| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Jericho" |
| Date: |
18 Nov 2005 06:44:25 PM |
| Object: |
Double Standard for where it comes from. |
I've been reading through lots of postings and one thing occurs to me.
When asked where "God" comes from, the religious answer is "I don't
know but he created the universe." And this is supposed to be an
acceptable answer.
When the athiest is asked where the universe comes from the answer is
"I don't know but we're getting evidence that it came from (..lots of
text..) and we're trying to find the answers to the things we don't
know". And this is unacceptable to the religious posters.
Why is their "I don't know" with no evidence whatsoever okay, but our
"I don't know" with lots of supporting evidence not. I'm looking for a
religious type to give me a clear answer (good luck) for the double
standard or at least open their eyes to the similarities and difference
in arguments.
Jerricho
.
|
|
| User: "Denis Loubet" |
|
| Title: Re: Double Standard for where it comes from. |
18 Nov 2005 10:14:18 PM |
|
|
"Jericho" <wasteofcarbon@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1132339465.719117.274230@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
I've been reading through lots of postings and one thing occurs to me.
When asked where "God" comes from, the religious answer is "I don't
know but he created the universe." And this is supposed to be an
acceptable answer.
When the athiest is asked where the universe comes from the answer is
"I don't know but we're getting evidence that it came from (..lots of
text..) and we're trying to find the answers to the things we don't
know". And this is unacceptable to the religious posters.
Why is their "I don't know" with no evidence whatsoever okay, but our
"I don't know" with lots of supporting evidence not. I'm looking for a
religious type to give me a clear answer (good luck) for the double
standard or at least open their eyes to the similarities and difference
in arguments.
Ahh, but the Christian dishonestly does an end run around your question. He
does not answer "I don't know where god came from", he instead says his god
ALWAYS WAS, and thus didn't have to come from anything or anywhere. The
Christian thinks this rhetorical trick lets him off the hook.
--
Denis Loubet
dloubet@io.com
http://www.io.com/~dloubet
http://www.ashenempires.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jericho" |
|
| Title: Re: Double Standard for where it comes from. |
18 Nov 2005 10:36:28 PM |
|
|
Normally I'd agree with you. But this question came up in my mind
because duke actually posted "I don't know (where God comes from) but
He created the universe". I don't really know where anymore, since
I've covered so many threads, but it was about the universe and was
today sometime. I'm also noticing that there isn't a religious type
posting to answer this. Convinces me even more to atheism.
If any religious type reads this, here's a clue. If you can't argue
your point logically without leaping to conclusions about people and
throwing about insults, you're never going to be more than a troll to
waste time on.
Jerricho
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Double Standard for where it comes from. |
20 Nov 2005 05:14:18 PM |
|
|
On 18 Nov 2005 14:36:28 -0800, "Jericho" <wasteofcarbon@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Normally I'd agree with you. But this question came up in my mind
because duke actually posted "I don't know (where God comes from) but
He created the universe". I don't really know where anymore, since
I've covered so many threads, but it was about the universe and was
today sometime. I'm also noticing that there isn't a religious type
posting to answer this. Convinces me even more to atheism.
If any religious type reads this, here's a clue. If you can't argue
your point logically without leaping to conclusions about people and
throwing about insults, you're never going to be more than a troll to
waste time on.
Don't forget being an object to be laughed at.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president
represents, more and more closely, the inner soul
of the people. On some great and glorious day the
plain folks of the land will reach their heart's
desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." --- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: Double Standard for where it comes from. |
18 Nov 2005 11:11:12 PM |
|
|
on 18 Nov 2005 in alt.atheism, dear sweet Jericho
(wasteofcarbon@yahoo.com) made the light shine upon us with this:
Normally I'd agree with you. But this question came up in my mind
because duke actually posted "I don't know (where God comes from) but
He created the universe". I don't really know where anymore, since
I've covered so many threads, but it was about the universe and was
today sometime. I'm also noticing that there isn't a religious type
posting to answer this. Convinces me even more to atheism.
If any religious type reads this, here's a clue. If you can't argue
your point logically without leaping to conclusions about people and
throwing about insults, you're never going to be more than a troll to
waste time on.
Jerricho
Duke is not an authority on matters religious, even according to his own
religious counterparts. But you are correct in stating that when the
going gets tough, the religious start crying. They think we're taking
something away from them, when they have no evidence they have anything
for us take away in the first place.
--
Uncle Vic
aa#2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
----
"The world is only 5-6 thousand years old does not mean the planet
earth is only 5-6 thousand years old. There have been many worlds
created and destroyed on this planet. The creation of the planet is
described in Genesis 1. The creation of the world is described in
Genesis 2. Two different kind of creations." --Eric Brze
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Chris H. Fleming" |
|
| Title: Re: Double Standard for where it comes from. |
18 Nov 2005 07:18:35 PM |
|
|
Jericho wrote:
I've been reading through lots of postings and one thing occurs to me.
When asked where "God" comes from, the religious answer is "I don't
know but he created the universe." And this is supposed to be an
acceptable answer.
When the athiest is asked where the universe comes from the answer is
"I don't know but we're getting evidence that it came from (..lots of
text..) and we're trying to find the answers to the things we don't
know". And this is unacceptable to the religious posters.
