Page 25 of 54 FirstFirst ... 1521222324252627282935 ... LastLast
Results 241 to 250 of 540

Thread: Evolutionism vs creationism

  1. #241
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Esslingen, Germany
    Posts
    3,973

    Default

    > 3. In Everyday Life, You're Not That Different.
    Not everyone, no, but some religious folks are very much unlike me. I think I mentioned it somewhere in an earlier post, some man recently spammed me and other people in front of a shopping center. I'd never do that. So thats an extreme difference right there.
    > 8. Focusing on Negative Examples Makes You Stupid

    > 4. There Are Good People on Both Sides
    What an irrelevant point. Its about right and wrong, not good and bad.
    You can't find out who is "right" and who is "wrong" - so this aspect is about the most irrelevant ever when it comes to the very relevant issue of the clash between atheism vs. christianity and why it doesn't need to be quite as full of "I'm right, you're an idiot" as it often ends up. Though I guess in the end it's up to anyone whether they're going to try and be a know-it-all douchebag. I know I'm one a lot of the time.

    Focusing on positive examples will generall not help your cause either.
    Um. Yes, I guess? What does that have to do with anything? What is this "cause" you speak of?

    > 9. Both Sides Have Brought Good to the Table
    I'd say atheists have likely brought less bad things to the table. Think crusades.
    ... You did read the article, right?
    ADOM Guides - whatever you wanted to know about playing a certain class, but have been afraid to ask!

    Check out my youtube channel to see my ADOM videos, including a completed playthrough of the game. I try to give instructions, so if you want to see some place you haven't been before and get some hints on how to deal with it, this might help! There's also some other games featured there that you might find interesting.

  2. #242
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Epythic View Post
    I mean, god either exists or he doesn't, one way or another, one of us (them) is wrong.
    Or both. Maybe some kind of God does exist, but he is totally different than anyone has imagined.

    More specifically, remember that about 100 years ago, scientists thought that they basically understood everything and only needed to figure out some more details to complete the picture. In the decades that followed, two entirely new fields were discovered (relativity and quantum mechanics). To this date, we still don't have a theory of physics that is both complete and consistent.

    "There is more between heaven and earth, horatio, than is dreamt of in your philosophy." In the light of the above, I see this as quite a reasonable position.

    Quote Originally Posted by Silfir View Post
    Though I guess in the end it's up to anyone whether they're going to try and be a know-it-all douchebag.
    Last edited by grobblewobble; 08-16-2010 at 12:02 AM. Reason: insert some more blah blah
    You steal a scroll labelled HITME. The orc hits you.

  3. #243
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    5,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Silfir View Post
    I disagree with points:

    "1. You Can Do Terrible Things in the Name of Either One"

    There has never been anyone doing terrible things in the name of atheism. There have been atheists who have done terrible things, but that's not the same thing. Hitler was a vegetarian, but we don't say he committed genocide in the name of vegetarianism, nor do we say vegetarianism is evil simply because he was one. There have been religious folk of various stripes who have done terrible things in the name of religion.

    "3. In Everyday Life, You're Not That Different"

    To me, this is a problem for religious folk. They ought to be. The author also doesn't seem to understand that morality can and did evolve.

    "8. Focusing on Negative Examples Makes You Stupid"

    Disagree. The negatives examples are the important ones. The people that sit around minding their own business aren't the ones who aren't important in the grand scheme of things. Radicals are the ones that cause problems because they're the ones who might decide that blowing up a building in the name of their god is a good idea.

    "9. Both Sides Have Brought Good to the Table"

    Difficult to argue without the benefit of hindsight. His argument that religion is necessary for morality is false, however. There are philosophies and legal systems that work just fine without the need for reference to a creator.

    Didn't see #10...
    Hoping to win with every class, doomed. Archer, Barbarian, Bard, Beastfighter, Druid, Elementalist, Farmer, Fighter, Monk, and ULE Priest down.

  4. #244
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    117

    Default

    In the name of stamping out Religion the Communists in Russian and China under Mao and others systematically murdered millions dwarfing the totals of virtually every religion in the world combined including Islam.

    No atheist charities exist save for the promulgation of atheism.

    Atheists in my experience do every bit as much proselytizing if not more than most Christians.
    Last edited by garyd; 08-16-2010 at 12:02 AM.

  5. #245
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    2,828

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JellySlayer View Post
    "1. You Can Do Terrible Things in the Name of Either One"

    There has never been anyone doing terrible things in the name of atheism. There have been atheists who have done terrible things, but that's not the same thing. Hitler was a vegetarian, but we don't say he committed genocide in the name of vegetarianism, nor do we say vegetarianism is evil simply because he was one. There have been religious folk of various stripes who have done terrible things in the name of religion.
    You can reverse that argument and say that no one has done a lot of good in the name of atheism, either. There have been great atheists doing wonderful things, but they didn't say they did it because they were atheist.

    How about this: "1. Both atheists and religious folk can do terrible things."
    You steal a scroll labelled HITME. The orc hits you.

