For Ordinaryclay: Atheism

[mymistake]

Archeologists and anthropologists have studied past human cultures.  Ever since people learned how to make statues people have been making gods and goddesses.  Ever since we invented literature people have attributed deeds and powers to these deities.  All though history, people have personified these deities with personality traits, emotions, human instincts and needs.  There are thousands of gods that were created by people.  Each and every one of them demonstrates that it is in human nature to invent gods.

 

Slowly as our technology improved our knowledge and understanding of our world improved.  Our skills in story telling improved as well.  The gods we created became more detailed and the myths we made with them became more epic.  Some gods became more popular than others.  Religion became a method that a few people could use to control many.  Less useful theology would be discarded by conquering cultures that had religions that gave better control.

 

Empires would rise and carve out a new culture for regions and continents.   Though these conflicts it was demonstrated that monotheism could easily replace regions where the population was already polytheistic.  Monotheism was more appealing to the human mind and adapted well to governments ruled by dictatorships.  So the world was divided among the religions based on politics.  Where Catholic armies could defend became Catholic lands, where Muslim armies could defend became Muslim lands and so on.

 

But then human understanding grew too much.  People started to figure out the scientific method and used it to learn things we had never known before.  Suddenly the old myths didn’t make sense anymore.  The theology people created in ignorance didn’t match what we learned through science.  The authority of the gods was broken.  The enlightenment happened and churches began to lose power.  Wars were fought over it but eventually religion was far less of an influence.  People could no longer be burned alive for admitting they did not believe in any gods.

 

But creating gods was still human nature.  So we kept making gods but instead of doing so in theology we made gods in novels.  We still create monsters and villains.  Because we are enlightened we agree that nobody will accept it as true.  The epic stories and myths are entertainment.  It is human nature to create such stories.  As our technology continued to grow we would create comic books, television and cinema for our “new gods”.

 

Now it is true that even today some people still cling to remnants of religion.  Sometimes they deny scientific discoveries that disagree with ancient texts such as the Bible.  Other times they look for tiny gaps in scientific discoveries and try to create a god that can still fit in that gap.  When they imagine such a god they are doing the same thing their ancestors did thirty thousand years ago when fashioning gods out of clay.  Creating gods is human nature.

[Roz]

I need to remind myself to get some popcorn before reading Clay's reply. 

[Guest afireinside]

My prediction; tomfoolery!

[TheRedneckProfessor]

My prediction; tomfoolery!

Based on other attempts at getting Clay to engage in serious debate, I'd predict "copy and paste tomfoolery."

[Guest afireinside]

CAPT-it's their new acronym "I totally CAPT them pastor!!"

[RipVanWinkle]

"Now it is true that even today some people still cling to remnants of religion."  mymistake

 

Unfortunately it is more than just some people who have swallowed the bait. In this regard they are as unsophisticated as those ancient people. Indoctrination and brainwashing have a lot more power than those who lived during the Enlightenment  could have dreamed. It's really sad.   A new potentially deluded people are born every day and will continue to be so as long as brainwashed parents are allowed to brainwash their own children. So, what's the answer? This is a problem that has been an albatross around mankind's neck since the beginning.  I fear the answer will be a violent one. And most violent rebellions or revolutions do not end up achieving their initial goal.  bill

[FreeThinkerNZ]

"Now it is true that even today some people still cling to remnants of religion."  mymistake

 

Unfortunately it is more than just some people who have swallowed the bait. In this regard they are as unsophisticated as those ancient people. Indoctrination and brainwashing have a lot more power than those who lived during the Enlightenment  could have dreamed. It's really sad.   A new potentially deluded people are born every day and will continue to be so as long as brainwashed parents are allowed to brainwash their own children. So, what's the answer? This is a problem that has been an albatross around mankind's neck since the beginning.  I fear the answer will be a violent one. And most violent rebellions or revolutions do not end up achieving their initial goal.  bill

The internet is the answer.  It is run by atheists.

 

The only way for the indoctrination to really stick is to ban children's access to the internet.  Parents can only do that for so long.  The kids will eventually grow up and get online.  Some of them might stay xian long enough to marry someone from the same offline background and have kids and keep them offline, but eventually someone will crack and then it is just a matter of time.

