First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
Atheist against all Gods? Not really (explained.)
10513 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / In your room stea...
Offline
Posted 4/19/09 , edited 4/19/09

Gaia93 wrote:


Allhailodin wrote:


Gaia93 wrote:

1) Aggressive atheist: attacks other religions and is often intolerant to the follower of other religions. Often brings up the insensitive fact that faith is the "complete acceptance of a God without proof," somewhat equatable to ignorance, which, among other things, is the "complete acceptance of an idea without proof."

Yep, that's him. No offense.


Those are the retarded atheists, don't take them seriously, there no different from a christain extremest.


Yeah, but I think christain extremest are even worst.
Have you ever been to a holy sanctified church? (Probably not).
They'll rip you apart.


Heh, like I said their all idiots, no point in taking a moron seriously, and besides every religion is bound to have extremists, christanity, islam and so on. Its only natural that atheism would have em too right ?
578 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / US
Offline
Posted 4/19/09

jewishplayer wrote:

It is better that way but it does not make much of a difference if you consider his spelling and language. At least he is capable of using other words to convey his meanings even though it is somewhat a modified version of the original diction.

Maybe we are too harsh on him because we use different styles of writing than he does. He has his own dialect, which is nice, but what I find singular is his kindness to actually include the definitions of the words he uses in the form of context cues instead of direct meanings, unconsciously or otherwise.


I do agree with you about people seeming purposefully antagonistic, but I also agree with others in that his statements are in need of correction.

Context clues really refer to implied meanings rather than absolute statements such as this. That Christians believe in one God and none others is not as stated, "atheist against other gods". Rather, the closest term to describe this manner of belief this would be monotheism. To be an atheist does not simply imply the lack of belief of one or more "higher power", but is an absolution of non-belief in any such being. That is to say... zero. None. Nada. Nil. Thus for the word to be used with the inclusion of any such belief makes it incorrect. I do see the implications that he was trying to make, but it is wrong all the same. "Atheism" as a term lacks the possibility of the context utilized here.

I haven't read every post in this thread, lengthy as some are, but the volcano part struck an interest. As far as that is concerned, if someone told me that a volcano was their god. Well, I believe in the volcano, but I do not believe that the volcano is a conscious existence of higher power, which is what makes it a "god". Meaning, I believe in the existence of said landmark, but not their god. Belief is not tied to tangible concepts, which is what makes it "belief". At least, in this context. Rather, I personally prefer the term "faith", but that is an entirely different discussion altogether.
1696 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Brisbane, Australia
Offline
Posted 4/20/09
In science, multiple theorys on one subject will be more alike to each other as they are worked on.
The more scientist work on a theory, the closer it will get to the truth.

There is no way in the WHOLE UNIVERSE that the longer people believe in thier seperate religions.
That all the religions will start to become more and more the same.
Unlike theorys on a subject, worked on through scientific methods. The theorys become more and more the same, until the truth is revealed.





559 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / Feminism is made...
Offline
Posted 4/20/09



Context clues really refer to implied meanings rather than absolute statements such as this.


Yeah, but that is exactly the reason why I used "cues" to hopefully separate it from "context clues."


Thus for the word to be used with the inclusion of any such belief makes it incorrect. I do see the implications that he was trying to make, but it is wrong all the same. "Atheism" as a term lacks the possibility of the context utilized here.


Correct, unless his whole paragraph is put into consideration along with his confession asserting that English is his "third" language. He did "successfully defined his terms quite possibly unintentionally but he still made sense. So I do think we are too much of grammar/syntax Nazis despite the fact that we do not even have a degree of expertise when it comes down to it. Or we are just too arrogant to think we are better; or we are bored that we have to criticize him for his different language; or we have low self-esteem that we notice every small mistakes he does; or we are just hypocrites; or we are narcissists.

As for the volcano god: it was probably his only clear misunderstanding of the distinction between believing and not believing as he implied it is not a god but contradictorily argues that it is because it simply exists. But he was still able to broadcast his message so it does not matter much.

Anyway, I really do not see the point of actually quoting you but I guess I have this as free time so pardon me.
18663 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 4/21/09 , edited 4/21/09

Skales wrote:


jewishplayer wrote:

It is better that way but it does not make much of a difference if you consider his spelling and language. At least he is capable of using other words to convey his meanings even though it is somewhat a modified version of the original diction.

Maybe we are too harsh on him because we use different styles of writing than he does. He has his own dialect, which is nice, but what I find singular is his kindness to actually include the definitions of the words he uses in the form of context cues instead of direct meanings, unconsciously or otherwise.


