RE: Yes, even Atheists...

RE: Yes, even Atheists... (Full Version)

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

Message

Aylee -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/26/2013 7:53:39 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: curious23 Just to clarify, when I said Change, I meant in doctrine. So, like njlauren said, you need uniformity in belief otherwise the faith will die. "I'd like to welcome you to the first Cathojudistian service. First, let us prey to Jesus, who is not our lord to forgive us for our sins, which isn't necessary. And through faith, which we don't need, may we find our root to heaven, which may or may not exist." The three paths would have to split because there is no way in hell this church I describe would survive. I thought that it was called Universal Unitarian. quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice quote: Good enough? Q/ Is killing the first person the only option the third person has? Would subduing him or her be a possibility? Or possibly explaining why it is not kosher to kill and eat a person. Although. . . we really do not know the motive or the whole situation so we do not know why person A killed person B.

IceColdBastard -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/26/2013 7:58:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Tkman117 The gist of the message is, do good things in life and god will reward you. Before I became an agnostic this is the opinion I always held, no matter the belief system of others. It doesn't make sense that if someone such as hitler, who was a christian, would be favoured in heaven over someone who was an atheist who lived a happy, kind life free of greed or hate. Yet it's a position many christians take, and it makes no sense why an all powerful being would be so petty as to care whether or not people believed in him/her over the actions and intentions committed by said people. Judge people by what they do in life, not by what they believe, a god who thought any different is one not worthy of my or any sane person's devotion or love. theres something wrong with your statement about hitler being favored in heaven when he is clearly sucking turds in purgatory

FrostedFlake -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/26/2013 8:33:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice quote: This thought experiment doesn't address slavery. I know. That strikes me as more than a little odd since you proffered it in response to the following exchange: quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice quote: But slavery cannot be right, because a person is by inalienable right his own property. On this we wholeheartedly agree. [:)] But do we actually have evidence for this belief, or is it a civic form of faith? Curious was saying that she couldn't see believing without evidence, and I think it may be more common than one realizes. Your artificial hypothetical, while mildly interesting in a parlor game sort of way, ultimately has, by your own admission, no relevance to the point I was making. I thought you were asking a different question. Note bold, above. I thought you were asking for evidence of the existence of natural rights. To prove rights are real and not based on some civic form of faith. I thought my demonstration was irrefutable as well as difficult to misunderstand. I still think that. And also think the right to self determination is sufficiently close to the right to life that you could walk there from here if you wanted to. I think you are trying to make me try to force you to take that very short walk. And I think we have danced quite enough for one day. quote: ORIGINAL: dcnovice quote: Good enough? Q/ Is killing the first person the only option the third person has? Would subduing him or her be a possibility? Subduing until when? Recall that the scenario is intentionally simplified in order to remove exactly those sorts of distractions. Surely that is what you meant by artificial hypothetical. But now you forgot. Again, that's enough dancing.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/26/2013 9:13:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Marini quote: I firmly believe that people should all be entitled to their beliefs, but the problem I have with atheists (especially two specific posters here) is that it seems in order to "embrace" their beliefs, they need to be insulting and nasty. [;)] Some people just don't have the concept of meeting in the middle or that good deeds are the right way to live. But as the pope said, God loves them anyway. If they find that insulting and it makes them angry, I guess we can just call it a bonus. Have I told you lately that I enjoy reading what you have to say? Happy Memorial Day weekend! No, but it made my day to hear it, thank you!

LafayetteLady -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/26/2013 9:17:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 I like how this atheist handled Wolf`s question and showed how she wasn`t hostile toward god fearing folks. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LP3Zs_V_BQ Certainly not all atheists are. However, there are a good many here who seem to think that they need to prove they are better, smarter, etc. than believers. Their behavior exemplifies why people have a tendency to not like atheists.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/26/2013 9:23:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tweakabelle I suppose I should be happy that the Pope has pronounced that I have a chance of getting into heaven. However I find it odd that this is even an issue. If the Christian God is all compassionate (as it has been represented for two milennia) then the idea of punishing (by denying them access to heaven) a person who has lived a good life without believing seems superfluous. It contradicts my understanding of what compassion is. So, from where I sit, it's really odd that this is an issue, and even odder that it took the Catholic Church a little over 2,000 years to realise this. Many religions believe they are the "chosen" who will get into heaven. I personally do not believe this, although my church certainly does (we have been at odds on the issue, and I don't give in on my position at all. I'm stubborn like that). I appreciate that you were not nasty in your comment, even though this is not my OP. I think what is important is that he is confirming what many already believe this premise, and reminding those who don't that perhaps their behavior could prove to be a stumbling block to their own entry. You seem like a person who tries to do good, regardless of faith. So, forgive me but saying this as I don't mean it as an insult, but I will likely be the one saying, "told you so," when you are looking around at surprise that something greater exists.

