Not so harsh Shrunk, I don't rule out that Atheistoclast is starting to realise that god did provide too many facts to ignore that he used evolution instead of creation. He knows that god isn't whispering in his ear, and that if he hears voices in his head, he should visit a doctor to get some prescription drugs. I genuinely empathize with someone who has been told never ever to question a particular thing (i.e. the bible). So, it is only fair to give him some time on his own to come to terms with it. There are several former creationists on this forum, if I'm correct, and it took them quite a while to come to terms with that.

Bert
2012 The year that Rod Carty and Robert Byers will have to face Atheistoclast. I'm looking forward to it, because Atheistoclast is not stupid. Imagine what he can do with a set of proper facts.

bert wrote:
2012 The year that Rod Carty and Robert Byers will have to face Atheistoclast. I'm looking forward to it, because Atheistoclast is not stupid. Imagine what he can do with a set of proper facts.

That is, in my opinion, the real shame here. Byers wouldn't understand how to open a packet of peanuts if it didn't say 'open here' with a symbol of a pair of scissors and a line of trajectory. Rod's gone so far down the rabbit-hole he's popped out into a dimension antithetical to logic and reason and consequently can't use them to find his way out. But Atheistoclast... he's got sufficient intelligence to grasp all this if he could just take off his god-goggles for a moment, and the effort he puts into being wrong could so easily be turned towards the betterment of his fellows. As a corollary though, that he wastes his life abusing strangers on the internet who don't genuflect to his delusional pap is far more indicting of him than Byers and Rod's failings.

bert wrote:Not so harsh Shrunk, I don't rule out that Atheistoclast is starting to realise that god did provide too many facts to ignore that he used evolution instead of creation. He knows that god isn't whispering in his ear, and that if he hears voices in his head, he should visit a doctor to get some prescription drugs. I genuinely empathize with someone who has been told never ever to question a particular thing (i.e. the bible). So, it is only fair to give him some time on his own to come to terms with it. There are several former creationists on this forum, if I'm correct, and it took them quite a while to come to terms with that.

Bert
2012 The year that Rod Carty and Robert Byers will have to face Atheistoclast. I'm looking forward to it, because Atheistoclast is not stupid. Imagine what he can do with a set of proper facts.

Don't hold your breath. Bozorgmehr has been going at this for 4 years at least, don't think for a second anything new is "dawning" on him any time soon. He knows enough to know that his position is bullshit. As spearthrower says, he's probably quite intelligent, it takes more than a moron to come up with the often quite elaborate concoctions his arguments are. No, he's here to propagandize for doctrine, whether physical reality supports it or not, the end will justify the means to Atheistoclast. Don't think for a second his chosen name is a joke. He wants to achieve something specific and to him, very personally important, and that goal takes precedence over anything else. The facts be damned, the doctrine has to be true.

Rumraket wrote:The facts be damned, the doctrine has to be true.

This sums up creationism in a nutshell.

Rumraket wrote:Don't hold your breath. Bozorgmehr has been going at this for 4 years at least, don't think for a second anything new is "dawning" on him any time soon. He knows enough to know that his position is bullshit. As spearthrower says, he's probably quite intelligent, it takes more than a moron to come up with the often quite elaborate concoctions his arguments are. No, he's here to propagandize for doctrine, whether physical reality supports it or not, the end will justify the means to Atheistoclast. Don't think for a second his chosen name is a joke. He wants to achieve something specific and to him, very personally important, and that goal takes precedence over anything else. The facts be damned, the doctrine has to be true.

Why are people who believe in god so shit at believing in god? Why does scripture trump god every time?

Sometimes when I hear arguments from people with (what I would call) strange beliefs, I can put myself in their shoes and see where they are coming from. Some arguments make sense in a different context. I'm not just talking about claims from creationists, but also conspiracy theorists and supernaturalists etc. Even claims that are demonstrably false can make some sense when you consider the beliefs of the individual.

But what we're talking about now is something I completely fail to understand and I simply cannot empathise with. I get that people will ignore facts if they contradict their personal beliefs, I can get that far. But when it comes to reality vs religious belief, I simply can't appreciate this position we're discussing. The bible contradicts reality. Hell, it even contradicts itself, so it is inherently wrong at least in parts. And anyone can understand why that's the case: the scripture is man-made. It isn't infallible. But reality itself wasn't passed down generation to generation or translated by countless individuals. In the minds of theists, reality is the undiluted creation of their God, the one thing that is pure. God didn't write the bible, but to them he literally created the universe, and all the natural phenomena within. When scripture contradicts reality, we have to choose between man and god. A god supposedly created this universe, and it turns out that this universe is one that has seen undirected natural phenomena like biological evolution come about. And it turns out the universe is billions of years old, not thousands.

If we assume there is a god that created the universe, that shouldn't change the facts we learn about our universe. If organisms evolve, and life came from non-life, then so be it. We've learned something. We've learned more about this world that the god created (again, assuming that there is a god). That's what I find so weird. Scientists are running around obsessed with this supposed creation. We're studying it, we want to know all about it. In a way, scientists are showing the most respect to god's creation. But creationists are rejecting their god's single purest creation in favour of a man-made book. Do they really believe in a god, or do they just believe in a scripture?

That's the part I can't understand or appreciate. I don't get the "facts be damned" attitude. Don't the facts tell us more about god and his/her/its creation? If I believed that a god created the universe, I'd see science as our best tool for understanding god.

Peter Harrison wrote:

Rumraket wrote:Don't hold your breath. Bozorgmehr has been going at this for 4 years at least, don't think for a second anything new is "dawning" on him any time soon. He knows enough to know that his position is bullshit. As spearthrower says, he's probably quite intelligent, it takes more than a moron to come up with the often quite elaborate concoctions his arguments are. No, he's here to propagandize for doctrine, whether physical reality supports it or not, the end will justify the means to Atheistoclast. Don't think for a second his chosen name is a joke. He wants to achieve something specific and to him, very personally important, and that goal takes precedence over anything else. The facts be damned, the doctrine has to be true.

Why are people who believe in god so shit at believing in god? Why does scripture trump god every time?

Sometimes when I hear arguments from people with (what I would call) strange beliefs, I can put myself in their shoes and see where they are coming from. Some arguments make sense in a different context. I'm not just talking about claims from creationists, but also conspiracy theorists and supernaturalists etc. Even claims that are demonstrably false can make some sense when you consider the beliefs of the individual.

But what we're talking about now is something I completely fail to understand and I simply cannot empathise with. I get that people will ignore facts if they contradict their personal beliefs, I can get that far. But when it comes to reality vs religious belief, I simply can't appreciate this position we're discussing. The bible contradicts reality. Hell, it even contradicts itself, so it is inherently wrong at least in parts. And anyone can understand why that's the case: the scripture is man-made. It isn't infallible. But reality itself wasn't passed down generation to generation or translated by countless individuals. In the minds of theists, reality is the undiluted creation of their God, the one thing that is pure. God didn't write the bible, but to them he literally created the universe, and all the natural phenomena within. When scripture contradicts reality, we have to choose between man and god. A god supposedly created this universe, and it turns out that this universe is one that has seen undirected natural phenomena like biological evolution come about. And it turns out the universe is billions of years old, not thousands.

If we assume there is a god that created the universe, that shouldn't change the facts we learn about our universe. If organisms evolve, and life came from non-life, then so be it. We've learned something. We've learned more about this world that the god created (again, assuming that there is a god). That's what I find so weird. Scientists are running around obsessed with this supposed creation. We're studying it, we want to know all about it. In a way, scientists are showing the most respect to god's creation. But creationists are rejecting their god's single purest creation in favour of a man-made book. Do they really believe in a god, or do they just believe in a scripture?

That's the part I can't understand or appreciate. I don't get the "facts be damned" attitude. Don't the facts tell us more about god and his/her/its creation? If I believed that a god created the universe, I'd see science as our best tool for understanding god.

It is because if they question the veracity of The Book in favor of a maybe god discerned from creation itself (a Deist approach), they are forsaking all the comforts that religion gives them in favor of the unknown.

The Bible god says they will live forever. The universe or this Deist god doesn't say anything. No guarantees.

Clastie hasn't posted for a while. I'm not accusing him of abandoning a thread where he was getting his metaphorical arse kicked but perhaps he's busy saying an extra Mass this Christmas.

Just A Theory wrote:Clastie hasn't posted for a while. I'm not accusing him of abandoning a thread where he was getting his metaphorical arse kicked but perhaps he's busy saying an extra Mass this Christmas.

I thought he was of the Allah Sky Fairy branch of Abrahamism?

Spearthrower wrote:

Just A Theory wrote:Clastie hasn't posted for a while. I'm not accusing him of abandoning a thread where he was getting his metaphorical arse kicked but perhaps he's busy saying an extra Mass this Christmas.

I thought he was of the Allah Sky Fairy branch of Abrahamism?

The name is certainly Christian. He claims to be both, though.