the classic jonhguth move

get called out on your bullshit and claim you are trolling.

3/22/2006 1:28:45 AM

Here we go

The typical stupid fucking troll response:

"Hey, I'm going to act like the total fucking idiot that I am. Then, when I get called out and thoroughly defeated, I'm going to pretend like it was all part of my BRILLIANT plan that you're stupid enough to fall into! ha ha!"

Dude it's much better when FroshKiller does it

3/22/2006 1:29:03 AM

JonHGuth - for anyone to have an actually discussion with you, you'd have to write something that has more value than monkey excrement.

3/22/2006 1:30:19 AM

haha you realize you got all pissy and stopped debating along time before i did

right?

3/22/2006 1:30:45 AM

Your master scheme, both devious & cunning, has succeeded!

[Edited on March 22, 2006 at 1:31 AM. Reason : too slow, stupid load time]

3/22/2006 1:31:09 AM

You realize that I'm better than you right?

3/22/2006 1:31:25 AM

atheist

3/22/2006 1:35:07 AM

Seeing as how JonHGuth turned the last two pages of this thread into a study of his intellectual shortcomings, I'll repost my last serious response so that GrumpyGOP won't miss it (he, at least, can structure an argument and is actually worth spending time on).

--------------------------------------------

Quote :

"What does experience matter one iota if as soon as you die you cease to be in every relevant sense of the word? And you're going to have to do better than just saying "but if you experience things it's good" or "you appreciate life more," because you can't appreciate it, because you're dead."

You only get but so much time. Experiences increase the breadth of what you know, what you have the capacity to appreciate. Notice I didn't say the capacity to feign or fake appreciation -- I mean a full spectrum gives you the proper scope and perspective by which to judge and rate mental states in life.

You can't appreciate much after you're dead, sure. That doesn't mean you shouldn't appreciate much when you're alive. Gathering experiences helps you to raise better children. If you're lucky, you can preserve your patterns of behavior in future generations -- this is probably as close to living forever as any of us have.

Does it suck that once we die we cease to exist? Yes, it sure does. Does it make accomplishing much or feeling much seem fleeting and pointless? Yes, it sure does. Welcome to the real world. Unfortunately, wishful thinking about how we'd like things to be don't magically materialize into how things are.

Quote :

"No, what's silly is that acting as though the things religion would typically take out of your life are self-evidently the "good" things that contribute to its "fullness.""

Most religion takes acting naturally out of the equation, and replaces nature with a sense of guilt and fear over what oneself is (conquering man's nature). Caging a man in such a manner squanders what time he DOES have in existence. Religion is such a thorough mindfuck that not only has it caged your being, you defend your cage to the death.

Quote :

"I ask again, what grand standard is it that you have stumbled upon that says a life with regular fucking is more rewarding/fullfilling/etc. than a life with regular prayer or church attendance?"

Like many other sexually starved and frustrated religious fanatics, you have mistaken "full life" with regular fucking. You also presume that the only advantage of abandoning religious life is sex. I don't even need to respond to this level of feigned ignorance. You're smarter than this, and I'm going to give you the credit you've denied yourself.

Most religion -- more specifically, Christianity -- has the main concept of turning nature onto its head. It's supposed to replace "man's nature" with "god's nature". The only funny part of this is, god's nature is unnatural. It's a far fetched, unreachable ideal created by the weak to cripple and devour the strong. It's a standard by which all would be made equal -- equal only in the sense that they have nothing.

Remember -- they need nothing in this (read: the only) world, their treasure is in the next (read: imaginary) world. This is an ancient technique by which the clergy used to keep its thumb on the populace. It's hilarious and sad to see it outlive its usefulness in that sense, and have people actually buying into it now. Christianity is Scientology with a little bit of history and the mists of time to obscure it and make it seem more credible. If it's old, and people have thought it for a while, chances are it's correct, right?

Nothing I said is going to change your mind, because you've firmly rooted yourself in a frame of thinking where you are right by default. Your opinion hasn't been formed by any careful examination of the facts. Your conclusion is enough proof of that.

3/22/2006 1:38:04 AM

Christian

3/22/2006 1:48:40 AM

HAIL XENU

3/22/2006 1:57:42 AM

this may make it to 10 pages

^^any specific denomination?

3/26/2006 10:28:08 PM

christians make me SO ANGRY

IM SLAMMING MY FINGERS ON THE KEYBOARD IN DISGUST

3/26/2006 10:29:46 PM

atheist

3/26/2006 10:46:51 PM

HAIL XENU

3/26/2006 10:48:00 PM

bump

3/31/2006 8:36:42 PM

i wonder if at this ponit anyone would go through and read all the religious insights, or if nigh 10 pages will just scare ppl away... they can still atleast add to the poll.

3/31/2006 9:16:09 PM

Agnostic

I can confidently say "I dont know" when someone pops me the question on whether there is or is not a god.

This isn't to say I dont have spirituality. I feel that the soul is physical and the mind trancends. In introspect I think the soul is what you do in reality, your impact on history, your morals and convictions, karma. Your mind is something all together different. It trancends reality in that your thoughts are hidden from others until you release them. I long to feel comfort in knowing that my mind will surpass death and is ultimately part of something larger to which I will have the chance to futher understand. I accept my fate of not knowing until the time has come where I will face that horizon. Right now my duty is to pass on my genes and create a better environment for my children and families in general. That is the gist of my spirituality as much as I can define it in words,

and while others may find it a concept too out there, I am o.k. with that. It's my personal way of defining my existance.


As for being agnostic, I think that any one who tries to define god is being arrogant and isn't staying true to the limits of their mental capacity. At the same time, I feel exactly the same for those who try to falsify god.

4/1/2006 5:18:17 PM

Quote :

"Experiences increase the breadth of what you know, what you have the capacity to appreciate."

On this point we agree. I still want to know how the experience of going to church somehow doesn't count while the experience of plowing some drunk girl after a party does.

Quote :

"Most religion takes acting naturally out of the equation, and replaces nature with a sense of guilt and fear over what oneself is (conquering man's nature)."

For one, I disagree; you, as many atheists/agnostics have done, seem to play up the guilt aspect a good deal more than many churches do. The point of Christianity is joy, but not through the convention (read: most base) channels. I know the same to be true for many other faiths.

For another, how does conquering our nature not count as an experience? Does that not, in fact, have the potential to be an unusually grand experience, giving us as it does that much more objective knowledge and insight into the things we do?

Quote :

"Like many other sexually starved and frustrated religious fanatics, you have mistaken "full life" with regular fucking."

Hardly. I've used -- perhaps overused -- sex as an example because it is so ubiquitous. I've met people that don't like doing drugs or drinking. I really haven't met that many people who don't like sex. It's also a bigger deal for most people than, say, whether or not you can eat pork. Sure, a lot of people like bacon, but I dont expect the prospect of taking it away to horrify them.

Quote :

"It's a far fetched, unreachable ideal created by the weak to cripple and devour the strong."

In a way, yes.

The goal is unattainable in life. That doesn't mean we shouldn't strive for it. Realistically, a lot of goals that many people have that have nothing to do with religion are unattainable, but I don't see you telling them that their lives are unfulfilling.

And the process does favor the weak, because the weak are, by default, the ones being oppressed by the strong. Do Communists also live unfulfilling lives?

What I still don't understand about this entire part of your post is how any, any of it indicates that a religious adherent lives a less fulfilling life with fewer experiences than anybody else.

Quote :

"Your opinion hasn't been formed by any careful examination of the facts."

If that is the case I must be fairly stupid, because I spent months of reading up and thinking for myself -- as an atheist -- before I consciously and independently decided to take the path that has led me here. So, if my consideration was not careful enough for you, all I can offer is that it was the best my feeble mind could manage.

4/1/2006 5:53:48 PM

Quote :

"I still want to know how the experience of going to church somehow doesn't count while the experience of plowing some drunk girl after a party does."

This strawman gets more and more stupid each time you repeat it.

I can spend the time going to church, attempting to learn the answer to the unanswerable, or I could spend my time learning and enriching my experience.

Remember, being a GOOD Christian (following the rules of the Bible) means you sacrifice all glory to God, means you shouldn't try mind-expansion through drugs (this, apparently, was only okay when the religions were being thought up), you cannot have sex outside of marriage (a rule more attributed to organized religion than the religion itself), you cannot even THINK natural thoughts without guilt as a requirement (remember kids, even THINKING you want to plow that girl is wrong and you should feel horrible, you piece of shit sinner).

The list goes on and on, but the most damaging lack of experience is not feeling the full potential of being happy in your own human nature. A man caged by fear and guilt < a man who enjoys his fullness without the trappings of religion.

Quote :

"For one, I disagree; you, as many atheists/agnostics have done, seem to play up the guilt aspect a good deal more than many churches do. The point of Christianity is joy, but not through the convention (read: most base) channels. I know the same to be true for many other faiths."

This is halfway true, but not the whole picture. The "joy" of Christianity is in Christ perfecting you. It's in Christ taking you, a piece of shit, and performing an alchemical transformation on you. The base assumption here is that you're a piece of shit without Christ. Not exactly a self-esteem booster.

Quote :

"For another, how does conquering our nature not count as an experience?"

It does. File it under the "bad" category. Amputating my own leg is an experience too.

Quote :

"Does that not, in fact, have the potential to be an unusually grand experience, giving us as it does that much more objective knowledge and insight into the things we do?"

No, because you're operating the human machine in a manner which is against its nature. You don't drive a Geo Metro in an offroad rally. There's a reason for this.

Let's really evaluate what's at the core of your religion here. You not only have claimed to answer a question without an answer, but you now use that as the cornerstone upon which you build a structure. If you had any concept of objective thought, you'd abandon the question of God's existence into the same pile as the question of "large, effectless, undetectable eyeball-monsters".

Quote :

"The goal is unattainable in life. That doesn't mean we shouldn't strive for it. Realistically, a lot of goals that many people have that have nothing to do with religion are unattainable, but I don't see you telling them that their lives are unfulfilling."

Probably because they aren't relevant to this discussion. Fact of the matter is, you don't really know my opinion on that. It would probably depend on whether working towards the unattainable goal will further our progress in future generations or not.

The unattainable goal of religion is based on an answer to a question that has no answer. I will continue to repeat this until you understand exactly how foolish it is.

Quote :

"And the process does favor the weak, because the weak are, by default, the ones being oppressed by the strong. Do Communists also live unfulfilling lives?"

I'll let you know when I meet a Communist, operating in a Communist society. Seeing as how this has never happened, I don't understand your point and I have no means by which to answer your question.

Quote :

"If that is the case I must be fairly stupid, because I spent months of reading up and thinking for myself -- as an atheist -- before I consciously and independently decided to take the path that has led me here."

I'm going to dissect this into two parts I'd like to address:

Quote :

"If that is the case I must be fairly stupid, because I spent months of reading up and thinking for myself"

This doesn't mean you're stupid. The fact that you stopped does.

Quote :

"-- as an atheist --"

So you went from believing that you had answered a question that is not falsifiable... right back to believing you had answered a question that is not falsifiable? How is this surprising or unique? More importantly, how is it anything more than extra knowledge we just don't need? This does not show that you were careful in your thought process -- it just exposes the fact that you were just as careless back then as you are now.

Quote :

"So, if my consideration was not careful enough for you, all I can offer is that it was the best my feeble mind could manage."

It's not whether it's careful enough for me or not. It's not careful enough for yourself. Your mind isn't feeble at all. I respect you more than most people on these boards. You're very intelligent and have a great mind -- you've just chosen to ingest a very dangerous poison, one which debilitates it.

4/1/2006 6:24:05 PM

how did you come up with all that...

not reading...

I'm Southern Baptist

4/1/2006 7:14:43 PM

Quote :

"how did you come up with all that... not reading... I'm Southern Baptist"

I'm not surprised.

4/1/2006 7:18:16 PM

Since the last time I posted I've been leaning towards Hermeticism.

4/1/2006 7:49:21 PM

Quote :

"I can spend the time going to church, attempting to learn the answer to the unanswerable, or I could spend my time learning and enriching my experience."

Neither you nor anyone else has explained how the two options are different. There may be a great many good reasons, but no one has even attempted to explore them; you simply take it as an article of faith (pardon the fun) that no religious experience is enriching and all non- (and especially anti-) religious experiences are.

Then I see you go on precisely to prove my point -- you all hold drugs and sex to be the "enriching" experiences, with no support.

Quote :

"A man caged by fear and guilt < a man who enjoys his fullness without the trappings of religion."

OK, so we're apparently only supposed to strive for happy experiences.

What do we do with all those people who want to do things that you and I both agree are wrong? The rapists and the child molestors who take great joy from their pasttimes? Should we cage them by guilt and fear? Where does it become OK to do that?

Quote :

"Not exactly a self-esteem booster."

Oh, good, now we've brought self-esteem into the equation. Now our goal should be to pursue that that with all our might and tenacity?

Quote :

"You don't drive a Geo Metro in an offroad rally."

Well, people had no say in designing people, and the overwhelming majority of the population had no say in developing the Geo Metro.

If I showed the automobile to someone who had no concept of cars and taught them the basics of driving, I'd wager that they'd try to take it off the road at some point. They may well crash and burn, but they'd gain an important understanding of the thing in doing so.

Same with us. Since I've yet to run into the person that has every facet of humanity figured out, we -- almost inevitable -- do things that our design and nature probably did not intend. We learn in the process. This is a valuable experience.

But all of that is, again, irrelevant. You're still suggesting that we should simply act in accordance with our nature, and I'll say again that it's in our nature -- or at least in the nature of many -- to do some pretty abominable things.

Quote :

"Probably because they aren't relevant to this discussion."

Bullshit, at least until you more clearly define what exactly it is we're supposed to be doing. There's plenty of experiences, positive and otherwise, entailed in pursuing what are probably unacheivable goals. Should we now limit ourselves only to that which is obviously within our grasp?

Quote :

"I don't understand your point and I have no means by which to answer your question."

You used the idea of religion being designed to favor the weak over the strong in an apparently negative way, and I want you to explain why. Why is such a system undesirable? Why does it inherently cause one to lead a less-than-fulfilling life?

Quote :

"The fact that you stopped does."

I haven't stopped. Or don't you think that these discussions give me food for thought every time I participate in them? I am very confident in my belief in God and Christianity and all that, but such does not leave me deaf to alternatives. I doubt that I'll change -- the things put before me don't give much cause to -- but I can't deny the possibility, because every time I think of God I consider the possibility of His nonexistence.

Quote :

"More importantly, how is it anything more than extra knowledge we just don't need?"

You don't need any of this discussion, but if you're going to make judgements about the root and nature of my beliefs, you have to incorporate it. There was a thought process with several steps -- including your agnostic one. And I think you're mischaracterizing a key aspect. I wouldn't say that I "know" the answer to a question that isn't falsifiable. I'd say that, presented with the information that I have seen, I consider one possibility to be more likely than another; given the gravity of the question, I have decided to run with the more probable option.

4/1/2006 11:39:52 PM

You've managed to do exactly what I expected you to do:

You chopped my post up and addressed none of the meat.

Many religions bring to the table a question of the same "gravity" as your Christian one.

I do hope that if one of these arbitrary belief sets is correct, that you have selected the correct one from the infinite pool of questions that cannot be answered.

Quote :

"I wouldn't say that I "know" the answer to a question that isn't falsifiable. I'd say that, presented with the information that I have seen, I consider one possibility to be more likely than another; given the gravity of the question, I have decided to run with the more probable option."

This is incorrect. There is nothing more probable about Christianity than there is about Islam, or Judaism, or Hinduism, or the Flying Spaghetti Monster. They're all questions that cannot be answered. From the infinity of questions without answers, the specific configuration of Christianity has been plucked. How is it any more probable than the other arbitrary religions? It certainly has no more evidence, and if you weigh its actual beliefs versus what we know about reality I'd say it has much less evidence than atheism.

You're basically saying that you'd rather be wrong and get to go to heaven for making a mistake than knowing the truth. This is the same tired safe-haven all Christians retreat to, seeing as how "God works in mysterious ways" doesn't fly anymore.

4/2/2006 1:07:16 AM

4/2/2006 3:48:19 AM

^I'm surprised it took over 8 pages before someone "mentioned" The Church of the SubGenius....

[Edited on April 2, 2006 at 10:53 AM. Reason : ]

4/2/2006 10:52:53 AM

Some people seem to be of the mind that all religions have good aspects. In that case I think polytheism like that of the ancient greeks and romans (and ancient near east ppl to some extent) should be appealing. I think everyone can recognize the ideals of Justice, Wisdom, and Love as being good and different things even they don’t call them Nike, Athena, and Aphrodite. Monotheists seems to push unity a little hard, when it seems like any worship of the good aspects of divinity, like Wisdom, is where the real good things are at. Oneness vs Twoness vs Manyness seems like an odd way to decide what to worship. How is oneness a good thing? (if anything ppl any many situations think the bigger & the more the better). Worshiping God for his Wisdom and Justice seem to make more sense than worshipping him because he is One rather than Two. And I think that Justice and Love are clearly different, but recognizably important and powerful forces.

I know some people are put off by the imperfection of some gods in polytheism… but a God that strives to overcome imperfection and still show the value of Justice seems like a better thing than a God who is omnipotent and who can do anything at the flick of an immaterial wrist. Someone who struggles to help us who has to put a lot of effort into it, seems better than someone who helps us effortlessly. If you value redemption as an important quality, as an ability to ever strive to overcome ones flaws, then atleast in that sense the Olympians are better than a monotheistic omnipotent god.

Polytheism and Monotheism aren’t all that different anyways. The ancient greeks had the highest up God named Zeus (although when they just said God, or the one God, or the main God, you would understand they are talking Zeus), and an array of other gods in a hierarchy that also had demi-gods, nymphs, creatures like the furies, and mortals. They had the elysian fields and tarturus… and all this was in a society in many ways similar to our own in that they were a democracy (in addition to democracy the greeks also gave us philosophy, a lot of early science, architecture, artistic and religious ideas which were later copied whole sell in Christianity). Christianity also has a hierarchy of supernatural creatures with a highest up Yahweh, demi gods half mortal/half gods like Christ (like Hercules or Achilles or Aeneas), an array of other powerful supernatural creatures like the hierarchy of different types of angels, and mortals, and creatures like demons and the devil. Its hard to define Greco-roman religion in a way that would make them polytheistic without also making Christianity polytheistic, or define Christianity in a monotheistic way without also calling the Greco-Roman religion monotheism.

4/4/2006 4:29:32 PM

Christian Church of Christ
Go to Baptist Church up here

4/4/2006 10:05:49 PM

Christian

4/4/2006 10:10:42 PM

Hermes staff (with the snakes, i forget its name) that he gave to his older brother Apollo to give to his half God son Asclepius (who was worshiped as a god of medicine somewhat) still appears on our hospitals, ambulances and the like.

4/4/2006 11:07:29 PM

agnostic

4/4/2006 11:17:23 PM

I believe in the soaking of my cork.

4/4/2006 11:37:26 PM

Quote :

"You're basically saying that you'd rather be wrong and get to go to heaven for making a mistake than knowing the truth. This is the same tired safe-haven all Christians retreat to, seeing as how "God works in mysterious ways" doesn't fly anymore."

Welcome to PASCAL'S WAGER.

Fuck that, man. If God is so stupid as to fall for such things, I don't want Him even if He exists.

4/5/2006 8:58:08 AM

Evangelical Christian

4/5/2006 11:21:39 AM