RE: agnostic or atheist?

RE: agnostic or atheist? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Aneirin -> RE: agnostic or atheist? (5/11/2010 8:05:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyAngelika quote: ORIGINAL: Aneirin That's what I always saw with catholicism, too much emphasis on suffering and death. Aneirin, the image I posted is from the Filipino Easter crucifixion ritual. See: Filipinos whipped and nailed to crosses in terrifyingly realistic re-enactment of the Crucifixion - LA It's too much for me, it does remind me of those grotesque dark wood crucifixes in dimly lit damp smelling rooms of my grandmothers house. My father being a non believer banned them from our house and thanks be to him for that, for night terrors were bad enough without influences from a so called loving religion. But crucifixes though from a kink point of view are interesting, but for me the catholic idea can keep out of it.

GotSteel -> RE: agnostic or atheist? (5/11/2010 8:27:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sirrandpolyfam quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel That's called confirmation bias, it isn't a good thing. That is called Belief system stupidity. I'm referring to an actual phenomenon: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias You on the other hand just made that up and what do you even mean?

GotSteel -> RE: agnostic or atheist? (5/11/2010 9:44:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl lol i didnt say it was true, just said it was claimed. That's some backpedaling [8\|] Why would you bother bringing up that ridiculous claim if you didn't think it was true. quote: Not so sure you should write off the arc theory yet. First of all it's not a theory, it hasn't gotten that far. Besides the obvious issues with a 600 year old drunk hand making a boat that could hold two or more of the 1.5 billion species on earth, how did oh say kangaroos get to it?

tazzygirl -> RE: agnostic or atheist? (5/11/2010 10:00:43 PM)
oh gee, another male with a wad problem. Steel, would not matter if i said emphatically that i didnt believe it... you would, of course, find a way to twist it all to suit your atheistic views. and you call religious people narrow minded. i am open to the possibility, nothing more. The OP mentioned the arc, i offered an opinion given by some that it may have been found... offered up the site which clearly states they are not giving out proof... and yet you seem to believe that i hold that information as accurate and factual. lol First of all it's not a theory, it hasn't gotten that far. Besides the obvious issues with a 600 year old drunk hand making a boat that could hold two or more of the 1.5 billion species on earth, how did oh say kangaroos get to it? Hmmm.. lets see. How did the walls of Jericho get built? The pyramids? I dunno, do you, without a doubt ? I can honestly say, no one knows without a doubt. They have theories, they have ideas, but to have certain knowledge requires a time machine. As far as the animals on board.... i would think it would include those indegenous to the area. But i have no proof that is true... nor do you that it is not. As far as the flood, its been presented that the flood was a local one. But, of course, those on the arc would not assume it was just a local one. Nor would they have much knowledge of the grand scope of the earth's surface. Again, i have no proof of this, nor do you have any proof its not a correct theory. Now, much in the bible is a limited story. Alot of it is historically proven. I prefer a lets wait and see attitude. So, you may of course slam everything religious, as you often enjoy doing. And i simply smile, say a little prayer for you and continue to believe as i do.. as will you.' But your attacks are cute.

RCdc -> RE: agnostic or atheist? (5/11/2010 11:53:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: catfightservice I was not specific enough with my comment about us fetishers being honest with ourselves, intelectual, enlightened..... I was refering to those of us who are up front and honest about who we are. Not the fakes, posers, and liars on here, or any other board, forum, im, etc. Maybe we've been lucky. My wife and I have only been exploring this stuff for maybe 2 years. The actual people we've met in person have seemed very cool, intelectual, open minded, and on top of it polite. Maybe I haven't been around long enough. Hopefully our experiences continue to be like that. What I meant by enlightened is those of us who are active in the fetish world, are different from the rest. Not at all in a religous sense, but in our general perspective. Im sure you've all heard people fringe as they say something like "oh they are into bondage.....ew......" or "they are into whips and being tied up... what freaks...". We are differant from those prudes. We as fetishers are understanding of that, even though we may not be into a particular activity, we dont hold it against those who are. At least I dont, and the people we've met dont seem to either. From what I can tell actual members of the fetish community are tolerant of different opinions, and interests. Enlightend by the variety, and pleasure of this life style. This is an opinion based on my own experiences, and I realize I could be wrong. (I hope Im Not) Ok, so you are of the real and true variety and most others are fake and plebby - that is what you are suggesting? So, by your suggestion that because you are free with all your yumminess in two years of BDSM practices, IF you are so enlightened - how comes you posted such a post that derided people who choose a religious or spiritual path. You just disproved your own theory by your own actions, again. the.dark.

belladevine -> RE: agnostic or atheist? (5/12/2010 1:10:35 AM)
A cubit is not a linear measurement. A cubit is a box shape of specific dimensions. A cubit is a geometric square.