dcnovice -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/26/2013 9:23:45 PM)
quote: I thought my demonstration was irrefutable as well as difficult to misunderstand. I thought it was neither. quote: Recall that the scenario is intentionally simplified in order to remove exactly those sorts of distractions. Surely that is what you meant by artificial hypothetical. A key reason why hypotheticals of this sort are rarely convincing is precisely that they have to be (over)simplified to such an absurd degree that they bear no resemblance to reality.

dcnovice -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/26/2013 9:28:51 PM)
quote: Q/ So being dead is bad? A/ Yep. Q/ Why? A/ Because when you are dead, you are dead. I don't know how I missed this circle earlier.

dcnovice -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/26/2013 9:30:20 PM)
quote: Or possibly explaining why it is not kosher to kill and eat a person. Although. . . we really do not know the motive or the whole situation so we do not know why person A killed person B. True. We also don't know whether the island of Hypothetica has any other food resources.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/26/2013 9:33:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Owner59 quote: ORIGINAL: searching4mysir FR To a Catholic, redemption and salvation are not the same thing. What the Pope has essentially said, that if God is good, then all good comes from God, even if in the form of nonbelievers (they are doing God's work, even if they do not acknowledge it to be so). To a Catholic, Christ died so that all COULD be saved (redemption) knowing that not everyone would choose to reject sin and choose God (salvation). For a Catholic, it isn't faith vs. works. It is both. Works only get you part of the way. Faith without works is dead (according to James), but works alone won't get you to heaven either. This post shows the inherent elitism that comes with some faiths.... IMHO....the Pope was NOT speaking to atheists but to believers ......telling them essentially that they are no better or worse than non-believers and get off their high-horses and worry about their own souls. Even if that is the case, isn't that a good thing for everyone to believe? Even if you aren't religious and believe in a soul, as with atheists, it could easily be changed to, "you are not brighter than those that believe, so get a grip and worry about you conduct your own life instead of trashing others."

