Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

When atheists go too far

1…2930323435…47

Comments

  • #932
    Canis Lupus
    Registered Users Posts: 9,893 ✭✭✭Canis Lupus


    Ellis Dee wrote: »
    A very high level. Here's mine terrified in his "safe place" in the bathroom with all the fireworks going off everywhere on New Years Eve. Thunder has the same effect on him. If there really was an all-loving sky fairy, there would be neither thunder nor rockets in this world.:mad:

    That dog looks possessed.


  • #933
    twinQuins
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,199 ✭✭✭twinQuins


    philologos wrote: »
    Proof is only to be found in mathematics.

    If you go down certain philosophical rabbit-holes, yes.

    However, if you could see your way to setting aside your usual epistemological whataboutery (and really, it is completely irrelevant), can you prove your god exists?


  • #934
    KeithAFC
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,239 ✭✭✭✭KeithAFC


    twinQuins wrote: »
    If you go down certain philosophical rabbit-holes, yes.

    However, if you could see your way to setting aside your usual epistemological whataboutery (and really, it is completely irrelevant), can you prove your god exists?
    How the hell can he prove his god exists? Why do people ask this of religious people?


  • #935
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    KeithAFC wrote: »
    How the hell can he prove his god exists? Why do people ask this of religious people?

    Because they would likely squirm in a crisis of conscience if you asked them to say "**** you God You're a Total Asshole!!!".


  • #936
    KeithAFC
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,239 ✭✭✭✭KeithAFC


    Malty_T wrote: »
    Because they would likely squirm in a crisis of conscience if you asked them to say "**** you God You're a Total Asshole!!!".
    People who ask that question, already know the answer. So it is a pointless question. Its impossible to prove god exists. Doesn't mean people don't have faith in it.


  • Advertisement
  • #937
    JimiWonderDoor 92
    Closed Accounts Posts: 271 ✭✭JimiWonderDoor 92


    KeithAFC wrote: »
    People who ask that question, already know the answer. So it is a pointless question. Its impossible to prove god exists. Doesn't mean people don't have faith in it.

    I can prove my god exists... that's what I love about sun-worship :rolleyes:


  • #938
    KeithAFC
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,239 ✭✭✭✭KeithAFC


    JimiWonderDoor 92 wrote: »
    I can prove my god exists... that's what I love about sun-worship :rolleyes:
    :D Nice.


  • #939
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    KeithAFC wrote: »
    People who ask that question, already know the answer. So it is a pointless question. Its impossible to prove god exists. Doesn't mean people don't have faith in it.

    And, you just answered your own question. Why ask it?:p


  • #940
    Cú Giobach
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭Cú Giobach


    KeithAFC wrote: »
    People who ask that question, already know the answer. So it is a pointless question. Its impossible to prove god exists. Doesn't mean people don't have faith in it.
    It's just a pity that if people must believe in a god they can't have a nice one, instead of that rather insecure megalomaniac that has taken control of so many peoples minds.


  • #941
    KeithAFC
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,239 ✭✭✭✭KeithAFC


    Cú Giobach wrote: »
    It's just a pity that if people must believe in a god they can't have a nice one, instead of that rather insecure megalomaniac that has taken control of so many peoples minds.
    A nice god would be boring.


  • Advertisement
  • #942
    Cú Giobach
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭Cú Giobach


    KeithAFC wrote: »
    A nice god would be boring.

    A nice god would be brilliant. :)


  • #943
    CerebralCortex
    Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    twinQuins wrote: »
    If you go down certain philosophical rabbit-holes, yes.

    However, if you could see your way to setting aside your usual epistemological whataboutery (and really, it is completely irrelevant), can you prove your god exists?

    The best question to ask is what kind of world would you observe if the god hypothesis were true.


  • #944
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    A Nice God wouldn't last very long.


  • #945
    The Mad Hatter
    Registered Users Posts: 4,718 ✭✭✭The Mad Hatter


    KeithAFC wrote: »
    A nice god would be boring.

    A boring god would be nice.


  • #946
    KeithAFC
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,239 ✭✭✭✭KeithAFC


    The Mad Hatter wrote: »
    A boring god would be nice.
    That is why he sent down Jesus.


  • #947
    Cú Giobach
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭Cú Giobach


    Malty_T wrote: »
    A Nice God wouldn't last very long.
    I am trying to think of a nice god, and offhand I can't, they all seem to be angry and prone to smiting all the time.


  • #948
    JimiWonderDoor 92
    Closed Accounts Posts: 271 ✭✭JimiWonderDoor 92


    CerebralCortex wrote: »
    The best question to ask is what kind of world would you observe if the god hypothesis were true.

    Well assuming it is true, and one is a christian, Prebysterian more specifically, then pre-destination is 'gospel'.

    Therefore one need not worry about what one does and therefore rather than looking for enlightenment or forgiveness, I would strongly argue that coke and hookers would be the order of the day.


  • #949
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Cú Giobach wrote: »
    I am trying to think of a nice god, and offhand I can't, they all seem to be angry and prone to smiting all the time.

    Aphrodite : sexy, she was too.


  • #950
    Cú Giobach
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭Cú Giobach


    Malty_T wrote: »
    Aphrodite : sexy, she was too.
    Of course, All Hail Aphrodite. A sexy god, now that idea I could take to. :D


  • #951
    KeithAFC
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,239 ✭✭✭✭KeithAFC


    Is the Atheist movement in the Republic big?


  • Advertisement
  • #952
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    KeithAFC wrote: »
    Is the Atheist movement in the Republic big?
    Catholic atheists yes. Protestant atheists not so much. :pac:


  • #953
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    twinQuins wrote: »
    However, if you could see your way to setting aside your usual epistemological whataboutery (and really, it is completely irrelevant), can you prove your god exists?

    I can't prove that I exist as a material being on a philosophical level. There are many things I can't prove.

    That suggests that it is a pretty useless path of discussion to go down. What is more fruitful is what reasons we have for our thinking. This is a better line of discussion.

    I would consider the "provide proof" line to be a dead end, but not just in respect to the God debate but in respect to a whole lot of other debates as well.

    I find the idea of atheists barking "where's the proof" to be lazy.

    Here's the line of discussion on this issue that I generally posit a a good one.:

    Given the following 3 positions:
    1. Atheism - God is not likely to exist.
    2. De-facto agnosticism (agnostic atheism is in the first in that God is regarded as less likely, and agnostic theism falls into the third in that God is more likely, defacto agnosticism is strictly "I don't know").
    3. Theism - God is likely to exist.

    A better discussion would work like this:
    If I am an atheist what are my reasons for thinking that God is less likely to exist than not.
    If I am a theist what are my reasons for thinking that God is more likely to exist than not.
    De-facto agnosticism could be argued for but there isn't much to be argued for in saying why one is uncertain.


  • #954
    iamstop
    Moderators, Music Moderators Posts: 11,788 Mod ✭✭✭✭iamstop


    KeithAFC wrote: »
    Is the Atheist movement in the Republic big?

    Atheist movement? Lol.

    https://open.spotify.com/album/69JKwCcZGdLqX4Upj3DwP7



  • #955
    Cú Giobach
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭Cú Giobach


    iamstop wrote: »
    Atheist movement? Lol.
    I had one of them this morning. :D


  • #956
    strobe
    Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    Cú Giobach wrote: »
    I am trying to think of a nice god, and offhand I can't, they all seem to be angry and prone to smiting all the time.

    Dionysus always struck me as a sound enough chap.
    Dionysus was the god of the grape harvest, winemaking and wine, of ritual madness and ecstasy in Greek mythology.... He is also the Liberator (Eleutherios), whose wine, music and ecstatic dance frees his followers from self-conscious fear and care, and subverts the oppressive restraints of the powerful.

    Sounds like my kind of deity.


  • #957
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    philologos wrote: »
    If I am an atheist what are my reasons for thinking that God is less likely to exist than not.
    If I am a theist what are my reasons for thinking that God is more likely to exist than not.
    De-facto agnosticism could be argued for but there isn't much to be argued for in saying why one is uncertain.

    Actually this may seem unfair on the theist, but alas life isn't always fair. The atheist doesn't actually have to explain anything as s/he is not making the assertion that something exists. If you follow your trail of thought to its logical conclusion then every human should be expected to explain why s/he doesn't believe in every imaginable entity possible that they don't believe in. Such an approach is impractical and rather useless. Instead those who make the assertion of some claim or truth should explain why it is likely to be true and others can simply argue their case against it by scrutinising the proponents points.

    And to make it even more relevant, Christians are the ones who claim we're gonna burn in a pit for the rest of our unnatural lives. So clearly, they should explain why? I'd argue that theists themselves shouldn't have to explain any of their beliefs until those theists namely Muslims, Christians and Jews who believe in certain negative consequences have explained their reasoning for believing in those negative consequences first.


  • #958
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Malty T: In the best discussions there is a dialogue. I'm not much interested in having one person bark continually "prove it" (There are a whole load of things that we would regard as pretty certain haven't been proven). As far as I see it both atheism and theism deviate from defacto agnosticism and as such both should present reasons for why something is likely or not likely in the best discussions that can be had about this issue and that's really the absolute best we can do in this discussion bar actually being willing to give Christianity a go or vice versa.


  • #959
    Cú Giobach
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,772 ✭✭✭Cú Giobach


    strobe wrote: »
    Dionysus always struck me as a sound enough chap.
    Sounds like my kind of deity.
    Maybe it's time we got the Greek pantheon going here, it would make a nice change from that rather austere chap in vogue at the moment.


  • #960
    Turtwig
    Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    philologos wrote: »
    Malty T: In the best discussions there is a dialogue. I'm not much interested in having one person bark continually "prove it". As far as I see it both atheism and theism deviate from defacto agnosticism and as such both should present reasons for why something is likely or not likely in the best discussions that can be had about this issue and that's really the absolute best we can do in this discussion bar actually being willing to give Christianity a go or vice versa.

    I have a ball
    Oh Yeah? Prove it!
    Here are the likely reasons why I have a ball.

    I'm sorry mate but according to your beliefs everyone reading this thread is guilty of a crime by which their punishment is an eternity in hell. The onus is on you to prove their guilt! Not on them to prove their innocence! The burden rests with you, face up to that.

    Edited to add : In my book nothing can be proven the best we can ever offer is the likely rational and plausible explanations for everything. So rational reasons will do.


  • Advertisement
  • #961
    philologos
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Malty_T wrote: »
    I'm sorry mate but according to your beliefs everyone reading this thread is guilty of a crime by which their punishment is an eternity in hell. The onus is on you to prove their guilt! Not on them to prove their innocence! The burden rests with you, face up to that.

    Everyone including me actually! It's not very difficult to show that everyone has done what is wrong on numerous occasions. It's also not very difficult to show that mankind as a whole is fallen. All that takes is a quick read through today's newspaper or the newspaper on any other day. As I've said already hell shouldn't be an option for anyone in comparison to restoring the broken relationship that we have with God.

    But yeah, I'm merely saying that what I've described is the model that I find most appropriate for discussing whether or not God exists. That's what I find most reasonable and I'm quite entitled to say why that is so.

    As far as I'm concerned atheists and theists both deviate from defacto agnosticism and as a result should both be willing to argue as to why they take these positions. I'm not going to "face up" to what I find an unreasonable and an unworkable method of discussing this subject.


Advertisement