Suhrthing
Recruit
- Joined
- Sep 17, 2016
- Messages
- 15,675
Agreed. You're an ugly **** who drinks **** beer and hates the world.Hard to believe, but I'm also Agnostic. That's where all similarities we share end.
Agreed. You're an ugly **** who drinks **** beer and hates the world.Hard to believe, but I'm also Agnostic. That's where all similarities we share end.
I'm not ugly. Rarely drink beer. Prefer Bourbon. Love all peoples and the world. Must admit I don't care for those weird *** groups, but believe everybody should have equal right, not reset the *** bar.Agreed. You're an ugly **** who drinks **** beer and hates the world.
Bourdon... see our similarities don't end yet!I'm not ugly. Rarely drink beer. Prefer Bourbon. Love all peoples and the world. Must admit I don't care for those weird *** groups, but believe everybody should have equal right, not reset the *** bar.
So you also hate special people. No shock there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Burke_(actor)Did you forget to switch accounts? You're quoting yourself there corky...
Why you so mad all the time?So you also hate special people. No shock there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Burke_(actor)
Depends on how push the believers are. I love the idea that people can believe what they want, I just don’t like when the push it on me as facts.Funny thing is I got to church on a semi-frequent basis, was a church youth speaker, but I never understood why people spoke so dedicatedly to being a believer and not being more questioning about the Bible and the many things that can easily be proven wrong. I guess you can say I'm not a believer. in fact I hate being in the company of a bunch of holy people.
Stop trying to find reasons to be offended by strangers online. Mmmkay?
Stop trying to find reasons to be offended by strangers online. Mmmkay?
The astronomical odds are quite stunning. I'm of the belief that man lacks even a modicum of intuition to make any concrete sense of the world we inhabit.I grew up pretty "religious", but was turned off by what I realized later was hypocrisy and power jockeying in mainstream denominationalism. I majored in biology, so was heavily introduced to the material (non-spiritual) cosmology of the universe, and was transitioning to an agnostic world-view. My background, however, was software coding (shout-out to the Testing Center and the good times had by all in the Ungar building). Anyway, sitting in Cell Biology and Human Embryology I came to the personal conclusion that our DNA represents an overwhelmingly complex coding algorithm that try as hard as I might, I could not assign to non-sentient entropy.
.
Long story short (sort-of), I've spent the ensuing years in the spiritual journey of finding and more clearly understanding my Programmer. I lost my religion, ditched my churchianity, and became a follower of the Way (Acts 9:2, not the "cult").
Whoa. That hits close to home.Agreed. You're an ugly **** who drinks **** beer and hates the world.
No, and I'm not sure that God/religion has had a net positive effect on humanity. Maybe for the individual person but once it becomes 'people' it's a problem.
^This is interesting. Post more.I grew up pretty "religious", but was turned off by what I realized later was hypocrisy and power jockeying in mainstream denominationalism. I majored in biology, so was heavily introduced to the material (non-spiritual) cosmology of the universe, and was transitioning to an agnostic world-view. My background, however, was software coding (shout-out to the Testing Center and the good times had by all in the Ungar building). Anyway, sitting in Cell Biology and Human Embryology I came to the personal conclusion that our DNA represents an overwhelmingly complex coding algorithm that try as hard as I might, I could not assign to non-sentient entropy.
.
Long story short (sort-of), I've spent the ensuing years in the spiritual journey of finding and more clearly understanding my Programmer. I lost my religion, ditched my churchianity, and became a follower of the Way (Acts 9:2, not the "cult").
Those things were around before Christianity and even exist in other religions. imo Christianity can't take credit for humanitarian notions. Those notions are basic, even animals have them.You should probably read up a little more on Christianity’s contributions to the rise of western culture. Rodney Stark’s “Victory Of Reason” is a good read on this topic if interested. It is well established all our humanitarian notions of charity, brotherhood, care for the poor and disabled, etc. had a Christian basis at one time that now has been largely discarded. But the basis is still undeniable.
