|
Posted By
|
Message
|
Silveraura
God's God
Registered
08/08/2002
Points
6747
         
|
2nd August, 2011 at 20:06:40 -
Originally Posted by UrbanMonk
Originally Posted by Silveraura
Making a statement about how many Christians feel it's their obligation to convert anyone they feel needs saved, is not a stereotype. That's a generalized statement.
http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Sterotyping
lol, wut?
Oh yeah, hey! Thanks for reading the rest of my post. Yeah, glad you have such a thought provoking response. Yeah, I'm just going to assume you agree with everything I said about you.
http://www.facebook.com/truediamondgame
|
Rob Westbrook
Registered
25/05/2007
Points
193
|
4th August, 2011 at 20:04:57 -
The problem I see with debates of this nature is that humans are bound to thinking of things in terms of humans. Asking why a [potentially existent or non-existent] supreme being does something is like an ant questioning the workings of a supercomputer. Humans, as a species, have absolutely no fathomable way of perceiving something so [potentially] vastly different. Yet we spend large amounts of money, time, effort and other more violent approaches (including increasingly more heated forums posts  ) trying to prove otherwise.
There are 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
Rob Rule
Rusten Crating
Registered
22/12/2007
Points
532
|
4th August, 2011 at 22:00:58 -
Crosses don't kill people, people do.
It'll all blow over.
|
Silveraura
God's God
Registered
08/08/2002
Points
6747
|
5th August, 2011 at 08:07:31 -
Originally Posted by Rob WestbrookThe problem I see with debates of this nature is that humans are bound to thinking of things in terms of humans. Asking why a [potentially existent or non-existent] supreme being does something is like an ant questioning the workings of a supercomputer. Humans, as a species, have absolutely no fathomable way of perceiving something so [potentially] vastly different. Yet we spend large amounts of money, time, effort and other more violent approaches (including increasingly more heated forums posts ) trying to prove otherwise.
Yet people still find some way to insist that they know the truth and will fight tooth and nail to support it.
Debates themselves are fine. It's always interesting to hear what other people might be willing to contribute. It's when you get people who stand up and say that they're right and that they've heard every excuse in the book for why they're wrong, that the debate turns into an argument. If people can discuss the topic without insisting they're right and walk in with both an open mind and be willing to acknowledge that their faith is just that, faith. When people confuse, literally... confuse, their faith with established fact and blur the lines between the two, is when the fabric of debate starts to unwind and people quickly begin dismissing anything someone has to say.
If you tell me most plants need sunlight to grow... that makes sense, most plants probably do need sunlight to grow. I wont question you even if I'm not entirely informed on the topic (I don't know how many plants don't need sunlight to grow).
If you happened to have insisted before that though, that it's impossible for pancakes to be made in any other shape besides squares, and your only proof is that your kitchen is stocked exclusively with square pans... well, suddenly I'm less inclined to take your word about most plants needing sunlight to grow. It may be true, it sounds true, but seeing how shallow you invest your logic... I'll still double check just to make sure, before I continue discussing anything further with you.
http://www.facebook.com/truediamondgame
|
HorrendousGames
Sourpuss
Registered
31/10/2009
Points
481
|
5th August, 2011 at 20:33:29 -
Originally Posted by Rob WestbrookThe problem I see with debates of this nature is that humans are bound to thinking of things in terms of humans. Asking why a [potentially existent or non-existent] supreme being does something is like an ant questioning the workings of a supercomputer. Humans, as a species, have absolutely no fathomable way of perceiving something so [potentially] vastly different. Yet we spend large amounts of money, time, effort and other more violent approaches (including increasingly more heated forums posts ) trying to prove otherwise.
That's not what the debates are usually over, however. The debates are over a blatant man made God that tries to use concepts like that to try and keep disproof away from it. If you take a look at some of the ancient religions that came before the Abrahamic God, many of them put their Gods in situations where eventually humans could disprove it (such as Gods living on Mt. Olympus, or don't go into the forbidden zone or any of that crap), the Abrahamic God puts their god in a place no human could ever go and it says that if any human were ever able to come into contact with God, their head would 'splode, and that you'll never ever be able to actually know he exists only through blind faith. Now if that doesn't send up any "this is BS" red flags to anyone, I don't know what will.
When you bring up the question of "Asking why a [potentially existent or non-existent] supreme being does something is like an ant questioning the workings of a supercomputer." Is a good question, but if you've got a "perfect" being that contradicts itself on so many levels (i.e. condemning humans for murder, yet he's perfectly fine murdering people on a whim or granting other people permission to do so), you get into the realm of "is this of divine qualities or of human qualities?". It would be completely different if this God were actually doing things beyond human comprehension, but when you have a "perfect" being that is supposedly above the petty workings of humans yet he constantly falls prey to countless errors, jealousy, rage, etc.
I don't know what you guys classify as a "heated forums post" but neither this thread nor the enormous "do you believe in god?" thread are anywhere close to heated. Just because someone disagrees with someone does not turn it into a heated argument. And I don't know how the heck you can equate words to violence? You might have a point on that one if there was actually hate speech, but there isn't. If you can go through either thread and find someone saying "all theists must die" or "kill those filthy terrorist liberal atheists", then by all means, maybe they should be shut down.
But other than that, both threads are great, in fact, they are the only interesting thing happening around here as of late, if anything is promoting growth around here, it would be giant forum topics that gets everyone involved, and I find it especially refreshing that they aren't getting heated (However, it's common for a person to read something on the Internet that disagrees with their standpoint and the person interprets the author as screaming every word of it at the top of their lungs. JUST BE CAREFUL NOT TO USE ALL CAPS OR THEY'LL THINK YOU'RE REALLY ANGRY.)
/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/-=?=-/
That Really Hot Chick
now on the Xbox Live Marketplace!
http://marketplace.xbox.com/en-US/Product/That-Really-Hot-Chick/66acd000-77fe-1000-9115-d80258550942
http://www.create-games.com/project.asp?view=main&id=2160
|
|
|
|
Advertisement
Post Reply