ps. thanks for keeping this dialog going. I do appreciate that you respect my freedom and are willing to discourse with someone who disagrees with you.
"people draw prejudices from the actions of the few." I see everyone as an individual that represents their self and then I consider the possibility they also represent a group. So I find it quite annoying when the assumption is reversed. I use reason all the time! Even when I reason that being a rude arrogant asshole is the best option for me at the time, however reason shouldn't need support from anyone. Reason speaks for itself.
You're correct... I'm not very good at insulting another person. You on the other hand do it quite well. You must practice often. Insults are the recourse of a lesser mind. I find myself unable to stoop to your level.
to the video remark "what bible is she reading" i feel as if much of the moderate christian nation have adopted a new and modern sort of religion, one that takes the morals and values that they like, and a view of God that doesn't conflict with scientific reasoning
I'm saying the Bible is true (for other reasons as well) because the apostles wrote the Bible, the apostles died for their message, and the apostles saw Jesus face to face. There's a lot of historical evidence behind it. And there's a lot more proof of the Bible on my channel.
Read my comment again. I didn't intend to imply that being christian necessarily involves churches and my comment 'little to do with following the bible or worshipping christ' was intended to reflect this. I called her 'god is love' rhetoric for the bullshit it was and I still think that her use of this as a basis to accuse anyone of arrogance is staggering -- particularly after her accusation at atheists. Now, did I sense some projection?
She doesn't say faith is humble. She says a person humbly of faith (meaning a moderate, non-fundamentalist "believer") would never make the assertion that they understand the mind of God. A person of faith (a believer), who is non-fundamentalist does not exhibit the arrogance or pretense of knowing the mind of God. What's contentious about that?
I don't expect anyone to listen or see things my way so I reason it's more fun to insult and mock them. "Dawkins seems to think reason does need support. So does Sam Harris." in what sense? what do you do to support reason? PS how do you reason with unreasonable people? what is the first step toward becoming a reasonable person? can two reasonable people given the same information come to two different conclusions?
I can't say that I've read all of Nietzsche but what I have read did not seem to hold jesus in a 'deep reverence'. Perhaps you could support your claim with a quote.
maxpolaris99 you appear to be correct. odd that Nihilist127 didn't know that!? "in the final analysis its nothing but mental masturbation in my humble opinion." I've often said that about religion, superstition, and philosophy but without the humble part and I state it as fact to sound even more arrogant.
Christianity introduced into humanity a concept of love called agape, a love so radical that is must be inhuman or Godly. God so loved humanity that God would sacrifice itself to redeem a broken humanity. For me, for a Christian there are several ways to approach God but never to know God. 1) the bible as proximate witness and thousands of years of a tribe wrestling with and trembling before G_d. 2) The cross and empty tomb 3) Love, the face of Christ seen in people in meet.
"You sir are an ass for subjecting..." in order for you to call me an ass, you must first acknowledge my existence. so, coming from a nihilist, I'll take it as a compliment.
No, your comments haven't harmed me. Granted you're not every atheist but whether you like it or not, people draw prejudices from the actions of the few. Excuse me if I'm wrong when I assume you're trying to support the cause of reason but I don't think your earlier, rude comments are helping the spread of reason.
The fundamentalist believer sees the holy text as a way to the mind of God and thus can use the bible for instance as a weapon of hatred against pro choice, gays and lesbians etc. The atheist typically is also a humanists who sees himself as the measure of all things and believes science/reason will lead us to understanding the logos/logic of the universe. Logos is what atheists call God.
What exactly was it specifically about my initial comment that sparked your seemingly hostile reply? I don't like rhetoric when it is used in place of an actual argument.
