God, with a capital "G"

[Vextor]

I'm a strong believer in the all powerful creator of all things, the FSM (Flying Spaghetti Monster). Pastafarians are growing in numbers, and have argued with a number of school boards in the USA that were trying to teach Intelligent Design along with Evolution... that they need to devote an equal amount of time teaching kids about how the Almighty FSM created the world (and how Jesus was one of His sons). Unfortunately the school board rejected both the Pastafarian account and Intelligent Design, but still nobody has been able to prove that Jesus wasn't the son of the Flying Spaghetti Monster (there's actually a huge reward out there for anybody who can prove otherwise).

On an unrelated note, there are religions out there that don't really care much about creation, or explaining the natural world. Buddhism and Shintoism for one thing devote very little time (or none at all) to explaining natural phenomenon because it's not important in their faith. Even among scholars of religious studies, there's continuous debate as to how exactly "religion" can be defined-- and there have been entire books written about this subject. There's no "obvious definition" of religion.

[Raww Le Klueze]

The Flying Spaghetti Monster and his noodly appendage? Please. Everyone knows the Celestial Teapot is where it's at.

Though the Invisible Pink Unicorn is looking interesting but I'll have to see it first to make up my mind.

[Crowley Reborn]

I'll admit, I just sorta stumbled back into this thread.
But my take on this entire thing is that everyone needs to relax. Seriously. Religious fanatics are a bit extreme, and nobody should ever have beliefs shoved down their throat, nor should they be in any way condemned for something they believe (like someone else has said, the "right" religion is usually the one you were raised under--so why should we berate someone who was raised differently?)
But in the same sense... and really, I may be generalizing, but having been at a UC campus for so long, I see a very extreme atheist movement, which to me seems ironic.
Gilgamesh, I'm calling you out. You're being a dick. You don't believe? That's fantastic. Try having a logical discussion that doesn't involve you belittling your opposition via slander and ridicule.
Something I absolutely cannot stand (liberals and conservatives alike, but I see it more with libs) is someone ending an argument with a "you're ignorant" or "you just don't know what you're talking about." Biggest copout ever.
So, Gilgamesh... way to copout and not join us as an intellect. Way to not try to make others feel welcome. Way to really shove your atheistic views down everyone's throats.

Oh yea. Went on a tangent. What I really meant to post was that I hate how atheists have such an extreme stance against religion; it's cool that you don't believe, but isn't it kind of paradoxical to create groups and institutions based on atheism? Sounds like a religion to me, and atheism seems to claim to be an anti-religious view...
Irony? Or hypocrisy?

[son_michael]

gilgamesh obviously has an anger problem. You can't have a debate with someone that can't control his temper. Not sure why you came back Crowley(considering your history) but thanks for trying to have my back. This is pretty much a religion bashing thread now, hell when the admin comes in and utterly ridicules a person's faith and beliefs....that's when you know its time to let the thread die.

so with that said, this will be my last post in this thread unless there's some kind of revival movement in here or something lol. I suggest you get out as well and lets let these wonderful people bash faith and people's beliefs so that they can feel good about themselves.


As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord.

[gilgamesh31]

Gilgamesh, I'm calling you out. You're being a dick. You don't believe? That's fantastic. Try having a logical discussion that doesn't involve you belittling your opposition via slander and ridicule.

Firstly calling me a dick online displays youre imatureness and stupidity right away, you see by you attempting to belittling me immedietly before you accuse me of belittling people you have proven youre self to be a hypocrite another thing you also accused me of. And come off it the holy texts are the best belitterers in history they are basically sexist and homophobic or do you just choose not to follow some points of it just others that suit your way of thinking?

omething I absolutely cannot stand (liberals and conservatives alike, but I see it more with libs) is someone ending an argument with a "you're ignorant" or "you just don't know what you're talking about." Biggest copout ever.
So, Gilgamesh... way to copout and not join us as an intellect.

Secondly can i have an exact quote from myself when i say: "you're ignorant" or "you just don't know what you're talking about." cause i sure cant find one. So way to completely "Copout" in your own words actually " Biggest copout ever" wasnt it and as far as intellect, wheres youre end of the bargin? Religion doesnt require intellect you merly have to be extreamly susceptible to complete bullshit and be good at doing what youre told, basically people of faith dont think for themselves.

Oh yea. Went on a tangent. What I really meant to post was that I hate how atheists have such an extreme stance against religion; it's cool that you don't believe, but isn't it kind of paradoxical to create groups and institutions based on atheism? Sounds like a religion to me, and atheism seems to claim to be an anti-religious view...
Irony? Or hypocrisy?

Lastly atheism is not a religion its just a lable that we didnt even create ourselves, we dont condem others for who they are (Race/sexulaity Religion doesnt count as its man mad) we dont follow 2000 year old myths to the T and we dont feed people lies to control them such as the hell threat ive already mentioned in a previous post and whats up with "god" watching everyone all the time, i mean everyone? he would have to have billions of eyes and what a pervert he truly would be if he did actually exist (which he doesnt).

