Page 6 of 11 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 153

Thread: It is impossible to believe in Evolution and not be a racist

  1. #76
    Postaholic chalsdk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Greator Denmark
    Posts
    838
    Quote Originally Posted by Craigus View Post
    "Lots of stuf to think over".
    Give me a few days. Ill think it over

  2. #77
    Forum Fanatic Elldallan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,018
    Quote Originally Posted by Palem View Post
    1. Isn't that what everyone does though? You're not going to believe that Evolution is wrong unless someone comes along and 100%, without a doubt, disproves it. Even if someone comes along with an equally plausible theory, I doubt you would believe that Evolution is wrong because there's a competing theory.
    If somebody came up with a different theory that is more plausible, logical, has fewer assumptions, and is empirically founded then I'd have to re-evaluate my position. But until creationists can come up with such a theory then evolution still fulfils all of the points I mentioned, creationism doesn't.

    Quote Originally Posted by Palem View Post
    2. Why do you despise them for encouraging science? Science by it's very nature is meant to be questioned and poked and prodded and have it's flaws called out and questioned. If there's something missing in a theory, not only is it their right to question it, it's the obligation of science to explore it and actually find the thing that's missing. Don't get me wrong, some questions and challenges are downright stupid, but if no one asks stupid things then no one learns. Even if the redneck hillybilly refuses to believe that God couldn't have created the Earth 4000 years ago because we have rocks and trees that are older than that currently on Earth, maybe his son will come to the realization that there's absolutely no way that adds up.
    What they're doing is not encouraging science, the purported rewards pale next to the costs of most research. Yes Science should be poked, prodded and questioned in a rational, constructive and empirical way. Just stating I'm right and you're wrong contributes absolutely nothing.

    Yes, everyone has the right to their opinion, if you want to believe that the earth is a flat disc borne up on the backs of 4 elephants situated on a giant turtle flying through space then that as ludicrous as it might be is their right and no more ludicrous than the abrahmitic creation myth, they're equally flunky. What annoys and sometimes offends me is the attempts to force these ludicrous views on our young in school, it is quite enough that they might have to suffer through it at home, if the creationists gets their intellectual design bull**** to be adopted as a valid education theory then that is a crime against humanity and a loss for all mankind because it decreases the chance that that redneck descendant ever discovers how ludicrous the dogma he's been brought up to believe is, we don't need to go back to the dark ages, Christianity has already done enough damage as it is.


    Quote Originally Posted by Palem View Post
    I think you're being a little harsh. Yes, there are some things that are on that "You've got to be f'ing kidding me" level, but there are plenty of very smart people (scientists even) that believes god exists and plays/played a real practical role in the universe.
    Yes undoubtedly there are actual scientists in the natural and formal sciences(as opposed to the humane sciences) that believe in the existence of a supreme being but is much much rarer than in the population at large.

    Quote Originally Posted by Palem View Post
    You act like it's some sort of easy request to prove their theories or provide solid evidence. How do you prove that someone created something without an actual historical record of the time? Let's pretend that all of our records only date back to the 2000. How do you prove that Tim Berners-Lee invented the Internet in 1990 and have like actual, solid proof? Especially if no one believed your crazy theory just because you've been told that's who did it. I mean, I think I'm fairly clever and I honestly would have no idea where to begin. Stack on top of that, the fact that Berners-Lee is an actual person and not a divine being that a lot of people actually doubt the existence of in the first place. I'm not saying religious beliefs are above being proven, but understand that asking someone to prove that God created man and asking for proof that man evolved from a more primitive being are two completely different different tasks.
    Two completely different tasks but not considerably more difficult when viewed from the opposition. Also historical records are unnecessary to the task and what more they're notoriously unreliable. What you need to do is find some phenomena or other that could not possibly be explained by any other means than through the existence of a supreme being. Now of course I believe that to be utterly impossible because I don't think there is such a thing. But for the religious minded person that is where they need to start, the concept is no harder to prove than it was for Darwin to prove evolution, it just lies in observation and detailed study, if there is such a thing as a supreme being then that evidence should eventually manifest itself in some manner that is incontrovertible or at least makes more sense than science.