 

Most kids growing up in xian homes today are able to access the internet and in their teenage years they will fall away from their parents' faith.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

I bet two of Lot's drunken daughters that OrdinaryClay's first response will be "You are mistaking 'archaeologists' with people who study ancient history and by the definitions proffered by the English language I win by default."

[RipVanWinkle]

"The only way for the indoctrination to really stick is to ban children's access to the internet.  Parents can only do that for so long.  The kids will eventually grow up and get online" FreeThinKer NZ

 

I like your optimism. However once the Xtian leaders figure this out, they will preach to the faithful that the internet is the tool of the devil. I don't know whether that scare tactic will be successful,. But I hope not.   bill

[FreeThinkerNZ]

"The only way for the indoctrination to really stick is to ban children's access to the internet.  Parents can only do that for so long.  The kids will eventually grow up and get online" FreeThinKer NZ

 

I like your optimism. However once the Xtian leaders figure this out, they will preach to the faithful that the internet is the tool of the devil. I don't know whether that scare tactic will be successful,. But I hope not.   bill

They may already be preaching that to them, but I am confident it won't work (with most).  It's getting to the stage that it's impossible to function in society without internet access and a mobile phone.  I live with elderly parents who prefer to pay bills in person and write letters, for example.  They dabble in the internet but it's not their first port of call when they want to do anything.  They are going to find it increasingly difficult in just 5 or 10 years time not to get with the program fully.

 

Sure, I think there will be a minority of fundies who cut themselves off from the internet, we have Amish people who don't even use zippers after all.  But I think all liberal xians and most fundies will use the internet for something, and all the information a doubting xian could ever need about the world and the universe and deconversion is just waiting there for them.  We never had the internet "in my day" and it sure is starting to make a difference to the rate of transmission of the virus between generations.

[♦ ficino ♦]

mm, I had a horrible thought this AM: don't religions seem to evolve in response to the development of new technologies? As you point out, religions that were based on reverence for places and individual forces, after literacy spread, in many places were replaced by religions based on reverence for written texts. How did Judaism survive the destruction of the temple, for example, but by replacing it with the Torah?

 

So now, are we going to find some new cybergod or cyberspace religion coming forward? It will be a tool of the elites even more effective than written texts. Those who don't worship the cybergod (which will be the tool of some group) will be hunted down... little pockets of resistance will sprout up here and there... then "heresies" and "schisms" will develop, maybe even aided by or among robots.... Egad!!

 

OK, signing off. Waiting for OC to reply to your rich OP.

[mymistake]

Archeologists and anthropologists have studied past human cultures.  Ever since people learned how to make statues people have been making gods and goddesses.  Ever since we invented literature people have attributed deeds and powers to these deities.  All though history, people have personified these deities with personality traits, emotions, human instincts and needs.  There are thousands of gods that were created by people.  Each and every one of them demonstrates that it is in human nature to invent gods.

 

Slowly as our technology improved our knowledge and understanding of our world improved.  Our skills in story telling improved as well.  The gods we created became more detailed and the myths we made with them became more epic.  Some gods became more popular than others.  Religion became a method that a few people could use to control many.  Less useful theology would be discarded by conquering cultures that had religions that gave better control.

 

Empires would rise and carve out a new culture for regions and continents.   Though these conflicts it was demonstrated that monotheism could easily replace regions where the population was already polytheistic.  Monotheism was more appealing to the human mind and adapted well to governments ruled by dictatorships.  So the world was divided among the religions based on politics.  Where Catholic armies could defend became Catholic lands, where Muslim armies could defend became Muslim lands and so on.

 

But then human understanding grew too much.  People started to figure out the scientific method and used it to learn things we had never known before.  Suddenly the old myths didn’t make sense anymore.  The theology people created in ignorance didn’t match what we learned through science.  The authority of the gods was broken.  The enlightenment happened and churches began to lose power.  Wars were fought over it but eventually religion was far less of an influence.  People could no longer be burned alive for admitting they did not believe in any gods.

 

But creating gods was still human nature.  So we kept making gods but instead of doing so in theology we made gods in novels.  We still create monsters and villains.  Because we are enlightened we agree that nobody will accept it as true.  The epic stories and myths are entertainment.  It is human nature to create such stories.  As our technology continued to grow we would create comic books, television and cinema for our “new gods”.