Religion is a spell that youre under an extreamly effective brainwashing technique, so effective that it makes believers blind to reason is it so bad to try and cure the blind? Remember kids: "absence of evidence is evidence of absence."

[gilgamesh31]

This is pretty much a religion bashing thread now, hell when the admin comes in and utterly ridicules a person's faith and beliefs....that's when you know its time to let the thread die.so with that said, this will be my last post in this thread unless there's some kind of revival movement in here or something lol.

I thought you left six posts ago? or are you going to keep retreating until more sheep arrive so you can all say the same thing together repeatedly? Going on the defensive about attacking faith c'mon im constintly stopped on the street by someone attempting to brainwash me into going to church and if that aint bad enough they even show up at your door like sellsman its disgusting!

. I suggest you get out as well and lets let these wonderful people bash faith and people's beliefs so that they can feel good about themselves.

Yeah bashing faith all day really gets me off...What are you sick? obviously im preaching to the deaf here with you michael but if even one person reads this thread and it wakes them up from faith that would be enough for me.

[Vextor]

What you mean admin comes in and ridicules one's faith? I'm committed to my belief in the FSM, and strongly believe that Jesus is His son. I don't think anything I said is ridicule, but simply an expression of my devotion to the almighty.

[gilgamesh31]

Silly billy son_michael, implying that admin cant have an opinion on their own website what ever is next? Vextor love your work, the forums here and on Suikox have kept me entertained many a boring workday.

'Asslam brother.'

Praise be to The Flying Spaghetti Monster

'Amen'

[Crowley Reborn]

Gilgamesh, I really want to thank you for calming down and acting like an adult here. It's really nice to be able to debate with someone who can control their emotions, especially over the internet. Nothing is more annoying than someone who thinks that fighting with a keyboard using a slew of insults, rhetorical (trivial too, to top it off) questions, and painfully obvious sarcasm.
First off, where did you get the idea that I was in any way religious? I made it very clear in the beginning of my post that nobody should have beliefs shoved down their throat--religious or otherwise.
I didn't call you a dick. You even quoted me, but apparently reading every word is too much work for you. Maybe you're a little too emotional (were you perhaps raised catholic? It's kind of a trend I see for people with the mindset you're letting off here). I said you're BEING a dick. There's a huge difference. If you'd like me to elaborate for you, please ask.
I do NOT have a direct quote of you saying that "you're ignorant" or "you just don't know what you're taking about." BUT, those statements were very much implied in your posts (should I post some definitions of basic English vocabulary, such as tone, syntax, diction...?).
Also, I'd like to ask you about when you said "atheism is...we didnt even create ourselves, we dont condem others for who they are." First thing here, atheism is something that you created yourselves. Not only is it a natural, human inclination to believe in a higher power, thus spawning a religion (almost negating your point of religion being man made, but I'll get there in a moment), but religion is rarely a choice in many people--so many parents raise their kids on a strict religious diet that it's hard to get out of. If you were, say, born and raised in a community of families that abide by Mexican traditions, do you think you would be able to easily abandon those traditions? It's the same with religion. It's not at all different from a tradition (wonder why so many white people in America are Christian? It's because they technically have no traditions, unless you count the south... but that's like a whole other continent.)
Now, religion is no different than a tradition. When you see someone smack a pinata on their birthday, do you think, "What an ignorant dick. Doesn't he know that hitting that pinata is pointless? He could just grab the candy. Asshole." Uh... I really hope you don't. So why would you do that to someone with religion? I thought "you atheists" didn't condemn people?
Really, you're just embarrassing yourself. I left this thread like six years ago because I was being just like you, only on the other side. Hopefully you'll see the light and stop being closed-minded one day.
Until then, I sincerely hope someone doesn't decide to beat you with a crucifix. As much as I love irony... wouldn't wish that on anyone.

[gilgamesh31]

"and the post about the gay people, I really only meant that I dislike the flamboyant gay people. They simply got on my nerves"

Really, you're just embarrassing yourself. I left this thread like six years ago because I was being just like you, only on the other side. Hopefully you'll see the light and stop being closed-minded one day.

Now this is embarrassing, embarrassing for you, like many believers such as yourself although you pretend to be impartial your a hypocrite. These two statements where made in under a 3 year period not 6 as you would have others to believe.