    Quote Originally Posted by Palem View Post
    Also, suggesting that using the argument that "science can not explain this" should be ridiculed is a bit of a blanket statement. Using that as a scape goat when you can't explain yourself any further is just arguing, but there are arguments that god created the universe that are sort of reliant on this. For example, during the Planck epoch, time doesn't necessarily function in a linear manner*, which means all concepts of "science" that we have ceases to exist for the first moments of the universe's existence and science truly can not tell us what is happening. We can only provide very rough theories for what may have been happening based on what was happening directly after that, but we really can't test anything from it.
    That's not what I said, I said that anybody saying that because "science can not explain this" that means I'm right should be ridiculed. They should have the same onus to present a credible empirical theory as science before they're given space, at least in education That's something very difficult because there are indeed things that science cannot explain and some theories that are extremely vague because we currently lack the tools and/or knowledge to prove or disprove said theories, so for the moment they are our best explanation for something we know very little of, not unlike your argument about written history, because there is obviously no written history about the birth of the universe.

    Quote Originally Posted by Palem View Post
    I'm a mathematical person. I studied math, so asking me to consider a fact as something that may not be 100% true is hard, especially when there are scientific stuff that we do actually know 100% about. Things like Hydrogen having 1 proton and 1 neutron, or that photons travel at the speed of light. I realize that these things seem sort of "true by definition", but if we ever find something wrong Evolution, we're just going rewrite the definition of evolution, so we're always going to have the "definition" of Evolution be right, unless we have a huge breakthrough and Evolution ends up being totally wrong lol.
    The fact about photons travelling at the speed of light is a good example here, because scientists have proven that light can travel at speed lower than 299,792,458 m/s it has been slowed to the speed of roughly 38 miles/per hour (http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/1999/02.18/light.html)

    Quote Originally Posted by Palem View Post
    So I'm going to commit the ultimate sin of discussion and agree to disagree on this point :p. I'm mostly just tired of going back of forth on the definition of a scientific fact lol
    That's fine, I can understand your position because in math as I said earlier a fact is a fact :)

    Quote Originally Posted by Craigus View Post
    They have plenty of passages that defy gravity like the parting of the seas, a magic man walking on water or rising from the grave. You would think they would attack Sir Isaac Newtons credibility to prove all these things can happen.
    Walking on a fluid does not defy gravity, it is technically possible either by having a fluid with a high enough surface tension or a creature that distributes it's weight enough, or you could just walk on frozen water :P
    Even the parting of the red sea or what might appear as such can in theory be explained by logic even though it's going to be pretty far fetched.
    But then gravity isn't a central concept for religion and hence not an area of friction like evolution is, abrahmitic religions clearly state that man was created by god in his image, the claim that man was descended from a primordial goo would offend them because that'd mean that god is a puddle of primordial goo and that we've strayed from his image. :P

    Quote Originally Posted by Craigus View Post
    It's only a matter of time until they accept Darwin's theory of evolution. They did eventually come around to Galileo, just took a while. Just imagine the can of worms that will be opened when we turn chemistry into biology, that is after all their biggest gap they go to when it comes to evolution.
    I seriously doubt that, people can be oh so hell bent on believing truly stupid things, this is absolutely not limited to religion. But thankfully the hardcore refuser's are growing fewer and fewer which is why the whole "intellectual design" bull**** is very worrying because it seems to aim to bring us back to the dark ages where religion is the one and only explanation for everything no matter how ludicrous the explanations are.

    And sorry to tell you this but the area of biochemistry already exists :P We already know exactly what elements make up a strand of DNA, I can go on and make examples for several pages. It is actually a budding area of study in biology because so far when biologists deal with proteins, protein markers etc. they typically use a place holder descriptive image, we know it does this or that but until fairly recently we have not had the ability to exactly determine what chemical compounds makes up a protein, or how that impacts on a protein folds itself and thereby which atoms are exposed in the active site. This in combination with advanced 3D imaging techniques has the possibility to advance small scale biology by leaps and bounds exactly because you can trace the chemistry and exactly WHY something happens the way it does, not just knowing that it does.

    Quote Originally Posted by chalsdk View Post
    To just make a few things clear.

    Elldallan & others - I never claimed I support Creative design - I think you mix stuf up, and its becourse your very American centric in your view. At any regard I dont. I support The Pure Version of it. AKA Creation. How that is done, Dunno. Can sceince give good hints, sure, Do I look for em, no.
    No I never meant to imply that you did, but as that's my biggest beef(and currently where most of the resistance comes from) with the religious view on evolution denial it naturally spilled over.

