11 Things the Bible Bans, But You Do Anyway

[Zageron]

Originally Posted by Reincarnate

I have no problem calling out religious people on the retardation of their beliefs. Yeah, you're free to have whatever beliefs you want. But that doesn't mean I have to respect them or pretend like they hold any validity or intellectual merit. I consider it a good thing to be blunt about just how insane religion is. Pretending like it's anything more than that is not progress.

I have to agree with this completely.

[~kitty~]

Originally Posted by Reincarnate

I have no problem calling out religious people on the retardation of their beliefs. Yeah, you're free to have whatever beliefs you want. But that doesn't mean I have to respect them or pretend like they hold any validity or intellectual merit. I consider it a good thing to be blunt about just how insane religion is. Pretending like it's anything more than that is not progress.

Do you think you know there isn't a God? Or do you not care and wont say one or the other, but generally lean towards believing in cause and effect (to the extent of which the time-space continuum exists)? Did I word that correctly? lol

[Reincarnate]

Originally Posted by ~kitty~

Do you think you know there isn't a God? Or do you not care and wont say one or the other, but generally lean towards believing in cause and effect (to the extent of which the time-space continuum exists)? Did I word that correctly? lol

Personally I am an agnostic atheist -- which means "I don't think you can know for sure that there isn't a God, but I don't believe that there is one."

It's always bad science to say something is impossible. You can't ever disprove God, much like you can't logically disprove something that could exist outside the scope of your influence.

The problem is that it doesn't really do us much good to wonder if such things exist. It's a lot like Carl Sagan's Dragon -- a dragon that leaves behind no trail or evidence of its influence and isn't detectable by sight, smell, taste, touch, or sound. There's no difference between such a dragon and a dragon that doesn't exist in the first place. It calls into question what it means for something to "exist."

And so when there's no evidence for something's existence, there's no reason to assume one possibility over another. God could exist. The tooth fairy could exist. Peanut butter demons could exist. And so on and so forth. But what good does it do to pick one and hold it as true over all others? If truth is what you seek, then you can't find it in religion, since there's no way to acquire justified true belief when there's no evidence for the justification. So you have to remain agnostic about those possibilities until something comes forth.

However, I am atheist as well because I say that even though God can't be disproved, I think it's extremely improbable that he does exist.

For one, it's hard to define God. Many like to think of God as something supernatural and sentient -- something with a mind that can process logic and decisions but perhaps on greater capacities. The less you anthropomorphize God, the more you have to call into question "Why call it God? Why not just call it another aspect of the universe/existence?" For instance, if String Theory turns out true, why not call the superstrings "God"? If you do want to anthropomorphize God, then ask yourself why. This question becomes even more obviously-silly when you consider how and why our minds evolved the way they did in the first place. “If triangles had a God, it would have three sides" is a good quote to summarize that problem.

Past that, there's just so much evidence that our universe is exactly consistent with a universe that didn't need a God to jumpstart it or control anything. God is an unneeded variable just like you don't need pixies to explain why ice cream melts. Yeah, it's possible that pixies are influencing things, but we have perfectly good science to explain the phenomena instead.

But understanding why God isn't needed is a lot harder to intuit. It really takes a decent grasp of cosmology, physics, chemistry, biology, evolution, mathematics, statistics, philosophy, psychology, logic, quantum mechanics, and so on. And handling all of that stuff is a tall order that even the best minds have trouble grasping firmly.

As for cause and effect, right now quantum mechanics kicks causality down a few notches because it incorporates randomness at a fundamental level. It's a bit of a simplification to put it that way, but the short story is that causality is suspect. There are particles that pop in and out of existence without any observable cause whatsoever. We can logically rule out locality and see that on some level, randomness governs individual particles (even though the wave function may be arguably deterministic in its setup).

"The most I learn about the universe, the less convinced I am that there's any sort of benevolent force that has anything to do with it, at all."
— Neil deGrasse Tyson

[00Razor00]

Derailed religion thread #98238721

[Reincarnate]

it happens. but it's no secret that the Bible is full of stuff that even the most extreme of Christians will admit they don't follow or take literally.