LafayetteLady -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/26/2013 9:45:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: njlauren I can understand that, but what I personally have told friends of mine, very liberal but Catholic, that their money is going to help support the people and policies they are mad about, that if Catholics in the US, for example, had made it clear any money they give stays with their own church, that none flows to the Vatican or the Bishops, you would have seen real action...but how many people really have time or energy to do that kind of thing? While all of your posts here are a voice of reason among some chaos, the above stood out to me. Here's the problem with that: You can't dictate that your weekly donation is only for one thing. You are making a donation to the church, as a whole. However, the way to circumvent that is to specifically donate to any local "causes" the church takes part in. Donate to the CYO, the food pantry, clothing drives, etc. where your donation has a better chance of staying locally. I'm not Catholic, but I rarely participate in the weekly "offering." I have some issues with some of the things my church's leaders are doing, and this is one of the ways I say it. I also don't participate in the "ministry" offerings because I think that we have, in my area at least, causes and issues they should be helping to support locally, as opposed to some "ministry" in Singapore. It really isn't a lot of work to simply not open your wallet each week when the collection plate comes around. However, many people worry what others would think if they didn't put something in. Since I have NEVER worried what others think of my actions, this isn't a problem for me, lol.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/26/2013 9:49:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: njlauren I wonder then DS if the catholic church will now consider anyone(homosexuals or civil unions) are married in gods eyes. Nope, they won't, but then again, they barely consider people married by other religious beliefs, Christian as not, as 'truly married'. Last I checked, for example, I believe the Catholic church will marry people who have been divorced if they were divorced before becoming Catholic or if it was a civil wedding (I could be wrong on that). At the very least , they will pretty easily ignore marriages done elsewhere, just take a look at Newt Gingrich shrug The current belief is that a Catholic who has been divorced can remarry in the Catholic church, but at a "side" altar. I left the Catholic church long before I knew this, but it was quite funny when I was planning my wedding to my ex 21 years ago. He was Catholic and divorced, I was raised Catholic and never married (so I met their "requirements"). I told his family who had serious issues with my very anti-Catholic beliefs that there was no way I would get married in a church that saw my marriage as second rate. Of course, I also told them if they didn't like it, they didn't have to attend my wedding, but it was going to be done MY way.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/26/2013 9:57:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: curious23 Out of curiosity, doesn't the pope's statement undermine the whole idea of faith? I don't see how this is a step in the right direction since it appears to only add to the hypocrisy of a religious denomination. Throughout history, concessions have been made to adjust with the times and this I feel is just one more. No, it doesn't undermine the idea of faith at all. While not all religions follow this (though they should), faith and church are not exclusively bound. Church is where you attend to hear the teachings of Christ and meet in fellowship with people who share your religious beliefs. Faith, however, is something you carry with you at all times. Even if you choose not to attend church at all, but you have faith in God and believe, then you have faith. At the base of all Christian religions is that we should all love and treat each other as Christ loved and treated us. That doesn't involve church, it involves faith and being a good person.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/26/2013 10:02:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: curious23 In my opinion, the statement appears to be some sly way of incorporating God into an atheists life whether the atheist likes it or not because God loves all of his children just that much. Sorry but atheists don't suffer from what believers seem to. We learn to be good through experiences that don't involve a God. We don't have to be told to be good. This isn't an attack on believers either. I'm just saying that we come to the same conclusion (being a good person) through vastly different means and the pope is wrong for trying to make anyone think otherwise. I'm Godless and good and the pope is saying "No you're not" The pope was obviously not talking to you, but to his congregation. And Christians don't "suffer" because of those beliefs, and your "being good" goes out the window with the insult. As others have mentioned, since you don't believe in God, what does it matter if someone tells you that He loves you? It isn't an insult to you, any more than when you suffer some tragedy in life and someone who says "I will keep you in my prayers" is an insult to you. I don't get mad if some random Catholic says they will light a candle for me, or if Wiccans or Pagans offer to send positive energy to me, even though I don't share their beliefs. I take it as they mean nothing but good from it.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/26/2013 10:04:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: UllrsIshtar quote: ORIGINAL: curious23 Out of curiosity, doesn't the pope's statement undermine the whole idea of faith? I wouldn't think so. It'd be logically inconsistent to believe that God created mankind, but then decided that a part of mankind are not his children. They may be considered children astray, but they are necessarily children of God nonetheless. Of course such a father would want all his children to do good, and would care more about the fact that they do so, than the idea that they do so for him. All I see the Pope doing is moving away from the vengeful God of the first testament, and move towards the God that Christ spoke about. After all, Christ died on the cross for the sins of humanity, not for the sins of Christians. If I remember correctly Ishtar, you don't believe in God. As such, your positive statement is one others should aspire to figuring out.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/26/2013 10:07:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: curious23 All I see the Pope doing is moving away from the vengeful God of the first testament, and move towards the God that Christ spoke about. I believe this is called picking and choosing. The catholic god and his testaments are inconsistent and what you see is the pope trying to overlook the ugly bits. Do you know anything about the books of the Bible? There is an Old Testament, and a New Testament. The New Testament deals with Jesus Christ and his time on earth. Just as people have evolved over time, things evolved with the Old Testament to the New Testament, and theoretically, while the Old Testament has value, it is the teaching in the New Testament that Christians are supposed to be paying close attention to.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/26/2013 10:17:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: curious23 Woooaaah you'er asking me to play devil's advocate here by comparing a being that makes absolutely no sense to a father. If I do, then let me present you with my own. This father has condoned rape, the selling of women, the death and murder against those who 'werent' chosen, and the eternal punishment of the Children of parents who at an apple he made and put in front of them. The commands he delivered personally to have fathers slay sons or to have kings destroy entire peoples are noble in the bible but if a person today claims they killed their child because God told them to or if a president declared war on a neighboring nation because Americans are God's chosen people because God told him in a dream, you'd label these folks as mad (I hope). So think twice before asking someone to see God as some sort of authority figure. The bible has him condoning some pretty scary things. You are confusing a church with God. For people of faith, God IS an authority figure. Just because he isn't for you, doesn't make it less so. And exactly where do you get the idea that GOD has condoned rape or the selling of women? Incidentally, Christianity is the only faith with a checkered history. Israel has been violently fighting with Palestine for years, it was some Muslims who hit the twin towers on 9/11 in what they interpreted as God's direction (which it wasn't). The Westboro Baptist Church believes it is God's command that they blow up abortion clinics. These are all misinterpretations of God's teaching, and not part of the New Testament to my recollection.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/26/2013 10:25:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: curious23 The God of Christ detested homosexuality and did not support the equality of women (I'll quote versus if you ask). The new testament also speaks of the fate of those who don't believe in him in revelations. The new testament God sacrificed his some to appease himself. "Because you broke this vase Jimmy, I'm going to have a new kid that is perfect and torture him for you so that I can forgive you when you do bad things. YOU'RE WELCOME." Sorry but that God doesn't seem to be that much of a step up from the Old testament version. I understand that you nor I are here to legitimize what's in the bible. All I'm saying is that, when it comes to the pope, he's changing the very nature of god and his desires because what he stated in that statement is most certainly not supported in the bible (neither testament). If he's going to change who god is then he himself raises the question- If the bible is inaccurate about who God is and what he wants from his children in any way, then why do I believe in this book in the first place? And to that I respond "Exactly". The pope's changing the rules so that he can put a funny hat on what is obviously a very dangerous bear. I'm not like you Ullrs. I'm not going to go "Awwww it's so cute and non threatening now. What a pleasant change to what it was before." I'm going to see it for what it is. A giant fucking bear lol. First of all, much of the context of the Bible is consistent with those times, such as the women not being seen as equals. NO ONE during that time saw women as equals regardless of God or not. The same thing with slavery. Life evolves, and frankly, for many of us, a literal view of the Bible is inconsistent with the current world. It doesn't mean that trying to apply things to the world of today is wrong. But for atheists, this doesn't seem to be within their realm of comprehension because it means they couldn't bash things so easily. As for God being a giant, dangerous bear....well, that's just funny.