First thing here, atheism is something that you created yourselves. Not only is it a natural, human inclination to believe in a higher power, thus spawning a religion (almost negating your point of religion being man made, but I'll get there in a moment)

???Sorry youre just too dumb...athiest was a lable that non belivers got tagged with infact you probably started this monster of 'extreme' athiesm yourselves by uniting us under one name. Religion is man made, fool! who else made it? did god write the bible? i dont think so. Also youre point about religion being no different than a tradition is a bit wrong, you cant really compare hitting a pinata with tricking people into blowing themselves up in exchange for 99 virgins or wateva the number is. Religion makes good people do evil things without them even realizing it. I think i have a right to be angry that something that consciously turns people against each other and deludes people into a dogmatic mindsets still exists in the modern day. Infact it sickins me, But ill forgive you, its not youre fault youre blind to the truth i actually pity you a little.

[Crowley Reborn]

"Sorry, youre just too dumb" is exactly the copout I mentioned. Congratulations, you're brilliant.
I very much stand by my assertion that tradition and religion are almost identical--the fact that you jumped to the most extreme religious act (which, by the way, is something completely warped out of the Koran, that book doesn't tell anyone to kill themselves. That's an ignorant misconception, FOOL. <-- see what I did there?). Why are you discussing extremes? It makes you look like an ignorant bigot.
Btw, it's seventy two virgins. Maybe you should actually research both sides of your arguments before you start them and make yourself look stupid, FOOL.
Religion is man-made; but whatever made us, be it random chance, a higher power, or biological evolution, there is psychological wiring within us that makes us want to believe in a higher power. It may possibly be the absolute fear of death and nothingness, or something else. The point is, it's natural to want to believe in something greater, and that's how religion started.
You have your beliefs and I have mine. There's no reason for you to be a dick about it. Be mature and relax.
If you have such an issue with something that makes people fight, then why are you fighting about it? Why can't we all just get along? Because when it comes down to it, we're all arguing why we can't get along. "A few religious nuts tried shoving religion down my throat, I'm angry." And on the other end, "These atheists are blaspheming my beliefs and it was someone else who made them angry." See? We'd all get along if people weren't so damn extreme.
And you, sir, are arguing with extremity.
Good day!
I said good day!

[Vextor]

Whoa, personal attacks are not allowed on these forums. Read the rules, because those are "must follow" covenants you agree with when you register for this forum. Calling someone else "dumb" or "fool" constitutes as a personal attack. You can have reasonable disagreements without using these cop-out words which only show you're grasping for straws. Keep it up and you'll be surgically removed with prejudice, precision, and pasta. Ramen!

[Crowley Reborn]

Oops, sorry Vextor! I'm out!

PS Gilgamesh, I love Breath of Fire 3 as well

[gilgamesh31]

well someone had to stop it at some point otherwise we would be arguing until judement day. Im suprised that when i was called a dick the admin didnt intervene then? i mean where i come from being called a dick is far more offensive then being called dumb or fool, and you could argue its in the phrasing but if i said: "youre being dumb" or "your being a fool" it would still be as offensive. Bit of a cop-out, But it was stupid to lower myself to that level, i was completly venting and i didnt mean to make it that personal but anyway thats no excuse.

Ive made my point, any further religious bashing would just be overkill. If people want to live in their delusions they can be my guest. Before i leave or get kicked off for questioning vextor ill just leave you religious nuts out there somethings to consider.

WARNING THOSE OF WEAK FAITH SHOULD NOT READ FURTHER:

Anti-intellectual
All religions have in common that they are faith based. People are taught to believe claims from some ancient text or self-proclaimed spiritual leader, instead of relying on their own senses, evidence and critical thinking. Indeed, as Christopher Hitchens said: "What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."

Anti-scientific
Some religions try to appear "science-friendly" by avoiding statements that clash too obviously with modern science. This however only obscures the fact that the very concept of "faith" is inherently anti-scientific and cannot be tested by using the scientific method.
As all religions rely, at some point, on faith it is easy to show that they are not scientific. A key test of whether or not a hypothesis is scientific is the question of falsifiability. What evidence would the hypothesis' supporters accept as being able to falsify the hypothesis? By definition, as religions are based on faith and not evidence, no evidence can be presented which would persuade a religion's followers it is wrong - and consequently no religion can be scientific.

Cosmic nonsense
The "cosmic argument" is an ill-conceived attempt at "proving" the existence of god (whatever the definition) by suggesting that the universe must have come from "somewhere", or that something must have existed "before". It is obvious however that this argument is based on a Newtonian model of the universe which we now know to be false. Causality is clearly time related, but time does not exist independently of the universe. Rather, spacetime is the universe. So asking what was before the beginning of the universe is asking what was before time, which makes no sense. As Hawking famously put it, it's like asking what's north of the North Pole. It's an ill-posed question.

Creation
The very concept of creation depends on time. Something that did not exist before a given point in time comes to existence through the act of creation and exists from that time on. The universe clearly cannot have been created in this sense, because the universe is spacetime and thus there is no time outside of the universe itself.

