> >
> >
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues"
<curtisdeltablues@> wrote:
> > >
> > > I think I figured out something important concerning the dialog
between theists and atheists. When theists argue against atheists, it
usually concerns the actual existence of a God. The arguments are often
at the most abstract range of philosophical discussion where metaphysics
and ontology (the study of what exists in philosophy) wander into a
local Starbucks, and after ordering bloatedly caloric peppermint and
gingerbread lattes,sit together eating cake balls off sticks (actual
Starbucks overpriced confectionery)like a couple of dorks.
> --- In [email protected], "Jason" jedi_spock@ wrote:
> >
> > Basicaly, there are two types of Gods. The personal god of
> > Abraham, Issac and Jacob. And the god of the Spinoza,
> > absolutely impersonal having no special people and no active
> > interst in causation.
--- In [email protected], "curtisdeltablues"
<curtisdeltablues@...> wrote:
>
> That is the God of the deists I think. I don't see how any atheist
could have a problem with such ideas as a theory about how this all
began. I certainly don't. But there is a gray area where people claim
special mental states that align them with say abstract natural laws so
they can claim as was claimed about Maharishi, that they are nature
speaking English or have spontaneous "right" action. The claims line
gets kind of fuzzy with the claims of what "higher" or "altered" states
mean. Abstract philosophers don't cross into this gray zone but most
yogic claims do.
>
Actually, there is now some scientific hints that even the
actual act of commencing the big bang itself does not need
God. Heard of the 11 dimensional M theory?
Both data from particle accelerators and far reaching
telescopes give first tantalising glimpses of the existence
of parallel universes and other dimensions. Which means
this so called "god" could be far more impersonal than even
Deists advocate.!
> >
> > Do you think a babbling moron like Robin can make
> > distinctions between the two?
>
> Robin hasn't really clarified or expanded on his theological views. I
believe he does make this distinction, but has given priority to the
personal as being more real in some unexplained sense.
>
>
>
>
> >
> > >
> > > If I hear one more theist announce that you "can't prove that God
does NOT exist" as if proving a negative is even logically possible for
anything, I might just have to replace all those Starbucks' cake balls
with C4 plastic explosives, order my $1.53 coffee-of-the-day, and sit
down to enjoy the fireworks. (Surprisingly little brain matter gets
splattered from the cake-ball-on-a-stick eaters.)
> > >
> > > Wow, sorry about that. I didn't realize my homicidal rage at this
faux Tootsie-pop till I started writing. But in my defense, I sat
through the whole mini cupcake fad without a single peep. It was only
when they covered the little bastards in chocolate and put them on a
stick that I had to say my piece. So where was I...so easily distracted
by food...
> > >
> > > Oh yeah, the problem atheists have has nothing to do with the
existence or non existence of any of the various god ideas that people
enjoy. And the move by theists to frame the discussion in those terms
can now officially cease with this post.
> > >
> > > I have never heard any atheist (and I've read a few) make a case
for the non existence of God. The actual existence of God is not an up
topic. It literally doesn't come up much. It is completely eclipsed by
the actual problem atheist's have is the theist's claim that anyone
knows what God wants.
> > >
> > > That is the problem atheists have with theism. They don't believe
that any of the self-appointed managers for the big guy, are actually
receiving W-9s (Yeah, God never gives health insurance benefits of
fulltime employment just like Maharishi. We are all independent
contractors to save on taxes.) with heaven listed as the address of the
employer and the employment ID number being Pi.
> > >
> > > So if someone holds up say, a Bible, and says, "this is the word
of God and we are going to follow everything in it except the part where
we need to kill people for working on the sabbath because we might run
out of Bud-lite during the football game and might need a 7-11 run
including but not limited to pork rinds and Yahoo. And we can't openly
support slavery or beating women with a rod the thickness of your thumb,
but when you try to bring these cases in front of a judge, don't worry
we will work something out for you. But that thing that says that gay
people are an abomination is the word of God, and we are the right ones
to be making these distinctions..."
> > >
> > > the atheist puts up one of his fingers and says, "I don't mean you
are number one".
> > >
> > > It has nothing to do with the possibility that there might be some
kind of super being out there, or in here or wherever, it has to do with
whether or not it is credible that this particular book can be
distinguished from any other wonderful examples of people making shit up
and repeating the stories again and again until other people forgot that
someone made it up. And back in the day before celebrity publishing
dominated, the catch phrase for anything someone wanted to promote as
the next best seller was that God wrote it, or dictated it, or had it
ghost written for him or her or him dressed like a her.(Yes I mean you
cross-dressing Krishna. The Christian Bible says you are an abomination
with your blue Jersey Shore spray tan.)
> > >
> > > So this is my cause for the New Year. Bringing up this critical
distinction between what atheists actually are saying, and what many
theists want them to be saying because it would be much more convenient
if the burden of proof could be shifted away from the person claiming to
speak for God.
> > >
> > > I want to start the New Year off right by stating unequivocally
that I have never met any human being who I believe is so different from
the rest of us that this specialness can only be explained by actual
contact with the creator of the universe. What I do see are one out of a
million of us, audacious enough to claim to have this connection, and
whole bunches of the rest of us deferring to this claim without
demanding more proof than that he stays up late a lot, giggles at his
own jokes and one time a plane or boat didn't leave without him when it
usually leaves on time. (actual proof offered of Maharishi's special
state of mind)
> > >
> > > I am resisting the temptation to stick the landing with some
cutesy reference to those damn cake pops to tie this whole post together
because I'm serious this time.
> > >
> > > Atheists don't know if there really is some God being. Neither do
theists. Or if they do, they have not made a convincing case to
atheists. But that is a moot point.
> > >
> > > The real point is that nobody knows that God hates gay people so
lets get the F off their backs (unfortunate image I know) and let them
enjoy the hell of marriage like straight people. Because we may not be
living eternally, but being married can sure make it feel as if you are.
> > >
> > > That's as stuck a landing as I'm gunna get.
> > >
> >
>
