Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all. Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
Posted: June 07 2009 at 13:16
Sean Trane wrote:
Had to come back, two replies towards me, made me do so
Hve ignored the first part of your post becaudse you are still patronizing.
>>>>> no way, José!!!!! These are extreme minorities and are only gaining visibility through internet lately and even then, they depend of vthe Ivàns s of this world eeling them out of the darkness to try to get his point across >>> I'd say up to 95% of atheist have not heard of these organizations and 99% of those refute these falacies,There are no rumes in Atheism and I even shouldn't put a capital A to it) although we could we could see some copncepts as valid, but that's it......
Please Sean you talk of extreme minorities, but at least according to Wikilpedia, the Positive Atheists are a majority.
<<<<< I'm sorry to say, but that only exists into your brains!!!!!
Do you say positive Atheists don't exist?
>>> WE (and I think I can speak for the entire contigent of atheists on this site) did until now, and will most likely continue doing so....paying attention top these fallacies wouuld only gain them credibitity, which they direly need....
Those are fallacies because you disagree, it's a very religious position like saying my god is the correct one the others are false.
>>> then I suggest you go back to our debate (Is God Ruining prog???) and read up your words >>> if memoryb serves, , you even associated their signs (compass and ruler) to a David star..... You hadn't mention your grandfather back then either (orv at least I have no recollection), and were almost accusing me of of "evilry" for liking their counterbalancing role in Europe in the XIXth century. BTW, nowadays, the FM are slowly becoming mafias >>> too many people out for fortunes without ethics are joining up....
I went back, as a fact I said Civil Watchers are full of atheists, you sai Civil Watchers are Free Masons and you assume I said Free Masons are Atheists,
I even compare their symbol with the star of David WHICH IS A JEWISH RELIGIOUS SYMBOL, HARD TO SAY AN ATHEIST SYMBOL!!!!!!, and yes I believe many legal or correct institutions have been corrupted
But I clearly said:
Ivan wrote:
That's something I don't get, the Masons have a Jewish organization, use some early Christian symbols plus some Greek and they are Atheists? isn't that contradictory?
Even said it would be a contradiction to say they ar atheists!!!!
Totally different to saying they are atheists...I accused the Civil Right Watchers of being pro-atheists and you made a parallelism between them and the Free Masons,
Sean Trane wrote:
Because the atheists you accuse in the Civil rights Watcher are really Free Masons - who are not atheists
I believe the multitude of colors in that thread confused you, I talked about the Civil Right Watchers, you said they were Free Masouns and then you thought that I said Free Masons are Atheists.
Then you (In green) said that ATHEISTS trust more Masons than a any religious Institution and i (In red) said that it was contradictory to trust more a secret logia who's agenda nobody ooutside knows than a religious organization
But Free massons are free thinkers and Atheists trust Free masons more than organized religions. They fought on the same side on many issues which to a Christians might be reason enough to confuse the two cutrrents!! (i love this debate!!!!)
Atheiststrust a secret logia whose real beliefs and agenda we all ignore????? For God's sake, a bow of secrecy is praised by Atheists, thisis more medieval than the Inquisition and the Witch Hunt.
I stay in my piont The Civil Watchers organizations are anti religious in most cases and flooded with Atheists but the connection with the Masons was made by you.
because he's probably haviong political views not suiting Vatican ... I can'rt see them expelling him for another reason....
So, if they keep the politician inside the Church is wrong, and if they sanction him, the Church is also wrong..This is a no win situation.
>>> Come on Ivàn, I'm not talking of internatuinal politics (the UM seat would prompt the jews and Muslims to claim a seat as well) or even politics regarding business. I'm talking of politics like personal rights (education, divorce, , pregnancy etc.... >>> the churches shouldn't have a say in these moral issues outside giving their advice and basta for the rest....
I don't know other churches, but the Catholic Church only says something to their members, who have to accept if they want to be Catholics, not to the Governments. We are not writing in the books that Evolution is only a theory as valid as Creationism, the Church has accepted evolution.
They may give opinions, but that's something every person ad institution can do in a democratic country.
Joined: March 02 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 730
Posted: June 07 2009 at 13:20
Ivan, I think your tenacity and restlessness and ego are starting to show. Perhaps you better leave for good. True, debates can be entertaining, even enlightening, but you maintain you will leave.... why keep coming back then; you have to get the last word in (as a lawyer)?
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
Posted: June 07 2009 at 13:32
Dean wrote:
The main difference is that some individual athiests are being proactive and agressive, though still not as part of any collective, while some christians are evangelising because that is part of the tenet of their church - to go out and spread the word of god. But, yeah, I agree in part and certainly see on reason to continue debating it.