  6. #246
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,099

    Default

    "8. Focusing on Negative Examples Makes You Stupid"

    Disagree. The negatives examples are the important ones. The people that sit around minding their own business aren't the ones who aren't important in the grand scheme of things. Radicals are the ones that cause problems because they're the ones who might decide that blowing up a building in the name of their god is a good idea.
    The negative examples are just as important as the positive examples and even the inbetween examples. By assigning importance to one group does make you stupid. It narrows perspective.

    Radicals can be both the negatives or the positives. The more common ones are all the ones in the middle. One might assume only the radicals are the important ones because they commit the most spectacular acts, but quantity beats quality any day of the week. Luckily for these radicals, the common members all seem to follow their instructions. So while all the attention is on the radicals, you have to remember that it is the efforts of the many that bring around results.
    I said it before, and I'll say it again. If I knew scripture like you, I'd prolly be an athiest too.. -gut

     /l、
    (゚、 。 7  
     l、 ~ヽ   
     じしf_, )ノ

  7. #247
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Esslingen, Germany
    Posts
    3,973

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JellySlayer
    Disagree. The negatives examples are the important ones. The people that sit around minding their own business aren't the ones who aren't important in the grand scheme of things. Radicals are the ones that cause problems because they're the ones who might decide that blowing up a building in the name of their god is a good idea.
    Focusing on negative examples makes you stupid. The emphasis, as I understand, is on the "focus". I must have missed the suicide bombing assaults in the name of Christ in recent history.

    You should realize that Christianity encompasses a vast spectrum of positions, opinions and convictions. The many people you don't hear about because they don't blow things up are currently sitting in congress, populate universities and laboratories in search of scientific progress (contrary to what some people might think, it's perfectly possible to be both religious and a scientist - if you think otherwise, you don't understand what either is about). Christianity is part of what they are. They choose not to make a big deal out of it. You might just as well denounce the entire ADOM player base as a legion of opiniated sanctimonious nitwits with the playing skills of a roasted baboon, just by the example I present on a regular basis.

    (Btw: "Celebrating the death of somebody you disagreed with pretty much makes you a dick." is the 10th thing, as far as I understand.)
    Last edited by Silfir; 08-16-2010 at 01:38 AM.
    ADOM Guides - whatever you wanted to know about playing a certain class, but have been afraid to ask!

    Check out my youtube channel to see my ADOM videos, including a completed playthrough of the game. I try to give instructions, so if you want to see some place you haven't been before and get some hints on how to deal with it, this might help! There's also some other games featured there that you might find interesting.

  8. #248
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    5,067

    Default

    > There has never been anyone doing terrible things in the name of atheism.

    I suppose we read some different history books.

    > was a vegetarian, but we don't say he committed genocide in the name of vegetarianism

    would if he rounded up meat eaters.

    >>"3. In Everyday Life, You're Not That Different"

    > To me, this is a problem for religious folk. They ought to be

    Presence of belief would make one a better driver, worker, sleeper? I disagree.

    > morality can and did evolve.

    Yes, I used to see it displayed on the news daily.

    > people that sit around minding their own business aren't the ones who aren't [are?]
    > important in the grand scheme of things. Radicals are the ones that cause problems

    Disagree again, and think maybe you watch too much tv. How many americans
    died in 9/11 attacks? 3000? 5000? By contrast, here's some data about
    traffic deaths from the same year: http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/Main/index.aspx
    For those too lazy to click, it was > 40K. Not one american I've ever met
    can tell me how many of us died last year in transit, yet they are
    happy to tolerate war, record debt, crap economy, increased fed spying,
    international resentment, etc... because of 9/11. I do believe it is these
    'unimportant' people, the ones who 'mind their own business' that do hold
    the record for humanoid slaying. Just because tv doesn't drill traffic
    death data on 24 hour cycles doesn't mean it's not 10x more deadly than
    terrorism. Don't even get me started on tobbaco.

    > His argument that religion is necessary for morality is false

    as I said before, if I didn't fear god, I'd slay you all

    > it's perfectly possible to be both religious and a scientist

    newton
    "Whip me!" pleads the adom player. The rng replies... "No."

  9. #249
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    5,739

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by garyd
    In the name of stamping out Religion the Communists in Russian and China under Mao and others systematically murdered millions dwarfing the totals of virtually every religion in the world combined including Islam.
    Mao and Stalin were communists. That they were atheists is largely coincidental--their interest wasn't in stamping out religion per se, it was in stamping out ideologies that were incompatable with communism, of which some religions happen to be.

    Hilter was a devout Roman Catholic.

    That said, would you seriously doubt that had that the opportunity, resources, and a modern military, that Islamic nations wouldn't be just as brutal? How about Joshua in the Bible? Or the Crusaders?