 

Now it is true that even today some people still cling to remnants of religion.  Sometimes they deny scientific discoveries that disagree with ancient texts such as the Bible.  Other times they look for tiny gaps in scientific discoveries and try to create a god that can still fit in that gap.  When they imagine such a god they are doing the same thing their ancestors did thirty thousand years ago when fashioning gods out of clay.  Creating gods is human nature.

 

 

OrdinaryClay, I hope next time you log on you will let me know when you will have time to get to this.  If you had told me Friday that you will not have time for it this weekend then I would have been happy to postpone.

[TheRedneckProfessor]

[mymistake]

I guess when OC says "I will only engage in debates that allow the true definition of evidence as defined by the English language" what he really means is that he won't be online for at least a week.

 

http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/62003-christians-please-stop-being-arrogant/page-8#.U2OV1Sjqp5g

[TheRedneckProfessor]

I guess when OC says "I will only engage in debates that allow the true definition of evidence as defined by the English language" what he really means is that he won't be online for at least a week.

 

http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/62003-christians-please-stop-being-arrogant/page-8#.U2OV1Sjqp5g

Or perhaps he has been studying the definition of the word "definition" so he will know how to use it in a sentence.

[bornagainathiest]

I guess when OC says "I will only engage in debates that allow the true definition of evidence as defined by the English language" what he really means is that he won't be online for at least a week.

 

http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/62003-christians-please-stop-being-arrogant/page-8#.U2OV1Sjqp5g

 

I beg to differ, MM.

 

If we look at what OC wrote before that message, the proper context of what he's actually trying to do becomes apparent.

(Clay's words are in blue.  The highlighting is mine, to show the underlying theme.)

 

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

 

Posted 24 April 2014 - 03:40 PM

boftx, on 22 Apr 2014 - 04:40 AM, said:

I think that a more practical request to make of Christians (or any other group) would be that they not impose their beliefs on others who disagree with them.

 

This is a strawman. Everyone in society attempts to influence the beliefs of others and this translates into the push and pull we see in the political process. Any atheist who is seeking to remove the ten commandments from a courthouse is seeking to impose their will and is displaying intolerance.

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

Posted 24 April 2014 - 09:29 PM

florduh, on 24 Apr 2014 - 9:53 PM, said:

 

Quote

Any atheist who is seeking to remove the ten commandments from a courthouse is seeking to impose their will and is displaying intolerance.

 

No, they are seeking to impose the law of the land. Our Constitution prohibits the government from promoting religion. Believe it or not, officially we still have a secular government, not a theocracy. Not yet, anyway.

 

The law of the land exists because a group of people chose to impose their will and are displaying intolerance of those who disagreed with that particular law. So my point still stands.

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

Posted 24 April 2014 - 09:32 PM

WarriorPoet, on 24 Apr 2014 - 9:52 PM, said:

 

OrdinaryClay, on 24 Apr 2014 - 9:40 PM, said:

 

boftx, on 22 Apr 2014 - 04:40 AM, said:

I think that a more practical request to make of Christians (or any other group) would be that they not impose their beliefs on others who disagree with them.

 

This is a strawman. Everyone in society attempts to influence the beliefs of others and this translates into the push and pull we see in the political process. Any atheist who is seeking to remove the ten commandments from a courthouse is seeking to impose their will and is displaying intolerance.

 

Really? you just pulled that out?   You know good and well that getting the 10 commandments removed from a courthouse has nothing to do with atheists spreading their beliefs.  It is them being responsible citizens and calling out the government when it fails to live up to the 1st amendment. 

 

Atheists do this because of their beliefs. Very simple. We all act based on our beliefs. It would be irrational not to do so.

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

Posted 24 April 2014 - 09:39 PM

TheRedneckProfessor, on 24 Apr 2014 - 10:50 PM, said:

 

OrdinaryClay, on 24 Apr 2014 - 9:40 PM, said:

Any atheist who is seeking to remove the ten commandments from a courthouse is seeking to impose their will and is displaying intolerance.

This is a bald-faced lie and you know it perfectly well, OrdinaryClay.

 

The law of our land provides for the separation of church and state.  Placing the 10 commandments on a public courthouse defies the law of our land.  Atheists are not alone in wishing to rectify this, secular humanists and even satanists join them. 

