LinuxQuestions.org
Visit Jeremy's Blog.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices

View Poll Results: You are a...
firm believer 168 28.82%
Deist 18 3.09%
Theist 23 3.95%
Agnostic 120 20.58%
Atheist 254 43.57%
Voters: 583. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 12-23-2012, 10:06 AM   #4156
TB0ne
Guru
 
Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Distribution: SuSE, RedHat, Slack,CentOS
Posts: 14,759

Rep: Reputation: 2612Reputation: 2612Reputation: 2612Reputation: 2612Reputation: 2612Reputation: 2612Reputation: 2612Reputation: 2612Reputation: 2612Reputation: 2612Reputation: 2612

Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegospel View Post
I was referring to his reference to the living God as a "mythological creature." Such a statement requires either arrogance, a stunted mentality, or at best, total blindness.
And you wonder why you're branded a troll? Telling people they are arrogant, 'stunted mentally', or totally blind is just plain nasty. However, it seems you don't consider ANYONES opinion as valid, unless they are 'true believers' like you. And incidentally, given how you behave and the exclusionary nature of your comments, I see NONE of the compassion, tolerance, or forgiveness a Christian should have.

And if you want to see a good example of someone who is 'stunted mentally', try this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegospel
I have studied science some, and I believe I've studied enough
Quite typical...learn enough to cherry-pick some things that support what YOU want, and ignore/bash the rest, probably because it's too difficult. And from a very strict scientific standpoint, the description is accurate.
 
Old 12-23-2012, 03:26 PM   #4157
bluegospel
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2010
Distribution: centOS
Posts: 404

Rep: Reputation: 53
Red face

Quote:
Originally Posted by brianL View Post
Well, mythical being, is that better?
Arrogance? No, I'm a very 'umble person, Mr Copperfield.
Stunted mentality? No. Not a genius, just slightly above average IQ.
Total blindness? No. Short-sighted, though.
Mythological being is no better (yes, I understand your sarcasm).
But you are right and I'm sorry I insulted you. I haven't any valid excuse but try to understand, any time somebody slights the living God--which you did--I take it as personally as if you were to slight my wife.

You see (and this is the perfect context), YHWH is a very personal God--unlike mythological "gods," where you quite intentionally classify the Judeo-Christian God.

That's the difference. The genuine Christian experience is not w an impersonal object, but w a very personal, living God. Bible and prayer is not a one-way wall but a two-way, life-giving relationship--and pardon me, but I cannot help but use every method I know, including haste, to try to compel others to see for themselves.
 
Old 12-23-2012, 04:09 PM   #4158
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Hanover, Germany
Distribution: Main: Gentoo Others: What fits the task
Posts: 15,592
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegospel View Post
You see (and this is the perfect context), YHWH is a very personal God--unlike mythological "gods," where you quite intentionally classify the Judeo-Christian God.

That's the difference. The genuine Christian experience is not w an impersonal object, but w a very personal, living God. Bible and prayer is not a one-way wall but a two-way, life-giving relationship--and pardon me, but I cannot help but use every method I know, including haste, to try to compel others to see for themselves.
That is the same for the believers of most other religions. There is no difference between you and a Muslim or a Hindu.
But nonetheless is your god a mythological being: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mythology
Quote:
In folkloristics, a myth is a sacred narrative usually explaining how the world or humankind came to be in its present form
Quote:
Myths typically involve supernatural characters and are endorsed by rulers or priests.
Quote:
They are transmitted to convey religious or idealized experience, to establish behavioral models, and to teach.
Quote:
Typical characteristics
The main characters in myths are usually gods, supernatural heroes and humans.[5][6][7] As sacred stories, myths are often endorsed by rulers and priests and closely linked to religion or spirituality.[5] In the society in which it is told, a myth is usually regarded as a true account of the remote past.[5][6][8][9] In fact, many societies have two categories of traditional narrative, "true stories" or myths, and "false stories" or fables.[10] Creation myths generally take place in a primordial age, when the world had not yet achieved its current form,[5] and explain how the world gained its current form[2][11] and how customs, institutions and taboos were established.[5][11]
 
Old 12-23-2012, 05:25 PM   #4159
brianL
LQ 5k Club
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: Oldham, Lancs, England
Distribution: Slackware & Slackware64 14.1
Posts: 7,039
Blog Entries: 52

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by bluegospel View Post
But you are right and I'm sorry I insulted you.
That's OK. I'm thick-skinned, insults roll off me like water off the proverbial duck's back. Apology accepted.
 
Old 12-23-2012, 05:51 PM   #4160
k3lt01
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2011
Location: Australia
Distribution: Debian Wheezy, Jessie, Sid/Experimental, playing with LFS.
Posts: 2,744

Rep: Reputation: 570Reputation: 570Reputation: 570Reputation: 570Reputation: 570Reputation: 570
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
That is the same for the believers of most other religions. There is no difference between you and a Muslim or a Hindu.
But nonetheless is your god a mythological being: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mythology
TobiSGD, what you are calling "your god" maybe a mythological being to you but to others it isn't. The extreme combatative nature of this discussion stops all of you from going anywhere near the middle ground and this stops anything like a debate where people will acknowledge others thoughts. Both sides are playing the "my way is the only way" game.

Blue, I'm still waiting for an answer. I hope to see it before Christmas 2020.
 
Old 12-23-2012, 06:35 PM   #4161
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Hanover, Germany
Distribution: Main: Gentoo Others: What fits the task
Posts: 15,592
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by k3lt01 View Post
TobiSGD, what you are calling "your god" maybe a mythological being to you but to others it isn't.
And to those others the other gods, which are in turn real for others, are also mythological beings. The point is that there is no difference between the Christian god, the gods of the Mayas or the gods of the Greeks. There is nothing special about the Christian god.

Quote:
The extreme combatative nature of this discussion stops all of you from going anywhere near the middle ground and this stops anything like a debate where people will acknowledge others thoughts. Both sides are playing the "my way is the only way" game.
Can there even be a middle ground between a believer of one religion and someone that does not believe in that specific god?
To at least start to get somewhere into the middle ground there must be a clear definition of the terms used in the discussion, which I delivered for the term mythological, together with my hypothesis that for all believers, regardless of the religion, gods are real, but they are from an objective standpoint (if that is even possible) mythological beings.
 
Old 12-23-2012, 06:43 PM   #4162
k3lt01
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2011
Location: Australia
Distribution: Debian Wheezy, Jessie, Sid/Experimental, playing with LFS.
Posts: 2,744

Rep: Reputation: 570Reputation: 570Reputation: 570Reputation: 570Reputation: 570Reputation: 570
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
And to those others the other gods, which are in turn real for others, are also mythological beings. The point is that there is no difference between the Christian god, the gods of the Mayas or the gods of the Greeks. There is nothing special about the Christian god.

Can there even be a middle ground between a believer of one religion and someone that does not believe in that specific god?
To at least start to get somewhere into the middle ground there must be a clear definition of the terms used in the discussion, which I delivered for the term mythological, together with my hypothesis that for all believers, regardless of the religion, gods are real, but they are from an objective standpoint (if that is even possible) mythological beings.
Continuously stating they are mythological is not allowing a middle ground. There is nothing objective about it. You are forcing your opinion on the other side by denying anyones right or ability to believe in something as if it was real because you, and others, keep plastering the word mythological on things you do not believe in. You do this because the word mythological means it isn't real.

You and Blue are as bad as each other.
 
Old 12-23-2012, 07:02 PM   #4163
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Hanover, Germany
Distribution: Main: Gentoo Others: What fits the task
Posts: 15,592
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by k3lt01 View Post
You are forcing your opinion on the other side by denying anyones right or ability to believe in something as if it was real because you, and others, keep plastering the word mythological on things you do not believe in.
I explicitly stated that for the believer his specific god(s) is/are real:
Quote:
And to those others the other gods, which are in turn real for others
A believer will always think his god(s) is/are real, otherwise believing in that god wouldn't make much sense.

Quote:
You do this because the word mythological means it isn't real.
Did you even read the definition?
Quote:
In fact, many societies have two categories of traditional narrative, "true stories" or myths, and "false stories" or fables.
The myths are the true stories.
 
Old 12-23-2012, 08:34 PM   #4164
k3lt01
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2011
Location: Australia
Distribution: Debian Wheezy, Jessie, Sid/Experimental, playing with LFS.
Posts: 2,744

Rep: Reputation: 570Reputation: 570Reputation: 570Reputation: 570Reputation: 570Reputation: 570
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
I explicitly stated that for the believer his specific god(s) is/are real:
Yet you keep insisting on stating that something you do not believe in is mythological.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
A believer will always think his god(s) is/are real, otherwise believing in that god wouldn't make much sense.
Yet again you keep insisting the thing the believer believes in is mythological.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
Did you even read the definition?
I tend not to read definitions made up by people who are biased and have a point to prove. http://thesaurus.com/browse/mythological http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/myth
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
The myths are the true stories.
Myths are not true stories they are invented stories and this is the problem with your argument. Just because you don't believe somethign does not mean it is not true.
 
Old 12-25-2012, 05:47 AM   #4165
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Hanover, Germany
Distribution: Main: Gentoo Others: What fits the task
Posts: 15,592
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047
From the second link you posted:
Quote:
a traditional or legendary story, usually concerning some being or hero or event, with or without a determinable basis of fact or a natural explanation, especially one that is concerned with deities or demigods and explains some practice, rite, or phenomenon of nature.
All believers of a religion believe their god(s) to be real. This is true for any religion and there is no difference in believing in the Christian god, the Greek god(s), the Hindu gods or the nordic gods. So we could assume that all gods are real, but sadly the default position for most religions is that only their god(s) are allowed to be real, all other must be false, non-existent gods (which by the way is especially funny for the judeo-christian god with his origins in a polytheistic religion). Since we can not assume all god(s) to be real for this exact reason the fair thing to do is to assume that no god is real.
So believers make the same assumption for other religions as I do for all religions, but you do not seem to find that offensive.
 
Old 12-25-2012, 06:20 AM   #4166
cascade9
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2011
Location: Brisneyland
Distribution: Debian, aptosid
Posts: 3,718

Rep: Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904Reputation: 904
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
All believers of a religion believe their god(s) to be real. This is true for any religion and there is no difference in believing in the Christian god, the Greek god(s), the Hindu gods or the nordic gods. So we could assume that all gods are real, but sadly the default position for most religions is that only their god(s) are allowed to be real, all other must be false, non-existent gods (which by the way is especially funny for the judeo-christian god with his origins in a polytheistic religion).
I disagree with the bolded bit.

While the various different judeo-christian and islamic versions tend to take the 'only our god is real' position, its nowhere near as common in Hindu traditions (apart from the IMO slightly crazy twisted visions of Hinduism where its perceived as a monotheism). In many polytheistic and other similar systems, the assumption can actually be 'our gods are real, maybe those other gods are real as well'.

In many ways acceptance of other gods as at least possibly real is one of the ways that monotheisms have used to erode other belief systems.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
Since we can not assume all god(s) to be real for this exact reason the fair thing to do is to assume that no god is real.
Since some groups of people are one-eyed bigots the whole is idea should be assumed to be unreal and/or imgainary? That is almost as crazy as blind belief.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TB0ne View Post
And you wonder why you're branded a troll? Telling people they are arrogant, 'stunted mentally', or totally blind is just plain nasty. However, it seems you don't consider ANYONES opinion as valid, unless they are 'true believers' like you. And incidentally, given how you behave and the exclusionary nature of your comments, I see NONE of the compassion, tolerance, or forgiveness a Christian should have.
Of course you dont see any compassion, tolerance, or forgiveness. Look at the positions that bluegospel is taking. Its a lawyers position, with the bible as the law, with no possibility that the bible is in any way incorrect.

Because of that and the way that bluegospel is using this thread as a soapbox for his message, IMO this should be closed or rolled into the religion thread. This is not a discussion, its a very poor attempt at proselytism.
 
Old 12-25-2012, 12:19 PM   #4167
k3lt01
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2011
Location: Australia
Distribution: Debian Wheezy, Jessie, Sid/Experimental, playing with LFS.
Posts: 2,744

Rep: Reputation: 570Reputation: 570Reputation: 570Reputation: 570Reputation: 570Reputation: 570
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
From the second link you posted:

All believers of a religion believe their god(s) to be real. This is true for any religion and there is no difference in believing in the Christian god, the Greek god(s), the Hindu gods or the nordic gods. So we could assume that all gods are real, but sadly the default position for most religions is that only their god(s) are allowed to be real, all other must be false, non-existent gods (which by the way is especially funny for the judeo-christian god with his origins in a polytheistic religion). Since we can not assume all god(s) to be real for this exact reason the fair thing to do is to assume that no god is real.
No it is not fair to assume anything of the sort. You have no proof no god is real just your belief that you, as Blue does, tries to force on everyone else.

As for the Judeo-Christian god having an origin in polytheistic religion methinks you need to prove that one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
So believers make the same assumption for other religions as I do for all religions, but you do not seem to find that offensive.
Who said I don't find that offensive? I certainly have made no representations of the sort. What I find offensive is the pig headedness of ths conversation you and Blue are having. He wont answer simple questions and you try to squirm your way out of your hole by makng your own definitions that you expect everyone else to adhere to and accussing others of bias.

Last edited by k3lt01; 12-25-2012 at 12:20 PM.
 
Old 12-25-2012, 03:33 PM   #4168
TobiSGD
Moderator
 
Registered: Dec 2009
Location: Hanover, Germany
Distribution: Main: Gentoo Others: What fits the task
Posts: 15,592
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047Reputation: 4047
Quote:
Originally Posted by k3lt01 View Post
You have no proof no god is real just your belief that you, as Blue does, tries to force on everyone else.
Ever heard of the burden of proof? I never have said that a god does not exist, so I don't have to proof that. The proof has to come from the people that claim something to be true, for example the existence of the judeo-christian god.

Quote:
Originally Posted by k3lt01
As for the Judeo-Christian god having an origin in polytheistic religion methinks you need to prove that one.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_History_of_God
Quote:
the cult of Jahweh, one of the pagan deities of Canaan.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_history
Quote:
The culture of the earliest Israelite settlements is Canaanite, their cult-objects are those of the Canaanite god El, the pottery remains in the local Canaanite tradition, and the alphabet used is early Canaanite
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History...Judah#Religion
Quote:
The development of Israelite monotheism was a gradual process which began with the normal beliefs and practices of the ancient world.[71] The religion of the Israelites of Iron Age I, like the Canaanite faith from which it evolved[72] and many other Ancient Near Eastern religions, was based on the cult of the ancestors and the worship of family gods (the "gods of the fathers").[73] The major deities were not numerous El, Asherah, and Yahweh, with Baal as a fourth god, and perhaps Shamash (the sun) in the early period.[74] By the early monarchy El and Yahweh had become unified and Asherah did not continue as a separate state cult,[74] although she continued to be popular at a community level until Persian times.[75] Yahweh, later the national god of both Israel and Judah seems to have originated in Edom and Midian in southern Canaan, and may have been brought north to Israel by the Kenites and Midianites at an early stage.[76] With the emergence of monarchy at the beginning of Iron Age II the king promoted his own family god, Yahweh, as the god of the kingdom, but beyond the royal court religion continued to be both polytheistic and family-centered, as it was also for other societies in the Ancient Near East.[77]
Quote:
Originally Posted by k3lt01
by makng your own definitions
Quote:
Originally Posted by k3lt01
I tend not to read definitions made up by people who are biased and have a point to prove.
I always post the links to the source for my quotes. If that is your definition of making up things then I don't know what to say anymore to you, since you won't accept any of my sources, without even having read them. Now call me biased again.
 
Old 12-25-2012, 06:50 PM   #4169
k3lt01
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2011
Location: Australia
Distribution: Debian Wheezy, Jessie, Sid/Experimental, playing with LFS.
Posts: 2,744

Rep: Reputation: 570Reputation: 570Reputation: 570Reputation: 570Reputation: 570Reputation: 570
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
Ever heard of the burden of proof? I never have said that a god does not exist, so I don't have to proof that. The proof has to come from the people that claim something to be true, for example the existence of the judeo-christian god.
You infer by your posts that God is a mythological being/creature that he does not exist. The burden of proof is upon you when you infer that to prove it. So far you have not done this at all.

Wikipedia is hardly a reliable academic resource and I am surprised you resort to it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
I always post the links to the source for my quotes. If that is your definition of making up things then I don't know what to say anymore to you, since you won't accept any of my sources, without even having read them.
Yes wikipeadia is such a brilliant resource that you use, thanks for sharing

Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
Now call me biased again.
Is that a dare? OK, I accept. Tobi it is obvious you are biased.

Is there anything else you want?
 
Old 12-25-2012, 07:20 PM   #4170
oskar
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2006
Location: Austria
Distribution: Ubuntu 12.10
Posts: 1,138

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 49
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrCode View Post
I vote that this should be merged with the religion megathread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TobiSGD View Post
I second that.
Thirded!
Feed my sweet baby! Feed it! D8
 
  


Reply

Tags
bible, censorship, christ, christian, determinism, education, faith, free will, god, human stupidity, humor, islam, jesus, magic roundabout, mythology, nihilism, peace, pointless, polytheism, quran, religion, virtue, war, zealot


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The touchpad "tapping" questions answers and solutions mega-thread tommytomthms5 Linux - Laptop and Netbook 4 10-30-2007 06:01 PM
What is your religion? jspenguin General 9 04-25-2004 01:28 PM
New Religion (no linux in this thread, sorry) Calum General 9 02-13-2003 02:37 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:25 AM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration