4
   

Do you believe in God?

 
 
Professer Frost
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jun, 2008 09:16 pm
@Holiday20310401,
Quote:
Actually I think u should keep the profeser part, it makes u seem hypocritical.

I know. Is there any way I can make things right and be at peace with this forum?

Holiday20310401
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jun, 2008 09:26 pm
@Professer Frost,
I dunno.
In your avatar option you could have it say 'not a prof'.Wink

Don't worry I prefer people's writing that has no intelectual extremeites like a prof would have.

" If ever I see a post with a super, transcendent, intellectually superior, opinion I will not say thank you for it, for I will not understand it"Surprised
Professer Frost
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jun, 2008 09:42 pm
@Holiday20310401,
I hereby promise that further off-topic posts in this thread will not come from me.
Please proceed with the discussion!
- Frost
0 Replies
 
Mephistopheles phil
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jun, 2008 10:19 pm
@Professer Frost,
Professer Frost wrote:
When I said the "unlettered Professor" I meant it. That wasn't just obnoxious false humility. I mean come on, if I were really a Professor wouldn't I know how to spell and punctuate properly?



No the fault is my own. I did not lurk this forum before joining. I have never encountered you before. I have met actual verifiable professors on internet debate forums like this. I was naive enough to assume you were one, too. I didn't realize there was a Christian tune to your name.

I'm simply a dumbass.

Frost wrote:
I guess it was. I think (with your kind permission) I'll go crawl in a hole now. I'm feeling pretty lousy about all this. Once again, I'm really sorry.
- Frost
Edit: Sorry about back-to-back


I was being purposefully rude. I apologize.

Frost wrote:
I hereby promise that further off-topic posts in this thread will not come from me.
Please proceed with the discussion!
- Frost


Don't feel bad here, I'm the stupid one.
Didymos Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jun, 2008 12:58 am
@Mephistopheles phil,
Quote:


Heh, my user name is the author of scripture. That has to be worse than a CS Lewis reference. I think you're fine.

Quote:
Is there any way I can make things right and be at peace with this forum?


Don't worry so much? That's my advice, anyway. Wink
VideCorSpoon
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jun, 2008 08:16 am
@Didymos Thomas,
http://i25.tinypic.com/6ifrd3.jpg

Problem solved...
Holiday20310401
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jun, 2008 09:59 am
@VideCorSpoon,
This is funny, a thread about whether god exists or not turns into this!
Anybody want to figure out what my username means?
VideCorSpoon
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jun, 2008 11:15 am
@Holiday20310401,
Your right, Holiday. But one thing that should always be taken into account is the necessity for humor in a pseudo-serious discussion. It encourages relative perspective in a collegial setting.

Is it that unexpected that a discussion of God's existence would devolve in some sort of way? Doesn't this imply the very nature of the argument? The paradox can be examined but a relative response will always be given. This seems to be the nature of any philosophy, but even more so in this case.

I like to think of this particular question like a hot air balloon. We all fuel this hot air balloon with all manners of "hot air" and gradually the balloon will float away. The course may change, the passengers may differ, the very air might cool, but the nature of the question implies that the balloon will never reach even the stratosphere of our own normative world, even if there is a trained operator at the helm.

I have always thought that people who ask this question ask for an answer to something that cannot be answered. Yet they ask any way under the assertion that proof expresses truth. No proof other than belief can be given, so there is no truth in the affirmative. This is bad logic me.
Holiday20310401
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jun, 2008 11:19 am
@VideCorSpoon,
I think that the humor implies the nature of this discussion.
0 Replies
 
Professer Frost
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jun, 2008 11:19 am
@Holiday20310401,
On the God issue: I am in the process of writing out my (current) thoughts on the existence of God. So please be patient while I re-hash Herbert Spencer and I'll be right with ya!
- A. Frost
Professer Frost
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jun, 2008 11:56 am
@Professer Frost,
Nay, nay I'm too lazy even to paraphrase. One redundant question: How can you say that something infinite "exists"? Doesn't the very definition of existence require that whatever exists be differentiated from other existent things and thus finite?

