Alright, not new, but returning

ShadowScythe13 · Feb 1, 2009

Some of you may remember me, some of you may not.

i just got back from a particurlarly nasty 1-year ban for my comments
Right Here

and since then, i have changed a lot. I have a new girlfriend, a new Hairstyle, a new Job, a new College outlook, and a new religous look on life.

some of you may say that this was inevitable, reading some of my previous posts.

But i am now an Agnostic Atheist. That's right, i believe that there is no way for humans to believe that God exists, and thus i choose to not believe in one. I don't know that there is no god, and i dont know that there is a God. so i dont believe in one.

Let me put it this way: i cannot prove to you that there is not an invisible flying Spaghetti monster who created us all and is hovering over us at this very moment.
but at the same time i cannot prove that there isnt one.

there is just as much evidence for the existance of such a flying spaghetti monster as there is for Vishnu, Jaweh, Jesus, Allah, Odin, Zeus, Thor, and Hercules.

and i bet you thought you had silenced me.

still love you all, even though i dont have a god to tell me to do so.

:red:

Spitfire · Feb 2, 2009

A new hairstyle changes everything, hmm?

So much has to transpire, so many things have to come together perfectly for one bowl of spaghetti to come into being. The flying spaghetti monster is far too subject to causality to qualify as much of a deity, if you ask me.

ShadowScythe13 · Feb 2, 2009

Spitfire said:
So much has to transpire, so many things have to come together perfectly for one bowl of spaghetti to come into being. The flying spaghetti monster is far too subject to causality to qualify as much of a deity, if you ask me.

You hit the nail on the head right there. it is impossible for me to prove that there is a Flying Spaghetti monster.

yet at the same time, there is no way for you to prove that there is no Flying Spaghetti monster.

You say it is too subject to casualty to be plausable, and i reply to you,

"You will just have to take it on faith"

see where i am getting here?

Spitfire · Feb 2, 2009

ShadowScythe13 said:
You hit the nail on the head right there. it is impossible for me to prove that there is a Flying Spaghetti monster.

yet at the same time, there is no way for you to prove that there is no Flying Spaghetti monster.

I meant that I agree with what some theologians and philosophers have articulated about God's simplicity and lack of composition, and the necessity of assigning these characteristics to God when we try to understand him. Were God in any way composite, something else would need to have preceded God. Semolina flour and plum tomatoes, even before they are made into pasta and red sauce, are already composite and therefore owe their existence to the process by which they came about according to the principles to which these materials are subject. Therefore, it is most logical and necessary to conclude that if there is an author of reality, this supreme being whom we call God, it is not a flying spaghetti monster.

Nathon Detroit · Feb 2, 2009

ShadowScythe13 said:
and since then, i have changed a lot. I have a new girlfriend, a new Hairstyle, a new Job, a new College outlook, and a new religous look on life.

Well... as long as you have a new hairstyle I guess we can give you another chance.

CabinetMaker · Feb 2, 2009

ShadowScythe13 said:
there is just as much evidence for the existance of such a flying spaghetti monster as there is for Vishnu, Jaweh, Jesus, Allah, Odin, Zeus, Thor, and Hercules.

Non-believers keep saying there no evidence for God yet God, the Chrstian God, has let us with the Bible. The flying spaghetti monstor is a recent construct to ridicule Christians so there is not much point in discussing them. The followers of Allah created a book that is diametrically opposed to the Bible on enough points to make me seriously wonder exactly who Allah is as it is not God. Zeus, Thor and Hercules are all charecters out of mythology and never left us an kind of record of what they expect of us. We were always more like toys to them than anything else. Vishnu, like most of the Eastern gods, is sentered on self rather than others.

Alone in the worls is the Bible and its expectations for us. God records His actions, both flattering and not, warns of hell and tells us *exactly* how to escape it and He leaves us with a two commanments for living a Godly life.

While I agree that there is no *physical* evidence that I can point to prove God exists, I do think that the Bible and creation as a whole does provide a basis for knowing that God does exist.

ShadowScythe13 · Feb 2, 2009

CabinetMaker said:
Alone in the worls is the Bible and its expectations for us. God records His actions, both flattering and not, warns of hell and tells us *exactly* how to escape it and He leaves us with a two commanments for living a Godly life.

While I agree that there is no *physical* evidence that I can point to prove God exists, I do think that the Bible and creation as a whole does provide a basis for knowing that God does exist.

