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.
ETA: That data is 5 years old. No doubt the "Nones" have increased. Probably with Catholics losing the most.
Interesting.
I'm surprised that there are so few Anglicans, given that Canada was under the British crown for much of its history. Or do I not have my history correct?
And so on, providing more and more things that God has to be in order to be considered God. Which they then lead into spurious arguments where "since I have not observed this, God must not exist."
No. Look around you. Everything in this world is from God. Even with our freak weather, plants and animals have not died off. Rather we have a constantly evolving world, that continues to grow in spite of the massive potential for entropy. Which btw, given that you got through college, you can tell me what entropy is, and does. Right?
Here is the actual dictionary definition of God. I believe you'll find no built-in assumptions of perfection or any of the others.
Do you see omnipotence there? Omniscience? Perfection? Nope, just morality, creation, and rulership with God, and power over nature/fortune with gods. I didn't distort the definition.
A god with such limited power is not worth worshiping or praying to either which means he/she is not technically a god and just a creator similar to a computer manufacturer. If anything you could call him (if said god is a guy) Big Daddy but God...not so much.
A god with such limited power is not worth worshiping or praying to either which means he/she is not technically a god and just a creator similar to a computer manufacturer. If anything you could call him (if said god is a guy) Big Daddy but God...not so much.
And there you have it in a nutshell, the human vanity and hubris regarding what a God is required to be to qualify as God. This is the source of the Omni's and there is no other justification for them.
A god with such limited power is not worth worshiping or praying to either which means he/she is not technically a god and just a creator similar to a computer manufacturer. If anything you could call him (if said god is a guy) Big Daddy but God...not so much.
I think you are deeply missing the point.
Quote:
24When the ten heard about this, they were indignant with the two brothers. 25Jesus called them together and said, “You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. 26Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, 27and whoever wants to be first must be your slave— 28just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.”
First off, this is like going to a country person and being like "I don't see why with his hard work, he isn't a successful banker." Uhhh, duh, because the guy likes farming! Or expecting a lesbian to get married to a guy. You have some built-in success ideal, but it only works if they share your goals. Get to know the person/God.
Quote:
"Many will say to Me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?' 23"And then I will declare to them, 'I never knew you."
We assume God is like the autocrats of our time. But he wants nothing to do with this. He made us human. Weak. Vulnerable. Not able to lift tanks and crush other people's bones. Neither is God all-powerful. This is because God doesn't want us superstrong.
God is loving. Caring. Nurturing. I despise the word He for God. It's a misunderstanding of God's nature. God is whatever gender, but this is a wrong assumption about who and what God is. It isn't about God's power. If you seek after God with a desire to lord over others, you will always be disappointed.
Also, there are several logical flaws with omnipotence. Even if it was feasible, you are confusing the ability to do anything for the desire to do it. An hour ago, I was reading some mom talk about "don't help my kids, I want them to learn from their own mistakes, and get up when they fall." Codependent followers are not exactly desirable.
And there is nothing to suggest perfection in the grand design. In fact, there are built-in flaws. I could easily say that I was born in the wrong body, and free will seems like a flaw. But it's not. Because I have the ability to decide, I can get a sex change. I can decide to stay male and be genderfluid. I can raise a family, or I can pursue my dreams. Or a mix of above.
Last edited by bulmabriefs144; 01-14-2016 at 08:44 PM..
And there is nothing to suggest perfection in the grand design. In fact, there are built-in flaws. I could easily say that I was born in the wrong body, and free will seems like a flaw. But it's not. Because I have the ability to decide, I can get a sex change. I can decide to stay male and be genderfluid. I can raise a family, or I can pursue my dreams. Or a mix of above.
Or:
1. You could "get a sex change"? Do you know anybody who could actually afford that? Not just the expense, which is considerable, but the time off from work and so on to recover (maybe paid, maybe not, depends upon one's situation, doesn't it?) PLUS lifelong hormonal therapy? Even one person? I don't. That shyte is EXPENSIVE. And lengthy. Forever, actually. And it's forever as far as taking stuff, and/or having needles...or else it's right back to a person hormonally one sex and physically another, technically classified as a "mutilated male" or a "mutilated female". But anybody could just go do that, I guess? God bless free will.
2. You could raise a family? How about if you weren't attractive enough to find a mate? How about if you couldn't afford to run a household? How about if you were infertile and could not afford fertility treatment? How about if you/your mate were infertile and couldn't afford the quite considerable cost of adoption (yes, even out-of-country or high-needs child adoptions are expensive)?
3. You could pursue your dreams? Well, YOU, in a spoiled first-world country, could, sure. So could I. Millions COULDN'T "just" go "pursue their dreams". They dream of dinner. Maybe. And maybe they won't get it. Again.
3. "Or a mix of above." Again, God only seems to have given "free will" to the very spoiled who, by accident of birth, are in a locale where such fantastical daydreams can be entertained, much less pursued.
The verdict's in, folks. God gives free will! To the, per global standards, affluent and very, very, very, very, very lucky. Seems like the rest of the globe is you-know-what-canned. Sorry, gigantic part of the globe! God says you don't get free will. Truly, the Lord works in mysterious ways. And He sure likes to hob-knob with the creme de la creme! Exclusively.
I'm surprised that there are so few Anglicans, given that Canada was under the British crown for much of its history. Or do I not have my history correct?
There are some Anglicans in Canada, but the largest Anglo-Protestant churches were and are the Methodist and the Presbyterian, now merged and known as the United Church of Canada.
Keep in mind a large number of ''anglos'' in Canada were Scots and Irish as opposed to English. These people were not predominantly Anglican. And a good number of the English who came to Canada were Catholics, not Anglicans.
And later on the ''anglo'' population gained new members of German, Dutch, Ukrainian, etc. origins, none of which were Anglican either.
It would be nice if you could learn to correctly use the quote function. Hiding your text inside mine is poor form, and takes longer to reply to and requires more effort.
Thanks also for simply dodging, skipping and wholesale ignoring my last reply to you, choosing instead to skip over it entirely and reply to a post I wrote to someone ELSE. Dodge much?
All that said, let us now extract your words out of my mouth and reply to them directly....
Quote:
Originally Posted by bulmabriefs144
Perhaps you thought you were a precious little genius at school
Nothing in this sentence, nor the paragraph it appeared in is true. But that is what happens when you continue to simply make things up about me as you have been doing for more than one post now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bulmabriefs144
Uhhhh, do you understand the first thing about me?
That is rich considering it is you, not me, on a campaign of making up lies and misrepresentations. The simple fact remains however that as long as you sell this fetid little narrative that anyone who comments on the topic of god must therefore at some level believe in god..... then what I wrote above is perfectly cogent and applicable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bulmabriefs144
I could likely run circles about you on discussions about whether or not something exists.
Nice fantasy. Try backing it up by actually ONCE in your life attempting to do so. For example the topic of whether an intelligent intentional agency created our universe. By all means, for the first time ever, attempt to substantiate the existence of such an entity. You have not before. You have not today. I somehow doubt you will tomorrow either for all your fantastical nonsense about how great and educated you think you are.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bulmabriefs144
You keep saying "too complex" but it appears as though you are the one having a hard time with this.
It is simple:
You say "I do not believe in God." But you just said the name of something you reputedly do not believe in. This is a simple paradox.
Except it is not. So the only one having issues and a hard time understanding things is you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bulmabriefs144
If you were actually an atheist, you would not be putting me down about my belief, you would shrug it off as me being from a less developed time. Or something. Because you would be secure in your unbelief, not needing to convince others.
Except many many many times on this forum, even this thread, I have pointed out that I do not identify myself with words like atheist and agnostic. Perhaps YOU identify me thusly, but I never do. So as usual you are simply making up fantasy lies about me, packing your straw man tight with straw, and then flapping at it ineffectually in an attempt to knock it down.
Meanwhile in the real world where the real me actually exists, my agenda is based on the simple fact that beliefs matter. And more to the point the result of people applying their beliefs actually matter. And my agenda in life is less to "convince others" as you put it, but to mediate the effects of their beliefs and have their beliefs expressed in the proper time and place..... such as NOT in our halls of education, science and power.
So for the first time in your life, ever, if you want to move to reply to what I actually say and do, rather than this straw man distortion of me that you have thus far clung to so fetidly, I am here for you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bulmabriefs144
Instead, you are trying to convince me, even though I find atheism even more laughable than you.
By all means show me where I have tried to "convince you". Quote me on it. Or engage in some decent old style "christian honesty" and retract your lies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bulmabriefs144
Now, let's talk about distortion of dictionary definitions. I have always seen atheists tack on the belief set that:
Then take it up with people who have done that. Or with people who identify themselves using the word atheist. Given I have done NEITHER, you can leave me very well out of it thanks. I have enough things of my own to substantiate and defend without having to vicariously defend those of your straw man version of me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bulmabriefs144
No. Look around you. Everything in this world is from God.