[~kitty~]

Personally, I would like to believe there is a God. Some benefits may come out of it, but believing in an organized Religion comes with lots of logical flaws, such as the fact that I was taught that God loves all things, God knows everything, and God can do anything. According to the Bible, if this all was true, God doesn't exist. I'm pretty sure it states that if God isn't all of those things, he doesn't exist. That, or I heard it from somewhere else. However, if I say it benefits me to not believe in a God (non-traditional), then I would be a bit more stressful. However, this does bring up the "you don't really believe in God, you're just psychologically reacting to the environment by deluding that such a thing exists." I've thought about it, and I struggled over what to believe because I prefer to believe in something and believing in no theism makes the point of life less valuable, thus less enjoyable, and I want to enjoy my life. This really seems like I'm just trying to be deliberately delusional, or maybe I'm right.

A problem I've encountered numerous times, however, is how people die sometimes. If God exists and there's a soul, what about the people with mental disorders or what about all these organ functions that actually make us live? If we had souls and God existed, why do we die so easily? It just becomes a complicated mess. Anyway, I just think, from a point of view of actually being inside the Religious circle, that people are "retarded" about religion because rejecting these ideologies destroys their purpose of life, and they want to stick to it no matter what. Probably means nothing can change them. I don't know, I'm rambling now.

[MrGiggles]

fuuuuuuuck i'm starting to hate these threads

I mean, they're good, but they were better the first forty times around
there's no tread on these tires

[eastsideman09]

Originally Posted by ~kitty~

I've thought about it, and I struggled over what to believe because I prefer to believe in something and believing in no theism makes the point of life less valuable, thus less enjoyable, and I want to enjoy my life. This really seems like I'm just trying to be deliberately delusional, or maybe I'm right.

Elaborate, why would a lack of theism make said point less valuable? Is there even really a point to life? Why would we need one in the first place? Why even worry about it anyway?

[~kitty~]

Originally Posted by eastsideman09

Elaborate, why would a lack of theism make said point less valuable? Is there even really a point to life? Why would we need one in the first place? Why even worry about it anyway?

You were probably raised differently than I was. Just living isn't really enough for me. I, for some reason, need to have some further purpose because my life generally sucks. If that sounds cheesy or stupid, then whatever? I'm just saying what I think.

[Reincarnate]

Originally Posted by ~kitty~

A problem I've encountered numerous times, however, is how people die sometimes. If God exists and there's a soul, what about the people with mental disorders or what about all these organ functions that actually make us live? If we had souls and God existed, why do we die so easily? It just becomes a complicated mess. Anyway, I just think, from a point of view of actually being inside the Religious circle, that people are "retarded" about religion because rejecting these ideologies destroys their purpose of life, and they want to stick to it no matter what. Probably means nothing can change them. I don't know, I'm rambling now.

The answer is again "Because we don't need God to explain how the body works." We can understand everything about our form and function through our physical makeup. Everything you are is your body -- and it would make more sense to think of your brain as your "soul," if anything. Everything that comprises you as a person resides in your brain.

As for the latter point, all I have to say is that "meaning" is a human construct. "Purpose" is entirely human-defined. If Earth had no life, what would the "purpose" of the universe be with all those planets and galaxies and stars aimlessly wandering about? You don't need a religion to have purpose. As an atheist, I make my own purpose/meaning and live life the way I want to live it.

[~kitty~]

Originally Posted by Reincarnate

The answer is again "Because we don't need God to explain how the body works." We can understand everything about our form and function through our physical makeup. Everything you are is your body -- and it would make more sense to think of your brain as your "soul," if anything. Everything that comprises you as a person resides in your brain.

As for the latter point, all I have to say is that "meaning" is a human construct. "Purpose" is entirely human-defined. If Earth had no life, what would the "purpose" of the universe be with all those planets and galaxies and stars aimlessly wandering about? You don't need a religion to have purpose. As an atheist, I make my own purpose/meaning and live life the way I want to live it.

Well, that's not exactly what I meant (referring to the first part). However, I know exactly what you mean and I thought this as well, but I keep on getting insisted that they are separate. I probably should have made it clear that these aren't things I think now?

Latter point for you as well, I meant I didn't want to just have it where I "lived life the way I want to live it." This may seem weird, but I kind of don't want others to live life they want to live it either. It feels wrong to just do that and I know you'll have a response to this, but your response seems kind of theoretical. When you say Religion serving as a purpose, I don't mean to put myself into organizational Religion to have a purpose. It really is kind of pointless to have traditions forced down my throat just because it's what an "ideal God" wants me to. I don't know if I can adequately explain what I'm trying to say. Maybe you can read into my words or something?

Maybe not, I've lived a very awkward life, and maybe I'm just inexperienced because I've been shut off from the world all my life. I don't really know anything except for what I've been taught at school and home. It really conflicted with my logic and I constantly pondered these things? However (on topic), I truly believe that the Bible is quite literal in many ways, and saying it is misinterpreted is just a way out of the self confusion.