God is real cause the bible says so
the bible is true cause God tells us
God is real cause the bible says so
the bible is true cause God tells us

That argument holds no weight whatsoever. I could tell you that a document i wrote up in my bedroom proved the existance of the Flying Spaghetti monster, because in the document it says that the Flying Spaghetti monster told me it existed and that the document was true.

None of this would do anything to make the Flying Spaghetti Monster any more, or less, true.

CabinetMaker · Feb 2, 2009

ShadowScythe13 said:
God is real cause the bible says so
the bible is true cause God tells us
God is real cause the bible says so
the bible is true cause God tells us

That argument holds no weight whatsoever. I could tell you that a document i wrote up in my bedroom proved the existance of the Flying Spaghetti monster, because in the document it says that the Flying Spaghetti monster told me it existed and that the document was true.

None of this would do anything to make the Flying Spaghetti Monster any more, or less, true.

I believe that a moral code handed down by the Flying Spaghetti Monster would be as lacking as all the other moral codes given to us by all the other false gods. It would quickly become obvious that the FSM was created by a man to justify his own personal lusts.

Uberpod1 · Feb 2, 2009

Crash brought up violent rhetoric to characterize you, and you went along with it. Not a great reason to ban you. Was Crash banned as well?

I guarantee you they are running things a lot more fairly in 2009!!

ShadowScythe13 · Feb 2, 2009

CabinetMaker said:
I believe that a moral code handed down by the Flying Spaghetti Monster would be as lacking as all the other moral codes given to us by all the other false gods. It would quickly become obvious that the FSM was created by a man to justify his own personal lusts.

So it is no longer the religous works that determine the truth of a religion, but the values and morals that it promotes.

The question i have to ask you is this:

Who decides which moral codes are "better" than others? (please dont say God, then your argument will just turn into another circular-reasoning works because circular-reasoning works because circular-reasoning works argument)

I would argue that the morals of one religion can be the immoral restrictions of another. For instance, it is common practice in some religions (older than christianity) for Female Circumcision to take place, while Male circumcision (common in the Judeo-Christian faiths) is looked upon with just about as much revulsion as we of Judeo-Christian descent look upon Female Circumcision.

in this case, are the morals and values of Christianity so much better than the morals and values of the Animists, or the Muslims? Both involve the mutilation, at a age in which true consent cannot be given, of the genitals. Not for punishment, not for any legitimate scientific reason, but because "God" told them to.

i guess what im trying to say is that the moral code of the FSM would be no different than the other moral codes handed down to us by any God that anyone worshipped. It was accepted by those who believe in the FSM, and not by anyone else.

The moral codes of the FSM are accepted by the followers of the FSM as good and beneficial to life
The moral codes of the Christian God are accepted by the followers of the Christian God as good and beneficial to life
The moral codes of the Jews are accepted by the followers of the Jewish Faith as good and beneficial to life

what is really good and beneficial to life? it seems that the answer to that question depends on what your god tells you. or doesnt.

ShadowScythe13 · Feb 2, 2009

Uberpod1 said:
Crash brought up violent rhetoric to characterize you, and you went along with it. Not a great reason to ban you. Was Crash banned as well?

I guarantee you they are running things a lot more fairly in 2009!!

and thank you. i hope to not give anyone the opportunity to ban me this time around, however it is good to hear that someone else also thinks that the punishment far outweighs the crime.

doesnt it say something in the bible about that sort of thing?

something about forgivness, i dunno....

:red:

CabinetMaker · Feb 2, 2009

ShadowScythe13 said:
So it is no longer the religous works that determine the truth of a religion, but the values and morals that it promotes.

The question i have to ask you is this:

Who decides which moral codes are "better" than others? (please dont say God, then your argument will just turn into another circular-reasoning works because circular-reasoning works because circular-reasoning works argument)

I would argue that the morals of one religion can be the immoral restrictions of another. For instance, it is common practice in some religions (older than christianity) for Female Circumcision to take place, while Male circumcision (common in the Judeo-Christian faiths) is looked upon with just about as much revulsion as we of Judeo-Christian descent look upon Female Circumcision.

in this case, are the morals and values of Christianity so much better than the morals and values of the Animists, or the Muslims? Both involve the mutilation, at a age in which true consent cannot be given, of the genitals. Not for punishment, not for any legitimate scientific reason, but because "God" told them to.

i guess what im trying to say is that the moral code of the FSM would be no different than the other moral codes handed down to us by any God that anyone worshipped. It was accepted by those who believe in the FSM, and not by anyone else.

