And Romans 1:27 says, "In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error." Do you believe that I have had sex with another man? Are you prepared to tell me that I have had sex with another man?
No, I don't. I believe further up in the passage Paul is talking about all non-believers, and then later on he begins listing specific sins demonstrating that we are all sinners in one way or another.
You really should too. Otherwise, when someone said, "There is no God", you would not be able to contradict it.
If it is just some notion that we invented out of thin air and it has no real bearing on reality, then I am not sure why I should. Do you believe that the laws of logic existed during the Big Bang or did they only come into existence when we supposedly invented them?
Logic is the notion that when we talk about stuff, we should have clear definitions for our terms and use the same definition for the same term every time. It is an idea. As with any idea, simply expressing it is both proof of its existence and instantiation of it.
So then logic does not pre-exist human beings? So if another country on another continent binned the fundamental laws of logic and just decided to invent a different set of logical laws...that would be just as valid as our current laws of logic? So if I got enough people together we could develop an equally valid logical system where we replace the law of non-contradiction with the law of contradiction?
Because it's really just the definition of the term "not". When we use "not" to describe any possible situation, in this universe or any other, it will mean the same thing.
I think you have to presuppose the law of non-contradiction to come to that the conclusion.
I believe further up in the passage Paul is talking about all non-believers, and then later on he begins listing specific sins demonstrating that we are all sinners in one way or another.
What textual evidence do you have to support that interpretation? There is no indication that Paul is changing the subject. He just keeps referring to the same "they" and "them".
If it is just some notion that we invented out of thin air and it has no real bearing on reality, then I am not sure why I should.
Allow me to demonstrate: There is no God. Tell me something -- anything -- that would make this proposition false without using the law of noncontradiction.
So then logic does not pre-exist human beings? So if another country on another continent binned the fundamental laws of logic and just decided to invent a different set of logical laws...that would be just as valid as our current laws of logic? So if I got enough people together we could develop an equally valid logical system where we replace the law of non-contradiction with the law of contradiction?
It's been done. But remember, different logics are simply different sets of definitions. Both logics describe the same reality. It's not like you can change the truth by switching systems. And paraconsistent logics are weaker than classical logic -- you can't make as many inferences from a given proposition; the definitions contain less useful information. So classical logic is more useful for most people and most purposes.
Roughly speaking, it is as if one logic described me as a "bachelor" and another described me as a "man". Both descriptions are true, and any inference you make from either description is likewise true. You can't change me by changing the description of me. But from the description "bachelor", you can make the inference that I am not married, whereas from the description "man" you cannot.
I think you have to presuppose the law of non-contradiction to come to that the conclusion.
In exactly the same sense that you have to presuppose the definition of "God" in order to say whether there is or is no God. All definitions are, in a way, presuppositions. That's not a problem.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Vive, vale. Siquid novisti rectius istis,
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
I think your observation that people don't hate things they don't believe in is correct. And that is why I believe every agnostic/atheist believes in the Biblical God on some level. If people truly didn't believe in God there wouldn't be a whole sub-forum on MTGS that is mostly about bashing Christianity and the Bible. We don't have forums solely devoted to bashing Islam, Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, or Fairies. That is because we all know that Allah, Santa Clause, the Easter Bunny, and Fairies are not real, and therefore we don't hate them and obsess over them like we do Christianity.
So, are you claiming that Jace Beleren is real, or just that the people that dislike him are delusional? Because you seem to be under the impression that people can't have feelings for non-existent things.
I think your observation that people don't hate things they don't believe in is correct. And that is why I believe every agnostic/atheist believes in the Biblical God on some level. If people truly didn't believe in God there wouldn't be a whole sub-forum on MTGS that is mostly about bashing Christianity and the Bible. We don't have forums solely devoted to bashing Islam, Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, or Fairies. That is because we all know that Allah, Santa Clause, the Easter Bunny, and Fairies are not real, and therefore we don't hate them and obsess over them like we do Christianity.
So, are you claiming that Jace Beleren is real, or just that the people that dislike him are delusional? Because you seem to be under the impression that people can't have feelings for non-existent things.
More so, people who 'hate' on Christianity are hating because they hate the attributes it's associated with that people in the real world have. Often, because of moral qualms.
