Theo, I’m glad to have ven inspired those interpretations, much less have said them myself.

In order for God to appear, S/He could not be be God becaues S/He would cause our physical human form to explode in absorbing the whole of His/Her presence.

Either way, OB, I personally have never been addicted to anything but physical laziness, & I would characterize only a minority of the church to have recovered from addictions, although I would agree that those who have are the more zealous of us.  Yet what other philosophy/organization can claim the same salvation/recovery rate for drug abuse?

In order for God to appear, S/He could not be be God becaues S/He would cause our physical human form to explode in absorbing the whole of His/Her presence.

Is that why Moses only got to see God’s ass?

Com’on, you’re telling me God can do anything he wants except show himself to us because he can’t figure out a way to keep us from exploding because of his awesomeness?

Com’on, you’re telling me God can do anything he wants except show himself to us because he can’t figure out a way to keep us from exploding because of his awesomeness?

Tut, tut, Les, you weren’t really paying attention to what ellie said, were you now?  “Show himself”?  I laugh hollowly in your general direction:

In order for God to appear, S/He could not be be God becaues S/He would cause our physical human form to explode in absorbing the whole of His/Her presence.

Ellie said “absorb”, and it’s left as an excercise to the reader to guess: absorb exactly what, and exactly where.  That would truly cause our physical human form to explode righteously.

I want to explode from awesomeness!

Also:

I personally have never been addicted to anything but physical laziness

Does that include philosophical laziness, I wonder?

Yet what other philosophy/organization can claim the same salvation/recovery rate for drug abuse?

Just exchange one OCD behavior for another.

Now there’s a mental picture I really didn’t need to start my day with…

Com’on, you’re telling me God can do anything he wants except show himself to us because he can’t figure out a way to keep us from exploding because of his awesomeness?

It’s not true anyway - I watched Dogma and it’s only her voice that will make our heads pop. I guess she’s too lazy to write on a notepad or something.

I guess she’s too lazy to write on a notepad or something.

elwed, didn’t you know? The sound of Her Pencil scratching on Her Notepad alone suffices to waste Her critters.  Even the Psytronic Radiation of Her Brainwaves as She Thinks is enough to blow our minds.  That’s why she hires fundies to do Her Dirty Work- no danger of getting any brainwaves off of them, no Ma’am.

Yet what other philosophy/organization can claim the same salvation/recovery rate for drug abuse?

The recovery rate for addicts who go through the 12 step programs, like AA, which are the leading form of religous recovery, is 5%.

The recovery rates for those who do not go through the religous indoctrination of a 12 step program is, wait for it.....  5%.

Statistics taken from Penn & Teller’s crack “Bullshit” research team.

And those who go religious but not 12 step exactly?  & those who try nothing at all?  & the total number of those who recover?  Yeah, kind of Stepford wives image, huh?  Well, CLEARLY Dogma is much more reliable than any document thousands of years old...Have you ever read the jacket why he created that movie?  I LOVE that man!  Some of the deleted scenes are the BEST!

Which is kind of interesting because this whole discussion is on euthenasia (sort of) & that’s what saves human existence in Dogma…

Originally posted by KPatrickGlover:
So Jesus wants you to be a 40 something guy living in your mom’s basement?

I think I missed something.....

When you read it hyper literally like that then yes that is exactly what it means.

Originally posted by Ulfrekr:
Theocrat, in order for that anology to work, your Mom doing “everything she can to get your attention� would have to exclude her doing things such as, I dunno, trying to actually get your attention.

Or maybe if you would get your thumbs out of your ears, your fingers away from your eyes and stop screaming “la la la” while running in any direction you can to get away from her voice because you believe your logic and reasoning ability will give you the key to the universe you might discover she really is there.