eyesopened -> RE: agnostic or atheist? (5/12/2010 4:56:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife quote: ORIGINAL: eyesopened I have answered and you don't like the answer. Come over this Friday (I have the day off) and I will be more than happy to have a long discussion with you. But in interest of the OP and time. You are right! There is no God! There cannot be because there is no proof that you could ever accept therefore you are the sole decider of what is and what is not. Happy? I'll come over if you feed me and and have plenty of beer. [8D] As far as being the decider you are mistaking me for the Connecticut Texan. I will accept proof however. Do you have any? Because I would be thrilled to know there is an omnipotent being that is looking out for my welfare. See? I asked you to think beyond barriers. Where did I claim God to be an omnipotent being? If you want me to prove to you *your* definition of God...sorry, I cannot. If you were willing to hear how I am certain my God exists then just let me know what kind of beer you prefer and how you like your steak.

vincentML -> RE: agnostic or atheist? (5/12/2010 5:32:22 AM)
quote: First, to the best of my recollection, Newton didn't propound any "theory of gravity." He did identify (quantify) what we refer to today as the Law of Gravity, though. Perhaps you're referring to General Relativity, a theory proposed several centuries after Newton? I think you missed the irony intended by rulemylife. quote: Science does have a central tenet of faith: That the cosmos is ordered according to discoverable, universal laws. I agree with most of your comments and the attitude they demonstrate but this one smacks of "Intelligent Design." I posit it is more proper to say scientists think there are discoverable, universal laws but since "scientific laws" are merely measurable observations of repeated phenomena they are not immutable. Hence the controversy (?) over Newton's force of gravitational attraction vs Einstein's time/space warp around a planetary body.

catfightservice -> RE: agnostic or atheist? (5/12/2010 6:34:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: RCdc quote: ORIGINAL: catfightservice I was not specific enough with my comment about us fetishers being honest with ourselves, intelectual, enlightened..... I was refering to those of us who are up front and honest about who we are. Not the fakes, posers, and liars on here, or any other board, forum, im, etc. Maybe we've been lucky. My wife and I have only been exploring this stuff for maybe 2 years. The actual people we've met in person have seemed very cool, intelectual, open minded, and on top of it polite. Maybe I haven't been around long enough. Hopefully our experiences continue to be like that. What I meant by enlightened is those of us who are active in the fetish world, are different from the rest. Not at all in a religous sense, but in our general perspective. Im sure you've all heard people fringe as they say something like "oh they are into bondage.....ew......" or "they are into whips and being tied up... what freaks...". We are differant from those prudes. We as fetishers are understanding of that, even though we may not be into a particular activity, we dont hold it against those who are. At least I dont, and the people we've met dont seem to either. From what I can tell actual members of the fetish community are tolerant of different opinions, and interests. Enlightend by the variety, and pleasure of this life style. This is an opinion based on my own experiences, and I realize I could be wrong. (I hope Im Not) Ok, so you are of the real and true variety and most others are fake and plebby - that is what you are suggesting? So, by your suggestion that because you are free with all your yumminess in two years of BDSM practices, IF you are so enlightened - how comes you posted such a post that derided people who choose a religious or spiritual path. You just disproved your own theory by your own actions, again. the.dark. quote: Ok, so you are of the real and true variety and most others are fake and plebby - that is what you are suggesting? So, by your suggestion that because you are free with all your yumminess in two years of BDSM practices, IF you are so enlightened - how comes you posted such a post that derided people who choose a religious or spiritual path. You just disproved your own theory by your own actions, again. the.dark. Ok guys I hate to break this question down line by line but I have to. "Ok, so you are of the real and true variety and most others are fake and plebby - that is what you are suggesting? " Answer: Yes I am of the real, and true variety. I was not saying that most others are fake or plebby. I was just trying to say that the fakes, and posers are not included in my statement "people of the fetish way of life seem respectful, intellectual, openminded etc..." I was refering only to the people of real and true variety with that. "So, by your suggestion that because you are free with all your yumminess in two years of BDSM practices, IF you are so enlightened - how comes you posted such a post that derided people who choose a religious or spiritual path." Answer: Yes I am free with my yummies, and its great. Yes I feel enlightened to the pleasure and variety of the fetish world. I posted this on the politics andreligion forum simply because I was curious.

