Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,808 Year: 3,065/9,624 Month: 910/1,588 Week: 93/223 Day: 4/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Anti-theistic strawmen?
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 106 of 145 (425552)
10-02-2007 5:54 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by ringo
10-02-2007 5:46 PM


How is one person's ordinary philosphizing distinguishable from another's?
it isn't.
how can you separate childish theology from mature theology?
i think it's some rubbish about considering multiple sources and cultural insights and experience rather than charisma and good feelings.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 102 by ringo, posted 10-02-2007 5:46 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 108 by ringo, posted 10-02-2007 6:08 PM macaroniandcheese has not replied

  
macaroniandcheese 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3927 days)
Posts: 4258
Joined: 05-24-2004


Message 107 of 145 (425554)
10-02-2007 5:56 PM
Reply to: Message 105 by crashfrog
10-02-2007 5:51 PM


i thought it was really a blatantly obvious part of this whole discussion that no one can disprove god. this is no giant proof, but it is what it is.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by crashfrog, posted 10-02-2007 5:51 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by crashfrog, posted 10-02-2007 6:39 PM macaroniandcheese has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 411 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 108 of 145 (425558)
10-02-2007 6:08 PM
Reply to: Message 106 by macaroniandcheese
10-02-2007 5:54 PM


brennakimi writes:
quote:
how can you separate childish theology from mature theology?
i think it's some rubbish about considering multiple sources and cultural insights and experience rather than charisma and good feelings.
Sooo... there's no way to tell the "strawman" from the real man? Then no strawman has been demonstrated, as I've been saying all along.

“Faith moves mountains, but only knowledge moves them to the right place” -- Joseph Goebbels
-------------
Help scientific research in your spare time. No cost. No obligation.
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 106 by macaroniandcheese, posted 10-02-2007 5:54 PM macaroniandcheese has not replied

  
Rahvin
Member
Posts: 4032
Joined: 07-01-2005
Member Rating: 9.2


Message 109 of 145 (425562)
10-02-2007 6:28 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by Cold Foreign Object
10-02-2007 5:49 PM


Re: Atheist-communist-evolutionists and murder
You have misunderstood. Nobody denies his "religious fervor." We are attempting to verify its validity.
Which is impossible. There is no way to truly know the motivations of another individual. All we can go by is their stated motivations - in Hitlers case, his reasons were religious in nature.
His actions were protested by the Church to no avail.
Which church? Not the Catholic Church. Not when the actions were actually taking place.
Since you believe Hitler, I am relieved and complimented. Your approval of my historical knowledge would have made me like you said.
My "approval" is irrelevant. Your statements are devoid of facts. You equate atheism with mass murder, and so you fanatically defend the idea that Hitler was an atheist in spite of evidence to the contrary, and with zero supporting evidence of your own other than your "atheist=bad, bad=atheist" circular argument. You're simply delusional and wrong, Ray.

Every time a fundy breaks the laws of thermodynamics, Schroedinger probably kills his cat.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 10-02-2007 5:49 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 110 of 145 (425566)
10-02-2007 6:39 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by macaroniandcheese
10-02-2007 5:56 PM


i thought it was really a blatantly obvious part of this whole discussion that no one can disprove god.
The existence of atheists proves that it's quite possible to establish to a reasonable person's satisfaction that there's no such thing as God.
Getting theists to understand that there's abundant evidence against the existence of God may or may not be possible, until they're willing to approach their own beliefs with the same objectivity with which they came to disbelieve in Santa Claus.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 107 by macaroniandcheese, posted 10-02-2007 5:56 PM macaroniandcheese has not replied

  
Vacate
Member (Idle past 4600 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 10-01-2006


Message 111 of 145 (425569)
10-02-2007 6:57 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by Cold Foreign Object
10-02-2007 5:31 PM


Re: Atheist-communist-evolutionists and murder
My identification that Hitler was an Atheist is based on the fact that he was a mass murderer, and based on this fact, we conclude that he was also a liar.
Based on the fact that Crashfrog admits to being an Atheist, he must therefore be a liar.
I simply explain the fact that you believe a mass murderer when he claimed to be a Christian by pointing out that you are an Atheist.
Based on the fact that you believe Crashfrog when he says hes an atheist I can conclude that you are also an atheist and a liar.
Nobody in their right mind would believe anything that Hitler said.
Because he was an atheist, like Crashfrog - the one you believe
Given that I say Hitler was a nut, I can safely say that I am neither a liar nor a mass murderer.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 10-02-2007 5:31 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by Chiroptera, posted 10-02-2007 7:00 PM Vacate has not replied

  
iceage 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5914 days)
Posts: 1024
From: Pacific Northwest
Joined: 09-08-2003


Message 112 of 145 (425570)
10-02-2007 6:58 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by Cold Foreign Object
10-02-2007 5:49 PM


Fervor versus Validity
Ray writes:
You have misunderstood. Nobody denies his "religious fervor." We are attempting to verify its validity.
Just like Ray, we understand your rabid superstitionist religious fervor but what have we to verify its validity? We have continuous fallacious reasonings, belligerent name calling, errant misinterpretations of scripture, boastfully claiming to know God's thoughts, intemperance, etc.
Edited by iceage, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 10-02-2007 5:49 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

  
Chiroptera
Inactive Member


Message 113 of 145 (425572)
10-02-2007 7:00 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by Vacate
10-02-2007 6:57 PM


Cretans, unite!
Ooh, good point.
Since crashfrog is an atheist, he must be a liar. So when he says he's an atheist, he must be lying. Oh, wait a minute....

