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.
Without God, or gods , but in reference to the supernatural ones, not the meaningless ones .
That is YOUR qualifier...and does not comport with the experts.
Sorry...you have another bogus and impotent argument.
BTW...you should listen to Arach A & buu...they typically both put forth very sensible and reasonable points. AA has been stellar on this subject...top notch offerings on it. You, et al, could learn from him if you just opened your minds a bit.
I tire of having to repeatedly point out that I don't care if anyone is a pantheist or wants to become a pantheist , but that I simply take issue with pantheists insisting that we must all accept their version of God . You seem incapable of grasping this simple fact, so I see no point in continuing a discussion with someone so utterly unable to process such a simple statement.
Have a nice day .
That is it ... you have a problem that others insist you must accept their version of "a belief".
That is the problem not "How is it meaningful". How can you expect us to have a real conversation about "meaning to people" when you are talking about "I don't like how 'they' say we must accept(insert belief).
I say the meaning, in this area, is different for different people. You are answering with "I don't like how they force their opinion on me." You are coating it in "meaning" and it is coming off looking bad because that is not what you are really talking about.
Can you see the disconnect here? I don't like it either when people force a belief on me. I agree with you. But that is not what we are talking about with you is it. We are talking about "meaning".
Last edited by Arach Angle; 05-27-2016 at 03:42 AM..
Fundamentalist atheists cannot abide even the semblance of legitimacy of that which they personally abjure. Their antipathy for how they are oppressed by more powerful groups, such as Christian Dominionism, apparently prompts them to craveny attempt to marginalize less powerful groups. It's classic bullying behavior.
Let me help you three along in understanding the agnostic position with an analogy .
Suppose you are the designated driver for a night out with your buddies , so you can't drink . The nightclub offers free bottled water to DDs, but your buddies want to buy you non alcoholic beers so you can join in the clinking of bottles and feel like your really drinking . A friend late to the party joins and sees you drinking and begins to harangue you because you are the DD. You point out that you are not really drinking real beer, even though it is marketed as non alcoholic beer , you are drinking a non alcoholic brew . Beer is universally understood to mean alcohol unless a qualifying adjective like root-beer or nonalcoholic-beer is used . Once your buddy realizes you are not drinking the real stuff he joins in buying your rounds when needed . So from the standpoint of a teetotaler , or the law, whether you drink the free water or the free non alcoholic beer is irrelevant . It doesn't matter . You're not drinking real beer, so whether you drink the water or the illusionary beer is immaterial . There is no relevant difference between the two .
This is pretty well analogous to the belief of agnosticism concerning your God or no God . Whichever you choose is immaterial , because your God is irrelevant with regards to whether it matters if one accepts it or not . The choice will make absolutely no difference . Which is why we say your version of God is pointless and matters not a bit . And no one would care whether you drink the pretend beer all the time if you come to like it, although they would disagree if you began to insist you were actually drinking real beer , and everyone must admit that the brew you are drinking really is real beer .
Let me help you three along in understanding the agnostic position with an analogy .
Suppose you are the designated driver for a night out with your buddies , so you can't drink . The nightclub offers free bottled water to DDs, but your buddies want to buy you non alcoholic beers so you can join in the clinking of bottles and feel like your really drinking . A friend late to the party joins and sees you drinking and begins to harangue you because you are the DD. You point out that you are not really drinking real beer, even though it is marketed as non alcoholic beer , you are drinking a non alcoholic brew . Beer is universally understood to mean alcohol unless a qualifying adjective like root-beer or nonalcoholic-beer is used . Once your buddy realizes you are not drinking the real stuff he joins in buying your rounds when needed . So from the standpoint of a teetotaler , or the law, whether you drink the free water or the free non alcoholic beer is irrelevant . It doesn't matter . You're not drinking real beer, so whether you drink the water or the illusionary beer is immaterial . There is no relevant difference between the two .
This is pretty well analogous to the belief of agnosticism concerning your God or no God . Whichever you choose is immaterial , because your God is irrelevant with regards to whether it matters if one accepts it or not . The choice will make absolutely no difference . Which is why we say your version of God is pointless and matters not a bit .
Actually...here is how the Alcoholic Beer/Nonalcoholic Beer analogy fits the Pantheist perception of GOD.
The Non-alcoholic beer IS Beer (God, in your analogy), with the alcohol (Religion) removed from it.
So, now...what you have is still GOD...only better, cuz it's had the part removed that has the potential to get you all messed up in the head.
Actually...here is how the Alcoholic Beer/Nonalcoholic Beer analogy fits the Pantheist perception of GOD.
The Non-alcoholic beer IS Beer (God, in your analogy), with the alcohol (Religion) removed from it.
So, now...what you have is still GOD...only better, cuz it's had the part removed that has the potential to get you all messed up in the head.
So now you have a crappy tasting "beer", that does nothing for you.... Okay then...
Actually...here is how the Alcoholic Beer/Nonalcoholic Beer analogy fits the Pantheist perception of GOD.
The Non-alcoholic beer IS Beer (God, in your analogy), with the alcohol (Religion) removed from it.
So, now...what you have is still GOD...only better, cuz it's had the part removed that has the potential to get you all messed up in the head.
Even in this analogy your God is irrelevant because drinking ( or believing) is no different than not drinking ( or not believing) .
The complete irrelevance of both with regards to choosing to drink pretend beer or water, or believe in no gods or a natural universe as God is the same . It will have no effect either way . Which means the choice is irrelevant and meaningless, except as you make it so in your own head . A DD probably feels like one of the boys while drinking non alcoholic beer instead of bottled water , but it's just a perception in his own head and not one in reality .
Let me help you three along in understanding the agnostic position with an analogy .
Suppose you are the designated driver for a night out with your buddies , so you can't drink . The nightclub offers free bottled water to DDs, but your buddies want to buy you non alcoholic beers so you can join in the clinking of bottles and feel like your really drinking . A friend late to the party joins and sees you drinking and begins to harangue you because you are the DD. You point out that you are not really drinking real beer, even though it is marketed as non alcoholic beer , you are drinking a non alcoholic brew . Beer is universally understood to mean alcohol unless a qualifying adjective like root-beer or nonalcoholic-beer is used . Once your buddy realizes you are not drinking the real stuff he joins in buying your rounds when needed . So from the standpoint of a teetotaler , or the law, whether you drink the free water or the free non alcoholic beer is irrelevant . It doesn't matter . You're not drinking real beer, so whether you drink the water or the illusionary beer is immaterial . There is no relevant difference between the two .
This is pretty well analogous to the belief of agnosticism concerning your God or no God . Whichever you choose is immaterial , because your God is irrelevant with regards to whether it matters if one accepts it or not . The choice will make absolutely no difference . Which is why we say your version of God is pointless and matters not a bit . And no one would care whether you drink the pretend beer all the time if you come to like it, although they would disagree if you began to insist you were actually drinking real beer , and everyone must admit that the brew you are drinking really is real beer .
"your version of god is pointless." That's a personal opinion.
exactly the same thing as my brother stating "dark matter" is meaningless to him. good for you not wanting to learn more. It doesn't matter to you that some people want to understand how the universe works. we get it.
Its such a reasonable stance to say "some have meaning and some don't" and that you keep insisting that "their god" is pointless is a red flag. You are just pushing your meaning at this point.
please, don't help out with agnostic thinking. Your take is "anti religion", that's it. My version of agnostic atheist is using what we know to describe what we don't know and learn as much as we can. My version of "agnostic" says we will learn what the universe is doing and not tell the universe what it is doing.
Your version of agnostic is wanting people to claim what you want them to claim. you want positive feedback via head nods.
"your version of god is pointless." That's a personal opinion.
exactly the same thing as my brother stating "dark matter" is meaningless to him. good for you not wanting to learn more. It doesn't matter to you that some people want to understand how the universe works. we get it.
Its such a reasonable stance to say "some have meaning and some don't" and that you keep insisting that "their god" is pointless is a red flag. You are just pushing your meaning at this point.
please, don't help out with agnostic thinking. Your take is "anti religion", that's it. My version of agnostic atheist is using what we know to describe what we don't know and learn as much as we can. My version of "agnostic" says we will learn what the universe is doing and not tell the universe what it is doing.
Your version of agnostic is wanting people to claim what you want them to claim. you want positive feedback via head nods.
Nonsense . My point is that pantheists insisting that agnostics must agree a pantheist God exists is meaningless, on the basis that it changes nothing for the agnostic . If a pantheist finds pantheism meaningful , then good for him . My posts addressed the issue of pantheists insisting that others accept their views, and the meaningless of an agnostic agreeing to do so because it wouldn't alter anything .
I've done all I can do to help you understand , and won't waste any more time on a lost cause . Maybe you should get someone to read it for you and explain it slowly to you .
"your version of god is pointless." That's a personal opinion.
exactly the same thing as my brother stating "dark matter" is meaningless to him. good for you not wanting to learn more. It doesn't matter to you that some people want to understand how the universe works. we get it.
Its such a reasonable stance to say "some have meaning and some don't" and that you keep insisting that "their god" is pointless is a red flag. You are just pushing your meaning at this point.
please, don't help out with agnostic thinking. Your take is "anti religion", that's it. My version of agnostic atheist is using what we know to describe what we don't know and learn as much as we can. My version of "agnostic" says we will learn what the universe is doing and not tell the universe what it is doing.
Your version of agnostic is wanting people to claim what you want them to claim. you want positive feedback via head nods.
It has nothing to do with learning, Arach. Learning about the Universe is not learning about God, it is learning about the Universe. We already study this. Dark matter and the like, is not the topic.
Their God IS pointless if it does nothing and changes nothing. Regardless of how they perceive the God, it is still worthless and pointless. If it changes something in them, then GREAT! They can learn about the Universe and call it God until they are blue in the face, no one cares. When they come on here and tell us that we must accept their definition and therefore atheism is null and void, then we have an issue. They are making a factual claim with no evidence to back them up. Other than Gldn's "DEFINITIONS!!!!" BS, which is also quite worthless.
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.