    Quote Originally Posted by chalsdk View Post
    On this topic - let me remind some of you, since its seams like your burning with passion for this very topic - Basis religion states that its ALL true - as if one thing is wrong - as if jesus said, its perfectly okay to drink from lakes and walls with dead animals - And we can find out that is playing with death -> Then the entire religion is FALSE .-> IF - but IF! -> its states this is a a fact, and not up for debate.
    No not really, the religion will just find a way to reinvent itself into a new direction, just like how Judaism reinvented itself into Christianity and later on Islam was reinvented from one of the two(not exactly sure which one but most likely Christianity since Islam admits the existence of Jesus which Judaism does not)
    There we have three major world religions who have wildly differing views on pretty much everything and yet shares the same God, the Christian god, the Muslim god and the Jewish god are all the same "God", so this supposed "god" comes of as more than a little schizophrenic, and why if this god exists would there be so wildly separate opinions on what the **** he wants out of mankind.

    Quote Originally Posted by chalsdk View Post
    Evolution is a teory - To claim otherwise is foolish. Poor understanding of the evolution. I can bring up 5 massive huge problems right here.
    Yes evolution is a theory, it can also be considered a fact, your refusal to admit this is because of your limited understanding of such scientific terms. In science a theory is something much bigger and palpable than a theory in common tongue, and likewise a fact is less so than in common speech.
    And secondly, your objections seems to lie mostly with the theory of a common descent, not evolution itself, they are absolutely not one and the same, sure the theory of a common descent was part of Darwin's theory but the study of evolution today is separate from it.

    Quote Originally Posted by chalsdk View Post
    Creation is also a teory - It can not be proved OR disproved.
    If there are actual wonders and miracles then it should be an easy thing to prove it, or at least to disprove or cast doubt on science. Because at least some of the supposed miracles cannot be explained in any other way than the complete rejection of everything science knows today, find one of those miracles and prove it's existence and you would disprove science, this is no harder to do than to find "the missing link" or any of the other issues with evolution that evolution rejectionists base their claims on.
    And lastly, until creationism can present a more coherent, empirical and probable theory then science it has absolutely no place anywhere in our schools except in basic religious education(such as which the main faiths are and what they stand for)and thre only to provide education about them and not provide them as a different theory on life, the universe and everything. It is up to the individual to seek out his own answers but it is not something that should be taught as an explanation in school.

    Quote Originally Posted by chalsdk View Post
    To return to the OP topic - IF evolution is abselute true - Why is right, right - or wrong wrong??
    Again, nobody has claimed that evolution is absolute, Science never is, and the social/humane sciences are even less so than pretty much anything else.
    Only religion ever claims to have an answer on why anything is right or wrong. The problem is that apparently that is not so immutable as what religion defines as right or wrong has changed over the years.

    For example we don't generally execute "a man who sleeps with a man as with a woman" of "a man who lies with a beast"
    Nor do we execute adulterers, or burn people who would sleep with a woman and her mother on a pyre.

    And even most religious Christians or Jews would agree that killing someone for doing any of the above would be wrong.
    Especially going as far as burning anybody on a pyre for any reason.
    Last edited by Elldallan; 03-01-2015 at 22:55.
    Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day, Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

  3. #78
    Forum Fanatic Elldallan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,018
    Quote Originally Posted by chalsdk View Post
    Has it? If so I got a Few things I like to have explained myself? Like why Females exist.(We come from bakterier, and where does the Genders come from?..) It makes no sence, and slows down and limits our race spreed. Also Why do these missing links always turn up to be frauds?
    Because people are greedy and want to cash in on the fame? Science isn't any more foolproof to idiots and nutcases than religion are. "Caedite eos. Novit enim Dominus qui sunt eius."

    Quote Originally Posted by chalsdk View Post
    No they are not the same. Plz come out of your predice and look things up. Intelegent Design AND creation is NO where the same. Intelegent disegn accept some evolution, and Creation does not, and says we where Created humies! Fall from Edan and all that jazz.
    Wrong, creationism is simply somebody who believes in a creation mythos, not neccessarily the specific Abrahmitic one(Christianity, Judaism, Islam) but any give creation mythos. or in more specific words Creationism is the belief that the Universe and Life originate "from specific acts of divine creation."