Yes, there are some agressive and even bigiot churches like the Wetboro Baptist Church, but you can expect that if Christianity has 30,000 denominations.
It's also truth that some are so small that really are like personal opinions, but sadly they are the loudest, the ones who praise God when a soldier or a gay is killed, they are savages, but you can't blame christianity for them.
[When one of the most vocal and agressive athiests (Dawkins) avoids this categorisation then it is an indication to me that it is neither generally accepted amoungst atheists, nor does it have any validity beyond the page it is written on. But since neither of us support what they say, I'm done.
I honestly don't know how small they may be, but lets agree on this.
I dispute that you have found "organisations" - you have found individual websites - you have no proof of organsiation behind those, and I'm not going looking for it.
Acording to their websites they are organizations but yes, I'm not involved with them so hardly can know their size or credibility, but they exist, that's the main point.
[Yep, I'm paraphrasing what you wrote in order to see whether it stands or falls. The assumption that an atheist says that 'there is no god' is a dogma is looking at it from the perspective of someone who believes that a god does exist. From a different perspective it is not dogma IMO and since we have different perspectives on this, debating it further will not change that.
No, it won't
Okay... a little odd that you think the message given to Moses on Mt. Horeb was not the word of god, but I will obviously not disagree with that.
I'm not sure on how much of it is the word of God and how much has been added by the writer, I said this about the old Testament since my first post.
[Thanks Iván - an enjoyable game of ping-pong and a little pyramid building thrown in for good measure.
Seems i will have to stay as long as Sean is around
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
Posted: June 07 2009 at 13:33
avalanchemaster wrote:
Ivan, I think your tenacity and restlessness and ego are starting to show. Perhaps you better leave for good. True, debates can be entertaining, even enlightening, but you maintain you will leave.... why keep coming back then; you have to get the last word in (as a lawyer)?
And I think that it is time to stop bating Iván.
This is not a closed forum - people are free to comment in any thread they wish to.
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
Posted: June 07 2009 at 13:51
This is the second time i have to come back BECAUSE I'M DIRECTLY ADRESSED, not referring to Dean's post because it was clearly said it was going to be his last reply as i made mine..
First was Stonebeard in page 4 and the Sean, and that's OK, but iof I'm directly adressed, I have to reply.
If you don''t want me to come, don't direct your replies towards me, that's simple.
Joined: March 02 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 730
Posted: June 07 2009 at 14:03
I suppose I personally don't see the point in debating minutiae and splitting hairs down to the last scrap. (this directed at anybody really) Seems absurd from where I stand. It's relentlessness like that which keeps the never-ending fighting going. You're just two rams battering at each other in a stalemate. Is it now a point of manliness and ego? I have a right to my opinion, and you have a right to yours. Since this is an open debate, that is my 2 cents.
Joined: March 02 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 730
Posted: June 07 2009 at 17:34
KoS wrote:
^ See it all works out
Back to topic, I have found this to be very informative,
Thank You!
Oh and sorry if my previous statements may have offended anybody. Please feel free to pm me if you have any concerns; I would be more than happy to try to reach an agreement of civility.
Joined: March 02 2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 730
Posted: June 07 2009 at 18:50
Well this is going to appear very arrogant, but I am going to quote myself, just in case anybody missed my original first post of the thread (and got lost in the heated discussion). Feel free to reply or make comments. I am open to constructive criticism!
avalanchemaster wrote:
"Well , where is God?", said Mrs. Coulter, "If he's alive?" "And why doesn't he speak anymore? At the beginning of the world, God walked in the garden and spoke with Adam and Eve. Then he began to withdraw, and forbade Moses to look at his face. Later, in the time of Daniel, he was aged--he was The Ancient of Days. Where is he now? Is he still alive, at some inconceivable age, decrepit and demented, unable to think or act or speak and unable to die, a rotten hulk? And if that is his condition, Wouldn't it be the most merciful thing, the truest proof of our love for God, to seek him out and give him the gift of death?"
(Philip Pullman; His Dark Materials trilogy; book 3; The Amber Spyglass.... quite easily the best adolescent's reader that utilizes christian ideas to take a different look at the possibility of a different reality besides a Pro-God, Pro-Christian dogma. Amazing read!)
I was raised Mormon- a Cult if there ever was one...and a big one at that. I do not care about other's beliefs and these days I tend to stray far from this sort of discussion, because you get people that are far too passionate about their own SUBJECTIVE beliefs, and start debating them feverishly, as if their very salvation/soul depended on converting everyone. Utter bullsh*t. Leave it alone for people to discover their beliefs on their own. If they cannot discover their own subjective truth, well then they may be candidates for the Darwin Awards, dying off and leaving the more fit to survive into the future.