I do agree with you about people seeming purposefully antagonistic, but I also agree with others in that his statements are in need of correction.

Context clues really refer to implied meanings rather than absolute statements such as this. That Christians believe in one God and none others is not as stated, "atheist against other gods". Rather, the closest term to describe this manner of belief this would be monotheism. To be an atheist does not simply imply the lack of belief of one or more "higher power", but is an absolution of non-belief in any such being. That is to say... zero. None. Nada. Nil. Thus for the word to be used with the inclusion of any such belief makes it incorrect. I do see the implications that he was trying to make, but it is wrong all the same. "Atheism" as a term lacks the possibility of the context utilized here.

I haven't read every post in this thread, lengthy as some are, but the volcano part struck an interest. As far as that is concerned, if someone told me that a volcano was their god. Well, I believe in the volcano, but I do not believe that the volcano is a conscious existence of higher power, which is what makes it a "god". Meaning, I believe in the existence of said landmark, but not their god. Belief is not tied to tangible concepts, which is what makes it "belief". At least, in this context. Rather, I personally prefer the term "faith", but that is an entirely different discussion altogether. :P


'It matters your definition of a god? For some people might think a god is something that creates things like planets and gives life. Does not need to be a living thing to be a creator. Such as a sun Worshiper. (as we all know suns do give us what we need to live, they also create planets. "

So in my mind I don't think of God is a living thing. More just something that creates life and other things.

since wen did a god need a mind? even mindless things can form life. Or create worlds, Or even set the worlds to moshen,
If that is what gods do? than why does it need a mind?

578 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / US
Offline
Posted 4/21/09



'It matters your definition of a god? For some people might think a god is something that creates things like planets and gives life. Does not need to be a living thing to be a creator. Such as a sun Worshiper. (as we all know suns do give us what we need to live, they also create planets. "

So in my mind I don't think of God is a living thing. More just something that creates life and other things.

since wen did a god need a mind? even mindless things can form life. Or create worlds, Or even set the worlds to moshen,
If that is what gods do? than why does it need a mind?



I was going to address this when jewishplayer quoted my post but I didn't really feel like it and forgot about it. I understand what you're saying. Simply saying that atheism is the lack of belief in god, it seems possible to infer that one believes in your god, utilizing an alternate diction of mere idolatry. So, playing upon the word "god", I relent that the you, and first poster (if you aren't the same, I don't feel like checking) have some manner of a point.

:)

However, to use the word "atheism" is still invalid, as idolatry is not the intended definition of "god" when referring to an atheist's lack of belief.
18663 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 4/21/09 , edited 4/21/09

Skales wrote:




'It matters your definition of a god? For some people might think a god is something that creates things like planets and gives life. Does not need to be a living thing to be a creator. Such as a sun Worshiper. (as we all know suns do give us what we need to live, they also create planets. "



So in my mind I don't think of God is a living thing. More just something that creates life and other things.

since wen did a god need a mind? even mindless things can form life. Or create worlds, Or even set the worlds to moshen,
If that is what gods do? than why does it need a mind?



I was going to address this when jewishplayer quoted my post but I didn't really feel like it and forgot about it. I understand what you're saying. Simply saying that atheism is the lack of belief in god, it seems possible to infer that one believes in your god, utilizing an alternate diction of mere idolatry. So, playing upon the word "god", I relent that the you, and first poster (if you aren't the same, I don't feel like checking) have some manner of a point.

:)

However, to use the word "atheism" is still invalid, as idolatry is not the intended definition of "god" when referring to an atheist's lack of belief.


playing of the word Atheist as lack of belief in a higher power or higher powers, and in that case if one was to take a god is a creator with out the need of being a higher power... Than most sneakly say On can be an atheist and still believe in a god.... Just not a Higher power. SO then one can worship the son as a god yet know its not a thinking thing..

Word games.
112 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / F / somewhere in the...
Offline
Posted 4/21/09 , edited 4/21/09

Darkphoenix3450 wrote:

[

playing of the word Atheist as lack of belief in a higher power or higher powers, and in that case if one was to take a god is a creator with out the need of being a higher power... Than most sneakly say On can be an atheist and still believe in a god.... Just not a Higher power. SO then one can worship the son as a god yet know its not a thinking thing..

Word games.


From Oxford Dictionary:

worship

• noun 1 the feeling or expression of reverence and adoration for a deity. 2 religious rites and ceremonies. 3 great admiration or devotion. 4 (His/Your Worship) chiefly Brit. a title of respect for a magistrate or mayor.

