If religion made sense (proof, curse, genesis, America)
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.
I don't just accept the Bible and reject other religious books. I revere the Bible because it is the religious text of my people. I have the same respect for other major religious texts, but I don't have as much interest in reading them (not that I ever won't) because I just don't have that same association with them. But I respect all the major religions and don't necessarily think that any one of them is better than the others. If an atheist doesn't understand that then I feel like nothing I can say will ever get through to them. And to me THAT feels like a brick wall.
I can understand, I think, the emotional attachment you (and others) may have for that text, just as i understand the attachment that Prof. Stavrakapoulu has to the Bible, though she is actually an atheist.
What we would like is an understanding that atheists also understand why people may have some identification with the text. Do you think that with 20 years of Gospel -study, I have no attachment to it? But also an understanding that while western society may understand how important Christianity has been to western culture, just as Greece and Rome, and the British empire - those days are gone, and we no longer need religion in our society any more than we need the Roman gods or a long -gone empire.
We believe that such ideas are not only outmoded but harmful, as prof. S has complained about how her career has constantly crunched up against the prejudices of believers. She should not be beating up on "New" Atheism but seeing that it is working in her interests. I do hope that she has had a rethink as we really need her onside.
I think that we are also working in your interests as we don't want to stop you being religious, or people being religious, or having churches. We want to ensure that no believers of any kind are going to take away your rights to walk out of a church because you didn't approve of their take on Christianity.
Last edited by TRANSPONDER; 11-18-2018 at 10:28 PM..
I do not see what your fruit salad recipe has to do with my argument.
I'll put it another way: can you compare the size of apples as opposed to oranges? Or can you only compare oranges to oranges and apples to apples in quality of size? The answer is Yes to the first and No to the second.
My point is that the hackneyed phrase "you're comparing apples and oranges" is moot/arguable because everything can be compared when it shares categorical descriptors.
When I say it doesn't make sense, I mean that I don't understand their reasoning and logic.
Then you should be more exact.
Saying it makes no sense means the arguments are not sound.
Saying it makes no sense to you means the you have the problem, not us. Which raises the question of why you attack atheism at almost every opportunity while ignoring other religions?
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzzyRules
Especially when they say that they KNOW everything evolved from (basically) nothing.
And there is the straw man again, misrepresentig what we know, why we know it, and what we believe.
I'll put it another way: can you compare the size of apples as opposed to oranges? Or can you only compare oranges to oranges and apples to apples in quality of size? The answer is Yes to the first and No to the second.
My point is that the hackneyed phrase "you're comparing apples and oranges" is moot/arguable because everything can be compared when it shares categorical descriptors.
Then you should be more exact.
Saying it makes no sense means the arguments are not sound.
Saying it makes no sense to you means the you have the problem, not us. Which raises the question of why you attack atheism at almost every opportunity while ignoring other religions?
And there is the straw man again, misrepresentig what we know, why we know it, and what we believe.
Because it makes more sense for people to describe God as best as they can, than to say that there is no God.
Because it makes more sense for people to describe God as best as they can, than to say that there is no God.
But it makes even more sense to ask whether there is any reason to believe in an existing entity that we need to attach the label "God" to. If there is - what? If there isn't, why?
Because it makes more sense for people to describe God as best as they can, than to say that there is no God.
So you now admit people DO invent their own version of God. Which was my original point you disagreed with. That people invent gods, whether they exist or not.
So you now admit people DO invent their own version of God. Which was my original point you disagreed with. That people invent gods, whether they exist or not.
No.
People don't invent gods, they describe God different ways.
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.
