What I believe RE: Token
This is a subject we will never agree on, and likely won't even find much common ground on, so I'm pretty much going to leave it be.
Our views on the subject could not be much more diametrically opposed.
Waxy
PS - Your example about voting. An electoral system, aka democracy, is a method of gov't created by humans. In effect, it means that the individual voluntarily gives up their right to determine the outcome to the majority. IMHO, it was a poor example of how we cannot control our destiny. What about the guy that did vote for the winning party? He got what he wanted.
If you don't like the gov't that was voted in, move to another state or country, you have that choice.
"That's why they call it fishin' not catchin'."
Outcomes will always be uncertain. But without predictability
and a general belief in cause and effect we would have no science or technology. Chaos is always with us but the early bird at least often catches the worm.
I try to remain "joyous despite the evidence".
This is what angers me about atheism, it prefers fiction over reality and has become a dead-end religion in itself. Its adherents are even more dogmatically ignorant than token Christians (and that's saying a lot). They come up with a dogma, a conclusion and then seek evidence to justify their a priori beliefs and biases, being deficient in thinking skills. Just the opposite of the scientific process.
PS - Your example about voting. An electoral system, aka democracy, is a method of gov't created by humans. In effect, it means that the individual voluntarily gives up their right to determine the outcome to the majority.
I do not require an explanation of the principles of voting, or legal nuances, which completely fail to refute my point.
IMHO, it was a poor example of how we cannot control our destiny.
Of course *you* find it a poor example - it discredicts your entire tangent on the matter - and your defense is wholly inadequate. In short, if that your best argument, you lost.
What about the guy that did vote for the winning party? He got what he wanted.
Yet another absurd assumption. A guy who voted for the winning party may have voted for them because it was better than his alternatives. Yet it is possible the candidate he really wanted did not even win the nomination at the primaries!
That's my principal disagreement with atheism as a world view. It thinks man is omnipotent and responsible for everything and controls his destiny. I show fact after fact that this isn't so and get no refutaton - because there is none of course.
Once you qualify these statements maybe would could hold a more thoughtful discussion on these points.
Whistler
That's my principal disagreement with atheism as a world view. It thinks man is omnipotent and responsible for everything and controls his destiny. I show fact after fact that this isn't so and get no refutaton - because there is none of course.
This is what angers me about atheism, it prefers fiction over reality and has become a dead-end religion in itself. Its adherents are even more dogmatically ignorant than token Christians (and that's saying a lot). They come up with a dogma, a conclusion and then seek evidence to justify their a priori beliefs and biases, being deficient in thinking skills. Just the opposite of the scientific process.
PS - Your example about voting. An electoral system, aka democracy, is a method of gov't created by humans. In effect, it means that the individual voluntarily gives up their right to determine the outcome to the majority.
I do not require an explanation of the principles of voting, or legal nuances, which completely fail to refute my point.
IMHO, it was a poor example of how we cannot control our destiny.
Of course *you* find it a poor example - it discredicts your entire tangent on the matter - and your defense is wholly inadequate. In short, if that your best argument, you lost.
What about the guy that did vote for the winning party? He got what he wanted.
Yet another absurd assumption. A guy who voted for the winning party may have voted for them because it was better than his alternatives. Yet it is possible the candidate he really wanted did not even win the nomination at the primaries!
Feel free to make this personal, and to think that you are the winner.
You should be careful of labelling anyone who does not follow your rather unique belief system as ignorant and deficient in thinking skills. Perhaps your understanding of the matter is what is lacking.
Of course, in your case, I suppose the outcome was a forgone divine conclusion and it doesn't much matter.
I hope God has good things in store for you.
Waxy
Ford Trucks for Ford Truck Enthusiasts
4.2,
it is called dogmatic ignorance
Shouldn't you be out doing whatever it takes to not be a "token Christian"?
I'm guessing that sitting around in front of a computer calling people ignorant isn't the fast track to heaven.
Waxy
I remeber when I got into an argument over God to an atheist. This guy had already read the Bible twice! He knew it waaay better than I did at the time. He was a little short with me, but he put up a better argument to why God isn't real that I could about God is real. It upset at first, but then I got to thinking, and he was actually one of the smartest people I'd ever talked to. I wish I could meet him again one day and re-discuss the topic, but that will probably never happen. If I knew as much as he did about the Bible, I'd be a much happier man.
Last edited by true4.2; Oct 3, 2003 at 01:23 PM.
I must be deficient as you say since I'm having trouble wrapping around your philiosophy.
Are you suggesting atheists are not controlling because someone else is?
Since I ascribe to no system of beliefs how can that be dogmatic?
I require no conclusions to satisfy my supposed cosmology so I am free to apprehend "reality" without looking for "signs".
Omnipotent is a big word and I can't even imagine wanting to be.
Even if we only play a small part in the outcome of the events of our lives, what would you suggest, just acting as a bystander?
Two words for you carpe: Bhagavad-Gita
It's a good read too.
) does in no way imply that I think those others of my past church affiliation are wrong. Acceptance is one of the highest virtues a man can ascribe to (in my belief). Carpe, I see dogmatic ignorance as the worst for the simple fact that it allows no tolerance for others to believe what they like (one of the basic tenets of America). I do not believe in Your god, His god, Her god, Their god. I have My god, the one that I am comfortable believing in, putting my faith in. And yes, I do believe in Evolution for the beginnings of Man. But am I an Evolutionist? No. I believe in a higher power just like the rest of us, mine just happens to have a different Name. The only problem I have with organized religion is the blind faith of those that try to push Their value system upon others, whether it be going door to door or through Jihad. In reality, it comes down to a pretty simple point (in my belief), with the appropriate leaders, lessons, practices, any religion would accept any other as a brotherhood. An appropriate leader being someone who sees the Truth for what it is and not what He wants to make it. As I have seen in this thread, I think, all religions are basically the same. The Belief in a higher power and living a life that makes the world a better place,,,,, For All Of Us! So if a guy down the street wants to pray to his gutterspout at dawn everyday, that's his Belief and I am happy for him. Having faith in something is getting harder and harder as the world becomes smaller and the egos grow to outrageous proportions. Thus, In My Opinion, a belief or non-belief in anything at all is great, it's the peace of mind that matters. The ability to interact with others without judging them or worse. Oh and well put, Sinjin, the more you can qualify a statement, the less "ignorant" the discussion will be. And that's my two and a half cents, I'm feeling generous
I have neighbors who will not let their children participate in the “rituals” of Christmas, Halloween, or Easter because the “grown-ups” believe them to be of Satan or some other dark invisible evil. I have seen these children beg to go trick-or-treating, or go on Easter egg hunts or ride in Santa’s sleigh. It’s demoralizing to those children and can (will) effect them later in life to some degree.
What I believe has a lot to do with what my children believe and I have make sure what I believe cannot, will not have a negative impact on them – ever.
I would quote grapegravy on many parts, but the following is the kicker:
Having faith in something is getting harder and harder as the world becomes smaller and the egos grow to outrageous proportions.
Since I ascribe to no system of beliefs how can that be dogmatic?