In many respects, the Bible was the world's first Wikipedia article. -- Doug Brown (quoted by Carlin Romano in The Chronicle Review)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by Vacate, posted 10-02-2007 6:57 PM Vacate has not replied

  
EighteenDelta
Inactive Member


Message 114 of 145 (425575)
10-02-2007 7:38 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by Cold Foreign Object
10-02-2007 5:31 PM


Re: Atheist-communist-evolutionists and murder
God is a mass murderer, you still seem to believe him.
Moses was a mass murderer. Abraham, David, etc. the list goes on, you still believe them.
Hitler was just carrying out the age old Christian traditions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 10-02-2007 5:31 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

  
iceage 
Suspended Member (Idle past 5914 days)
Posts: 1024
From: Pacific Northwest
Joined: 09-08-2003


Message 115 of 145 (425592)
10-02-2007 9:25 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by Cold Foreign Object
10-02-2007 4:15 PM


On the Jews and Their Lies
Ray writes:
Millions of persons murdered in the most horrifying ways possible says he was indeed an Atheist.
LOL.
So by this reasoning the killem-all-but-keep-the-virgins" authors of the OT are atheist too?
Wasn't Hitler influenced by Martin Luther? Martin Luther's treatise "On the Jews and Their Lies" was displayed by the National Socialist party at their rallies.
On the Jews and Their Lies - Wikipedia
referenced source writes:
Luther wrote that the Jews are a "base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth." They are full of the "devil's feces ... which they wallow in like swine," and the synagogue is an "incorrigible whore and an evil slut ..." He argues that their synagogues and schools should be set on fire, their prayer books destroyed, rabbis forbidden to preach, homes razed, and property and money confiscated. They should be shown no mercy or kindness, afforded no legal protection, and these "poisonous envenomed worms" should be drafted into forced labor or expelled for all time. He also seems to advocate their murder, writing "we are at fault in not slaying them.
Something was rotten in the state of Germany and Martin Luther was one of the original instigators and philosophical leaders.
Here is some objective evidence that Hitler was influenced by theist.
Edited by iceage, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 10-02-2007 4:15 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by anglagard, posted 10-03-2007 3:24 AM iceage has not replied

  
anglagard
Member (Idle past 836 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 116 of 145 (425600)
10-03-2007 3:24 AM
Reply to: Message 115 by iceage
10-02-2007 9:25 PM


Re: On the Jews and Their Lies
iceage writes:
Something was rotten in the state of Germany and Martin Luther was one of the original instigators and philosophical leaders.
This assertion is supported by modern scholarship beyond any doubt. One of the best books dealing with the entire anti-semitic phenomenon in Europe in general and Germany in particular prior to the Third Reich is Hitler's Willing Executioners by Daniel Goldhagen.

Read not to contradict and confute, not to believe and take for granted, not to find talk and discourse, but to weigh and consider - Francis Bacon
The more we understand particular things, the more we understand God - Spinoza

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by iceage, posted 10-02-2007 9:25 PM iceage has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 117 of 145 (425603)
10-03-2007 3:41 AM


Definitely offtopic
Perhaps a map will help, I found this one on the intertubes.
Hitler? Genocide? The evils of atheism? Evolutionism? Then read this map:
And decide how to get back on topic for yourself, thanks.

Replies to this message:
 Message 119 by bluegenes, posted 10-03-2007 12:08 PM Modulous has not replied

  
Archer Opteryx
Member (Idle past 3597 days)
Posts: 1811
From: East Asia
Joined: 08-16-2006


Message 118 of 145 (425647)
10-03-2007 10:59 AM
Reply to: Message 91 by Cold Foreign Object
10-02-2007 4:50 PM


Re: Atheist-communist-evolutionists and murder
Jeez. You walk away for day...
I know one thing I believe in. Thread devolution.
It's REAL! It's REAL! I BELIEVE!!!
______
Edited by Archer Opterix, : added drama.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 10-02-2007 4:50 PM Cold Foreign Object has not replied

  
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2477 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 119 of 145 (425653)
10-03-2007 12:08 PM
Reply to: Message 117 by Modulous
10-03-2007 3:41 AM


