310 réponses à ce sujet

[RedArmyShogun]

Luc0s In the Name of the Iman's in the Service of Allah, and his Prophet Muhammad I deliver this message, you have committed a Grevious Sin. The Sin of Speaking when not spoken too. This is a punishment and a crime most foul. However Allah is merciful. You are but the ignorant Pagan, who hasn't taken the Hajj. Under the rights of the Tabarra a Fatwā has been wrote against you. Three Fatwā's demand a Jihad, you have one. On the Counting of three no more, no less Jihad will be called.

On the Part of the Catholic Church I have received a notice of excommunication. On the Templars behalf...saddly I can not read Latin, but I assume it is not good.

[Siansonea]

Erik Lehnsherr wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...

Erik Lehnsherr wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...

Erik Lehnsherr wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...

Oh, well there's a nonzero chance that unicorns are real, so you might not want to take a stand on that one either. See how helpful I am? :innocent:

I actually do take this same viewpoint on everything that has not been proven. 

And I find that hilarious. It seems you're just a persuasive argument away from believing in literally anything.

Oh no, because it has not been PROVEN. See where I'm coming from now?

Well, if that were your only criteria, you'd be an avowed atheist. Because the "positive" proclamation, that gods exist, has not been PROVEN. See where I'm coming from? Your stance seems to entertain every single notion, however preposterous, on an equal footing with what we can observe easily. Gods, unicorns, fairies, wizards, witches—they're all standing toe-to-toe with the universe that we can observe directly. You'll give them the benefit of the doubt, even though that doubt is infinitesimal.

Exactly, but I still won't stand on a side of the barricade as the situations stand.

So it's really more about the social aspect of the debate, rather than a purely intellectual stance? For me, the null value is the default, a thing doesn't exist until it is proven to exist. Period. That goes for gods, witches, fairies, unicorns and Higgs bosons. Maybe it's because my great grandmother grew up in Missouri, but if you want me to accept something as fact, you need to make your case airtight. Theistic religion is about as airtight as fishing net. Pantheism and deism conveniently try to park themselves outside the boundary of observation, but that's a copout and they know it. Until something is proven one way or the other, I have to fall back to the null value, that gods do not exist, because they have not been proven to exist. And I could dance around it with tales of my openness to new information—and to speak truly, I am open to any new proof that comes along—but the fact is I do not have a belief in something that isn't shown to exist. I will transition from disbelief to KNOWLEDGE if gods are proven to exist, but I won't go from disbelief to belief.

[Blacklash93]

Volus Warlord wrote...
Doesn't everything boil down to fear or greed?

This is at least somewhat accurate.

Which is one of my hopes in evolution, tbh. If the cerebral cortex develops further it will bring us closer to becoming beings of reason and logic and further away from ones emotion and impulse.

[Siansonea]

Blacklash93 wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...
Doesn't everything boil down to fear or greed?

This is at least somewhat accurate.

Which is one of my hopes in evolution, tbh. If the cerebral cortex develops further it will bring us closer to becoming beings of reason and logic and further away from ones emotion and impulse.

This is already happening. 10,000 years ago we were clubbing each other over the head for morsels of food.

[stysiaq]

100% atheist here.

[JoeLaTurkey]

Ah, the BSN...has there ever been a more appropriate place to settle this debate?


To answer the question: I was a fundamentalist Christian for almost 12 years. Antitheist now.

[joseS95]

I dont believe in any religion because i think i dont need it... But if people think they need to believe in something, i respect them

[Voodoo2015]

How many people here are atheist?
What?

Who cares, you may belong to what religion you want.

[stysiaq]

Erik Lehnsherr wrote...

That's fair enough for you, for me it's rather "A thing may exist, until it's proven not to."

That just multiplies "probable" beings ad infinitum. Don't want to offend you, since you probably heard of Russels Teapot and Invisible Pink Unicorn. I know it's kinda unfair, but it fits your beliefs.

[Volus Warlord]

Siansonea II wrote...

Blacklash93 wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...
Doesn't everything boil down to fear or greed?

This is at least somewhat accurate.

Which is one of my hopes in evolution, tbh. If the cerebral cortex develops further it will bring us closer to becoming beings of reason and logic and further away from ones emotion and impulse.

This is already happening. 10,000 years ago we were clubbing each other over the head for morsels of food.

Are we confusing people and technology again?

Techonology advances.

Society goes in circles. We still do "club each other over the head" to bolster our own livelihoods. Just with fancier stuff.

[Siansonea]

Erik Lehnsherr wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...

Erik Lehnsherr wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...

Erik Lehnsherr wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...

Erik Lehnsherr wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...