• verb (worshipped, worshipping; US also worshiped, worshiping) 1 show reverence and adoration for (a deity). 2 feel great admiration or devotion for.

You're not going to show admiration and devotion for an hydrogen and helium sphere; are you? Theoretically you "could" but that would be a little overkill. People who worship Volcano gods direct their prayer to the deity they believe to exist within the volcano. You can worship the volcano as into show great admiration and devote yourself to it, however this side of "worship" has nothing to do with faith and belief. In that sense of the words I pretty much worship dogs and flowers since I admire them greatly and devote part of my life to make them healthy and happy.

Now here is the catch. God is inherently a higher power; it is part of what all gods are. God is not a physical object in and on itself. If god was, for example, an apple; in that particular case you could indeed worship the apple (in the sense that you can feel great admiration and devotion for the apple) without believing in the deity of an apple. Now that is a really nice thing and all that; however this cannot be applied because I've stated Gods are inherently "higher powers" it is something you cannot remove fro the essence of what a god is.

You can twist words to say whatever you want, however this words are just a fallacy and hold no real value.
10513 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / In your room stea...
Offline
Posted 4/21/09

Nedesukawaii wrote:


Darkphoenix3450 wrote:

[

playing of the word Atheist as lack of belief in a higher power or higher powers, and in that case if one was to take a god is a creator with out the need of being a higher power... Than most sneakly say On can be an atheist and still believe in a god.... Just not a Higher power. SO then one can worship the son as a god yet know its not a thinking thing..

Word games.


From Oxford Dictionary:

worship

• noun 1 the feeling or expression of reverence and adoration for a deity. 2 religious rites and ceremonies. 3 great admiration or devotion. 4 (His/Your Worship) chiefly Brit. a title of respect for a magistrate or mayor.

• verb (worshipped, worshipping; US also worshiped, worshiping) 1 show reverence and adoration for (a deity). 2 feel great admiration or devotion for.

You're not going to show admiration and devotion for an hydrogen and helium sphere; are you? Theoretically you "could" but that would be a little overkill. People who worship Volcano gods direct their prayer to the deity they believe to exist within the volcano. You can worship the volcano as into show great admiration and devote yourself to it, however this side of "worship" has nothing to do with faith and belief. In that sense of the words I pretty much worship dogs and flowers since I admire them greatly and devote part of my life to make them healthy and happy.

Now here is the catch. God is inherently a higher power; it is part of what all gods are. God is not a physical object in and on itself. If god was, for example, an apple; in that particular case you could indeed worship the apple (in the sense that you can feel great admiration and devotion for the apple) without believing in the deity of an apple. Now that is a really nice thing and all that; however this cannot be applied because I've stated Gods are inherently "higher powers" it is something you cannot remove fro the essence of what a god is.

You can twist words to say whatever you want, however this words are just a fallacy and hold no real value.


But if a "higer power" is not a physical thing, then what is it ? just an all powerful will that simply exists throughout the universe ? I don't really see how something can exist if it doesn't have a physical form, even an atom has a physical form even all the way down to leptons and quarks, they to have physical forms, so how can a "higher power" actually exist if it doesn't have a physical form ? As I see it that's basically saying it exists but at the same time it doesn't exist ?
1244 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/21/09
funny, from your arguement darkphoenix I'd have pegged you as an agnostic not an atheist
18663 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 4/22/09

blaaps wrote:

funny, from your arguement darkphoenix I'd have pegged you as an agnostic not an atheist


No becouse the Idea of a living thinking god, that has no evidence for it or than stories bronze age man made up, seems Ilogical and down right imposible. There be more chance of Humans being offspring of early manapes and Aliens than there being a living thinkning God that is exsistent yet not exsistent in the same time. really I was pointing out I have more respect for someone who worships something seeable (that does in a way create such as the magma that was leaking from earths crust) over something that is non-exsistent in any form of reality.
190 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / M
Offline
Posted 4/23/09
Atheist are people who don't believe in God.

And, they don't bother criticize others' religion.
67883 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M / Norway
Offline
Posted 4/23/09
Most atheist are anti-christs rather than being non-believers.
18663 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
36 / M / Small Wooded town...
Offline
Posted 4/23/09

-Khiel- wrote:

Atheist are people who don't believe in God.

And, they don't bother criticize others' religion.


Some Atheist do criticize religions. Such as a few of the forfathers who created America.
"They usually have good reseans bahind there criticizing of the religions.
Posted 4/23/09
So I guess you gals have a lot of unanswered questions that make you sleepless during the night?
Is it always the "why" that bothers you gals?

First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.