The moral codes of the FSM are accepted by the followers of the FSM as good and beneficial to life
The moral codes of the Christian God are accepted by the followers of the Christian God as good and beneficial to life
The moral codes of the Jews are accepted by the followers of the Jewish Faith as good and beneficial to life

what is really good and beneficial to life? it seems that the answer to that question depends on what your god tells you. or doesnt.

Sorry, you are not going to like my answer but God handed down the moral code He expects us to live up to. That is the nature of faith. I will not set it aside. I did for a while and I wont do it again. I believe in God and I see where His morals are much higher than most people are comfortable with and that is one reason why I trust that they are the only real morals worth having. It is also why I trust that there is only one God and He is revealed to us in the Bible.

CabinetMaker · Feb 2, 2009

ShadowScythe13 said:
and thank you. i hope to not give anyone the opportunity to ban me this time around, however it is good to hear that someone else also thinks that the punishment far outweighs the crime.

doesnt it say something in the bible about that sort of thing?

something about forgivness, i dunno....

:red:

Forgiveness does not mean that you are not punished. I forgive my kids pretty quick but they are still grounded for a week.

ShadowScythe13 · Feb 2, 2009

CabinetMaker said:
Sorry, you are not going to like my answer but God handed down the moral code He expects us to live up to. That is the nature of faith. I will not set it aside. I did for a while and I wont do it again. I believe in God and I see where His morals are much higher than most people are comfortable with and that is one reason why I trust that they are the only real morals worth having. It is also why I trust that there is only one God and He is revealed to us in the Bible.

If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religous people.

But you did just prove my point.
You only have your morals because you think God told you to have those morals.
Why do you believe God tells you to have those morals? Because those morals are obviously the best morals there are.
Why do you believe that those morals are the best morals there are? Because God told you to have those morals.

If it leads you to living a good life, trusting people, helping people, and feeling good about yourself, then believe what you want to. The problem comes when you try to force your beliefs on other people, tell them that their beliefs are wrong, and try to hold everyone to the same standards you set for yourself.

CabinetMaker · Feb 2, 2009

ShadowScythe13 said:
If you could reason with religious people, there would be no religous people.

But you did just prove my point.
You only have your morals because you think God told you to have those morals.
Why do you believe God tells you to have those morals? Because those morals are obviously the best morals there are.
Why do you believe that those morals are the best morals there are? Because God told you to have those morals.

If it leads you to living a good life, trusting people, helping people, and feeling good about yourself, then believe what you want to. The problem comes when you try to force your beliefs on other people, tell them that their beliefs are wrong, and try to hold everyone to the same standards you set for yourself.

God gave us a high set of morals to protect us from ourselves, not because He is a kill joy. If you don't do adultery then all the messy divorce and broken harted kids never happen. If you don't do sex outside of marriage then there are another whole set of messes that you never have to deal with.

ShadowScythe13 · Feb 2, 2009

CabinetMaker said:
God gave us a high set of morals to protect us from ourselves, not because He is a kill joy. If you don't do adultery then all the messy divorce and broken harted kids never happen. If you don't do sex outside of marriage then there are another whole set of messes that you never have to deal with.

So you are saying that it is simply common sense that drives you, not God's perfect word?
Or are you saying that God's perfect word is driven by common sense?

either way, seems kinda wrong to me

is the only reason you arent cheating on your wife because God told you not to? I would hope you are a little more loyal to your wife than that.

Or are you saying that the only reason you believe in God's morals is because it follows along with your already established morals?

If tomorrow you were to read a bible passage that you had never heard of before in which it said there were certain times in which cheating on your wife was permissable, would you then feel no remorse about cheating on your wife?

Of if tomorrow you were to read a bible passage that you had never heard of before in which it said there were certain times when pre-marital sex were okay, would you feel no remorse about going out and having sex with your Girlfriend of 6 months?

The simple fact is that regardless of these bible passages, the chance that your morals would change simply because of a bible verse you read is slim to none. unless you were one of those die-hard Mormans or Puritans, chances are you take some liberties with what parts of the bible you believe and which parts you choose to ignore.

take, for instance, the passages in Leviticus which strictly forbid eating Shrimp and Lobster. Chances are that, when a platter of shrimp is placed in front of you, your first thought will not be to check the bible for whether or not it is okay to eat it. Chances are that you have probably taken part in the consumption of some particularly good shrimp at some point in your Christian, God-Fearing life.

now i dont want to argue semantics with you, nor do i want to get into another "New Testament vs. Old Testament" debate here.

CabinetMaker · Feb 2, 2009

ShadowScythe13 said:
So you are saying that it is simply common sense that drives you, not God's perfect word?
Or are you saying that God's perfect word is driven by common sense?

either way, seems kinda wrong to me

is the only reason you arent cheating on your wife because God told you not to? I would hope you are a little more loyal to your wife than that.

Or are you saying that the only reason you believe in God's morals is because it follows along with your already established morals?

If tomorrow you were to read a bible passage that you had never heard of before in which it said there were certain times in which cheating on your wife was permissable, would you then feel no remorse about cheating on your wife?

Of if tomorrow you were to read a bible passage that you had never heard of before in which it said there were certain times when pre-marital sex were okay, would you feel no remorse about going out and having sex with your Girlfriend of 6 months?

The simple fact is that regardless of these bible passages, the chance that your morals would change simply because of a bible verse you read is slim to none. unless you were one of those die-hard Mormans or Puritans, chances are you take some liberties with what parts of the bible you believe and which parts you choose to ignore.

take, for instance, the passages in Leviticus which strictly forbid eating Shrimp and Lobster. Chances are that, when a platter of shrimp is placed in front of you, your first thought will not be to check the bible for whether or not it is okay to eat it. Chances are that you have probably taken part in the consumption of some particularly good shrimp at some point in your Christian, God-Fearing life.

now i dont want to argue semantics with you, nor do i want to get into another "New Testament vs. Old Testament" debate here.

Why do so many people put the cart before the horse? I understand why God gave us the morals. We tell our children not to touch the stove. We don't explain why we just tell them no. As they grow then begin to understand the why of being told don't touch. God started there, don't do this. As I grew, I began to understand the reasons He said no. Morals are a teacher and I learned the lessons. But not as a law to be obeyed, but as the reasons why things are to be avoided or strived for.

By theway, Jesus told us that it is not what goes into our mouths that makes us unclean, its what comes out. So I enjoy shrimp with no moral strictures whatsoever. Lobster, on the other hand, is a different story. I do not like lobster.

ShadowScythe13 · Feb 3, 2009

CabinetMaker said:
Why do so many people put the cart before the horse? I understand why God gave us the morals. We tell our children not to touch the stove. We don't explain why we just tell them no. As they grow then begin to understand the why of being told don't touch. God started there, don't do this. As I grew, I began to understand the reasons He said no. Morals are a teacher and I learned the lessons. But not as a law to be obeyed, but as the reasons why things are to be avoided or strived for.

By theway, Jesus told us that it is not what goes into our mouths that makes us unclean, its what comes out. So I enjoy shrimp with no moral strictures whatsoever. Lobster, on the other hand, is a different story. I do not like lobster.

So what you are saying is that God's word is indistinguishable from common sense? You are saying that, if we did not have the bible, we would still have the same set of morals, because the rules simply make sense?

CabinetMaker · Feb 3, 2009

ShadowScythe13 said:
So what you are saying is that God's word is indistinguishable from common sense? You are saying that, if we did not have the bible, we would still have the same set of morals, because the rules simply make sense?

In a sense, yes. God has written His morals into the heart of every man. That is why morals are so similar around the globe, they are all based on God's law written in our hearts whether we admit it or not.

cdldblwing · Feb 3, 2009

Not exactly new here myself. I read posts all the time and contribute when I think I should. However, I tried searching in the little search box and it keeps saying that I can't. Am I doing something wrong? Please help!

Alright, not new, but returning

New member

New member

New member

New member

LIFETIME MEMBER

Member of the 10 year club on TOL!!

New member

Member of the 10 year club on TOL!!

BANNED

New member

New member

Member of the 10 year club on TOL!!

Member of the 10 year club on TOL!!

New member

Member of the 10 year club on TOL!!

New member

Member of the 10 year club on TOL!!

New member

Member of the 10 year club on TOL!!

New member