RCdc -> RE: agnostic or atheist? (5/12/2010 7:23:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: catfightservice quote: Ok, so you are of the real and true variety and most others are fake and plebby - that is what you are suggesting? So, by your suggestion that because you are free with all your yumminess in two years of BDSM practices, IF you are so enlightened - how comes you posted such a post that derided people who choose a religious or spiritual path. You just disproved your own theory by your own actions, again. the.dark. Ok guys I hate to break this question down line by line but I have to. "Ok, so you are of the real and true variety and most others are fake and plebby - that is what you are suggesting? " Answer: Yes I am of the real, and true variety. I was not saying that most others are fake or plebby. I was just trying to say that the fakes, and posers are not included in my statement "people of the fetish way of life seem respectful, intellectual, openminded etc..." I was refering only to the people of real and true variety with that. "So, by your suggestion that because you are free with all your yumminess in two years of BDSM practices, IF you are so enlightened - how comes you posted such a post that derided people who choose a religious or spiritual path." Answer: Yes I am free with my yummies, and its great. Yes I feel enlightened to the pleasure and variety of the fetish world. I posted this on the politics andreligion forum simply because I was curious. You have omitted to respond to the key point of your post. That because BDSM people are so enlightened, they should be far more open minded and yet you are closeminded when it comes to religion - by your own words and post and slight ridicule of those that believe in such things. You claim that there is one thing, yet are the exact opposite of what you claim. Can you not see the hypocrasy in that? the.dark.

catfightservice -> RE: agnostic or atheist? (5/12/2010 8:15:01 AM)
RC&DC I dont ridicule people for their beliefs. I ridicule the beliefs themselves. I totally respect everyone for their religion. I just question the authenticity of the bible, and god that they believe in. If someone takes that as personal ridiculement, forgive me, thats not my intention. You can ask me about my beliefs, I have no problem talking about it. I enjoy it actually. If you disagree with me thats fine. I don't take it personal. After all it was supposedly the Bible tells us "god gave us free will." Now you make some stiff acusations about me personally. You say Im closed minded about religion. You are entitled to your opinion. But I will have you know I have actaully been to many churches in search for faith. I have attended catholic, piscapalion, babtist, and New Wave Style Christian churches. I plan on going to a Jehovahs Witness church as well. After attending countless masses, at all those churches, I have realized Im an agnostic. Ill also have you know my wife is a long time catholic, and even though Im agnostic, somehow we got over our religous defference in opinion. That being said my answer is no I dont see any hypocratsy at all. I think Im a good example of a non judgemental openminded member of the fetish community.

vincentML -> RE: agnostic or atheist? (5/12/2010 8:25:17 AM)
quote: Please direct me to the proof of our evolution from amino acids all the way to modern human. Please! I will make the time. Really. Unlike you, I do not say it isn't true, I'm just saying there is no proof that shows mutation by mutation how amino acids evolved into humans. I wrote previously that I agree with your statement there is no proof that amino acids evolved into humans. Hate to be nit-picky here but for my own peace of mind let me remark that no-one ever claimed amino acids evolved into humans. The narrative is that DNA became encapsulated in primative cells and this began the chain of life that leads to humans. No proof but a lot of evidence and as I said before a work in progress. In that vein, here is an easily read article by Olivia Judson in today's NYT describing the remarkable melding of the sciences of Genetics and Paleontology by the construction of the Neanderthal Genome. New tools and new knowledge. The article is linked here. Enjoy.

RCdc -> RE: agnostic or atheist? (5/12/2010 8:38:49 AM)
quote: I ridicule the beliefs themselves quote: Now you make some stiff acusations about me personally. You say Im closed minded about religion. You are entitled to your opinion. Openly admitting that you are ridiculing a belief doesn't represent someone who is openminded. quote: But I will have you know I have actaully been to many churches in search for faith. I have attended catholic, piscapalion, babtist, and New Wave Style Christian churches. I plan on going to a Jehovahs Witness church as well. Your protestations are akin to someone saying 'I'm not racist - I have friends who are black!' You cannot find faith at a church or a temple in the same way as you cannot find out what it's like to be a man via your brother. quote: I think Im a good example of a non judgemental openminded member of the fetish community. And I would disagree. I don't wish to sound condecending but you are making all the classic inferences to the 'BDSM Community' that people who are pretty new to it make - including fakes, openness, real and true... it's all hogwash in reality. You are just a person, just like everyone else and just as individual and special as the person standing beside you at the supermarket. the.dark.

vincentML -> RE: agnostic or atheist? (5/12/2010 8:42:43 AM)
quote: I dont ridicule people for their beliefs. I ridicule the beliefs themselves. I totally respect everyone for their religion. I just question the authenticity of the bible, and god that they believe in. The problem is we have been over this before in this forum and you are not saying anything new. We agree that some members question the authenticity of the Bible. That's easy to do. But when you do you inadvertently attack personal beliefs. You are not going to change anybody's mind just as Believers on this Board are not likely to change the minds of NonBelievers. So, what is the point? It is just agitation when phrased in the way you did in your OP. You say you do not mean to offend anyone but you just want the facts straight. But it is your facts that you wish straight and you do not really offer any; you merely offer reasons for denial of the authenticity of the Bible because your belief system is stretched. That's why Believers are offended by your OP, IMO. Yours is a counter productive position. I say that with the caveat that I am a NonBeliever so I have nothing to defend.