    Quote Originally Posted by chalsdk View Post
    I dont know. Good point. Adaption comes to mind, but dont know.
    Which is an integral part of the theory of evolution which you so cheerfully reject.

    Quote Originally Posted by chalsdk View Post
    Your point is ULTRA bias - and with a piss poor understand of alot of things, over 40% of american reaches belive in God - And I assume you can agree that American is the current sceince leader in the world.. If not, we got nothing to debate. Also, jews get WAY to many nobels prices in medicine and nature related stuf (like physics) - And they are hardly ALL hardcore belivers in evolution - very religius peaple.
    First of all Jew is both an ethnic group and a religious denomination, so an atheistic Jew would still refer to him/herself as a Jew.

    As to whether US is the world leader in science depends entirely on how you define world leader, be it by investment per capita or just total amount of $? I can also say that I honestly have a lot to say about the way US universities handle research grants from corporations, that can sometimes clash with good empirical science and will very often go buried if the funding corporation didn't get exactly the result they were looking for" Also the way American Universities handle tenure means that there's an unfortunate bias on things that will have real world applications which means that there is little research into things that will further scientific understanding of our world but might not carry a real world application for decades or centuries.

    But the claim you make is that a lot of these people are religious and not just atheists in a religious country, do you have any evidence for this whatsoever?.
    The Statistics I've seen would seem to indicate that roughly 50% of Israel's population defines themselves as secular(non believer), and for the United States that figure is only 20% or so, so 80% of the US population defines itself as religious, not 40%.
    And even if by God you men the Christian god then that's still wrong, ~73% of the US population define themselves as some variety of Christian.
    Now as to what if any correlation this has to the religiosity of said nations scientists is still something you havn't established,though it is a well established statistical fact that Scientists in general in any nation is significantly less religious than the population in general, so even if 99.98% of a population defined themselves as religious 100% of the scientists could be atheists(unlikely because it's more likely that they would have all moved to a more enlightened place)

    So you've as of yet produced absolutely zero evidence that there is a significant correlation between Nobel prices and religiosity.

    Quote Originally Posted by chalsdk View Post
    Go back and Read it. Belive in the wind if you experince the wind. If you dont, you dont belive in it. And dont worship the Idea of an God, but have an relationship with the God-Dude AKA talk to him, and get a replay, just as you go outside and feel the wind!
    Generally the people who talk to the voices in their head are considered mentally unstable and locked up in an institution... as long as you don't call the voice in your head "God", because then you're only locked up if he tells you to do stuff like harming other people, such as oh I don't know "If a man lieth with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. Leviticus 20:13"
    Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day, Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

  4. #79
    Postaholic chalsdk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Greator Denmark
    Posts
    838
    Quote Originally Posted by Elldallan View Post
    There we have three major world religions who have wildly differing views on pretty much everything and yet shares the same God, the Christian god, the Muslim god and the Jewish god are all the same "God", so this supposed "god" comes of as more than a little schizophrenic, and why if this god exists would there be so wildly separate opinions on what the **** he wants out of mankind.
    What you say is here that you think that jesus and Hitler are the same person, just depens on how you look at it. I have read all of it, but your arguments our soo arogant I am not even gona bother trying to reason mr "Ateism Is my religion"

  5. #80
    Forum Fanatic Elldallan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,018
    Quote Originally Posted by chalsdk View Post
    What you say is here that you think that jesus and Hitler are the same person, just depens on how you look at it. I have read all of it, but your arguments our soo arogant I am not even gona bother trying to reason mr "Ateism Is my religion"
    And no, it's not the same as saying that Jesus and Hitler are both the same person.
    Christianity admits it's roots in Judaism and even uses the Torah scrolls for part of the Bible(the old part), so it's the same god... And Islam recognizes Jesus and all the Jewish prophets as prophets, just not the final most important one. So again, same god. Even the religions themselves admit it(well at least Christianity and Islam does), Islam even have specific decrees that Christians & Jews should be treated better than other non-believers because they do share a faith in Allah or God Almighty, they're just havrn't been enlightened yet.
    So it seems that they mostly squabble over who is more right on points of detail. All three share the ten commandments for example. So the God seems to be very much the same one, the difference lies in the interpretation of his wishes and whatnot.

    So you mean that it's arrogant to say that people normally get declared mentally ill when they hear voices talk in their heads? Because you know what... they do.