Ouch, that reply hurt. Almost as sohpisticated as "I know you are but what am I?" If you're so honoured please spend a few years reading him as I have and then we'll talk. But suffice to say he would never so reductively and ignorantly of Christianity. In fact, Nietzsche had a deep reverence for Christ, his disdain was mainly with what we today would call organized religion. You must be American- so facile...Cheers
How is it that you understand the motivations as to why Theologians "love to quote Einstein"? That they do so to validate their religious views? Perhaps some theologians quote Einstein to highlight the compatibility of science and theology. Perhaps they do it on Monday's or when there's a full moon. The point is perhaps you should let the theologians speak as to why they are quoting Einstein and not impute motives to them.
"Especially when it's in the name of atheism..." as if one person can speak in the "name of atheism and reason" I'm an atheist, but I do NOT represent atheism! No one does & no one can! I'm an individual and I only represent myself. I belong to no group and never will. you may be an atheist but you still have a group mentality! I do respect your freedom to do and believe whatever you want as long as it doesn't harm anyone of infringe on the freedom of another. have my comments harmed you?
If god is love, as the women in the video redefines it to accuse Dawkins of arrogance, then does that not mean, assuming her new definition is correct, that there is no basis for churches, rituals or worshipping??? While her rhetoric may be both a justification and a comfort to likewise minded people, it has no basis either logic or reality and has little to do with following the bible or worshipping christ. That she chooses to defend a watered down version of her own beliefs is telling.
I can read tiny minds and Theologians minds are microscopic. Science and religion are not compatible. Science is about discovering truth and religion is about believing bullshit. Although one could argue that bullshit is more useful than religion and far more useful than a gawd.
Why must her version be watered down? It would seem ironically dogmatic of you to force her to believe in everything the modern church or even the Bible teaches in order to keep her in the box you have created for theists. For her, God may be totally separate from church membership. Atheists tend to try to keep theists in a corner and fight them there. This woman is out of that corner and you say she is watering down. Maybe, just maybe she actually has other beliefs.
Christianity has one thing other religions don't, and that is martyrdom and eyewitness in the same person. Al Qaeda (for example) die for what they have been taught. The Apostles died for what they SAW. The apostles saw Jesus face to face, claimed He was the Son of God, and died for their message. They should have known wether or not He was the Messiah. Its a case of primary vs. secondary evidence.
Why did you say God's actions = fear, etc. when you say there is no God? His actions cannot be that to you because He has no actions because He does not exist. Don't mistake God with the actions of those who say they are of God.
Wow, because Einstein is totally a theologian... Einstein considered himself neither christian nor atheist. Most quotes by Einstein that involve religious beliefs were stated to appeal to christians. Christians love to quote Einstein because they think, that that makes them smarter. Notice how this woman bobs her head around as if there is something wrong with her. By the way pause the video at 0:12 she looks like an alien, lol.
A decent response, but when you're going to all the trouble to make a video like this, which surely requires a fair amount of time in editing and so on, why not double check your spelling next time? A picky point, maybe, but a valid one nonetheless.
Let's focus on the video that you put out which is full of holes. She differentiated herself from fundies and then you proceeded to disagree with not her comments but what you wanted her to say or thinks she believes, as if she's lying. You did not deal with her comments in the video, but rather this Jerry Falwell, James Dobson, Ted Haggard FrankenChristian. This is the typical atheist fighting stance and its a little wanting.
I don't think a nihilist is necessarily a solipsist. I hate philosophy anyways, in the final analysis its nothing but mental masturbation in my humble opinion.
I really don't see the usefulness in singling out the comments of a progressive Christian who clearly does not believe in a paternalistic diety or take the Bible literally. It doesn't seem constructive at all.
"Let's focus on the video that you put out which is full of holes." just like the bible, but chritians don't seem to notice! most fundies differentiate themselves from other fundies. there is no "typical" atheist fighting stance BITCH!
What you are actually doing is trying to keep her boxed in where you can corner her, therefore perpetuating superficial affirmation of your own beliefs by assuming all theists and Christians think exactly the same. Most atheists don't like debating Universalist Christians, liberal Christians or theists because it's easier to debate fundamentalists. That's no accomplishment. Your assessment of her thoughts is what's REALLY telling.
