|
|
Post by SciFive on Jan 5, 2021 13:31:25 GMT
The anti-religion religion is hypocritical on its face. People who are just atheists don’t tend to try to interfere with believers. They themselves just don’t believe. Arguing in a board called Religion Faith and Spirituality over atheism/religion is not interfering with believers. The attack has been against believers by people who should mind their own business when it comes to private thoughts.
|
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 5, 2021 13:32:48 GMT
The anti-religion religion is hypocritical on its face. People who are just atheists don’t tend to try to interfere with believers. They themselves just don’t believe. Yea, I can't tell you how many times I have had atheists on my doorstep asking if I don't believe, or how I have to scroll past all those atheist preachers on their atheist channels on my cable TV channel listings. And you still haven't given us your definition of 'religion'.
|
|
|
|
Post by SciFive on Jan 5, 2021 13:33:38 GMT
God is no different than any of these things.
—————
God is different from all of your analogies.
This is part of the vast hypocrisy of the anti-religion religion.
|
|
|
|
Post by SciFive on Jan 5, 2021 13:34:34 GMT
The anti-religion religion is hypocritical on its face. People who are just atheists don’t tend to try to interfere with believers. They themselves just don’t believe. Yea, I can't tell you how many times I have had atheists on my doorstep asking if I don't believe, or how I have to scroll past all those atheist preachers on their atheist channels on my cable TV channel listings. And you still haven't given us your definition of 'religion'. Atheists are not the problem. The anti-religion religion is the problem.
|
|
|
|
Post by Winter_King on Jan 5, 2021 13:36:19 GMT
Arguing in a board called Religion Faith and Spirituality over atheism/religion is not interfering with believers. The attack has been against believers by people who should mind their own business when it comes to private thoughts. If the believers feel offended for what is posted in a board to discuss religion, I suggest that they should go to a place where their beliefs aren't being criticized. An echo chamber where they only hear what they want to hear. Every belief should can and should be criticized. Even non beliefs.
|
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 5, 2021 13:38:10 GMT
God is no different than any of these things. ————— God is different from all of your analogies. This is part of the vast hypocrisy of the anti-religion religion. This is special pleading.
|
|
|
|
Post by SciFive on Jan 5, 2021 13:39:10 GMT
The attack has been against believers by people who should mind their own business when it comes to private thoughts. If the believers feel offended for what is posted in a board to discuss religion, I suggest that they should go to a place where their beliefs aren't being criticized. An echo chamber where they only hear what they want to hear. Every belief should can and should be criticized. Even non beliefs. Believers are attacked by arseholes. The anti-religion religion is arseholery.
|
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 5, 2021 13:40:12 GMT
Yea, I can't tell you how many times I have had atheists on my doorstep asking if I don't believe, or how I have to scroll past all those atheist preachers on their atheist channels on my cable TV channel listings. And you still haven't given us your definition of 'religion'. Atheists are not the problem. The anti-religion religion is the problem. Since you do not share what you think defines 'religion', while not using it in a regular sense but as an insult, no one has a firm idea of what this group constitutes.
|
|
|
|
Post by SciFive on Jan 5, 2021 13:41:12 GMT
The anti-religion religion obsesses over attacking believers with any insults theycan think to say because the anti-religion religion is involved in arseholery.
|
|
|
|
Post by Winter_King on Jan 5, 2021 13:41:30 GMT
If the believers feel offended for what is posted in a board to discuss religion, I suggest that they should go to a place where their beliefs aren't being criticized. An echo chamber where they only hear what they want to hear. Every belief should can and should be criticized. Even non beliefs. Believers are attacked by arseholes. The anti-religion religion is arseholery. Good thing there aren't any members of anti religion religion here. Beliefs are attacked just like any other belief. They aren't above criticism.
|
|
|
|
Post by SciFive on Jan 5, 2021 13:42:49 GMT
Believers are attacked by arseholes. The anti-religion religion is arseholery. Good thing there aren't any members of anti religion religion here. Beliefs are attacked just like any other belief. They aren't above criticism. The anti-religion religion members on this board aren’t above criticism either.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jan 5, 2021 13:44:01 GMT
A test is something repeatable and peer reviewable. Schedule a teet of fire throwing from the sky. The belief in God does not include any such thing. When God spoke to people somehow in the Bible, he would call their name. The usual answer to God was “I’m here.” Clearly a response, not a command to God. To quote Yudkowsky: Wouldn't mind seeing a teet of fire from the sky. Not a bad way to go out. This article ( www.lesswrong.com/posts/fAuWLS7RKWD2npBFR/religion-s-claim-to-be-non-disprovable) exposes what a huge lie the whole "God is non-disprovable" thing is, both by citing The Bible and by citing what most believers themselves profess. Here's my edited version, because I know you won't read the whole thing:
|
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Jan 5, 2021 13:46:38 GMT
Arguing in a board called Religion Faith and Spirituality over atheism/religion is not interfering with believers. The attack has been against believers by people who should mind their own business when it comes to private thoughts. No one has an issue with private thoughts; it is when they are uttered in the public sphere as dogma and doctrine as a matter of truth about reality, let alone in an attempt to influence public policy, that they can justifiably be examined and criticised where felt lacking. To repeatedly deny this freedom just comes across as being paranoid and defensive.