    Quote Originally Posted by garyd
    No atheist charities exist save for the promulgation of atheism.
    Atheism isn't a political movement. Atheists don't typically get together to discuss their hatred of God and to spread their ideological beliefs. There are many charities that are not religiously affliated, such as the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, that an atheist might choose to believe in, depending on what ideology they subscribe. There are, for example, a number of humanist charities as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by garyd
    Atheists in my experience do every bit as much proselytizing if not more than most Christians.
    How do you proselytize a lack of belief in something?

    Quote Originally Posted by grobblewobble
    You can reverse that argument and say that no one has done a lot of good in the name of atheism, either. There have been great atheists doing wonderful things, but they didn't say they did it because they were atheist.
    I would agree with this. Nobody does anything in the "name of atheism". Atheism isn't really a philosophy per se.

    Quote Originally Posted by fazisi
    The negative examples are just as important as the positive examples and even the inbetween examples. By assigning importance to one group does make you stupid. It narrows perspective.
    It is much easier to be spectacularly evil than to be spectacularly good, and the influence of a spectacular evil is much greater than that of a spectacular good.

    Quote Originally Posted by Silfir
    Focusing on negative examples makes you stupid. The emphasis, as I understand, is on the "focus". I must have missed the suicide bombing assaults in the name of Christ in recent history.
    Christians don't normally do suicide bombings. They have bombed abortion clinics as one example. The Christian Right in the United States has also been actively working to destabilize the Middle East. The fact that there are people sitting in the American Congress who believe that there will be a world-ending global war within the next decade or two is a pretty frightening prospect.

    Quote Originally Posted by gut
    Disagree again, and think maybe you watch too much tv. How many americans
    died in 9/11 attacks? 3000? 5000?
    I don't watch TV at all, actually, and I don't even live in the United States.

    How many people have died in Afghanistan so far? 100,000? 500,000? I don't think it's unreasonable to place those deaths, at least in part, at the hands of radical Islamists. I don't think it's unreasonable to place the deaths of at least as many Iraqis, at least in part, at the feet of Christian fundamentalists in the United States. I also don't think it's unreasonable to believe that if the Islamists had access to the military forces available to the United States, that they would not be as restrained in their use of them as the West has been. I don't think it's unreasonable to say that thousands of people have been senselessly murdered in religious courts in Saudi Arabia because of their irrational beliefs in Islam. Radical cause problems because they believe that the only thing that matters is what happens in the next life, and are prepared to sacrifice anyone or anything in this life to attain their rewards in heaven. This type of belief system is extraordinarily malevolent.
    Hoping to win with every class, doomed. Archer, Barbarian, Bard, Beastfighter, Druid, Elementalist, Farmer, Fighter, Monk, and ULE Priest down.

  10. #250
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    5,067

    Default

    > Mao and Stalin were communists. That they were atheists is largely coincidental

    I somehow doubt that was a condolence to the religious people they murdered.

    > --their interest wasn't in stamping out religion per se,

    I seem to recall the phrase 'religion is poison', but again, different books.

    > Hilter was a devout Roman Catholic.

    I don't know much of catholocism, but I doubt many catholics would repeat
    the above statement.

    > doubt that had that [they?] the opportunity, resources, and a modern military,
    > that Islamic nations wouldn't be just as brutal?

    If memory serves, iran has never launched a pre-emptive strike against any nation.

    > Christian Right in the United States has also been actively working to
    > destabilize the Middle East.

    Yes, especially the food donating. Our hope is that they will fight over it.

    > believe that there will be a world-ending global war within the next decade

    congress had them in the 50's too, more actually. we somehow managed

    The point of that section of the article was to prove that bad deeds
    have been perpetrated by believers and non. You agree that the believer's
    bad deeds are valid, yet claim the bad deeds of non-believers aren't
    valid, as they didn't previously declare that they were acting in the
    name of non-believing. Then you state this:

    > How do you proselytize a lack of belief in something?

    mass murdering believers seems an effective option.

    > I don't watch TV at all, actually, and I don't even live in the United States.

    Yay! (about no tv, not geography)

    > I don't think it's unreasonable to place those deaths, at least in part,
    > at the hands of radical Islamists.

    There is plenty of blame to be distributed. I place more blame for the afghani
    deaths upon vengence seekers. I remember no cries for 'justice' coming from
    any religious organizations. Quite the contrary from secular sources.

    > unreasonable to place the deaths of at least as many Iraqis, at least
    > in part, at the feet of Christian fundamentalists

    Hogwash. The push for Iraq war was from uncle sam, not churches. Do not
    equate the fed with religion, regardless of what they spout.

    > if the Islamists had access to the military forces available to the United
    > States, that they would not be as restrained in their use

    Debatable. Iran will soon have nuke capability. This scares US politicians to
    no end, yet I sleep easy.

    > they believe that the only thing that matters is what happens in the next
    > life, and are prepared to sacrifice anyone

    You quote an extreme. The counter would be an athiest that says it's OK to
    eat humans, as they're just animals... but you would call that invalid, as
    he didn't first proclaim he was eating in the name of atheism.
    Last edited by gut; 08-16-2010 at 06:55 AM.
    "Whip me!" pleads the adom player. The rng replies... "No."

Posting Permissions

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