But since we are asking, let me be passionate for a moment:
In the bible, we are made to think that man was created in God's image. I think they got it backwards; God was created in man's image. It is the ultimate testament of existential anxiety and grief. We need so much to not feel isolated and alienated, that we create fantasies and fairytales (whose to say that in another 1000 years, they won't be worshipping Hairy Potter?) and allegories to teach us to come together and not be so frightened of some big gaping UNIDENTIFIED hole at the end of our lives. That's nice if you believe in heaven, but show me the proof either way; existence/non-existence in God/Satan/Heaven/Hell...... and I will show you a man/woman who can train themselves to believe anything, so long as it ails their suffering and anxiety, ultimately pushing doubt and fear away in a huge (possibly delusional) wave. I may be delusional too, in many of your minds, but I at least like to think that I try to face my own truth head on... without the aid of someone else's ideals. Beliefs can be dangerous either way, because when you filter everything through a binary system of beliefs, there is no room for debate/doubt. He who doubts is shunned. In our pro-Christian nation of America; there is only one "Accepted" religious belief system; and that is judeo-christian/Puritanical systems. We go to war in the name of God.(the Horror!) We print dollar bills in the name of God. We erect our monuments to show God what good we have done in his name. Everything for a THEN and THERE belief system.... the afterlife, supposing one acted good in the forelife, is assumed as a reward granted upon the completion of requisite actions. (that's not to say that morals are bad) How sad that people focus more on death and the afterlife more than the HERE AND NOW. Pro-war/anti-abortion seems to be the order of the day for the fundamentalist, "religious right" (the supposed "Moral Majority"- as if a majority proves righteousness- what of lynchmobs and crowds of riotous persons? Are they "right" too? "Insanity in individuals is rare, but in groups, epochs and nations- it is the rule"- Nietzsche) I for one am disgusted by the tyrannical and fascistic methods that the CHURCH (as it were- all organized religion- even those that invert christianity) have committed many atrocities and will continue to, because they belief as a gestalt unit, that they are right beyond reasonable doubt---- BECAUSE GOD SAID SO. That's f**king scary.
In the end, I would much rather just let people believe what they want to (why not the Flying Spaghetti Monster? Or the Church of the Subgenius?)... as long as it does not encroach on my rights and liberties to lead my life as I see fit, in turn harming nobody else, (unless of course it is a matter of life and death- kill or be killed.... we are all just supposedly aware animals anyway, right?)
I hope I have not necessarily converted people, but merely shared my experience with you guys. I have read Dawkins' The God Delusion- and he asks the same questions; Proof of existence or non-existence.... there is none (proof- there is only faith- which can be defined as "belief in the face of counter-evidence") either way. That in my mind makes Agnosticism fit confortable in my mind as a very logical answer to that gnawing question of God.
Now be good little boys and girls and quit arguing over Subjective (non-factual) (personal) beliefs!
Joined: March 12 2005
Location: Neurotica
Status: Offline
Points: 166178
Posted: June 07 2009 at 19:19
Atavachron wrote:
your post was a good read, MWH
Dig me...But don't...Bury me I'm running still, I shall until, one day, I hope that I'll arrive Warning: Listening to jazz excessively can cause a laxative effect.
Ivan, despite some nice posts from you on the subject, I call "bulls**t" on this one.
You have some crap site's list of "commandments" that few, if any atheists have ever heard of.
And number 2 is downright insulting, and, well, a load of number 2.
It is the quest for knowledge and truth that has led many atheists to the conclusion that no god exists.
And remember, belief in science is belief in the provable. A theory is stated. Then scientific methods are used to prove or disprove the theory. Until the theory is proven, a theory remains just a theory. To this date, the theory of god (pick one) remains unproven.
I'm sure all but the most widely fanatical atheists would consider agnosticism if there was a shred of verifiable evidence of a god, and would join the believers with more than a shred. But so far, all we have are unbelievable, unprovable stories. You would think after thousands of years there would be more than that.
This is the closer you can get to a religious system
Oh not this pure bilge again... seriously, Iván, do you seriously think the majority of Atheists give a rats arse about commandments? These people are not true Atheists. They're just jumping on a bandwagon.
Iván wrote:
I also read that there 's a Bible in Klingon, but's not an oficial laguage.
The Bible has also now been translated into Lolcatz.
Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28057
Posted: June 07 2009 at 22:31
Common sense changes from culture to culture and time to time. If you want morals to be valid, they have to be universal (I think). I don't really have a problem saying that for some issues for our time, (like murder), it is wrong, but for more ambiguous issues, like abortion, there is no right answer because it's not unanimous.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.270 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.