelings tell me that to a certain extent it probably is, then if a Christian concurs with big bang theory and natural selection, how does he think God exists?

Three possibilities spring to mind:

a) There is a contradiction involved in claiming to be a Christian/Jew/Muslim and not being a creationist

b) God can exist without creating life, and evidence of his existence can be found elsewhere

c) God is trancendental, not existing in the way I use the word, being more of a subject experience.

What think you sir?

[Cort Haus]

Originally posted by MOBIUS


Exactly, "to treat everyone the way you would want to be treated yourself" easily has to be one of the most arrogant and self-centred things a person could do

There are many more arrogant and self-centred things than that code, however crude a foundation for morality it may be.

[MOBIUS]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
You know, Whaleboy, that most Christians are not creationists?

I am very confused about why this is so often used to attack Christianity. I think that people who use this are still thinking in the 19th (and early 20th) century.

JM

Yes, but all Christians were creationists until the whole preposterous idea was comprehensively pulled apart by science.

Another case of the 'believers' shirking away from the bright light of known science and seeking solace in the shadows of that which has yet to be completely disproved.

[Jon Miller]

As I said (many pages ago).. what makes Christianity unique isn't a 'god of the gaps' position. Christianity's central focus isn't explaining how we got here. Christianity's focus is on how we can fundamentally change.

Pretty much every other god is mostly a god of the gaps (explain thunder, explain that mountain, etc). On the other hand, Christ came to save us. He came to change us. Not only is the Christian God God.. but He also redeems us. The redeeming God is the God that I worship (not always very good, I admit).

Jon Miller

[MOBIUS]

Originally posted by Whaleboy
JM that's very surprising and not something I'd previously considered, so thanks for bringing it to me .

If we accept it as true, and my feelings tell me that to a certain extent it probably is, then if a Christian concurs with big bang theory and natural selection, how does he think God exists?

Three possibilities spring to mind:

a) There is a contradiction involved in claiming to be a Christian/Jew/Muslim and not being a creationist

b) God can exist without creating life, and evidence of his existence can be found elsewhere

c) God is trancendental, not existing in the way I use the word, being more of a subject experience.

What think you sir?

Maybe we should discuss the relative merits of the Arian Controversy, seeing as everyone round here apparently knows all about Constantine...

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by MOBIUS


Yes, but all Christians were creationists until the whole preposterous idea was comprehensively pulled apart by science.

Another case of the 'believers' shirking away from the bright light of known science and seeking solace in the shadows of that which has yet to be completely disproved.

So was everyone else..

What else were you to think, before science came up with it's theories?

I know that there were atheists before Darwin.. I think that they were fools of the highest order. In all actuality.. I don't really see how people could be atheist before Hawking..

If science can't explain something.. or if science doesn't even exist.. beleiving that it is of supernatural origin is the most reasonable thought process.

JM

[GePap]

Originally posted by Jon Miller


So was everyone else..

What else were you to think, before science came up with it's theories?

I know that there were atheists before Darwin.. I think that they were fools of the highest order. In all actuality.. I don't really see how people could be atheist before Hawking..

What re you talking about?

Whatever, I can;t even wrap my mind fully around this statement....

[GePap]

Also, I doubt Buddhists, Hindus, and anyone who does not follow a monotheistic religion accepted creationism prior to Darwin, or since.

Can Monotheist please stop ignoring non-monotheistic religious beliefs, please? Its rather disingeneous in this type of debate.

[Terra Nullius]

Originally posted by MOBIUS
Yes, but all Christians were creationists until the whole preposterous idea was comprehensively pulled apart by science.

Ri-i-i-ight,..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustine_of_Hippo

Augustine took the view that the Biblical text should not be interpreted literally if it contradicts what we know from science and our God-given reason. In an important passage on his "The Literal Interpretation of Genesis" (early 5th century, AD), St. Augustine wrote:

It is too disgraceful and ruinous, though, and greatly to be avoided, that he [the non-Christian] should hear a Christian speaking so idiotically on these matters, and as if in accord with Christian writings, that he might say that he could scarcely keep from laughing when he saw how totally in error they are.

[MOBIUS]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
I know that there were atheists before Darwin.. I think that they were fools of the highest order. In all actuality.. I don't really see how people could be atheist before Hawking..

How could they be fools if they were right after all!!?????

The whole sorry mess of multiple religions believing in mutually exclusive gods must've been at least a small clue towards the whole preposterous house of cards that is organised religion...

If science can't explain something.. or if science doesn't even exist.. beleiving that it is of supernatural origin is the most reasonable thought process.

JM

Who's side are you on JM, that comment is just making things easy for us!

"We can't explain why the sun rises - er, let's make something up!"

Exactly. Religion is borne from the ignorance of early man who knew nothing about how the world worked on a scientific level, hence gods for this, and gods for that, etc...

As we came to understand our world better, all the 'supernatural' stuff was explained. QED.