Re: Definitely offtopic
Perhaps a map will help...
Perhaps a diversionary thread will help, so I've proposed a Hitler one, and perhaps it could be promoted (hint, hint).
On topic, I don't really see anyone making a good case for Dawkins' view of religion being a strawman version.
We need someone to explain exactly what the sophisticated adult understanding of God that he's supposed to be missing actually is.
The "Root of all Evil" programmes were deliberately aimed at a broad audience on a major national U.K. TV channel. If Dawkins wanted to have complex "highbrow" discussions about God with theologians, he could've stayed amongst the dreaming spires of Oxford and done so (he probably has, at some point).
As such people only represent a microscopic proportion of the world's religious, perhaps Dawkins is right in seeing the Gods and religions of the masses as being much more important.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 117 by Modulous, posted 10-03-2007 3:41 AM Modulous has not replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 120 of 145 (425666)
10-03-2007 4:34 PM


Sophisticated theology
I've tried looking for this sophisticated theology. More specifically, I've gone looking for the God of sophisticated theology. I've sought it with thimbles, I've sought it with care; I've pursued it with forks and hope; I threatened its life with a railway-share; I charmed it with smiles and soap.' And oh, beamish theologians, beware of the day your God be a Boojum! For then it will softly and suddenly vanish away, and never be met with again!'
Here is Tillich's God:
quote:
"God does not exist. He is being itself beyond essence and existence. Therefore to argue that God exists is to deny him."
The best I've managed to ascertain from Tillich is that God is beyond space and time and is infinite. All knowledge of the divine is symbolic. The only way knowledge of the divine can be obtained is through revelation. I'm not sure on his ideas about prayer, I see this:
quote:
God's directing creativity is the answer to the question of the meaning of prayer, especially prayers of supplication and prayers of intercession. Neither type of prayer can mean that God is expected to acquiesce in interfering with existential conditions. Both mean that God is asked to direct the given situation toward fulfilment. The prayers are an element in this situation, a most powerful factor if they are true prayers. As an element in the situation a prayer is a condition of God's directing creativity, but the form of this creativity may be the complete rejection of the manifest content of the prayer. Nevertheless, the prayer may have been heard according to its hidden content which is the surrender of a fragment of existence to God. ... Every serious prayer contains power, not because of the intensity of desire expressed in it, but because of the faith the person has in God's directing activity - a faith which transforms the existential situation.
Here is my translation:

God's directing creativity is the answer to the question of the meaning of prayer, especially prayers of supplication and prayers of intercession. Prayer doesn't mean that God will actually do anything real. It means that someone is asking God to continue applying cause and effect until humans judge the situation to be 'fulfilled'. False prayers are an element in asking God to apply cause and effect and true prayers are a powerful factor. Since God is creative he doesn't have to do anything about the prayer. Nevertheless God appreciates that you are a sucker for thinking prayer will work ... It's not the prayer that changes existence, but the faith behind the prayer
So, by asking God to bring a situation to fulfillment, he may or may not do so. However, by having faith in God, you can change the real world.
This seems to me to be indirectly saying that in some sense of the word: Prayers have an effect on the real world, sort of, kind of, ish. This is addressed by Dawkins. Dawkins also deals with revelation as a means of knowing something.
That said - this is clearly not the theology of the Bible, this is basically general 'theism' with appeals to the Bible when things can remain vague and to refer to the Bible as symbolic metaphor at other times. I don't see a lot of beef here, but whenever this God has an effect on the world, it enters the realm of the kind of deity Dawkins is opposing. Whenever this God is a vague, indefinable being who doesn't exist - Dawkins states that he isn't arguing against that other than in a 'based on what, exactly?' argument.
Let us remind ourselves how Dawkins is using terms:
Dawkins writes:
Let's remind ourselves of the terminology. A theist believes in a supernatural intelligence who, in addition to his main work of creating the universe in the first place, is still around to oversee and influence the subsequent fate of his initial creation. In many theistic belief systems, the deity is intimately involved in human affairs. He answers prayers; forgives or punishes sins; intervenes in the world by performing miracles; frets about good and bad deeds, and knows when we do them (or even think of doing them). A deist, too, believes in a supernatural intelligence, but one whose activities were confined to setting up the laws that govern the universe in the first place. The deist God never intervenes thereafter, and certainly has no specific interest in human affairs. Pantheists don't believe in a supernatural God at all, but use the word God as a nonsupernatural synonym for Nature, or for the Universe, or for the lawfulness that governs its workings. Deists differ from theists in that their God does not answer prayers, is not interested in sins or confessions, does not read our thoughts and does not intervene with capricious miracles. Deists differ from pantheists in that the deist God is some kind of cosmic intelligence, rather than the pantheist's metaphoric or poetic synonym for the laws of the universe. Pantheism is sexed-up atheism. Deism is watered-down theism.
So, either Tillich is a theist and his God has some effect on the world or he is a deist and his God doesn't. He sounds like a strange mix of the two to me. His God has some effect on the world, can fulfil somethings and faith provides magical powers. Only it seems not in a definable way, just in a vague noncomittal sort of way. It looks Dawkins is not dealing with this kind of theology, except when it proposes intervention/revelation by a supernatural entity (or being beyond existence and essence if we want to be sophisticated about it).
I see no strawman here. Any suggestions anyone?

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024