Still can't give religion credit for stating what should be obvious. And if we're being fair, our framers idea of rights and equality were still off. And if we're really being fair, religion can NEVER make the claim to equality under law because they still don't believe in it. The framers did know enough to try to keep religion out of government or law but imo they didn't go far enough in those protections. Non religious people still have to fight for protection from religious beliefs.And the idea of individual rights and equality under law that the framers believed in derived from their beliefs in a creator. Having a transcendent source of the law that can judge rulers and subjects alike is important in this view and led to the idea of our inalienable rights and protections of those rights that we all depend on in this country.
It is pretty hopeless.. I doubt you can come up with enough examples of good that outweighs the bad. From Rome, probably until people get over it, people will be killing others in the name of their religion or God. People will still try to tell others how to live based on their religion and their God. People will still make laws to force others to conform to their religious beliefs. I don't make a judgement of religious people's morals, mine are very close just without the inducement. I might crack on the hypocrisy of spewing morals at others while breaking them regularly. But, I don't believe core morals came from religions.If you can’t see a net positive (I certainly get the corruption and abuses) in that then it’s probably hopeless to convince you otherwise. Look at it this way... you are essentially making a moral judgement implicit in your statement about religion being a “people problem” or to make any judgment concerning corruption and abuses of any religion. Without a transcendent source of moral values like God what makes your moral judgment any better or worse than anyone else’s? We are each wired and conditioned to believe in our own moral values and worth in God’s absence.
I beg to differ. Christianity actually elevated the Judaic ethical system from actions to thoughts. Even if you are thinking about adultery it is no better than acting on it. You also had harder sayings such as "bless those who persecute you", and "love your enemies". I would like to see other ethical systems that teach similar ideas. Christianity actually raised the bar which was intent to show more how far we are from holiness and in need of redemption from God.Those things were around before Christianity and even exist in other religions. imo Christianity can't take credit for humanitarian notions. Those notions are basic, even animals have them.
Maybe I did not articulate my point clearly enough. I am not saying that religion is necessary for the idea of equal rights and such. But you at very least need a theistic framework. Under atheism, individual rights are just a mental construct with no actual objective source outside of it. Might makes right and that is all there is to it. Benevolence and aggression are just personal preferences, not objective moral attributes. With no objective moral standards we also can't measure moral progress. Chattel slavery was bad back in the day and still is. We can make the argument that the situation has improved, not merely changed. Without objective moral standards, at best we can say morals change but whether it is for the good or bad is just conditional to the time and place.Still can't give religion credit for stating what should be obvious. And if we're being fair, our framers idea of rights and equality were still off. And if we're really being fair, religion can NEVER make the claim to equality under law because they still don't believe in it. The framers did know enough to try to keep religion out of government or law but imo they didn't go far enough in those protections. Non religious people still have to fight for protection from religious beliefs.
It is pretty hopeless.. I doubt you can come up with enough examples of good that outweighs the bad. From Rome, probably until people get over it, people will be killing others in the name of their religion or God. People will still try to tell others how to live based on their religion and their God. People will still make laws to force others to conform to their religious beliefs. I don't make a judgement of religious people's morals, mine are very close just without the inducement. I might crack on the hypocrisy of spewing morals at others while breaking them regularly. But, I don't believe core morals came from religions.
All these things predate religions, exist concurrently and separately, and will exist with humanity throughout time even if religion doesn't. I'm sure a good argument could be made that morals and humanitarian notions are more prevalent thanks to religions but those same morals and notions are constantly ignored under the same religious banners with devastating affect. When it's good, sure it's good, but when it's bad, it's really ******* bad. Is your belief in God or your faith what makes you a good person? Or is that just who you are? You either have the core morals or you don't. If you can understand my opinion that these things would exist anyway, you maybe can see why I believe the net effect is a negative.
Do you realize that the whole “Jesus was resurrected” thing could have easily been debunked on day one…if only his body was still in the tomb?If our current media/tech capabilities existed at the time Jesus roamed Palestine, he woulda been investigated six ways from Sunday and faced quick exposure. Can you envision his reappearance today (pressers, the deep dive expose on 60 Minutes, and the like).
Very convenient for him, and believers, that he lived in the unenlightened times that he did. I do have to give him and his disciples credit though. The myth/legend has lasted several thousand years. That is no mean feat as his "story" in 2022 would probably have a media shelf life counted in hours, over a day or two.