Oh, well there's a nonzero chance that unicorns are real, so you might not want to take a stand on that one either. See how helpful I am? :innocent:

I actually do take this same viewpoint on everything that has not been proven. 

And I find that hilarious. It seems you're just a persuasive argument away from believing in literally anything.

Oh no, because it has not been PROVEN. See where I'm coming from now?

Well, if that were your only criteria, you'd be an avowed atheist. Because the "positive" proclamation, that gods exist, has not been PROVEN. See where I'm coming from? Your stance seems to entertain every single notion, however preposterous, on an equal footing with what we can observe easily. Gods, unicorns, fairies, wizards, witches—they're all standing toe-to-toe with the universe that we can observe directly. You'll give them the benefit of the doubt, even though that doubt is infinitesimal.

Exactly, but I still won't stand on a side of the barricade as the situations stand.

So it's really more about the social aspect of the debate, rather than a purely intellectual stance? For me, the null value is the default, a thing doesn't exist until it is proven to exist. Period. That goes for gods, witches, fairies, unicorns and Higgs bosons. Maybe it's because my great grandmother grew up in Missouri, but if you want me to accept something as fact, you need to make your case airtight. Theistic religion is about as airtight as fishing net. Pantheism and deism conveniently try to park themselves outside the boundary of observation, but that's a copout and they know it. Until something is proven one way or the other, I have to fall back to the null value, that gods do not exist, because they have not been proven to exist. And I could dance around it with tales of my openness to new information—and to speak truly, I am open to any new proof that comes along—but the fact is I do not have a belief in something that isn't shown to exist. I will transition from disbelief to KNOWLEDGE if gods are proven to exist, but I won't go from disbelief to belief.

That's fair enough for you, for me it's rather "A thing may exist, until it's proven not to."

 

Well, at least no one can say you aren't "open minded". Technically, I feel the same way though. A thing "may" exist, until it's proven to be true, but I won't "believe" in it in the meantime.

[Gotholhorakh]

DuckSoup wrote...
 Because Darwin's theory of evolution has shown that we evolved. But you see, although his theory may be pretty solid, I could still say "Well, we still had to get here somehow you know! God must have created us in the beginning" and I could just choose not to believe what has been put in front of me. I could just completely have no faith in the Science. But I don't. I believe that what he found to have happen probably happened. I didn't see it for myself, I wasn't there, but I believe in it as much as I can.

Out of interest (and I make this point not to persuade anyone but because it's a legitimate point) there is absolutely nothing to preclude someone being a Christian and believing in Darwinian evolution, that's including the story of creation.

Some hicks somewhere set up this literalist doctrine where they want to stick their fingers in their ears and sing "la la la" and pretend most human discoveries never happened if they contradict their weird interpretation of Christianity.

Personally, I think it's pretty much moronic. I think if you asked most Christians (certainly in the UK) they would say the same, tbh.

[termokanden]

Volus Warlord wrote...

Society goes in circles. We still do "club each other over the head" to bolster our own livelihoods. Just with fancier stuff.

It may also be a matter of desperation. These days, many of us are not generally worried about survival on a day to day basis. Thus, we don't normally need to kill Bob just because he's hogging the ice cream.

[Siansonea]

Volus Warlord wrote...

Siansonea II wrote...

Blacklash93 wrote...

Volus Warlord wrote...
Doesn't everything boil down to fear or greed?

This is at least somewhat accurate.

Which is one of my hopes in evolution, tbh. If the cerebral cortex develops further it will bring us closer to becoming beings of reason and logic and further away from ones emotion and impulse.

This is already happening. 10,000 years ago we were clubbing each other over the head for morsels of food.

Are we confusing people and technology again?

Techonology advances.

Society goes in circles. We still do "club each other over the head" to bolster our own livelihoods. Just with fancier stuff.

Technology is a byproduct of reason and logic. The proliferation of technology in some ways indicates a greater trend toward reason and logic in humans. But it's not just technology I'm referring to, I'm talking about social dynamics in the modern world. True, they are still quite barbaric and social injustice is still pervasive. But there's a glimmer of hope that humanity will rise above its own base nature. Just a glimmer, mind you, it doesn't even qualify as a spark. 

[legion999]

Luc0s wrote...
Belief in god and the theory of evolution are not mutually exclusive. My mother is a Christian, but accepts the theory of evolution. She simply believes that evolution is the mechanic that God used to create us. My mother believes the famous 6 days of creation in the Genesis of the Bible are not litteraly 6 days, but metaphorically 6 days.

"Six days in god's perspective might be billions of years in our perspective. Time is after all quite relative." - My mom.

Huh, that is exactly what my mum believes as well.

To answerthe OP's question I'm an agnostic theist.