So far I'm extremely uncertain about God but I think there's a good case to be made for agnosticism. I haven't quite finished reading the chapter on "Ultimate Religious Ideas"
in Spencer's "First Principles" but so far it seems to make a deal of sense.
- Frost
P. S.
I know that short posts lacking detail are unhelpful but I'm still very much in the process of learning about Herbert Spencer and the things he stood for so a multi-faceted critique is not to be expected. I'm sorry if I misled people into thinking I had more knowledge than I in fact do.
Holiday20310401
 
  1  
Reply Mon 23 Jun, 2008 10:26 am
@Professer Frost,
Exactly! If there is a god it lies in the transcendent, and therefore physically irrelevant. The only potential that we can give God is the fundamentals it possesses, which depending whether you choose to believe in God or not, can be through god or through yourself independent of God as a necessity.
0 Replies
 
astrotheological
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 01:27 pm
@Pythagorean,
No I don't believe in god because I just assumed that it was one of those childish beliefs that you grow out of like Santa Claus. Obviously as I got older I was wrong though.
There is just no actual physical evidence that a god exists or at least characters from the bible exist. Its great that the ten commandments exist but honestly if we have to go to church every Sunday like a child going to school to learn. Then the human race would still be considered a child. At least if thats the only ways for people to obey the ten commandments because obviously thats a good thing.
Zetetic11235
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 03:34 pm
@astrotheological,
astrotheological wrote:
No I don't believe in god because I just assumed that it was one of those childish beliefs that you grow out of like Santa Claus. Obviously as I got older I was wrong though.
There is just no actual physical evidence that a god exists or at least characters from the bible exist. Its great that the ten commandments exist but honestly if we have to go to church every Sunday like a child going to school to learn. Then the human race would still be considered a child. At least if thats the only ways for people to obey the ten commandments because obviously thats a good thing.


That is very circular reasoning. First of all, you assume that only children asttend school, which isn't true, what of college? There are adults ranging from 18 to 80 who attend Universities. Many christians and indeed most of the religious do not just go to Church to attend, and many have a set of beliefes derived from thier chosen doctrie that contradict what some of the ministers might have to say. People get very personal with religion and the religious are not a homgenous group.

Many hebrew people see the old testament as a book of ethical stories which promote certain actions. The ten commandments as the most basic set of tennents.

I personally do not think that the Ten Commandments are neccessarily the best basis for a legal system, but if you toss out 1 2 3 and 4 it works O.K. if you are satisfied with the judeo-christian ethics we live under.
astrotheological
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 04:13 pm
@Zetetic11235,
When I say that it is children going to school to learn. I'm referring to kindergarden or preschool. This is where they develop social and behavioual skills. Eventually as they get older they begin to understand using logic and common sence to determine what is right and what is wrong.
cupofcoffees
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 04:15 pm
@astrotheological,
Umm, kay, sorry but I'm a little offended.

Why wasn't the flying spaghetti monster an option? Are you discriminating against my religion?
astrotheological
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 04:18 pm
@cupofcoffees,
cupofcoffees wrote:
Umm, kay, sorry but I'm a little offended.

Why wasn't the flying spaghetti monster an option? Are you discriminating against my religion?


If your referring to what I was saying I apologize. I don't mean to offend people who are religious. I'm just looking at religion in my own perspective.
0 Replies
 
Zetetic11235
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 04:27 pm
@cupofcoffees,
The kindergarten paralell isn't really accurate though. Its not neccessarily like going to school, in fact, there are christians who do not attend Chruch. They have developed an ideology based on their doctrine of faith that is personally distinct. This is true even of fundamentalists. They argue about certain passages becuase for many parts a literal translation is not called for os there are many possible interpretations.

For many people god does not follow the same logical form as santa claus. I myself am and agnostic. I do not believe in god but I do not refute the possiblity totally. You cannot refute somthing when their is no definite evidence either way, and you certainly can't make a proof over a system as open as the physical universe.
Holiday20310401
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 10:12 pm
@Zetetic11235,
Cupofcoffee,

Why be offended? Its only an opinion.

This is what I don't get about people and religion and how we can't get facts presented upon it in school. It would offend people. And then it ticks me off even more when people want to offend others.

But for most, people do not want to offend another's religion, just convey the truth; not hold bias upon it, or saying 'my religion's better than your'. (In Canada we don't get that crap, often). No, atheists are wonderful for helping others understand religion because they tend to know more about the source of the actual religion than the religious people.

Though I envy those who can be religious because it means they have a healthy (humanistic) spirit.

But really. Why must people hold their own religion as such a base to their emotion so that when criticized, it becomes offensive. Religion is not meant to be a tool of comparison and as such there is no need to allow yourself to be taken in by what others say about your spiritual side.
Didymos Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Sat 6 Sep, 2008 10:30 pm
@Holiday20310401,
Quote:
No, atheists are wonderful for helping others understand religion because they tend to know more about the source of the actual religion than the religious people.


Come on now, Holiday. You know better than to make that sort of generalization. As a general rule, everyone is pretty well ignorant, atheist and theist alike.

Quote:
Though I envy those who can be religious because it means they have a healthy (humanistic) spirit.


Some of them, yes. But some are just as angry and hateful as the angry and hateful atheists. And among atheists you also find wonderful, compassionate people.
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
Paradigm shifts - Question by Cyracuz
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.79 seconds on 12/23/2024 at 09:52:55