RCdc -> RE: agnostic or atheist? (5/12/2010 8:47:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML I say that with the caveat that I am a NonBeliever so I have nothing to defend. You are a wonderful and polite man who is respectful regardless of a persons belief or non beliefs. Well from my experience anyhoo. the.dark.

eihwaz -> RE: agnostic or atheist? (5/12/2010 10:52:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: GotSteel Besides the obvious issues with a 600 year old drunk hand making a boat that could hold two or more of the 1.5 billion species on earth, how did oh say kangaroos get to it? Technically, since the majority of these species are small -- e.g., microbes and insects -- they probably could fit in a ~400 foot (122 m) boat.[;)] BTW, I'm completely agnostic about the literal, historical truth of the ark story, or any story in the Bible for that matter. To me, the important truths in the Bible are spiritual and mythic, not literal or historic.

eihwaz -> RE: agnostic or atheist? (5/12/2010 11:32:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: First, to the best of my recollection, Newton didn't propound any "theory of gravity." He did identify (quantify) what we refer to today as the Law of Gravity, though. Perhaps you're referring to General Relativity, a theory proposed several centuries after Newton? I think you missed the irony intended by rulemylife. Yep, went right by me. In my defense, I didn't notice an ironicon in his post. [;)] quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML quote: Science does have a central tenet of faith: That the cosmos is ordered according to discoverable, universal laws. ... this one smacks of "Intelligent Design." I posit it is more proper to say scientists think there are discoverable, universal laws but since "scientific laws" are merely measurable observations of repeated phenomena they are not immutable. So call it an assumption, then, rather than a faith. It is well known and uncontroversial that science assumes this. From Assumptions of Science: quote: There are natural causes for things that happen in the world around us. Evidence from the natural world can be used to learn about those causes. There is consistency in the causes that operate in the natural world. The Intelligent Design notion is formed by adding ergo the universe must have been created by an omnipotent, "Intelligent Designer." The latter proposition is not, IMHO, properly a scientific question, therefore not provable or disprovable by the scientific method. I say this as a person of faith. quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML Hence the controversy (?) over Newton's force of gravitational attraction vs Einstein's time/space warp around a planetary body. Actually Relativity subsumed but did not invalidate Newtonian physics; the latter is still valid within a certain precision at certain scales of time and space.

Rule -> RE: agnostic or atheist? (5/12/2010 11:52:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: catfightservice I mean who seriously believes noah built an ark to hold two of every animal? I do. quote: ORIGINAL: catfightservice Part the red sea? A sea was parted. I do. quote: ORIGINAL: catfightservice jonah and the whale? Depends on the interpretation of the whale. I do. quote: ORIGINAL: catfightservice tower of babylon? I do. quote: ORIGINAL: catfightservice God created the heaven and earth? Depends on which pagan god. I do. quote: ORIGINAL: catfightservice what about the millions of other galaxies, who made them? What about them? quote: ORIGINAL: catfightservice The bible doesnt talk about dinosaurs. Maybe they had not yet been created. quote: ORIGINAL: catfightservice Some people put so much faith in the bible, but keep this in mind. When they wrote that book they still thought the earth was flat. Why should not their 'world' be flat? quote: ORIGINAL: catfightservice How many of their other beliefs can we debunk? I dunno. Why not simply assume that everything they wrote is true?

vincentML -> RE: agnostic or atheist? (5/12/2010 11:59:40 AM)
OMG .... thank you. You make me blush * big smile * [sm=hearts.gif]

vincentML -> RE: agnostic or atheist? (5/12/2010 12:23:48 PM)
quote: So call it an assumption, then, rather than a faith. It is well known and uncontroversial that science assumes this. From Assumptions of Science: quote: There are natural causes for things that happen in the world around us. Evidence from the natural world can be used to learn about those causes. There is consistency in the causes that operate in the natural world. The Intelligent Design notion is formed by adding ergo the universe must have been created by an omnipotent, "Intelligent Designer." The latter proposition is not, IMHO, properly a scientific question, therefore not provable or disprovable by the scientific method. I say this as a person of faith. Thank you. I am much more comfortable with "assumptions." Unfortunately, many with political agenda try to make ID a scientific concept. While the question cannot be properly tested as a scientific hypothesis do you not think, even as a person of faith, that those who put it forward have the burden of providing either evidence or reason to support their claim other than the eye and/or the flagellum are too complex to have developed from a series of natural, evolutionary algorithms? Both of those arguments have been shot down I think and I have not seen anything newly advanced lately.

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625