Well, since your argument is so thorough.....OKAY! Do you really think you are on the same level as Dawkins and Hitchens? Guess what? You're not. Do you think you're convincing me. Anyone else. Do you think YOU'RE arguments are deconverting? They're not. DEAL WITH THAT AND LET THAT BURN YOUR CHEST!
So you reason that the best way to get people to listen to you and see things your way is to insult them. hmmm. Good luck with that. "reason shouldn't need support from anyone" Have you seen the video on youtube entitled "Richard Dawkins: An atheist's call to arms"? Dawkins seems to think reason does need support. So does Sam Harris.
gospelmaestro thanx for missing the point! if you want a debate go see g0at or kingheathen! ps sarcasm is the recourse of a weak mind! now fuck off fucktard!
From an objective point of view I am sure she's done more good for those in need then you so stop wasting your time on here and either shut up and good vulunteer to help those in need or take care of the true enemies THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT
Yahweh may be beyond your understanding but I find Yahweh to be very simple. Yahweh is a fictional character in an immoral, evil book of lies called the BuyBull.
Christianity has introduced insanity, hate, violence, hell, Satan, sin, suppression of women, the acceptance of slavery, and many other atrocities to humanity. Where's the love? The crucifixion fiction was insane, pointless and did nothing to 'redeem a broken humanity'. You're delusional.
THANK YOU! THANK YOU SO MUCH! It was an amazing video and the documentary was awesome.
Brilliant Vid. Thank you.
ps. thanks for keeping this dialog going. I do appreciate that you respect my freedom and are willing to discourse with someone who disagrees with you.
thx for clearing that up
If a being does not exist, it has no mind to know.
great vid. Thanks. :)
Amen! :)
PS by harm I mean physical damage
"people draw prejudices from the actions of the few."
I see everyone as an individual that represents their self and then I consider the possibility they also represent a group. So I find it quite annoying when the assumption is reversed.
I use reason all the time! Even when I reason that being a rude arrogant asshole is the best option for me at the time, however reason shouldn't need support from anyone. Reason speaks for itself.
you never fail to make me laugh. please comment on my other videos so I can laugh some more.
You're correct... I'm not very good at insulting another person. You on the other hand do it quite well. You must practice often. Insults are the recourse of a lesser mind. I find myself unable to stoop to your level.
"Jesus died too soon. If he had lived to my age he would have repudiated his doctrine."
Friedrich Nietzsche
to the video remark "what bible is she reading"
i feel as if much of the moderate christian nation have adopted a new and modern sort of religion, one that takes the morals and values that they like, and a view of God that doesn't conflict with scientific reasoning
They give support and legitimacy to the fundies.
I know it's a canadian tv show but I don't remember the name.
I'm saying the Bible is true (for other reasons as well) because the apostles wrote the Bible, the apostles died for their message, and the apostles saw Jesus face to face. There's a lot of historical evidence behind it. And there's a lot more proof of the Bible on my channel.
Read my comment again. I didn't intend to imply that being christian necessarily involves churches and my comment 'little to do with following the bible or worshipping christ' was intended to reflect this.
I called her 'god is love' rhetoric for the bullshit it was and I still think that her use of this as a basis to accuse anyone of arrogance is staggering -- particularly after her accusation at atheists.
Now, did I sense some projection?
She doesn't say faith is humble. She says a person humbly of faith (meaning a moderate, non-fundamentalist "believer") would never make the assertion that they understand the mind of God. A person of faith (a believer), who is non-fundamentalist does not exhibit the arrogance or pretense of knowing the mind of God. What's contentious about that?
I don't expect anyone to listen or see things my way so I reason it's more fun to insult and mock them.
"Dawkins seems to think reason does need support. So does Sam Harris."
in what sense?
what do you do to support reason?
PS
how do you reason with unreasonable people?
what is the first step toward becoming a reasonable person?
can two reasonable people given the same information come to two different conclusions?