    And no, I wouldn't say I'm an Atheist, I lean more towards Agnosticism because while I don not believe in the existence of a higher being nor think it's particularly likely for one to exist if it was ever proven I would have to accept that proof.
    Atheism is the flat out rejection of the possibility that there is a god, I just think that the likelihood of the existence of some sort of supreme being is infinitely small, but not non-existent.

    If people choose to be religious then that's their choice and I will respect that, but I do think that that's a choice for an adult to make and therefore I think religion has no space in education outside religion classes.
    But I'm sorry if it offends you but I if somebody thinks that they're having conversations with any sort of voices in their head then I do think that is uncomfortably close to mental unhealth whether that voice be God's(any variety of God or Gods), Donald Duck or George W. Bush they hear in their heads.
    Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day, Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

  6. #81
    Postaholic chalsdk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Greator Denmark
    Posts
    838
    Quote Originally Posted by Elldallan View Post
    And no, it's not the same as saying that Jesus and Hitler are both the same person.
    Christianity admits it's roots in Judaism and even uses the Torah scrolls for part of the Bible(the old part), so it's the same god... And Islam recognizes Jesus and all the Jewish prophets as prophets, just not the final most important one. So again, same god. Even the religions themselves admit it(well at least Christianity and Islam does), Islam even have specific decrees that Christians & Jews should be treated better than other non-believers because they do share a faith in Allah or God Almighty, they're just havrn't been enlightened yet.
    So it seems that they mostly squabble over who is more right on points of detail. All three share the ten commandments for example. So the God seems to be very much the same one, the difference lies in the interpretation of his wishes and whatnot.

    So you mean that it's arrogant to say that people normally get declared mentally ill when they hear voices talk in their heads? Because you know what... they do.

    And no, I wouldn't say I'm an Atheist, I lean more towards Agnosticism because while I don not believe in the existence of a higher being nor think it's particularly likely for one to exist if it was ever proven I would have to accept that proof.
    Atheism is the flat out rejection of the possibility that there is a god, I just think that the likelihood of the existence of some sort of supreme being is infinitely small, but not non-existent.

    If people choose to be religious then that's their choice and I will respect that, but I do think that that's a choice for an adult to make and therefore I think religion has no space in education outside religion classes.
    But I'm sorry if it offends you but I if somebody thinks that they're having conversations with any sort of voices in their head then I do think that is uncomfortably close to mental unhealth whether that voice be God's(any variety of God or Gods), Donald Duck or George W. Bush they hear in their heads.
    Your need to open a book- and use reason. And yes your in essens saying hitler and jesus is the same person. I will not replay to your post in this post - or any later posted.
    Last edited by chalsdk; 05-01-2015 at 01:53.

  7. #82
    Moderator for:
    Utopia Forums
    Palem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    22,030
    Quote Originally Posted by Elldallan View Post
    And no, I wouldn't say I'm an Atheist, I lean more towards Agnosticism because while I don not believe in the existence of a higher being nor think it's particularly likely for one to exist if it was ever proven I would have to accept that proof.
    Atheism is the flat out rejection of the possibility that there is a god, I just think that the likelihood of the existence of some sort of supreme being is infinitely small, but not non-existent.
    Atheism is the belief that god does not exist. You don't believe that god exists, so you're an atheist. You make it sound like atheist would reject a valid proof of god's existence, which really isn't the case for most atheists (you'll have hardheaded, stubborn people in any belief system). There's no shame in believing one way or another ;)

    Agnosticism is the "I honestly have no idea what my opinion is so I'm staying out of it" stance. It's not any sort of stance and I refuse to recognize it as a belief system. You either believe god exists or you don't. Not having thought about it enough doesn't indicate a lack of belief.

  8. #83
    Post Fiend
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    170
    Quote Originally Posted by Palem View Post
    Atheism is the belief that god does not exist. You don't believe that god exists, so you're an atheist. You make it sound like atheist would reject a valid proof of god's existence, which really isn't the case for most atheists (you'll have hardheaded, stubborn people in any belief system). There's no shame in believing one way or another ;)

    Agnosticism is the "I honestly have no idea what my opinion is so I'm staying out of it" stance. It's not any sort of stance and I refuse to recognize it as a belief system. You either believe god exists or you don't. Not having thought about it enough doesn't indicate a lack of belief.
    You beat me to it. Richard Dawkins describes 7 stances one can take with regards to the belief of god. It goes something like:

    1. Strong Theist - Absolutely sure there is a god
    2. Theist - More than likely is a god but could be convinced otherwise with strong evidence
    3. Agnostic Theist - Not really sure but probably is a god
    4. Agnostic - No opinion
    5. Agnostic Atheist - Not really sure but probably isnt a god
    6. Atheist - More than likely is no god but could be convinced otherwise with strong evidence
    7. Strong Atheist - Absolutely sure there is no god.