In the united states there are a lot of different sub-cultures wandering around, especially for Christianity and Atheism. In general, it feels like the generation I'm a part is much less concerned with religious affairs than our forebears are, which leads to lower church attendance, greater attention being paid to secular celebration of holidays, and an over all apathy towards tithing. On the atheist side there's a lot less grumbling and pushing around because most Christians are "christians of little interest" and mostly are just Christian by the fact they got through Sunday school and confirmation.
Personally, even as an Atheist I feel that Church serves an important role in American society in that it is a way to get people together in one place and meet each other. With our lives being so automated and stuck in a 9 to 5 or 8 to 4 work cycle, we don't have time to pursue social interaction, which leads to issues of family continuation in white collar society. Blue Collar work tends to be a bit more flexible on time so it's easier to socialize with others outside of ones area of expertise.
Also, who here is actually hating on Christianity? Most Atheists just go about their lives and don't really care much about other religions. I mean, my family is Christian and I spend easter with them all the time.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
Personally, even as an Atheist I feel that Church serves an important role in American society in that it is a way to get people together in one place and meet each other.
And yet, that can be accomplished just as easily in other ways. A social club, for example.
Personally, even as an Atheist I feel that Church serves an important role in American society in that it is a way to get people together in one place and meet each other.
And yet, that can be accomplished just as easily in other ways. A social club, for example.
True, but sometimes it's about context and what people are comfortable with. Highly traditional folks may prefer going to church over social bars, while adventurous extroverts may hang out at bars in the evening just to unwind. Do non-religious folk have ways to socialize? Yes, but they aren't as organized because by our own nature we aren't part of an organization. Well, most of us aren't part of some "Church of Atheism".
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
Personally, even as an Atheist I feel that Church serves an important role in American society in that it is a way to get people together in one place and meet each other.
And yet, that can be accomplished just as easily in other ways. A social club, for example.
I agree with Lithl. A religious community's central point is the religion. Beyond that, a sense of community can just as easily be fostered anywhere else.
Personally, even as an Atheist I feel that Church serves an important role in American society in that it is a way to get people together in one place and meet each other.
And yet, that can be accomplished just as easily in other ways. A social club, for example.
I agree with Lithl. A religious community's central point is the religion. Beyond that, a sense of community can just as easily be fostered anywhere else.
On paper you guys are correct but I have to say as an ex-Christian I do miss the community. I have yet to find a social club that parallels my old church. Most of my best friendships were sparked years ago at church. Ironically enough none of us continue to go lol
Personally, even as an Atheist I feel that Church serves an important role in American society in that it is a way to get people together in one place and meet each other.
And yet, that can be accomplished just as easily in other ways. A social club, for example.
I agree with Lithl. A religious community's central point is the religion. Beyond that, a sense of community can just as easily be fostered anywhere else.
On paper you guys are correct but I have to say as an ex-Christian I do miss the community. I have yet to find a social club that parallels my old church. Most of my best friendships were sparked years ago at church. Ironically enough none of us continue to go lol
For a while I attended an atheist/agnostic group that met weekly and even did some community service. But eventually attendance petered out.
Personally, even as an Atheist I feel that Church serves an important role in American society in that it is a way to get people together in one place and meet each other.
And yet, that can be accomplished just as easily in other ways. A social club, for example.
I agree with Lithl. A religious community's central point is the religion. Beyond that, a sense of community can just as easily be fostered anywhere else.
On paper you guys are correct but I have to say as an ex-Christian I do miss the community. I have yet to find a social club that parallels my old church. Most of my best friendships were sparked years ago at church. Ironically enough none of us continue to go lol
In my experience, the answer to "I can't find a group to join to do X" is "Start a group to do X and get others to join you."
So, start a Magic club. You'll make some new friends, and then they may invite you to do other things.
Sure, I could do that but the community would pale in comparison to a church. It would give me but a taste of a large church community with say 300 members. The most attractive part of the church community is it's a one stop shop for all of your social needs. There are tons of activities being planned all the time, some outreach some fun. The nice part is its always the same group of people attending the various events together. Sure I could go to each if these events on my own time with separate groups but there is a certain comfort in going with the same people.
I'll echo what others have stated in that the original question was oddly phrased. I don't find Christianity as an idea to be "unappealing" or "unacceptable". I think the Jesus story is awesome and has inspired a lot of people to action in the world, for both good and evil. The think Christianity as a concept is great. The problem is not that it is unappealing, I just don't believe it in a metaphysical sense.
Here's the thing though: I don't think religions should be judged by whether they are true or not. I think most rational people will agree that no religion is "true" in a metaphysical sense. Or at least they are skeptical about the more mystical elements. A religion shouldn't be judged by how closely it aligns with reality. It should be judged only by it's fruits.