The problem with this discussion is that we disagree with who is avoiding “reality.” Neither side can prove or disprove a reality so we make our choice on our own judgement of what we experience reality to be.  Atheists deny the reality of the power of God as experienced by Christians because they can’t experience that power themselves or choose to ignore it.  Religion denies the inexistence of a higher power we feel better off “for he knows nothing, and thinks that he knows.  I neither know nor think that I know.” Atheism believes that the fraction of 1% of all the knowledge in the universe that can be grasped is reminiscent of the other 99+% Religion believes the 99+% is more likely to hold the key than what can be grasped.  The difference of faith between the religions is a result of experience difference that must be interpretted in a rational manner to further the discovery of whatever higher being exists in the unfound knowledge.  I say neither side has a right to mock the other only that each should allow all opinions of matters to be respectful.  No one requires belief in anything.  That choice is up to the individual.  So please stop riding us as if we are deranged.

Or maybe if you would get your thumbs out of your ears, your fingers away from your eyes and stop screaming “la la la� while running in any direction you can to get away from her voice because you believe your logic and reasoning ability will give you the key to the universe you might discover she really is there.

Right.  You know, I used to be quite religious.  I spent a great deal of time asking God to help me deal with my depression but nothing ever changed until I ditched god and went to a therapist.  Funny, that.  I spent a good portion of my early teenage years praying and waiting and trying when I could have been happy and godless.

Atheism believes that the fraction of 1% of all the knowledge in the universe that can be grasped is reminiscent of the other 99+% Religion believes the 99+% is more likely to hold the key than what can be grasped.

Ah, but see, it’s quite the opposite from where I stand.
Atheists like to search for the other 99% because they think that’s fun. They dont really have any delusions about ever knowing all the knowledge or having the “key.” It’s the creationists who think they already know that that 99% = god.

Though I quite agree with you about the “can’t we all just get along” part, I have a big problem when creationists try to force their beliefs on me, such as those regarding euthanasia, abortion, etc.  We cant get along if creationists continue to try and control the lives and choices of atheists.

Sorry if this is incoherent...the flashing lights of an upcoming migraine are blocking my vision

Theo, the “evolutionists” try to explain their viewpoints to you by showing the process by which they came to their conclusions, letting the facts speak for themselves, and inviting you to give them new facts with which to amend their viewpoints. You explain your viewpoint by saying “Well, it’s my viewpoint. And nothing you can say will change it.” So, who is screaming “lalala” with their thumbs stuck in their ears?

It strikes me as odd that those who support pro-creationist positions treat evolution as antithetical to religious belief.  Such is not the case, as I have mentioned elsewhere, I know a fair number of people who work within evolutionary biology who are in fact quite religious (though not all of them are Christian, but some of them are).  I think this false dichotomy is causing some of the confusion regarding this debate.

That said, I wanted to ask what’s the topic here again?  If everyone were to clarify what they are arguing for, perhaps there would be a little more progress.

I want evolution in schools, ID can suck me (read=not in the schools). 
This thread has devolved into the same dicsussion going on in Convert Us Heathens (also manned by Ellie) and once again at
Conservatives Find Creative Way to push creationism in schools (manned by Thrival “whoa man look at the stars” Theist), in slightly different flavors.
I have played a role in this devolution but willingly admit it and repent.
There’s where I’m at.

I agree, SS, on the dichotomy.  Struggling for a good analogy but have realized that sleep is necessary.

Originally posted by shana:
I spent a great deal of time asking God to help me deal with my depression but nothing ever changed until I ditched god and went to a therapist.

Why did you have to stop believing in God in order to go to a therapist?  Anyone that told you God and therapists don’t mix is off their rocker.

Originally posted by shana:
I have a big problem when creationists try to force their beliefs on me,

Originally posted by Ulfrekr:
Theo, the “evolutionists� try to explain their viewpoints to you by showing the process by which they came to their conclusions, letting the facts speak for themselves, and inviting you to give them new facts with which to amend their viewpoints. You explain your viewpoint by saying “Well, it’s my viewpoint. And nothing you can say will change it.� So, who is screaming “lalala� with their thumbs stuck in their ears?

Originally posted by Socialist Swine:
It strikes me as odd that those who support pro-creationist positions treat evolution as antithetical to religious belief.