 

Contrariwise, christians attempting to keep gays from being able to marry or making abortion illegal are attempting to impose their will and displaying their intolerance.

 

I've seen some pretty disingenuous arguments from you, Clay; but you really shouldn't stoop to the level of lying.  I think one of the very commandments you are attempting to defend here has something to say about that.

 

Clearly it was not a lie as I pointed out here. Any citizen who seeks laws is imposing their will on others. That's what a law is. Every citizen does it.

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

Posted 24 April 2014 - 09:50 PM

francesco, on 24 Apr 2014 - 11:22 PM, said:

impose their will and intolerance?

when christian put 10 commandments it's makes them special

so for the sake of fairness, every religion need to have an equal opportunity to put their religion motto, symbol or part of their holy book too

for example, Islam should have the same opportunity to  put syahadah in government building or buddhist can have an equal opportunity to put small buddha statue in the court room and so any other religion

and atheist can put their FSM or goddes of eternal lolly 

And they would all be seeking to impress their will. Note: I'm not arguing for allowing the 10 commandments in a court house. I'm pointing out that every citizen seeks to impose their will on other citizens when working to pass or enforce laws.

 

That said, of course I do believe that our society would be far better off if more people personally lived by the 10 commandments.

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

 

See what OC's doing, MM?

 

He's acting according to his beliefs

In this case he believes that every citizen (including him) seeks to impose their will on others.  He focused on the passing and enforcing of laws, but in this instance he's using a different and undeclared method of trying to impose his will on us.  He's trying to take control of what the words 'debate' and 'language' mean.  He's trying to impose HIS definitions and HIS meanings from get go.  Before the debate has even started, OC is trying to control it.

 

This is classic Ordinaryclay modus operandi.  

In all the years I've seen him at 'work' in various forums across the 'Net, I've never yet seen even the faintest hint of compromise in his writings.  Not even a suspicion of yielding on any point, whatsoever.  Either he controls or he ignores or he quits.  

 

Thanks,

 

BAA

[Roz]

It is now 5/5/14, no clay.  What a b  b.

[bornagainathiest]

It is now 5/5/14, no clay.  What a b  b.

 

Oh... he may well show, Roz!

 

Clay's beholden to nobody, when it comes to responding.  

He operates according to HIS timetable and the rest of the universe can go **** itself!  Which is another way he controls things.  You have to wait on him.  

 

Capiche?

[♦ ficino ♦]

One of the things accomplished by trolling a once-a-month or even less often is that most people forget what the troll said the last time. So the same stuff can be recycled. BAA, though, never forgets. Our elephant!!  

[bornagainathiest]

One of the things accomplished by trolling a once-a-month or even less often is that most people forget what the troll said the last time. So the same stuff can be recycled. BAA, though, never forgets. Our elephant!!  

 

I haven't forgotten the various questions and points that End3 has dodged recently, either, F.

 

But he and the Prof seem to be having a fun, so I'll hang fire on the reminders until that dialog winds down.

 

Who knows?  Meebe I'll do something like this?

 

http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/43670-all-the-questions-dodged-by-rayskidude/#.U2lErvldXlA  

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

One of the things accomplished by trolling a once-a-month or even less often is that most people forget what the troll said the last time. So the same stuff can be recycled. BAA, though, never forgets. Our elephant!!  

 

I haven't forgotten the various questions and points that End3 has dodged recently, either, F.

 

But he and the Prof seem to be having a fun, so I'll hang fire on the reminders until that dialog winds down.

 

Who knows?  Meebe I'll do something like this?

 

http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/43670-all-the-questions-dodged-by-rayskidude/#.U2lErvldXlA  

 

Hey, don't let our fun stand in the way of you having a good time, yourself!   

[bornagainathiest]

 

 

One of the things accomplished by trolling a once-a-month or even less often is that most people forget what the troll said the last time. So the same stuff can be recycled. BAA, though, never forgets. Our elephant!!  

 

I haven't forgotten the various questions and points that End3 has dodged recently, either, F.

 

But he and the Prof seem to be having a fun, so I'll hang fire on the reminders until that dialog winds down.

 

Who knows?  Meebe I'll do something like this?

