Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You say nothing about what it means to take some person from the past, real or imagined, and assert that he was a god. Your Judeo-Christian theology is confused beyond recovery. At a minimum, you are using the term "god" in a way that means nothing to anyone in the rest of the world, except when you mention Eric Clapton, which is understandable but highly debatable.
The word god doesn't mean that much to me. It simply means that someone or something has been attributed might by someone else. To say that Eric Clapton and Jesus Christ are gods doesn't mean that much in a literal sense to someone who doesn't attribute that might to them, but it is foolish to deny that someone has attributed might to them nevertheless. Because someone else may have attributed the same might to a phallic symbol, a mythological creature, or a pile of dung.
The atheist tends to be hung up on the application of deity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jackmccullough
Stop trying to convert atheists.
I don't believe in converting atheists. To attempt to do so would be nonsensical; folly. I simply want to educate the atheist as well as the theist. If either were to make a decision to convert themselves to atheism or theism isn't the point for me. I want them to make an informed decision either way based upon accurate information. I would be equally pleased, and in fact would expect the majority of the final informed decisions to be towards anti-theistic rather than theistic, so long as it is an informed decision.
If any of your beliefs may be described as faith based, or advertised by you as "sacred", then those are the restraints I was referencing.
They are clearly not myth or propaganda, rather they are self imposed stopping points in the consideration of the cosmic riddles...."I'm going to believe this in the face of anything said or established against it."
Escaping from that mentality, that is the beauty filihok meant.
I understand that. What I'm saying is that that isn't an accurate estimation.
An atheist is just someone who doesn't believe in any god in the same way a christian doesn't believe in Zeus or Thor.
I disagree because the Bible mentions many gods, some of them were men, women, objects, and some of them were not believed in or venerated by the writers of the Bible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by agnostic soldier
Denial presupposes that x claim is true, but the person is refusing to believe it, despite the fact that the evidence shows otherwise. This is the difference between not denying and not believing. Atheists aren't refusing to accept the truth of god, they don't believe in god because there is no evidence that verifies the existence of a deity.
That makes absolutely no sense to me.
Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities. In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities. Most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist. Atheism is contrasted with theism which in its most general form is the belief that at least one deity exists. From Wikipedia
A deity is a being, natural, supernatural or preternatural, with superhuman powers or qualities, and who may be thought of as holy, divine, or sacred. Believers may consider or believe that they can communicate with the deity, who can respond supernaturally to their entreaties, and that the deity's myths. Some religions have one supreme deity, others have multiple deities of various ranks.
C. Scott Litleton's Gods, Goddesses, And Mythology defined them as "a being with powers greater than those of ordinary humans. but who interacts with humans. positively or negatively, in ways that carry humans to new levels of consciousness beyond the grounded preoccupations of ordinary life."
Deities are depicted in a variety of forms, but are also frequently expressed as having human form. Also from Wikipedia.
If Jesus Christ comes down from the sky during the half-time show...
I love it!
I have to say, though, that I don't think that would persuade me. I would think it more likely some fraud is going on than that it really is Jesus. Just weighing the odds.
Religion's fundamental premise is that it's intolerable for there to be anything you don't know about with absolute certainty and which isn't under some form of sentient control -- by you or by superior beings, real or imagined. It then invents beings and realms that aren't subject to your five senses...
That is not historically true. Religion (philosophers, theologians and priesthood –not to mention the state) did not invent any beings. They did exploit the belief of the ancient peoples to persons known by the name “gods” whom they described as normal people living side by side with the “humans” and having sex with them, mostly by raping their women.
We were taught that the ancients were naive (rather stupid) to believe in such gods and that the true gods were the ones who were transfigured and transformed by the philosophers into heavenly beings (they became heavenly by climbing a ladder to the sky!!).
Therefore, I suggest that in the future you use the expression “Today’s religion” and not “Religion” in general. Today’s believers are naive but not so the ancient ones. The ancient Greeks –the believers among them- were terrified of their gods, and for good reasons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mordant
Of course science doesn't test what isn't testable. That which isn't testable is either beyond the reach of science for now or is perhaps beyond our reach,...
Or, perhaps, the scientific testing will be no good for the health of religion.
Religion is not a fruit of modern civilization, it is a borrowed one; borrowed from ancient civilizations.
How did it happen and people believed in gods for the first time? Is science unable to find out and answer that question? Obviously not! Then why it never attempted to answer it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mordant
The answer to that is to face it honestly and without embellishment or fabrication. This life is all there is for each of us, therefore it's precious. We have only each other, therefore, our fellow man is important and what I do impacts others for good or ill. Life is short and nothing is permanent, so make the most of the present moment, don't dwell on the past or fret about the future. Love well and laugh often -- at the absurdity of life if nothing else. These are the messages we need to be giving ourselves so that we can deal with life as it is and not as we childishly wish it to be.
I quite agree!
Yet, I cannot just ignore religion. I have to fight against it and I am doing it by trying to reveal that the entire structure of religion stands on a monumental archaic joke: that the gods climbed to the heavens by ladder!
The Pyramid Texts translated by J. Allen:
ASCENDING BY LADDER
352 [RECITATION]. When this Pepi goes up, Horus of the Duat will go up to the sky on the ladder;
One should not ignore religion, nor should one be hostile to it. Religions do a lot of good in this world, artistically, charitably, socially, psychologically.
I go to Temple from time to time; I find it refreshing and a good way to lift my spirits, even though I don't believe any of the stories (except as metaphors).
I also regularly contribute to their charitable drives.
I think a religious tradition is a good thing to be a part of, even though one maintains one's objectivity and in particular one avoids the arrogance of thinking one has some sort of monopoly on the Truth. Still, it holds one in the culture and gives one a historical place.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.