Post Reply

sleazy p martini wrote: Belief in a PERSONAL god is alright by me. Just that religion sucks ass...Too mny rules and regultions to further seperate you from your conception of your PERSONAL god

I could easily come up with a new religion that prevents you from thinking about a “personal god”.

Maggot Face wrote: It is a number I pulled out of my ass. However, I never asserted it as any kind of probability.

Sorry, it just sounded like that. Guess I misunderstood you.

It is a number I pulled out of my ass. However, I never asserted it as any kind of probability.

angeloelibz24 wrote:

Shaun of the Living wrote: What about Christian fundies who deny evolutionary science because they want to believe in creationism?

I am a Catholic, but I don’t believe on the Bible’s explanation of creationism. In fact, there are Catholics who considers the Book of Genesis entirely symbolical, not real. Did the writer of Genesis referred from any kind of source to write the book, or did any of the other parts of the Bible said he did, or did he simply just wrote it by himself and with his own interpretation of the environment around him?

Symbolic… Too bad we can take a cook book, and turn that into the symbolic meaning of creation.

Shaun of the Living wrote: What about Christian fundies who deny evolutionary science because they want to believe in creationism?

I am a Catholic, but I don’t believe on the Bible’s explanation of creationism. In fact, there are Catholics who considers the Book of Genesis entirely symbolical, not real. Did the writer of Genesis referred from any kind of source to write the book, or did any of the other parts of the Bible said he did, or did he simply just wrote it by himself and with his own interpretation of the environment around him?

RageOverdose wrote:

Shaun of the Living wrote:
How can it be most likely a deity exists yet simeltaneously be most likely that no deities exist when those opposite statements directly contradict each other in objective reality? That’s like a doctor saying to a patient “You have an 80% chance of survival in this operation and an 80% chance of dying.“

The problem here is you’re making logical assumptions that aren’t necessarily valid, although they are logical. There are other options besides right and wrong; you’re the one being to absolute here.
He may believe deities exist, but he may have doubts and/or is willing to accept they don’t exist. He may feel both are equally probable, and chose one based upon a number of factors, such as comfort, conformity, or just hope.
I mean, everyone has doubts of what they believe at some point. You’re taking a BS percentage and trying to mathematically analyze it as if you were in a probability class, which I find unfair.

It’s not unfair for shawn to basically say “you pulled that percentage out of your ass”.

Shaun of the Living wrote:
How can it be most likely a deity exists yet simeltaneously be most likely that no deities exist when those opposite statements directly contradict each other in objective reality? That’s like a doctor saying to a patient “You have an 80% chance of survival in this operation and an 80% chance of dying.“

The problem here is you’re making logical assumptions that aren’t necessarily valid, although they are logical. There are other options besides right and wrong; you’re the one being to absolute here.

He may believe deities exist, but he may have doubts and/or is willing to accept they don’t exist. He may feel both are equally probable, and chose one based upon a number of factors, such as comfort, conformity, or just hope.

I mean, everyone has doubts of what they believe at some point. You’re taking a BS percentage and trying to mathematically analyze it as if you were in a probability class, which I find unfair.

RageOverdose wrote: How so? In mathematics, the inverse of one statement is not necessarily true if the statement is true. I think this can be applied to people too.

He may accept all ideas as probable, but chose one based upon a number of factors.

How can it be most likely a deity exists yet simeltaneously be most likely that no deities exist when those opposite statements directly contradict each other in objective reality? That’s like a doctor saying to a patient “You have an 80% chance of survival in this operation and an 80% chance of dying."

RageOverdose wrote:
Considering he pulled that figure from his ass, it was probably just representing that he has a shred of doubt. I won’t assume you are, but it seems like you’re being too analytical of him and what he says.

I just don’t think any human has the knowledge to say whether the existence of unknown deities in the universe is most likely false or not. That’s really all I have a problem with.

RageOverdose wrote: What facts do you have in mind? Is it that Moses has no other records? Is it that many things in the Bible are reminiscent of earlier religions? Is it the fact the universe is older than a few ten-thousand years? Is it the fact man wrote it?

I was talking about people being wrong in general, not necessarily Christianity. The same statements I made go for me when I’m wrong. Either flawed logic has caused me to come to the wrong conclusion (it is possible by chance to come to the right conclusion through flawed logic, but this is often unlikely) or I am thinking the right way but am missing or mis-interpreting some of the evidence at hand.

RageOverdose wrote: So you just adapt to the morals around your society? Even if they regard things a previous society regarded immoral?

My morals are personal and self-admittedly subjective. If I disagree with the morals of the society I live in then I obey the laws that I need to in order to survive and live a good life, unless I find a way to ignore them without getting caught, which I won’t always do if my own morals tell me it’s wrong. My personal morals are also subject to extreme change due to mood and circumstances.

Shaun of the Living wrote:
I don’t think MaggotFace is being absolute, but by believing a deity probably exists, you are, in effect, believing the idea that no deities exist is probably wrong. You can’t believe something is probably wrong and probably right at the same time when it comes to the existence of an being in objective reality. I don’t have a problem with that, I’m not trying to force him to give up his belief, I just think he made up that probability without any real knowledge of how probable it actually is.

How so? In mathematics, the inverse of one statement is not necessarily true if the statement is true. I think this can be applied to people too.

He may accept all ideas as probable, but chose one based upon a number of factors.

Shaun of the Living wrote: I specifically stated that I don’t believe he doesn’t, however, I find it extremely hard to imagine how someone could calculate the likeliness of the existence of dieties in the universe, especially when deities could easily prevent themselves from becoming known if they wanted to (which makes me wonder if theism is falsifiable)

Considering he pulled that figure from his ass, it was probably just representing that he has a shred of doubt. I won’t assume you are, but it seems like you’re being too analytical of him and what he says.

Shaun of the Living wrote: Either they are ignorant in some way of the facts or they’re thinking the wrong way. That’s basically what I think is going on, yes.

What facts do you have in mind? Is it that Moses has no other records? Is it that many things in the Bible are reminiscent of earlier religions? Is it the fact the universe is older than a few ten-thousand years? Is it the fact man wrote it?

Shaun of the Living wrote: You’re asking if a belief in good is good or bad to somebody who doesn’t believe in good or bad.

So you just adapt to the morals around your society? Even if they regard things a previous society regarded immoral?

sleazy p martini wrote: Belief in a PERSONAL god is alright by me. Just that religion sucks ass...Too mny rules and regultions to further seperate you from your conception of your PERSONAL god

qft