LafayetteLady -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/26/2013 10:31:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: curious23 What traits could one possibly contribute to a being who's existence is undetectable in any way other than spiritual? You might as well ask what kind of father I think Leprechauns would be and what their values are. I've seen nice ones on my cereal boxes and mean nasty ones in movies that get stabby when you try and steal their gold. What are they basing these traits on? Th popes not basing his on the bible for sure. They chose to put their own spin on the natures of leprechauns just like the pope did (with god, not leprechauns). But that hardly means that their claims are true or even worth taking seriously. Even a nice interpretation of a leprechaun doesn't mean I'd want one as a father. And not believing in leprechauns might have something to do with that. Do you believe that love exists? Because there is nothing tangible to prove it, other than your belief it exists. As for the leprechauns, you obviously decided that the nice on on your cereal box can't possibly exist and only the ones from horror movies are a "true" interpretation of a leprechaun. I have to wonder, do people exist in both good and bad forms in your world, or is it only possible for you to believe in one or the other?

LafayetteLady -> RE: Yes, even Atheists... (5/26/2013 10:49:02 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: curious23 Actually, change kills a religion because it's followers start asking "Well if you're wrong about this than who's to say you're not wrong about any number of other things the bible says? We're talking about my life here. I've got to know that you won't change your mind about what is right and wrong tomorrow." What happens is religion diversifies when people can't agree amongst one another.Christianity turns to Catholicism turns to baptist turns to so on and so forth. You talk about all these changes that happen but one must ask why you're changing doctrine to suite reality? Why not just abide by the rules of reality? I'm not saying that these changes weren't important. I'm saying why try so hard to sustain an institution that basically adjusts to reality (being fruitful vs using protection depending on the time) instead of just skipping straight to what reality dictates. You don't need a book to tell you to be fruitful if only take a lot around and assess that there aren't a lot of people. And you don't need to be told to stop by a pope if you, again, just stop and look. Everyone seems to be dependent on this middle man religion when it's downright unnecessary. Again, faith and religious are not necessarily synonymous with each other. As Ishtar has pointed out repeatedly, she has faith, but isn't religious. Religion can't exist without faith (whether that be Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Buddist, Wicca, Pagan, etc. they all have faith in something). But faith can and does exist without religion. The faith that love exists, that being a good person will reward you, not with the gifts of heaven, but even for the atheists, who do good because it makes them feel good. And change has yet to kill any established religions. Judaism continues to exist (and is one of the oldest religions), Christianity has existed for 2000 years. Beliefs evolve with the world and society. There are many churches that are accepting of homosexuality, but they are still Christian at their core. It really seems that your inability to grasp these concepts is because you simply don't want to accept that others can believe in a deity.

Page: << < prev 7 8 [9] 10 11 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.09375