Is God mute?

[loyek590]

You make my point. That's exactly the problem...Bible and Koran often are treated like treasure troves of knowledge .

Wrong on small issues? You must be joking.
Bible and Koran, both historically hostile to any free inquiry of them. Coercive and glorifying the indiscriminate killing of whole nations. Both disdainful towards women and children. Both demanding worship and glorification of their supposed authors who condone and sanction such obnoxious behavior. Both, in great hypocrisy, promoting peace and love too, so should anyone whose 'treasure trove of ancient history and knowledge' be educated by its nasty ways, there is also found in the same place, absolution, the 'knowledge' of being excused and forgiven of their transgressions for only the price of some gratuitous worshiping.

You don't have to be Jewish to benefit from the wisdom of the Torah. It's free for anyone who wants to establish a stable society. Unlike Mohhamed and his Koran who wherever it goes spreads death and destruction and poverty. Let me just ask you, after 2000 years would you rather be Jew or Christian or Moslem?

We were around long before you ever came up with your idea that Karma no longer matters.

But I must say, the totally anti human notion of Christian forgiveness is something totally unknown in the Jewish/Moslem tradition. And it seems, wherever He goes, Peace follows.

If you don't believe me and you had the choice, would you rather be born in a predominately Moslem, or Jewish, or Christian nation?

As for me, I always vote, "None of the Above."

 

[loyek590]

"And God Bless America"

and when I bet the under, "God curse both of them". Come on God, you know I have a lot of money riding on this one. Bless both pitchers and give the hitters hell.

(and if it's not too much to ask, could you please make all the defense unusually alert?)

There's nothing more pathetic than an atheist gambler. At least the Believer has a plan.

I mean, what would you rather bet on, some mortal man's natural ability or the infinite power of God?

and if you are betting against a man's natural ability you better be praying really hard to God.

Don't matter if it is sports betting or trading, God always answers my prayers about 50% of the time.

When I was an atheist I use to just flip a coin. Then I went to a meeting and got converted and started praying. Same results, about 50%, but a lot more Peace.

 

[piezoe]

Have you ever wondered about the difference between psuedo intellectual people and true intellectuals.


1. Many pseudo intellectuals are just not bright enough to be real intellectuals. You do not have that problem. but...

2. Educated, bright people who are true intellectuals are very aware of their own potential failings and/or limitations. These interesting people almost never put down others religious beliefs. Whereas, many weaker academics and wannabes love to throw around snide comments thinking it makes them look witty. Now that I pointed this out to you, you may notice the pattern. The snide remarks almost always come out of the wannabes. Dawkins is a prime of example of an educated wannabe who plays to an audience of college level wannabes.

Let me offer some food for thought. I'm not sure how you would define 'put[ting] down' others' religious beliefs. I'm going to assume though that remarks such as calling people 'blithering idiots' who believe that someone nailed to board and left hanging their until stone dead comes back to life three days later, after being buried in a cave of course, hangs out with his buddies and brags about the holes in his hands, would be putting down their religion. On the other hand, perhaps politely pointing out that coming back to life after being dead three days (or even two and a half) is a low probability event, would, in your mind, not be putting down anyone's religion.

If, as a species, we are going to advance beyond the more destructive aspects of our instinctual eusocial behavior, I can't think of anything more helpful than 'putting down' all religion, in non-violent ways of course. These nutty religions, and certainly the Christian Religion invented by the Biblical Paul is among the nuttiest of all, could not succeed in hoodwinking millions had they got started today. They all began in ancient times. And now there is just so much money to be made directly from the religion industry, or indirectly via religion's spin-offs, such as the 'defense' industry, that far too few want to kill the goose that's laying golden eggs. At least we can take heart in our observation that those few religions that began after the 19th century in the scientific era will remain quite limited in appeal. We are no longer living in a time when 'God' commonly speaks to us through gold tablets he's conveniently dropped off in our back yard.

Second stanza of the British National Anthem (standard version):

O Lord our God arise,
Scatter her enemies,
And make them fall:
Confound their politics,
Frustrate their knavish tricks,
On Thee our hopes we fix:
God save us all.

 

[loyek590]

Let me offer some food for thought. I'm not sure how you would define 'put[ting] down' others' religious beliefs. I'm going to assume though that remarks such as calling people 'blithering idiots' who believe that someone nailed to board and left hanging their until stone dead comes back to life three days later, after being buried in a cave of course, hangs out with his buddies and brags about the holes in his hands, would be putting down their religion. On the other hand, perhaps politely pointing out that coming back to life after being dead three days (or even two and a half) is a low probability event, would, in your mind, not be putting down anyone's religion.