The problem with Christianity and Islam is that the fruits of those religions have been pretty poor historically. I'm not going to get into a debate about what those fruits are. I'm not even going to condemn Christianity by the inquisitions and the crusades as that happened more than a thousand years ago. However, I will judge the Catholic church for long systemic abuse of children or churches such as the Westboro Baptist church for all they've done. I will judge radical Islam for what is has done, is doing now, and will continue to do until it is stopped. I know that the common defense is well those people don't represent true Muslims or Westboro doesn't represent true Christians. BS. They may be more radicalized than others, and each person should be held responsible for their own actions, but when a certain ideology allows ideas to fester without doing anything about it that is a problem. A lot of history has been about Muslims and Christians killing each other.
The main religion I see having positive fruits is Buddhism. It has had a positive impact on my life. You could say I am a Buddhist but I don't take Buddhism literally, I just happen to think Mindfulness and meditation can be helpful in one's life.
Another issue I have with Christians in the U.S. is that I see no real point in debating with them. Over the years, I've tried to engage with them only to realize there is no point. I know that you're not going to change your belief system and even if I am open to what you're saying you're unlikely to be open to what I'm saying. I could disprove every single one of your points but then you would just bear your testimony, take it as a matter of faith, and still try to convince me. The reality is you probably believe in whatever particular church you were raised in or whatever church has given you the most fellowship in your community. When people believe in Christianity dogmatically I think they would have been dogmatic Hindu if they were raised in India or radical Muslims if they were raised in Syria. If you think about it, the same sort of brain that is going to ardently believe in Christian dogma is the same sort of brain that is going to be drawn to ISIS if that's what they were exposed to. That's what scares me. Only a very tiny fraction of the population is open-minded and both willing and able to examine their long-held beliefs.
If anything I am very compelled by the Jesus story and find it to be very appealing, but find most Christians and most Christian churches to be overwhelmingly unappealing. I don't count myself as an agnostic or atheist though so maybe I'm not the best one to answer your question.
I think most rational people will agree that no religion is "true" in a metaphysical sense. Or at least they are skeptical about the more mystical elements.
Either your definition of rational excludes an exceptionally large number of theists, or you are an exceptionally optimistic person.
I think most rational people will agree that no religion is "true" in a metaphysical sense. Or at least they are skeptical about the more mystical elements.
Either your definition of rational excludes an exceptionally large number of theists, or you are an exceptionally optimistic person.
This is just a personal opinion, but most of the theists I know accept that their beliefs aren't true in a literal sense, but rather they persist in going to church out of custom, familial benefit, social interaction, etc. I don't know many "die-hards" who literally believe in transubstantiation, for example. But I also may just be optimistic in this regard, as you stated.
I think most rational people will agree that no religion is "true" in a metaphysical sense. Or at least they are skeptical about the more mystical elements.
Either your definition of rational excludes an exceptionally large number of theists, or you are an exceptionally optimistic person.
This is just a personal opinion, but most of the theists I know accept that their beliefs aren't true in a literal sense, but rather they persist in going to church out of custom, familial benefit, social interaction, etc. I don't know many "die-hards" who literally believe in transubstantiation, for example. But I also may just be optimistic in this regard, as you stated.
I think you are. Like politics theism ranges from the far left liberals that understand that the stories in the bible are just fables intended to teach people right from wrong to the far right that literally think Jonah was swallowed by a whale and survived.
As hard as it is to believe right wing christians do exist.
I don't know many "die-hards" who literally believe in transubstantiation, for example. But I also may just be optimistic in this regard, as you stated.
Try looking up what the Catholics did in response to PZ Myers asking his readers for consecrated communion wafers so that he could desecrate them, back in 2008 IIRC. His email inbox got flooded with people talking about him actually threatening bodily harm to Jesus Christ. (Plus death threats, threats against his family, and attempts to get him fired.)
The news story that sparked Myers' request (a college student in Florida went through the communion ceremony and didn't eat the wafer) had Catholics comparing the student to a kidnapper holding someone (Jesus, presumably) hostage. And claiming that it was a hate crime.
I don't know many "die-hards" who literally believe in transubstantiation, for example. But I also may just be optimistic in this regard, as you stated.