What on Earth!?!  I never once mentioned creationism in my posts.  This is not a creationist vs. evolutionist debate.  This is an atheist vs. theist debate.  Reread the last paragraph of my last post.  I am tired of the general lack of respect going on between all theists and atheists.  We have reasons for what we believe and so do you.  Philosophically, none of these reasons are better than another, therefore why can’t we have discussions on this site in a respectful manner to everyone elses beliefs?  I will admit when Christians are being ignorant, I’ve done so many times already.  I’m irritated at the lack of respect shown for a belief system just because it does not fit your standards.  Faith in your own ability to logic and reason to give you answers is a belief system and when you put down other belief systems because they do not fit your standards of faith that makes you no better than any other Christian, Muslim, Hindu or anyone else doing the same thing.  Theists choose not to believe in themselves to the extent atheists do.  There is no reason then that theist or atheist should deride others based solely on such merits of what one puts belief into.

Originally posted by OB:
I suppose I’d rather my loved ones be Christians than crackheads… less chance they’ll steal from me.  I have to admit, though, I consider both drug addiction and fervent belief in the bible to be conditions that damage the intellect and cognitive ability of those afflicted by it to a high degree.

This is exactly what I’m talking about.  Christianity does not destroy intellect and cognitive ability.  Christianity puts belief into something other than self, particularly God.  I don’t enjoy seeing Les, ellie, and zilch going rounds at each other because they don’t hold similar beliefs.  Beliefs are not a reason to attack each other.

It’s similar to saying people whose favorite color is purple are stupid, red is best.  I don’t mind listening to facts and logical discussion, but if I disagree with you based on belief then shrug it off.  Just because I disagree based on belief does not mean I don’t think you are right.  I know you are right but I believe you are wrong.  Knowledge and belief are different.  If I were to disagree with Spocko’s comprehensive examination of the founding fathers beliefs because I knew they said other things that point towards my argument then attack me for being ignorant of evidence if you wish, but disrespect should not be pointed at people’s beliefs and opinions.  Distinguish the differences and be more respectful about such differences please.

Faith in your own ability to logic and reason to give you answers is a belief system

No, not true. A belief system involves believing something that you have no evidential support for. I have plenty of evidence that supports my own ability to reason. No belief system is required.

We have reasons for what we believe and so do you.  Philosophically, none of these reasons are better than another, therefore why can’t we have discussions on this site in a respectful manner to everyone elses beliefs?

Because this is a site dedicated to logic and reason. I view anyone who believes in God they same way I view adults who believe in the Easter Bunny or those that believe they’ve been abducted by aliens. In fact, the alien abduction people usually have more in the way of evidence then the God people.

It’s similar to saying people whose favorite color is purple are stupid, red is best.

Again, not true. What might be more accurate is me saying my favorite color is red and you saying your favorite color is slurplef, a color somewhere between blue and red that only those with faith in it can see.

Theo,

You have to pardon me, my last post was entered quite late last night and I had meant to post it in a different thread.  So it really doesn’t make sense here.  Sorry about that.

theo- I’m all for facts and logical discussion, too, as are most of the regulars here (well, with the possible exception of Brock, who sometimes lets his perversion get the better of him and says inexcusably ignorant things about Hawaiian shirts).

But it’s natural for people to become excercised about emotional issues and start slinging mud, if they feel they are being maligned.  I do my best to reserve my sarcasm for those I feel deserve it, for instance those who say to us, as ellie did, “No wonder y’all wanna surrender to the terrorists”, presumably for being liberals.  I realize that I sometimes get out of control, but I do try not to insult people who are not arrogant or insulting themselves.  As Les said once about himself, I am a pretty agreeable guy in real life, and I would love to meet all of you in the biosphere over a cup of coffee.

But as far as disrespecting people’s beliefs and opinions goes, anyone who trots out their hobby horse here is fair game.  And if ideas are ridiculous, I see it as my Darwin-given duty to ridicule them.  Especially if they come from a faction intent on arrogating to themselves the power to force those opinions on others.

Theocrat:"Christianity puts belief into something other than self, particularly God...
Theists choose not to believe in themselves to the extent atheists do...
Philosophically, none of these reasons are better than another, therefore why can’t we have discussions on this site in a respectful manner to everyone elses beliefs?..

Ahh, relativism.  No one’s opinion is any better than anyone else’s, it’s all just a matter of taste.  So why can’t we all just get along?

*snif* That’s… beautiful, man! 

Horsefeathers.  If you can’t take the heat…

You propose a false dichotomy, in which Christians believe in god and atheists believe in self.  First of all, there are atheists who believe in all sorts of silly things.  Second, belief in self is hardly essential to not believing in god.

zilch exhumed: theo- I’m all for facts and logical discussion, too, as are most of the regulars here (well, with the possible exception of Brock, who sometimes lets his perversion get the better of him and says inexcusably ignorant things about Hawaiian shirts).

There you go again man, deriding my beliefs regarding the uselessness of Hawaiian shirts. Why must you mock my sense of good taste?

This is not a Hawaiian shirt lover vs those with good taste debate. This is a lover of complimentary color integrations vs shock frock wearer’s debate. I am tired of the general lack of respect going on between all smart dressers and “momma dressed me” victims.  We have reasons for what we wear and so do you.

Presentationally, none of these clothing choices are better than another, therefore why can’t we have discussions on this site in a respectful manner to everyone else’s tastes? I will admit when Hawaiian shirt wearers are being ignorant; I’ve done so many times already. I’m irritated at the lack of respect shown a conservative dresser’s choice just because it does not fit your standards. Faith in your own ability to choose a shirt to give you energy is a dressing belief system and when you put down other dressing belief systems because they do not fit your standards of fashion, that makes you no better than any other zoot-suited, bell-bottomed, gangsta styler or anyone else doing the same thing. Muted color wearers choose not to believe in themselves to the extent flamboyant dressers do. There is no reason then that either tasteful or tasteless dressers should deride others based solely on such merits as what one puts on one’s body.

(Apologies to Theocrat for abusing his post; he isn’t even a participant in this particular debate)

Theo is right, I was in the middle of reading different threads and accidentally made my post about creationism vs. evolution, rather than theism vs. atheism. So where I said “evolutionists”, I should have said “atheists”. Everything else remains the same.
I’m not sure why you think you’re being attacked here Theo. I’ve seen your beliefs questioned, but I haven’t seen anyone attack you, so unless you feel that the two are the same I see little reason to be bemoaning a lack of respect. That said…

Theocrat writes…
We have reasons for what we believe and so do you.  Philosophically, none of these reasons are better than another, therefore why can’t we have discussions on this site in a respectful manner to everyone elses beliefs?

If it’s all relative and none of us have any better reasons for believing what we do, then why bother even discussing anything? I agree, everyone should be allowed to believe what they want, because to presume otherwise would be to invite tyranny. That said, no one is bound to hold all beliefs equal, particularly when some beliefs can be backed up with more than just a constant recitation of “I know it to be so.” Otherwise, why bother even EDUCATING anyone? After all, everyone might not BELIEVE that penicillin cures disease, or that the solar system is heliocentric, or that the Holocaust occured.You’ve been asked time and time again to provide some reason, ANY reason, that a rational human being should believe the way you do. It silly to get offended just because your steadfast refusal to do so has been duly noted. If you don’t have a rational reason, well fine, but then you should admit that your beliefs should be held well outside the bounds of rational inquiry until there is some compelling reason to bring them back in from the cold.

Hell with clothes altogether!  I say we go nekked!

As for aformentioned inflamitory statement regarding surrender to the terrorists, I appologized before, so I’m glad it’s not being held against me.  Just so you know, in good Christian faith, I’m not holding against you the times I’ve seen all Christians characterized under the statement or behavior of a wacko.

But I will repeat what I posted before that it is difficult when discussing politics/religion to differentiate between all the individual nuanced beliefs each person or group of people will hold, because there are several liberal groups who actually proposed surrender to terrorists (which I provided a link to before).

As for lack of respect, I kinda figure it comes with the territory & try to stick to insulting people’s beliefs rather than insulting actual people, & take most comments in the same vein. thank God for & mercy on the numerous flub ups.

Ellie, I wonder exactly what you mean.  As George Grizzard said, “Naked” means you ain’t got no clothes on.  “Nekkid” means you ain’t got no clothes on, and you up to somethin’! 

Originally posted by KPatrickGlover:
A belief system involves believing something that you have no evidential support for. I have plenty of evidence that supports my own ability to reason. No belief system is required.

What you don’t have is evidence to support your BELIEF that using reasoning and logic is able to discover that there conclusively is or is not a supreme being(s).  You can not be sure that your quest for the answer to the existence of God can be found through logic and reasoning.  If it could then why haven’t humans found him by now?  An atheists BELIEF there is no supreme being(s) is based on his/her BELIEF that logic and reasoning can answer that question.

Originally posted by KPatrickGlover:
Because this is a site dedicated to logic and reason.

This does not mean respect takes a seat.  It is fine that logic and reason are prime here.  It is fine on the other site I discuss things that faith and belief are prime.  Respect, however, should not be second class on either site.

Originally posted by KPatrickGlover:
What might be more accurate is me saying my favorite color is red and you saying your favorite color is slurplef, a color somewhere between blue and red that only those with faith in it can see.

When it comes to belief systems atheism must be included right along next to Christianity, Hinduism, Islam, etc.  Each is a definable color on the grid even though no one may be able to agree how much of any color should be used to paint what is and is not known about the universe.

Originally posted by Socialist Swine:
You have to pardon me, my last post was entered quite late last night and I had meant to post it in a different thread.  So it really doesn’t make sense here.  Sorry about that.

Understandable.  Thanks for being polite about it.

Brock, very creative, I hope you got something done today.

Originally posted by Ulfrekr:
I’ve seen your beliefs questioned, but I haven’t seen anyone attack you, so unless you feel that the two are the same I see little reason to be bemoaning a lack of respect.

I honestly do not mind when people question my beliefs.  But when people make statements like Christianity cause people to lose their intellect and cognitive ability, or Christians are ignorant, etc. I get frustrated because none of that is true or can be blamed on a belief system.  it is true that many people make themselves ignorance as a response to adopting a belief system, but that is the problem of the people, not the belief system. 

I am a fundamentalist Christian.  I BELIEVE the Bible to be inerrant and inspired by God.  I BELIEVE God created the world in six days, there was a flood, a bunch of miracles happened, Jesus came, changed how we should view our relationship with God, died, was resurrected, lives in Heaven, and will come again to reign for a millenium.  The fact that I believe these things to be true does not make me by default ignorant of the fact that evolution has a lot of evidence for being factual, that miracles are very unlikely since they can not be recorded or measured, that Jesus may be similar to many other God figures, or that God has yet to provide substantial, credible, and measurable evidence that He exists.  I know these things.  We differ in our beliefs that you BELIEVE knowledge can discover the answer to God’s existence and I BELIEVE that knowledge and reasoning are not sufficient to decide whether God exists.

Originally posted by Ulfrekr:
why bother even EDUCATING anyone? After all, everyone might not BELIEVE that penicillin cures disease, or that the solar system is heliocentric, or that the Holocaust occured.

I see no reason to say that logic and reasoning is not useful to discovering the world around us, how it works, and elaborate on things measurable to us.  It is very useful for those purposes.  We only disagree on whether it can be successfully applied to the supernatural and paranormal as well.

Originally posted by Ulfrekr:
You’ve been asked time and time again to provide some reason, ANY reason, that a rational human being should believe the way you do. It silly to get offended just because your steadfast refusal to do so has been duly noted. If you don’t have a rational reason, well fine, but then you should admit that your beliefs should be held well outside the bounds of rational inquiry until there is some compelling reason to bring them back in from the cold.

This is exactly what I was getting at.  There is no rational reason for a human to believe as I do.  There is also no reason for a human to believe that being rational should be applied to discover the existence of the supernatural.  You BELIEVE rational inquiry can and should be applied to discover the supernatural.  I BELIEVE rational inquiry can not and should not be applied to discover the supernatural.

Wow, my head hurts now.  I hope I was clear.  I’m going to eat and go to bed.