God vs. religion
It seems to be clear that a God in the sense of a miracle-working, interventionist deity does not exist, as no evidence of his miracle working interventionist activity can be found. In this case absence of evidence is evidence of absence. Obviously it cannot be excluded that some kind of "god" (whatever that is supposed to be) exists outside of our universe. But even if this were the case, it follows from basic scientific principles like the conservation of energy, that such a "god" cannot interact with the physical world in any way. In particular, he cannot write books, nor can he put thoughts (which consist of electric currents in the brain) into people's heads. This shows that, whether or not god exists, religion is wrong.

Soul
Soul is a type of music, but some people believe it to be some kind of spiritual thingie that every human is supposed to have, and which is supposed to survive when his physical body dies. But since this thing is non-physical, it again cannot interact with the physical world without violating basic science. So we have the same situation as with "god": a "soul" could hypothetically exists, but it can have no connection with the physical world.

NOMA
There are some attempts to "justify" religion by saying that it has no scientific implications. This is called Non-Overlapping Magisteria or NOMA and it is wrong on many levels. First of all, as we have seen above, any assumption that "god" or the "soul" could have a bearing on the physical world, would be clearly within the scope of science. Furthermore the supporters of NOMA seem quite coy about where the NOMA line should be drawn. Religious beliefs are the basis of creationism, intelligent design, and theistic evolution. While many NOMA advocates would happily attack creationism they sometimes hold the NOMA shield up to defend other (their own) religious beliefs - a position which could seem a little intellectually dishonest.

Morality
One of the things which many religions claim to possess is the authority to give eternal moral (or ethical) guidance to their followers. However, the fact that religious beliefs have frequently been important factors in causing or exacerbating divisions between peoples - sometimes even resulting in warfare - rather devalues religion's claim to the moral high ground. Furthermore, it is quite clear that religion's ethical advice is not eternal, as many religions' ethics evolve with society. This is clearly not a bad thing, but it removes religion's ability claim absolute moral standards or to pontificate for all time about morality.

Respect
Finally we have the suggestion that religious ideas should, for some reason, deserve a special measure of respect not given to, say, Homeopathy. (The concept of NOMA, mentioned above, is part of this.) But why should religion deserve this special status of being "respected"? If religions can make a forceful, rational intelligent case then they would be respected for that. If they are unable to present a forceful, rational intelligent case, then whatever respect they get should be based on their failure to do so. We are also sometimes told that we should respect religion because some intelligent people believe in it. This is simply repetition of the argument from authority fallacy, and may be dismissed without further concern.

Responses to this essay
This essay generated an interesting response and associated talk page. Although we had expected the points raised in this essay to be addressed, this unfortunately turned out not to be the case. Indeed, those who objected accepted the main points that that religion is both "not rational" and that "Science is incompatible with religion" - which are the main points being made here. Nevertheless some other points were raised to which a response will now be made.

The title is insulting
The title certainly pulls no punches. However our homeopathy, Feng shui and Demonic possession articles (to name but a few) are explicitly in our bullshit category. It is highly probable that supporters of these concepts would be equally upset by our classification of their beliefs. Why should religion be uniquely immune from criticism?
Many intelligent and/or good people have believed in Religion
Although we address this point in our essay we are taken to task for dismissing this argument. Please find a list of famous intellectual atheists. So what? We can find intellectuals, and good and bad people on both sides of the debate.

In fact, an interesting contrast may be made between these two questions:

Can you think of somebody who committed what you would consider to be an evil act because of his religion?
Can you think of somebody who committed what you would consider to be an evil act because he is atheist?

The essay cherrypicks the parts of religion that are easy to attack
Yes, it does. But if you encounter an idea which seems, at face value, to have obvious problems, a sensible course of action would seem to be to ask questions about these obvious problems - and only consider and deeper ramifications if there are good responses to the obvious initial difficulties.

P.S Crowley Reborn, "well doesnt that beat all"...Im suprised that you enjoy a game where you actually kill god, maybe you should check out Alundra you get to kill god in that to. Actually that may be tierkreis' redeeming feature, as that game is extremely anti-religious something the couldnt really toach on as much in the original suikoden world.

[Vextor]

Different moderators moderate differently, but I only interfere when things start to "get out of hand." However, how I judge whether things are "getting out of hand" is based on my expereince, so there's no standard. I don't believe in setting standards because then people will always exploit that and try to wreak havoc within the standard.

Anyhow, about the explaination of religion above, I have yet to find any single way to define "religion." There always seems to be some religion out there that doesn't fit into these definitions. There are religions out there without any deity, and others with no concept of life after death or creation. Others have no dogma (no holy books or rules), and there are many that have no real organization but remain popular (such as Confucianism). Typically the definition I see of religion seems to be centered around organized monotheisms, but although a huge chunk of the world subscribe to some sort of organized monotheism of the Abrahamic type, there are many other types of religions out there that won't fit the mold.