You never get tired of your fantasy or assertion. Perhaps, for ONCE, you can redirect that energy into substantiating some of it. Last time I checked, repetition of assertion does not validate assertion. That is more the JeffBase approach to things. Assertion, dodge, repeat. Assertion, dodge, repeat. Assertion, dodge, repeat.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bulmabriefs144
Or how about this one? Whenever you tell me God doesn't exist, you are also setting a definition.
Another little lie that you would do well to either quote me on, or retract. Because you see I have NEVER told you god does not exist. All I have ever said.... all I ever do say.... is that the claim there is a god.... that is to say an intentional intelligent agency that created our universe..... is entirely unsubstantiated at this time.
So by all means go over 100s and 100s of my posts and try to validate your lie by quoting me telling you there is no god. But let me save you the time: You will fail. I never said it. You simply made it up. Again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bulmabriefs144
What I don't have any use for, is fraudsters.
Then stop being one, stop making up things about me, stop claiming I said things I never said, stop inventing position for me I do not actually hold, and stop pretending I label myself with labels I never do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bulmabriefs144
Anyway, this article is about whether God is sick or not, not whether God exists, so your argument is irrelevant.
Actually not off topic at all. If god does not exist, and is just the invention of the believer, then any given god is only as "sick" as the person who invents it in their head. So the god of JeffBase and Supersoul is a sick homophobic racist for example. The god of GldnRule and his new agey cohort is nothing but a non-intelligent lingustic nothing. The god of LovesMountains and the like is just a happy slappy labrador with a "I love you all, cos cos I just do" neurotic needy boy. The list goes on.
Existence is rather an important attribute in mental health and well being I find.
Obviously your mental filter is doing the same thing, Bulma. If you had spent any time reading about WHY people who do not believe in God debate the existence or merit of that God, you would know that it is not because they believe in it. I know you have, because I have seen you on the threads where people have explained this.
I'll lay it out nice and easy for you...
People in the US especially, use this God and his holy book to try and create laws. They use this God to try and take away rights and get special privileges. So you can expect rational thinking people to object to this, and give their reasons for it. Also, a lot of the responses you see, and again, people have stated this over and over, are for the lurkers.
I have. Repeatedly. Whenever so-called rational people are given any reasonable argument for the existence of God, rather than give decent reason why they personally believe in no gods/God (which would be fine with me) they try to push fake science on me like I'm some fundie twit who doesn't know better. Dude, I'm a librarian. I know about stuff.
As for the passing of religious laws, this has nothing to do with me. You need to take it up with the fundie Christians. I won't sell you on a flat earth theory, that the earth was made in seven days, I believe in global warming/climate change, and couldn't care less as long as you aren't obnoxious about trying to belittle my faith. Atheists stir up grief at our end too, not allowing people to have Christmas party because one person is offended. Laws do get passed over that too. I'm in favor of laws to allow rights to LGBT, protection for the environment, but I have no party because liberal is too into "privilege" and Marxism, and republican is flooded with these backwards twits.
You want to talk about mental filter? How about the fact that after years of posting here, you guys haven't bothered to get to know me and are lumping me in the same group as Jeffbase, who I've agreed with roughly 5% of the time. I understand that atheism is more political than religious. I've seen it before. I also know that governments that have forced atheism are pretty crappy (of the ex-soviet countries the only ones that embraced it willingly after communist Russia fell apart were those it wasn't forced down their throats). And it's really crappy that in your urge to make a better world for yourself, you lump all your opponents together. That would be like me saying atheists are the same as Muslims. You don't like me saying that. So don't do it to me.
That's all.
Nozz, I'm gonna ignore that entire thing. Whenever someone picks apart what I say, paragraph by paragraph, it's to grief me. I'm sorry but I don't have time for grief anymore. Get a grip. You're not an atheist, you're an anti-theist. An atheist would leave me alone about my beliefs, and I'd do the same. An anti-theist makes drama and issue with my "stupid" beliefs. But they're my beliefs. I don't have time for drama anymore. AREQUIPA is a good role model for atheism, he rarely proselytizes, he just is, only speaking up if one of us is being too extreme.
The topic, is whether or not God is sick. Anything else is a sidetracked topic.
Last edited by bulmabriefs144; 01-15-2016 at 06:59 AM..
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.
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.
Christianity 101. If you can't win 'em by providing verifiable evidence to support your claim...then threaten them.