[Reincarnate]

"This may seem weird, but I kind of don't want others to live life they want to live it either"

no.

[twitchywindowbreaker]

LOL Number 4

[Garquillex]

Originally Posted by Reincarnate

I have no problem calling out religious people on the retardation of their beliefs. Yeah, you're free to have whatever beliefs you want. But that doesn't mean I have to respect them or pretend like they hold any validity or intellectual merit. I consider it a good thing to be blunt about just how insane religion is. Pretending like it's anything more than that is not progress.

Respect is an annoying word.
It seems to have developed a connotation (or poorly originally defined as?) positive regard for such that is favorable to you, and that lack of respect means disrespect, as if there is no neutral between positive and negative.

You certainly don't have to hold them in positive regards. But I think neutral regards, or neutral respect, should still be given to everyone regardless of your feelings or thoughts.

I don't see how social belligerence can be rational. All I see it doing is solidifying irrationality in defensive response to you and solidifying irrationality in others who are agreeing with you without the reasoning.

Originally Posted by ~kitty~

Personally, I would like to believe there is a God. Some benefits may come out of it, but believing in an organized Religion comes with lots of logical flaws, such as the fact that I was taught that God loves all things, God knows everything, and God can do anything. According to the Bible, if this all was true, God doesn't exist. I'm pretty sure it states that if God isn't all of those things, he doesn't exist. That, or I heard it from somewhere else. However, if I say it benefits me to not believe in a God (non-traditional), then I would be a bit more stressful. However, this does bring up the "you don't really believe in God, you're just psychologically reacting to the environment by deluding that such a thing exists." I've thought about it, and I struggled over what to believe because I prefer to believe in something and believing in no theism makes the point of life less valuable, thus less enjoyable, and I want to enjoy my life. This really seems like I'm just trying to be deliberately delusional, or maybe I'm right.

A problem I've encountered numerous times, however, is how people die sometimes. If God exists and there's a soul, what about the people with mental disorders or what about all these organ functions that actually make us live? If we had souls and God existed, why do we die so easily? It just becomes a complicated mess. Anyway, I just think, from a point of view of actually being inside the Religious circle, that people are "retarded" about religion because rejecting these ideologies destroys their purpose of life, and they want to stick to it no matter what. Probably means nothing can change them. I don't know, I'm rambling now.

I used to fear not being able to rationalize accepting death. How could I accept not existing anymore?! Everything I'll ever affect is going to vanish.

Well, that was actually only 5 months ago. I've attempted to discover a meaning of life and acceptance of death sporadically since, based on deceptively simple concepts.

So far I'm considering that what makes life worth living is the fulfillment of our emotional and intellectual desires. Fulfilling these means we need to live in a world that supports these pursuits. Having a world that supports these pursuits means that we should improve it so it supports them even better, for ourselves, the people we care about, their descendants, everyone in general, and the people who further developed what we have now.

If I can come to the end of my life having supported the emotional and intellectual pursuits of others and supported the improvement of the world, I think I can rationalize accepting my death, so that others may be able to do the same and live in a better world. I don't think I've been able to directly connect those enough yet, though. It needs to be more holistic.

A common theme in theism is that we are rewarded when we die. Why do we need to be further rewarded? Shouldn't our reward have been being born and living a sufficient life in a world improved by those who came before us, and further improved by ourselves? It seems like theism was created to answer questions we didn't think we would be able to solve, whether it be for good intentions, control, or even mercy.

Ah, well, this isn't so much a response to what you said than just me wanting to think about it some more.

[Reincarnate]

Originally Posted by garquillex

Respect is an annoying word.
It seems to have developed a connotation (or poorly originally defined as?) positive regard for such that is favorable to you, and that lack of respect means disrespect, as if there is no neutral between positive and negative.

You certainly don't have to hold them in positive regards. But I think neutral regards, or neutral respect, should still be given to everyone regardless of your feelings or thoughts.

I don't see how social belligerence can be rational. All I see it doing is solidifying irrationality in defensive response to you and solidifying irrationality in others who are agreeing with you without the reasoning.

I see no reason why we should hold religion in a respectfully neutral position when it's such a toxic thing. In many cases there is a logical pathway between faith and atrocity depending on the parameters of the religion. That is by no means worth respecting, especially when it's a driving force behind fearmongering, misinformation, twisting of human rights, atrocity and pain, resistance against progressive movements, etc. Most definitely not worth being neutral towards.