 

http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/43670-all-the-questions-dodged-by-rayskidude/#.U2lErvldXlA  

 

Hey, don't let our fun stand in the way of you having a good time, yourself! 

 

 

No.. No.. Prof!

 

I'm a patient man.  Time is my friend, not my enemy.  End is yours... for now.  

[TheRedneckProfessor]

 

 

 

One of the things accomplished by trolling a once-a-month or even less often is that most people forget what the troll said the last time. So the same stuff can be recycled. BAA, though, never forgets. Our elephant!!  

 

I haven't forgotten the various questions and points that End3 has dodged recently, either, F.

 

But he and the Prof seem to be having a fun, so I'll hang fire on the reminders until that dialog winds down.

 

Who knows?  Meebe I'll do something like this?

 

http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/43670-all-the-questions-dodged-by-rayskidude/#.U2lErvldXlA  

 

Hey, don't let our fun stand in the way of you having a good time, yourself! 

 

 

No.. No.. Prof!

 

I'm a patient man.  Time is my friend, not my enemy.  End is yours... for now.  

 

Fair enough. 

[mymistake]

Archeologists and anthropologists have studied past human cultures.  Ever since people learned how to make statues people have been making gods and goddesses.  Ever since we invented literature people have attributed deeds and powers to these deities.  All though history, people have personified these deities with personality traits, emotions, human instincts and needs.  There are thousands of gods that were created by people.  Each and every one of them demonstrates that it is in human nature to invent gods.

 

Slowly as our technology improved our knowledge and understanding of our world improved.  Our skills in story telling improved as well.  The gods we created became more detailed and the myths we made with them became more epic.  Some gods became more popular than others.  Religion became a method that a few people could use to control many.  Less useful theology would be discarded by conquering cultures that had religions that gave better control.

 

Empires would rise and carve out a new culture for regions and continents.   Though these conflicts it was demonstrated that monotheism could easily replace regions where the population was already polytheistic.  Monotheism was more appealing to the human mind and adapted well to governments ruled by dictatorships.  So the world was divided among the religions based on politics.  Where Catholic armies could defend became Catholic lands, where Muslim armies could defend became Muslim lands and so on.

 

But then human understanding grew too much.  People started to figure out the scientific method and used it to learn things we had never known before.  Suddenly the old myths didn’t make sense anymore.  The theology people created in ignorance didn’t match what we learned through science.  The authority of the gods was broken.  The enlightenment happened and churches began to lose power.  Wars were fought over it but eventually religion was far less of an influence.  People could no longer be burned alive for admitting they did not believe in any gods.

 

But creating gods was still human nature.  So we kept making gods but instead of doing so in theology we made gods in novels.  We still create monsters and villains.  Because we are enlightened we agree that nobody will accept it as true.  The epic stories and myths are entertainment.  It is human nature to create such stories.  As our technology continued to grow we would create comic books, television and cinema for our “new gods”.

 

Now it is true that even today some people still cling to remnants of religion.  Sometimes they deny scientific discoveries that disagree with ancient texts such as the Bible.  Other times they look for tiny gaps in scientific discoveries and try to create a god that can still fit in that gap.  When they imagine such a god they are doing the same thing their ancestors did thirty thousand years ago when fashioning gods out of clay.  Creating gods is human nature.

 

*bump*  Gee, I hope Ordinaryclay comes back before this thread is forgotten.

[FreeThinkerNZ]

 

One of the things accomplished by trolling a once-a-month or even less often is that most people forget what the troll said the last time. So the same stuff can be recycled. BAA, though, never forgets. Our elephant!!  

 

I haven't forgotten the various questions and points that End3 has dodged recently, either, F.

 

But he and the Prof seem to be having a fun, so I'll hang fire on the reminders until that dialog winds down.

 

Who knows?  Meebe I'll do something like this?

 

http://www.ex-christian.net/topic/43670-all-the-questions-dodged-by-rayskidude/#.U2lErvldXlA  

 

Nice job there.

 

I wish I had thought of listing the unanswered questions posed to Wololo in time.  Maybe for the next one someone can get a list going early on.

 

BTW, I have an unanswered question for end3, who said he thinks men and women have different (presumably intellectual) attributes that are best brought out by marriage.  I want to see him explain that one.