    Even some of the most outspoken atheists like Richard Dawkins considers themselves number 6. A true atheist will accept the most likely answer from the available evidence, if the stars alligned one night or a lightning bolt hit a rock with the words " I am Real " you would start leaning towards the possibility of a god.

  9. #84
    Forum Fanatic khronosschoty's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    2,506
    Quote Originally Posted by Palem View Post
    Atheism is the belief that god does not exist. You don't believe that god exists, so you're an atheist. You make it sound like atheist would reject a valid proof of god's existence, which really isn't the case for most atheists (you'll have hardheaded, stubborn people in any belief system). There's no shame in believing one way or another ;)

    Agnosticism is the "I honestly have no idea what my opinion is so I'm staying out of it" stance. It's not any sort of stance and I refuse to recognize it as a belief system. You either believe god exists or you don't. Not having thought about it enough doesn't indicate a lack of belief.
    Not true, Atheism is the belief God does not exist, Agnostic is admitting you do not know, or the belief you cannot know.
    #magi

  10. #85
    Moderator for:
    Utopia Forums
    Palem's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    22,030
    knowledge and belief are two different things

  11. #86
    Postaholic chalsdk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Greator Denmark
    Posts
    838
    Quote Originally Posted by Palem View Post
    knowledge and belief are two different things
    Ill argue that you can know got is there - as if you see the effect of it. Bringing back the dead, exosime, personal profesy and so on. Thats also where I go from Religion and to relationship with God. Job has a nice angle to it : I have heard the Rumers about you, but know I have seen you first hand

  12. #87
    Forum Addict
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    1,228
    Quote Originally Posted by Elldallan View Post
    There we have three major world religions who have wildly differing views on pretty much everything and yet shares the same God, the Christian god, the Muslim god and the Jewish god are all the same "God", so this supposed "god" comes of as more than a little schizophrenic, and why if this god exists would there be so wildly separate opinions on what the **** he wants out of mankind.
    Quote Originally Posted by chalsdk View Post
    What you say is here that you think that jesus and Hitler are the same person, just depens on how you look at it. I have read all of it, but your arguments our soo arogant I am not even gona bother trying to reason mr "Ateism Is my religion"
    Wow, how did you manage to inject Hitler into a discussion about god? That's quite a leap even tho it ties back to the OP being about racism..

    @Elldallan: How is it surprising that people from different cultural backgrounds can look at the same thing and come to different conclusions? Are you really confused about that?!

    Quote Originally Posted by Palem
    Agnosticism is the "I honestly have no idea what my opinion is so I'm staying out of it" stance. It's not any sort of stance and I refuse to recognize it as a belief system. You either believe god exists or you don't. Not having thought about it enough doesn't indicate a lack of belief.
    How do you know that an Agnostic never thinks about the question of god? Coming to the conclusion that there isn't enough evidence to proof or disproof the existence of god seems valid enough. I don't know if it qualifies as a "belief system" but it doesn't have to. It's a valid answer to the question, no one can force you to make a choice one way or the other.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

  13. #88
    Postaholic chalsdk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Greator Denmark
    Posts
    838
    Quote Originally Posted by TommyB View Post
    Wow, how did you manage to inject Hitler into a discussion about god? That's quite a leap even tho it ties back to the OP being about racism..

    @Elldallan: How is it surprising that people from different cultural backgrounds can look at the same thing and come to different conclusions? Are you really confused about that?!



    How do you know that an Agnostic never thinks about the question of god? Coming to the conclusion that there isn't enough evidence to proof or disproof the existence of god seems valid enough. I don't know if it qualifies as a "belief system" but it doesn't have to. It's a valid answer to the question, no one can force you to make a choice one way or the other.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
    Well - Look it up. Hitler is LOVED soo much with muslims in the middel east, they total Dig his job with the jews, and they want to finish the job. As a dane I get intro truble for the muhammed drawings, but if I tell I am realy a German(the danish occiped part) they love me, and tell me outright hitler did a great job so I am welcome.
    Note - if anything its the other way around, Germany occiped Danish lands.
    2 Note I got a ****lord of msg on FB from mulims telling me how right hitler was, youtube is full off em, Holocost only started when the Grand mufty (Arafats teacher) did talk to hitler.

    Muhammed said himself that killing jews is right, and when the time is right, even the stones and trees will cry out, There is a jew behind me, come and slay him! For its probber to slay em.

    THAT you dont find in the bible, jesus said, The one that is sinless shoud cast the first stone, but muhammed turned it the other way arround. God & Allah has nothing to do with ether what so ever and to claim so is total and abselute ignorance. There is a reason why Main Kamp is the 2 most sold book in every muslim contry, even thougt its banned in most.

    Tiny note - Muslim = Quran & Muhammed followers - Plenty of culture muslims that is just awesome peaple and want to live in peace.

    @Craigus Im still thinking

  14. #89
    Forum Fanatic Elldallan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    2,018
    Quote Originally Posted by chalsdk View Post
    Your need to open a book- and use reason. And yes your in essens saying hitler and jesus is the same person. I will not replay to your post in this post - or any later posted.
    I have opened a lot of books, even some of the ones you're referring to. The main difference between Judaism and Christianity lies in the belief of whether Jesus was the Messiah prophesied in the Jewish faith.
    The Jews say no, because there wasn't peace on earth and the land of Israel wasn't free.
    The Christians says yes, Jesus was the son of god and the prophesised Messiah. So basically they're arguing about whether Jesus was the son of God or not, not who God was.
    Islam recognizes that Jesus, Moses, Noah etc were all prophets of God(but in the case of Jesus not that he was the son of God), he just wasn't the "final" one because that would be Muhammed. Again, same God, different interpretations of who his messengers were or their importance in the grand scheme of things.

    This is why scholars refers to these religions as Abrahamitic(as in descended from Abraham) They all recognize Abraham in various aspects and his God as the God. Therefore they share the same God, they just can't agree on the details of his messages/messengers. But Yhwh(or Jehovah), Allah etc. are all the name of the same being, the God of Abraham.

    So no, I'm not comparing Jesus to Hitler the claim that I am is absolutely ludicrous.

    Quote Originally Posted by Palem View Post
    Atheism is the belief that god does not exist. You don't believe that god exists, so you're an atheist. You make it sound like atheist would reject a valid proof of god's existence, which really isn't the case for most atheists (you'll have hardheaded, stubborn people in any belief system).
    In math terms I would say that my belief that there exists is a supreme being of some sort approaches 0, but does not tangent it. Hence I think that it is technically separate from atheism by an infinitely small number but still separate. :P

    Quote Originally Posted by Palem View Post
    There's no shame in believing one way or another ;)
    You are absolutely correct :)

    Quote Originally Posted by Palem View Post
    Agnosticism is the "I honestly have no idea what my opinion is so I'm staying out of it" stance. It's not any sort of stance and I refuse to recognize it as a belief system. You either believe god exists or you don't. Not having thought about it enough doesn't indicate a lack of belief.
    As Craigus said it can be illustrated as a scale, i guess my definition of an atheist is what's called a strong atheist on that scale :)
    But if you go by that scale as written then yes then I am without doubt an atheist.

    I however doesn't agree that agnosticism isn't a stance, not choosing is also a choice. And it would be rude to Agnostics to claim they havn't thought about it enough, because they may very well have and came to the conclusion that there is no way to know.
    Last edited by Elldallan; 05-01-2015 at 15:09.
    Build a man a fire and he'll be warm for a day, Set a man on fire and he'll be warm for the rest of his life.

  15. #90
    Postaholic chalsdk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Greator Denmark
    Posts
    838
    Quote Originally Posted by Elldallan View Post
    There we have three major world religions who have wildly differing views on pretty much everything and yet shares the same God, the Christian god, the Muslim god and the Jewish god are all the same "God",...

    Jesus = God
    Muhammed did the same thing as hitler did - with he aproval of Allah -As it gives salvation points - or in other ways, its NEEDED to be SURE of your salvation, else its just odds-> just newer dude on the world sceine.

    End of debate - Stop lying - Ignorance is not an excuse when you claim to know so much about this topic
    Last edited by chalsdk; 05-01-2015 at 15:11.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •