Why do you believe in God?

[Peter Parka]

You love to make sweeping put down statements about whole groups of people dont you?:smiley24: Actually I used to be religious but I turned my back on it, partly because I hate the intellectual bullying in it, way to go jumping to conclusions without anything to back it up with though.

 

[Goat Whisperer]

I'm not saying that all Mormon's are racist just that their whole religion is based on sexism and racism. Think about, how many black people are LDS?

 

[LiberalVichy]

The fact that god is impossible and crazy has been case-closed for at least 200 years. Anyways, agnosticism is nonsensical since there is no 'third' way, one does or does not believe in deities and thus is a theist or atheist. Agnosticism is not a position on the existence of god but rather an epistemological position which is compatible with either theism or atheism; and it is a completely indefensible epistemological position because we can - and do - know that god is in fact a bunch of nonsensical and impossible fairy tales.

I like to make accurate statements about people who hold certain beliefs, for example that those who advocate the State are in fact advocating evil and thus can only be ignorant or evil. Likewise about those who assert agnosticism, they are either ignorant or they are corrupt and compromising.

 

[Goat Whisperer]

The fact that god is impossible and crazy has been case-closed for at least 200 years. Anyways, agnosticism is nonsensical since there is no 'third' way, one does or does not believe in deities and thus is a theist or atheist. Agnosticism is not a position on the existence of god but rather an epistemological position which is compatible with either theism or atheism; and it is a completely indefensible epistemological position because we can - and do - know that god is in fact a bunch of nonsensical and impossible fairy tales.

I like to make accurate statements about people who hold certain beliefs, for example that those who advocate the State are in fact advocating evil and thus can only be ignorant or evil. Likewise about those who assert agnosticism, they are either ignorant or they are corrupt and compromising.

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA! :willy_nilly::willy_nilly::willy_nilly::willy_nilly::willy_nilly:

To many big words! *Head Hurts*

 

[Minor Axis]

You love to make sweeping put down statements about whole groups of people dont you?:smiley24: Actually I used to be religious but I turned my back on it, partly because I hate the intellectual bullying in it, way to go jumping to conclusions without anything to back it up with though.

I'm hoping this comment was pointed at LV not me.

Making a decision about religion is like asking "you'll be walking from A to B, but we are not going to tell you how far it is. How long will it take you?"

1) 1 min
2) 1 hour
3) 1 day
4) 1 year

Ok, choose!

I choose number one because I have a book here, thousands of years old, written by superstitious people, in another language, translated multiple times that says faith indicates from A to B is 1 min. Now maybe God whispered in your ear (not you PP) and gave the right answer. Did God talk to you because you were smart, receptive, or gullible? It's too hard to say. Or was it God?

 

[Minor Axis]

because we can - and do - know that god is in fact a bunch of nonsensical and impossible fairy tales.

Whose we? Thats your faith talking.

I like to make accurate statements about people who hold certain beliefs, for example that those who advocate the State are in fact advocating evil and thus can only be ignorant or evil.

I disagree.

Likewise about those who assert agnosticism, they are either ignorant or they are corrupt and compromising.

Your mistaken.

 

[Peter Parka]

nah, I was talking to LV who I find completely deluded if she thinks that its been proved that there is no god. If it was a fact, huge debates like what's going on in this thread amongst intellegent people on both sides wouldn't be happening...butthen again she probably thinks their completely stupid because they dont conform to her make belief world.

 

[LiberalVichy]

'We' of course is not literally true, but rather to say rational opinion. I don't particularly care whether you agree on the other two, because I have a degree of logical certainty that precludes likely refutation; sort of like how I'm certain of things like non-contradiction, because if these things weren't the case then nothing would be the case.
Also don't mistake that I believe these things are at the forefront of people's mind and part of concscious, rational decision making. Most of people's motivations and decision-making is unconscious and pre-conscious, a fact that comes from the impossibility of logically analyzing all the information we encounter because our brains work so slowly. Also, for other evolutionary-biological reasons, most human beings have no problem repeating what they have heard without knowing or even thinking about it and may not be consciously aware that is what they are doing. Pointing these very things out will get you a lot of hostility, also, especially when it's rather obvious (like the Marxists who have never read a word of Marx, much less any of his predecessors or critics).

A lot of intelligent people have debated how many angels can dance on a pinhead, that doesn't make the idea anything less than retarded.

 

[Goat Whisperer]

'We' of course is not literally true, but rather to say rational opinion. I don't particularly care whether you agree on the other two, because I have a degree of logical certainty that precludes likely refutation; sort of like how I'm certain of things like non-contradiction, because if these things weren't the case then nothing would be the case.
Also don't mistake that I believe these things are at the forefront of people's mind and part of concscious, rational decision making. Most of people's motivations and decision-making is unconscious and pre-conscious, a fact that comes from the impossibility of logically analyzing all the information we encounter because our brains work so slowly. Also, for other evolutionary-biological reasons, most human beings have no problem repeating what they have heard without knowing or even thinking about it and may not be consciously aware that is what they are doing. Pointing these very things out will get you a lot of hostility, also, especially when it's rather obvious (like the Marxists who have never read a word of Marx, much less any of his predecessors or critics).

I'm sorry, but since you are suing those.... words, i'm not even sure what side your on

 

[Peter Parka]

A lot of intelligent people have debated how many angels can dance on a pinhead, that doesn't make the idea anything less than retarded.

Really? Care to point me in the direction of one then because I've never heard of intelligent people debating that!:unsure:

 

[Goat Whisperer]

Really? Care to point me in the direction of one then because I've never heard of intelligent people debating that!:unsure:

:24::24::24:

 

[LiberalVichy]

Really? Care to point me in the direction of one then because I've never heard of intelligent people debating that

Do you think people like Thomas Aquinas or the scholar-monks of St. Simone were stupid? For that matter, to pick something I'm sure you agree is a stupid opinion, do you think all of the serious Nazis were just fucking morons? A lot of intelligent people believe a lot of stupid things and it is because they feel pressured to believe it, both overtly and subtly through cultural and social emotion-warping, and the fact that so many obviously intelligent people believe so many obviously stupid things - things they have enough mental capacity and resources to easily dispose of on their own - simply goes to show the fact that it is these emotional pressures and psychological distortions that causes nonsense to get perpetuated.

 

[Peter Parka]

That's not answering my question, I asked point me in the direction of intelligent people having a debate on how many angels can dance on a pinhead, or was this just another one of your over exagerations which you seem fond of spouting?

 

[Goat Whisperer]

That's not answering my question, I asked point me in the direction of intelligent people having a debate on how many angels can dance on a pinhead, or was this just another one of your over exagerations which you seem fond of spouting?

Well I thought that angels can dance on a pin head....

 

[Minor Axis]

I don't particularly care whether you agree on the other two, because I have a degree of logical certainty that precludes likely refutation

An opinion base on your faith and your comedic too! If you say it's fact, then let the facts rip!

 

[LiberalVichy]

That's not answering my question, I asked point me in the direction of intelligent people having a debate on how many angels can dance on a pinhead, or was this just another one of your over exagerations which you seem fond of spouting?

The point I was making is it is absurd to assume all people involved in such a debate were stupid. As a general rule, one has to be somehwat intelligent to think of really complicated nonsense. Stupid people would never have thought whether angels had any specific size.

And, for that matter, I did mention someone: Thomas Aquinas. He was probably smarter than most anyone here.

 

[Peter Parka]

I see, you talked crap to make a point.

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

Atheists are not because you can't control people with atheism. But if you've talked to agnostics, intellectual bullying is a hallmark of many of them, largely because they resent any attack on the intellectual credibility of their own position

The same could be said of Atheists, perhaps even moreso.

Also, consider on this very forum the amount of threads that are created about religion and the accompanying posts and you will mostly find that the amount of threads/posts that are created to bring up religious debates and doggedly try to force their point of view against religion and such are done by atheists or disbelievers.

 

[LiberalVichy]

The same could be said of Atheists.

Some atheists have a really poor comprehension of the arguments for atheism, also many people are frustrated and/or defensive about their beliefs. I don't fundamentally disagree that some atheists act in this way (anymore than I would deny that some libertarians are antisocial assholes), but the atheist position is at least entirely tenable.

 

[COOL_BREEZE2]

Originally Posted by LiberalVichy
I don't particularly care whether you agree on the other two, because I have a degree of logical certainty that precludes likely refutation

Case in point.