Try looking up what the Catholics did in response to PZ Myers asking his readers for consecrated communion wafers so that he could desecrate them, back in 2008 IIRC. His email inbox got flooded with people talking about him actually threatening bodily harm to Jesus Christ. (Plus death threats, threats against his family, and attempts to get him fired.)
The news story that sparked Myers' request (a college student in Florida went through the communion ceremony and didn't eat the wafer) had Catholics comparing the student to a kidnapper holding someone hostage. And claiming that it was a hate crime.
I'm sure they exist, just as I'm sure radical racists and sexists exist. I just haven't seen it personally. Not that I don't believe you or don't agree. I know radicalized Christianity can be dangerous. No argument there.
No, I don't. I believe further up in the passage Paul is talking about all non-believers, and then later on he begins listing specific sins demonstrating that we are all sinners in one way or another.
If it is just some notion that we invented out of thin air and it has no real bearing on reality, then I am not sure why I should. Do you believe that the laws of logic existed during the Big Bang or did they only come into existence when we supposedly invented them?
So then logic does not pre-exist human beings? So if another country on another continent binned the fundamental laws of logic and just decided to invent a different set of logical laws...that would be just as valid as our current laws of logic? So if I got enough people together we could develop an equally valid logical system where we replace the law of non-contradiction with the law of contradiction?
I think you have to presuppose the law of non-contradiction to come to that the conclusion.
Allow me to demonstrate: There is no God. Tell me something -- anything -- that would make this proposition false without using the law of noncontradiction.
Neither. They're abstracta. Not time-indexed.
It's been done. But remember, different logics are simply different sets of definitions. Both logics describe the same reality. It's not like you can change the truth by switching systems. And paraconsistent logics are weaker than classical logic -- you can't make as many inferences from a given proposition; the definitions contain less useful information. So classical logic is more useful for most people and most purposes.
Roughly speaking, it is as if one logic described me as a "bachelor" and another described me as a "man". Both descriptions are true, and any inference you make from either description is likewise true. You can't change me by changing the description of me. But from the description "bachelor", you can make the inference that I am not married, whereas from the description "man" you cannot.
In exactly the same sense that you have to presuppose the definition of "God" in order to say whether there is or is no God. All definitions are, in a way, presuppositions. That's not a problem.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
So, are you claiming that Jace Beleren is real, or just that the people that dislike him are delusional? Because you seem to be under the impression that people can't have feelings for non-existent things.
More so, people who 'hate' on Christianity are hating because they hate the attributes it's associated with that people in the real world have. Often, because of moral qualms.
RUNIN: Norse mythology set (awaiting further playtesting)
FATE of ALARA: Multicolour factions (currently on hiatus)
Contibutor to the Pyrulea community set
I'm here to tell you that all your set mechanics are bad
#Defundthepolice
Personally, even as an Atheist I feel that Church serves an important role in American society in that it is a way to get people together in one place and meet each other. With our lives being so automated and stuck in a 9 to 5 or 8 to 4 work cycle, we don't have time to pursue social interaction, which leads to issues of family continuation in white collar society. Blue Collar work tends to be a bit more flexible on time so it's easier to socialize with others outside of ones area of expertise.
Also, who here is actually hating on Christianity? Most Atheists just go about their lives and don't really care much about other religions. I mean, my family is Christian and I spend easter with them all the time.
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
True, but sometimes it's about context and what people are comfortable with. Highly traditional folks may prefer going to church over social bars, while adventurous extroverts may hang out at bars in the evening just to unwind. Do non-religious folk have ways to socialize? Yes, but they aren't as organized because by our own nature we aren't part of an organization. Well, most of us aren't part of some "Church of Atheism".
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
BChainer, Dementia Master(Big Mana/Reanimator)
BRRakdos, The Showstopper (Mass Life Loss/Ramp)
BUThe Scarab God (Zombie Tribal/Control)
BWKarlov of the Ghost Council (Life Gain)
BGJarad, Golgari Lich Lord (Stompy/Dredge)
BRGProssh, Skyraider of Kher (Tokens/Non-infinite Combo)
For a while I attended an atheist/agnostic group that met weekly and even did some community service. But eventually attendance petered out.
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
BChainer, Dementia Master(Big Mana/Reanimator)
BRRakdos, The Showstopper (Mass Life Loss/Ramp)
BUThe Scarab God (Zombie Tribal/Control)
BWKarlov of the Ghost Council (Life Gain)
BGJarad, Golgari Lich Lord (Stompy/Dredge)
BRGProssh, Skyraider of Kher (Tokens/Non-infinite Combo)
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
Unfortunately, population density does play a part in that. Though it isn't hard to share your interests, getting people together can be a hurdle.
I want to go to an Athiest church lol.
BChainer, Dementia Master(Big Mana/Reanimator)
BRRakdos, The Showstopper (Mass Life Loss/Ramp)
BUThe Scarab God (Zombie Tribal/Control)
BWKarlov of the Ghost Council (Life Gain)
BGJarad, Golgari Lich Lord (Stompy/Dredge)
BRGProssh, Skyraider of Kher (Tokens/Non-infinite Combo)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Texas_Church_of_Freethought
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
Here's the thing though: I don't think religions should be judged by whether they are true or not. I think most rational people will agree that no religion is "true" in a metaphysical sense. Or at least they are skeptical about the more mystical elements. A religion shouldn't be judged by how closely it aligns with reality. It should be judged only by it's fruits.
The problem with Christianity and Islam is that the fruits of those religions have been pretty poor historically. I'm not going to get into a debate about what those fruits are. I'm not even going to condemn Christianity by the inquisitions and the crusades as that happened more than a thousand years ago. However, I will judge the Catholic church for long systemic abuse of children or churches such as the Westboro Baptist church for all they've done. I will judge radical Islam for what is has done, is doing now, and will continue to do until it is stopped. I know that the common defense is well those people don't represent true Muslims or Westboro doesn't represent true Christians. BS. They may be more radicalized than others, and each person should be held responsible for their own actions, but when a certain ideology allows ideas to fester without doing anything about it that is a problem. A lot of history has been about Muslims and Christians killing each other.
The main religion I see having positive fruits is Buddhism. It has had a positive impact on my life. You could say I am a Buddhist but I don't take Buddhism literally, I just happen to think Mindfulness and meditation can be helpful in one's life.
Another issue I have with Christians in the U.S. is that I see no real point in debating with them. Over the years, I've tried to engage with them only to realize there is no point. I know that you're not going to change your belief system and even if I am open to what you're saying you're unlikely to be open to what I'm saying. I could disprove every single one of your points but then you would just bear your testimony, take it as a matter of faith, and still try to convince me. The reality is you probably believe in whatever particular church you were raised in or whatever church has given you the most fellowship in your community. When people believe in Christianity dogmatically I think they would have been dogmatic Hindu if they were raised in India or radical Muslims if they were raised in Syria. If you think about it, the same sort of brain that is going to ardently believe in Christian dogma is the same sort of brain that is going to be drawn to ISIS if that's what they were exposed to. That's what scares me. Only a very tiny fraction of the population is open-minded and both willing and able to examine their long-held beliefs.
If anything I am very compelled by the Jesus story and find it to be very appealing, but find most Christians and most Christian churches to be overwhelmingly unappealing. I don't count myself as an agnostic or atheist though so maybe I'm not the best one to answer your question.
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
This is just a personal opinion, but most of the theists I know accept that their beliefs aren't true in a literal sense, but rather they persist in going to church out of custom, familial benefit, social interaction, etc. I don't know many "die-hards" who literally believe in transubstantiation, for example. But I also may just be optimistic in this regard, as you stated.
As hard as it is to believe right wing christians do exist.
BChainer, Dementia Master(Big Mana/Reanimator)
BRRakdos, The Showstopper (Mass Life Loss/Ramp)
BUThe Scarab God (Zombie Tribal/Control)
BWKarlov of the Ghost Council (Life Gain)
BGJarad, Golgari Lich Lord (Stompy/Dredge)
BRGProssh, Skyraider of Kher (Tokens/Non-infinite Combo)
The news story that sparked Myers' request (a college student in Florida went through the communion ceremony and didn't eat the wafer) had Catholics comparing the student to a kidnapper holding someone (Jesus, presumably) hostage. And claiming that it was a hate crime.
Two Score, Minus Two or: A Stargate Tail
(Image by totallynotabrony)
I'm sure they exist, just as I'm sure radical racists and sexists exist. I just haven't seen it personally. Not that I don't believe you or don't agree. I know radicalized Christianity can be dangerous. No argument there.
- Pauline Kael (semi-apocryphal)
The degree to which we self-segregate along ideological lines is far greater than many people realize.
candidus inperti; si nil, his utere mecum.
Yeah, I get that, and in fairness I admitted I may not see radical Christianity as being prevalent because I choose not to associate with such groups.