I can't say that I've read all of Nietzsche but what I have read did not seem to hold jesus in a 'deep reverence'. Perhaps you could support your claim with a quote.
maxpolaris99
you appear to be correct.
odd that Nihilist127 didn't know that!?
"in the final analysis its nothing but mental masturbation in my humble opinion."
I've often said that about religion, superstition, and philosophy but without the humble part and I state it as fact to sound even more arrogant.
Nothing hostile at all. I just rebutted your comments on what is an open forum.
Christianity introduced into humanity a concept of love called agape, a love so radical that is must be inhuman or Godly. God so loved humanity that God would sacrifice itself to redeem a broken humanity. For me, for a Christian there are several ways to approach God but never to know God. 1) the bible as proximate witness and thousands of years of a tribe wrestling with and trembling before G_d. 2) The cross and empty tomb 3) Love, the face of Christ seen in people in meet.
"You sir are an ass for subjecting..."
in order for you to call me an ass, you must first acknowledge my existence.
so, coming from a nihilist, I'll take it as a compliment.
No, your comments haven't harmed me.
Granted you're not every atheist but whether you like it or not, people draw prejudices from the actions of the few.
Excuse me if I'm wrong when I assume you're trying to support the cause of reason but I don't think your earlier, rude comments are helping the spread of reason.
The fundamentalist believer sees the holy text as a way to the mind of God and thus can use the bible for instance as a weapon of hatred against pro choice, gays and lesbians etc. The atheist typically is also a humanists who sees himself as the measure of all things and believes science/reason will lead us to understanding the logos/logic of the universe. Logos is what atheists call God.
What exactly was it specifically about my initial comment that sparked your seemingly hostile reply?
I don't like rhetoric when it is used in place of an actual argument.
Ouch, that reply hurt. Almost as sohpisticated as "I know you are but what am I?" If you're so honoured please spend a few years reading him as I have and then we'll talk. But suffice to say he would never so reductively and ignorantly of Christianity. In fact, Nietzsche had a deep reverence for Christ, his disdain was mainly with what we today would call organized religion. You must be American- so facile...Cheers
How is it that you understand the motivations as to why Theologians "love to quote Einstein"? That they do so to validate their religious views? Perhaps some theologians quote Einstein to highlight the compatibility of science and theology. Perhaps they do it on Monday's or when there's a full moon. The point is perhaps you should let the theologians speak as to why they are quoting Einstein and not impute motives to them.
..............?
"Especially when it's in the name of atheism..."
as if one person can speak in the "name of atheism and reason"
I'm an atheist, but I do NOT represent atheism!
No one does & no one can!
I'm an individual and I only represent myself.
I belong to no group and never will.
you may be an atheist but you still have a group mentality!
I do respect your freedom to do and believe whatever you want as long as it doesn't harm anyone of infringe on the freedom of another.
have my comments harmed you?
"Your" instead of "You're"
What show is this from and or who is the guy who's talking at the end?
she said "what if god is love"
this is just as retarded as saying
god is a really good bowl movement!
what word(s) are misspelled?
If god is love, as the women in the video redefines it to accuse Dawkins of arrogance, then does that not mean, assuming her new definition is correct, that there is no basis for churches, rituals or worshipping???
While her rhetoric may be both a justification and a comfort to likewise minded people, it has no basis either logic or reality and has little to do with following the bible or worshipping christ. That she chooses to defend a watered down version of her own beliefs is telling.
I can read tiny minds and Theologians minds are microscopic.
Science and religion are not compatible. Science is about discovering truth and religion is about believing bullshit. Although one could argue that bullshit is more useful than religion and far more useful than a gawd.
Why must her version be watered down? It would seem ironically dogmatic of you to force her to believe in everything the modern church or even the Bible teaches in order to keep her in the box you have created for theists. For her, God may be totally separate from church membership. Atheists tend to try to keep theists in a corner and fight them there. This woman is out of that corner and you say she is watering down. Maybe, just maybe she actually has other beliefs.
Christianity has one thing other religions don't, and that is martyrdom and eyewitness in the same person.