If, as a species, we are going to advance beyond the more destructive aspects of our instinctual eusocial behavior, I can't think of anything more helpful than 'putting down' all religion, in non-violent ways of course. These nutty religions, and certainly the Christian Religion invented by the Biblical Paul is among the nuttiest of all, could not succeed in hoodwinking millions had they got started today. They all began in ancient times. And now there is just so much money to be made directly from the religion industry, or indirectly via religion's spin-offs, such as the 'defense' industry, that far too few want to kill the goose that's laying golden eggs. At least we can take heart in our observation that those few religions that began after the 19th century in the scientific era will remain quite limited in appeal. We are no longer living in a time when 'God' commonly speaks to us through gold tablets he's conveniently dropped off in our back yard.

ha, ha Piezoe, I never thought you of all people could be so shallow. You are talking about an ordinary man. We are talking about a man whose mother was a virgin and father was God himself. Get your facts straight before you start talking about something you know nothing about.

You start your life out that way there's no telling what you can do.

And let's face it, after about 3000 years of old testament Jewish Law we all need a little forgiveness.

 

[piezoe]

ha, ha Piezoe, I never thought you of all people could be so shallow. You are talking about an ordinary man. We are talking about a man whose mother was a virgin and father was God himself. Get your facts straight before you start talking about something you know nothing about.

You start your life out that way there's no telling what you can do.

And let's face it, after about 3000 years of old testament Jewish Law we all need a little forgiveness.

Thank you, Loyek. That made my day!

 

[CaptainObvious]

But does it take a monumental effort for you to be convinced that not anything and everything, (you know, like a potato) can be responsible? Please Cap, reassure me you are being serious and don't say yes!

No doubt we can dispense with the potato theory of creation, but I have a feeling that you're going to say that worshipping some made up God has about as much substance to it as worshipping a potato. You may turn out to be right. I'm just a guy looking to exchange ideas, ask questions, and maybe learn something that I had not previously considered. Nothing to sell. No axe to grind.

 

[nitro]

God reminds me of Mr. Potato Head. You can dress him up anyway you like:

 

[loyek590]

God reminds me of Mr. Potato Head. You can dress him up anyway you like:

View attachment 156785
View attachment 156783
View attachment 156784

laugh if you want
at the depths of despair God gave me everything I ever wanted, and all I had to do was fail completely every day in every way
Talk about the book of Job, I was the best man god ever created, and he cursed me with just about everything you can think of
The only thing I've learned along the way
When things are going good, never ask God, "Why?" That's about the quickest way to mess up a winning streak.

and to this day, many do not know God because they haven't failed every day in every way

Like the man said, "He who is last shall be first."

(or if you are a democrat, "He who is first shall be last.")

 

[loyek590]

Sorry Pal, If you are not a total fuck up you will never know God. Haven't you noticed that those of us that still believe are total fuck ups?
Everybody wants to know God, but very few want to become what it takes to know Him.

 

[OddTrader]

Faith Versus Fact: Why Science and Religion Are Incompatible Hardcover – May 19, 2015
by Jerry A. Coyne (Author)

Q http://www.sacred-texts.com/aor/einstein/einsci.htm

At first, then, instead of asking what religion is I should prefer to ask what characterizes the aspirations of a person who gives me the impression of being religious: a person who is religiously enlightened appears to me to be one who has, to the best of his ability, liberated himself from the fetters of his selfish desires and is preoccupied with thoughts, feelings, and aspirations to which he clings because of their superpersonalvalue. It seems to me that what is important is the force of this superpersonal content and the depth of the conviction concerning its overpowering meaningfulness, regardless of whether any attempt is made to unite this content with a divine Being, for otherwise it would not be possible to count Buddha and Spinoza as religious personalities.

Accordingly, a religious person is devout in the sense that he has no doubt of the significance and loftiness of those superpersonal objects and goals which neither require nor are capable of rational foundation. They exist with the same necessity and matter-of-factness as he himself. In this sense religion is the age-old endeavor of mankind to become clearly and completely conscious of these values and goals and constantly to strengthen and extend their effect. If one conceives of religion and science according to these definitions then a conflict between them appears impossible. For science can only ascertain what is, but not what should be, and outside of its domain value judgments of all kinds remain necessary. Religion, on the other hand, deals only with evaluations of human thought and action: it cannot justifiably speak of facts and relationships between facts. According to this interpretation the well-known conflicts between religion and science in the past must all be ascribed to a misapprehension of the situation which has been described.
UQ