Originally Posted by garquillex

Shouldn't our reward have been being born and living a sufficient life in a world improved by those who came before us, and further improved by ourselves? It seems like theism was created to answer questions we didn't think we would be able to solve, whether it be for good intentions, control, or even mercy.

Absolutely

[LJRoX]

UR SIG IS MESMERIZING, THE 3rd and last one

i must waste my seed

[Mans0n]

So are you atheists still going to reject god when revelations judgments start happening? because from the looks of it, most will probably try to explain away a rapture, and or trumpet judgments with something else to keep people away from the fact that god is real, does exist, and is about to put this planet through the worse times it will ever see. And pretty damn fast too.

But seriously, when things start Happening EXACTLY as described in revelations, what are you non believers going to do? explain it away with some nonsensical scientific psychobabble to make what you claim seem correct? because that what is seems like.

[~kitty~]

Originally Posted by Mans0n

So are you atheists still going to reject god when revelations judgments start happening? because from the looks of it, most will probably try to explain away a rapture, and or trumpet judgments with something else to keep people away from the fact that god is real, does exist, and is about to put this planet through the worse times it will ever see. And pretty damn fast too.

But seriously, when things start Happening EXACTLY as described in revelations, what are you non believers going to do? explain it away with some nonsensical scientific psychobabble to make what you claim seem correct? because that what is seems like.

No, that's not. We would take the more probable solution. So far, it makes more sense to say there isn't a God and it really does make things easier just to say he doesn't exist. At least, on the surface this is true. It's perfectly rational for someone not to want to believe in God, and even if he existed, it shouldn't be considered a "sin".

[Reach]

Originally Posted by Mans0n

So are you atheists still going to reject god when revelations judgments start happening? because from the looks of it, most will probably try to explain away a rapture, and or trumpet judgments with something else to keep people away from the fact that god is real, does exist, and is about to put this planet through the worse times it will ever see. And pretty damn fast too.

But seriously, when things start Happening EXACTLY as described in revelations, what are you non believers going to do? explain it away with some nonsensical scientific psychobabble to make what you claim seem correct? because that what is seems like.

As I've said before, I reject theism because it can't be substantiated with any empirical evidence. However, a good ol' fashioned rapture would certainly be evidence enough for deities, in which case I would have to recognize you as correct.


The only problem with your thought train is that, are you Christians still going to believe in God when judgments never start happening? Because by the looks of it, most of you will keep on believing the rapture will happen anyway, some unknown time in the distant future to keep people from not believing that God is real, and that with the power of human perseverance and intellect we can continue to allow our species to thrive here on Earth. For a long time too.

But seriously, when things NEVER start happening exactly as described by revelations, what are you believers going to do? Explain it away with some nonsensical pseudointellectual asinine blabber to make what you claim seem correct?



Now, in all of that poking fun, I'm making a very serious point. If you noticed, I actually admitted that it certainly is possible to prove your position correct (and subsequently prove me wrong). If evidence is provided for the existence of deities, you effectively trump the position of atheism and I'm proven wrong.

I'm willing to bet the same isn't to say for proving your position wrong. Your beliefs are structured such that you can't ever be proven wrong, even when what you say never happens. A very convenient philosophical structure to perpetuate your beliefs...

[cry4eternity]

Usually I stay out of these threads, but what the heck.

First of all, +1 to everything Rubix said. A belief/opinion doesn't have any intrinsic right to be respected. People have the right to their own beliefs, though this is debatable within the overwhelmingly religious US, but nobody has the right not to be offended. This is important. I've come up with a personal mantra of sorts, "Respect people, not necessarily their beliefs."

As for the validity of Religion, there is none. It's really quite amazing how people can make such claims and not see how ridiculous they are. For example in this thread somebody claims that there is a context where grabbing a male attacker's genitals is (rightfully) punishable by hand amputation. A post a couple above me claims that the end of the world will correspond with the book of Revelations. I'm hopeful that at least a few other people can see why these ideas are completely laughable.

In the end, philosophical arguments mean nothing. Even if you had a flawless, sound and valid philosophical proof of the existence of the Christian God, it still would not be enough. Things that exist can be detected; they can interact with reality. For much the same reason, scientific theories such as String Theory and the existence of the Higgs Boson are not accepted as absolute fact as of right now. Even though all the math works out in their favor, no evidence of either has yet been detected. So, if a rapture identical to the one depicted in the Bible were to take place, I would definitely reconsider my beliefs simply because that would be actual evidence for Christianity.