Al Qaeda (for example) die for what they have been taught.
The Apostles died for what they SAW.
The apostles saw Jesus face to face, claimed He was the Son of God, and died for their message. They should have known wether or not He was the Messiah.
Its a case of primary vs. secondary evidence.
What does Chrsitanity have to do with this video? I never heard her mention Christ. Atheists have a bias against Christians, not Christ.
Fuck 'em both!
Why did you say God's actions = fear, etc. when you say there is no God? His actions cannot be that to you because He has no actions because He does not exist. Don't mistake God with the actions of those who say they are of God.
Wow, because Einstein is totally a theologian...
Einstein considered himself neither christian nor atheist. Most quotes by Einstein that involve religious beliefs were stated to appeal to christians. Christians love to quote Einstein because they think, that that makes them smarter. Notice how this woman bobs her head around as if there is something wrong with her. By the way pause the video at 0:12 she looks like an alien, lol.
A decent response, but when you're going to all the trouble to make a video like this, which surely requires a fair amount of time in editing and so on, why not double check your spelling next time? A picky point, maybe, but a valid one nonetheless.
**YAWN**. Okay, sure....
Let's focus on the video that you put out which is full of holes. She differentiated herself from fundies and then you proceeded to disagree with not her comments but what you wanted her to say or thinks she believes, as if she's lying. You did not deal with her comments in the video, but rather this Jerry Falwell, James Dobson, Ted Haggard FrankenChristian. This is the typical atheist fighting stance and its a little wanting.
I don't think a nihilist is necessarily a solipsist.
I hate philosophy anyways, in the final analysis its nothing but mental masturbation in my humble opinion.
I really don't see the usefulness in singling out the comments of a progressive Christian who clearly does not believe in a paternalistic diety or take the Bible literally. It doesn't seem constructive at all.
"Let's focus on the video that you put out which is full of holes."
just like the bible, but chritians don't seem to notice!
most fundies differentiate themselves from other fundies.
there is no "typical" atheist fighting stance BITCH!
What you are actually doing is trying to keep her boxed in where you can corner her, therefore perpetuating superficial affirmation of your own beliefs by assuming all theists and Christians think exactly the same. Most atheists don't like debating Universalist Christians, liberal Christians or theists because it's easier to debate fundamentalists. That's no accomplishment. Your assessment of her thoughts is what's REALLY telling.
*bowel* maybe?
Well, since your argument is so thorough.....OKAY! Do you really think you are on the same level as Dawkins and Hitchens? Guess what? You're not. Do you think you're convincing me. Anyone else. Do you think YOU'RE arguments are deconverting? They're not. DEAL WITH THAT AND LET THAT BURN YOUR CHEST!
Its realy stupid for you to judge her after and then admiting you don't even know her
So you reason that the best way to get people to listen to you and see things your way is to insult them. hmmm. Good luck with that.
"reason shouldn't need support from anyone"
Have you seen the video on youtube entitled "Richard Dawkins: An atheist's call to arms"? Dawkins seems to think reason does need support. So does Sam Harris.
gospelmaestro thanx for missing the point!
if you want a debate go see g0at or kingheathen!
ps sarcasm is the recourse of a weak mind!
now fuck off fucktard!
Atheists do not call anything god
From an objective point of view I am sure she's done more good for those in need then you so stop wasting your time on here and either shut up and good vulunteer to help those in need or take care of the true enemies THE RELIGIOUS RIGHT
Yahweh may be beyond your understanding but I find Yahweh to be very simple.
Yahweh is a fictional character in an immoral, evil book of lies called the BuyBull.
She is a lesbian feminist crazy person.
Christianity has introduced insanity, hate, violence, hell, Satan, sin, suppression of women, the acceptance of slavery, and many other atrocities to humanity. Where's the love? The crucifixion fiction was insane, pointless and did nothing to 'redeem a broken humanity'. You're delusional.
gospelmaestro
D A H !
there is no god fucktard! deal with it!
no, I shit your god!