|
|
|
|
Post by SciFive on Jan 5, 2021 13:47:45 GMT
This article (www.lesswrong.com/posts/fAuWLS7RKWD2npBFR/religion-s-claim-to-be-non-disprovable) exposes what a huge lie the whole "God is non-disprovable" thing is, both by citing The Bible and by citing what most believers themselves profess. Here's my edited version, because I know you won't read the whole thing:
—//————
The author is a flaming arsehole.
|
|
|
|
Post by Winter_King on Jan 5, 2021 13:49:30 GMT
Good thing there aren't any members of anti religion religion here. Beliefs are attacked just like any other belief. They aren't above criticism. The anti-religion religion members on this board aren’t above criticism either. Agreed. I haven't seen one here however.
|
|
|
|
Post by SciFive on Jan 5, 2021 13:53:07 GMT
The attack has been against believers by people who should mind their own business when it comes to private thoughts. People have the freedom to fire back when they are attacked by arseholes who smear billions and billions of innocent people. The attack against religion is so incredibly MORONIC that the “blessing” meant for the opening of a new House of Representatives was finished with: “AMEN...... AND A WOMAN.” “Amen” means “so be it”, not a grammatically incorrect “A MEN”.
|
|
|
|
Post by Winter_King on Jan 5, 2021 13:55:39 GMT
This article (www.lesswrong.com/posts/fAuWLS7RKWD2npBFR/religion-s-claim-to-be-non-disprovable) exposes what a huge lie the whole "God is non-disprovable" thing is, both by citing The Bible and by citing what most believers themselves profess. Here's my edited version, because I know you won't read the whole thing: —//———— The author is a flaming arsehole. Good article.
|
|
|
|
Post by Eva Yojimbo on Jan 5, 2021 13:56:49 GMT
The anti-religion religion is purely about thought control. It’s one of the creepiest things I’ve ever seen in my life. I don't agree. In my opinion, it's either ignorance and/or rebellion. Some people are too mentally unable to comprehend intangiblilties like spirituality. That is why we keep getting statements like, "There is no empirical evidence." And some Atheist are just angry at religion for various reasons. So they swear never to endorse it. And constantly blame the religions for what some evil acts people use religion as an excuse for. So what am I ignorant of or rebelling against? Because I've demonstrated you are are completely ignorant of how evidence works, and SciFive is completely ignorant of what her own Holy Book says about God interacting with the physical world. I'm pretty sure if I'm capable of comprehending probability theory--and math is something that's genuinely intangible--I'm capable of comprehending spirituality. I've asked SciFive repeatedly, and I'll ask you: what evidence (note: I'm not just asking for physical evidence) do you have that the spiritual world exists, and how have you determined that the method that produced that evidence is accurate and reliable? Because, see, it's not that atheists are unable to "comprehend intangibles," it's that most of us are skeptical of woo-woo bullshit. This whole "you're limited by only looking for empirical evidence" thing is also bullshit. The problem isn't in the demand for empirical evidence, which is the only method that's been demonstrated to produce reliable, accurate results and beliefs; it's that you have no other alternative to offer. If you were to produce a reliable non-empirical method for determining truth, you'd probably be the first person to win a Nobel Prize in philosophy, because nobody else has ever managed to do that. I'm also not angry at religion. I actually quite like religion in the Blakean/Jungian/Stevensian/Petersonian sense of being mythological, psychological "grand fictions" that encapsulated entire cultures' beliefs and values. The problem is that the world has changed a lot since they were written and certain people think religions are infallible and should be read literally and none of the morals espoused in them should be changed. THAT'S where the problem is: fundamentalism/literalism. I've said I don't have much problem with believers who don't let their religion influence their votes, but are you seriously going to tell me that doesn't happen a lot? Evangelical fundamentalists are NOT a small minority in this country. Scientists had to fight Supreme Court cases in order to stop such people from teaching pseudoscience like Creationism in schools. You'd have to be blind not to see the influence that religion in the fundamenalist/literalist sense has on this country.
|
|
|
|
Post by SciFive on Jan 5, 2021 13:57:04 GMT
This article (www.lesswrong.com/posts/fAuWLS7RKWD2npBFR/religion-s-claim-to-be-non-disprovable) exposes what a huge lie the whole "God is non-disprovable" thing is, both by citing The Bible and by citing what most believers themselves profess. Here's my edited version, because I know you won't read the whole thing: —//———— The author is a flaming arsehole. Good article. The author’s nastiness is a “high” to some people.
|
|
|
|
Post by SciFive on Jan 5, 2021 13:58:11 GMT
So what am I ignorant of or rebelling against? Because I've demonstrated you are are completely ignorant of how evidence works, and SciFive is completely ignorant of what her own Holy Book says about God interacting with the physical world.
/—————-
More lies.
|
|