Why is their "I don't know" with no evidence whatsoever okay, but our
"I don't know" with lots of supporting evidence not. I'm looking for a
religious type to give me a clear answer (good luck) for the double
standard or at least open their eyes to the similarities and difference
in arguments.
Jerricho
Because one answer makes you feel warm and fuzzy inside and the other
answer leaves you with a cold uncertainty.
Most people's gods are idols of their desires. The notion of god
destroys fear.
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Double Standard for where it comes from. |
20 Nov 2005 05:13:07 PM |
|
|
On 18 Nov 2005 11:18:35 -0800, "Chris H. Fleming"
<chris_h_fleming@yahoo.com> wrote:
Jericho wrote:
I've been reading through lots of postings and one thing occurs to me.
When asked where "God" comes from, the religious answer is "I don't
know but he created the universe." And this is supposed to be an
acceptable answer.
When the athiest is asked where the universe comes from the answer is
"I don't know but we're getting evidence that it came from (..lots of
text..) and we're trying to find the answers to the things we don't
know". And this is unacceptable to the religious posters.
Why is their "I don't know" with no evidence whatsoever okay, but our
"I don't know" with lots of supporting evidence not. I'm looking for a
religious type to give me a clear answer (good luck) for the double
standard or at least open their eyes to the similarities and difference
in arguments.
Jerricho
Because one answer makes you feel warm and fuzzy inside and the other
answer leaves you with a cold uncertainty.
Most people's gods are idols of their desires. The notion of god
destroys fear.
Disagree. The binary routines of either Heaven or Hell. The general
Christian statement about being 'god fearing people' also shows fear
is not destroyed.
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president
represents, more and more closely, the inner soul
of the people. On some great and glorious day the
plain folks of the land will reach their heart's
desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." --- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Chris H. Fleming" |
|
| Title: Re: Double Standard for where it comes from. |
29 Nov 2005 10:21:24 AM |
|
|
stoney wrote:
On 18 Nov 2005 11:18:35 -0800, "Chris H. Fleming"
<chris_h_fleming@yahoo.com> wrote:
Jericho wrote:
I've been reading through lots of postings and one thing occurs to me.
When asked where "God" comes from, the religious answer is "I don't
know but he created the universe." And this is supposed to be an
acceptable answer.
When the athiest is asked where the universe comes from the answer is
"I don't know but we're getting evidence that it came from (..lots of
text..) and we're trying to find the answers to the things we don't
know". And this is unacceptable to the religious posters.
Why is their "I don't know" with no evidence whatsoever okay, but our
"I don't know" with lots of supporting evidence not. I'm looking for a
religious type to give me a clear answer (good luck) for the double
standard or at least open their eyes to the similarities and difference
in arguments.
Jerricho
Because one answer makes you feel warm and fuzzy inside and the other
answer leaves you with a cold uncertainty.
Most people's gods are idols of their desires. The notion of god
destroys fear.
Disagree. The binary routines of either Heaven or Hell. The general
Christian statement about being 'god fearing people' also shows fear
is not destroyed.
Hmm... You are right. I stand corrected. I suppose the tensions between
desire and reality even exist within their own beliefs. Certainly the
mythology is just a distorted abstraction of how they percieve the
world.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Thurisaz, Germanic barbarian" |
|
| Title: Re: Double Standard for where it comes from. |
19 Nov 2005 07:07:31 AM |
|
|
Jericho wrote:
Why is their "I don't know" with no evidence whatsoever okay, but our
"I don't know" with lots of supporting evidence not. I'm looking for a
religious type to give me a clear answer (good luck) for the double
standard or at least open their eyes to the similarities and difference
in arguments.
Well, I am religious but not a jebus cultist, so you may or may not be
interested in my opinion ;)
The zealots do not really have faith. What they call "faith" is ten times
weaker than any house of cards. The slighest - dare I say it? - evidence
against their beliefs, and it will come tumbling down. But as the average
run-off-the-mill fundie idiot "knows" that he can't live without this house
of cards, never ever, he tries to prevent that from happening by destroying
all possible sources of this dreaded evidence.
Pretty simple... perhaps suspiciously simple. But as far as I can tell,
that's "just the facts ma'am".
--
"To his friend a man a friend shall prove,
And gifts with gifts requite;
But men shall mocking with mockery answer,
And fraud with falsehood meet."
(The Poetic Edda)
Must have been written with fundies in mind...
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Double Standard for where it comes from. |
19 Nov 2005 07:42:18 PM |
|
|
On 18 Nov 2005 10:44:25 -0800, "Jericho" <wasteofcarbon@yahoo.com>
wrote:
I've been reading through lots of postings and one thing occurs to me.
When asked where "God" comes from, the religious answer is "I don't
know but he created the universe." And this is supposed to be an
acceptable answer.
When the athiest is asked where the universe comes from the answer is
"I don't know but we're getting evidence that it came from (..lots of
text..) and we're trying to find the answers to the things we don't
know". And this is unacceptable to the religious posters.
Why is their "I don't know" with no evidence whatsoever okay, but our
"I don't know" with lots of supporting evidence not.
Hint: Eternal LifeŽ. Toddlers have the same emotional reaction to
"There is no Santa Claus."
I'm looking for a
religious type to give me a clear answer (good luck) for the double
standard or at least open their eyes to the similarities and difference
in arguments.
Their ego's stand in the way of reality.
Jerricho
--
Contempt of Congress meter reading-offscale.
Hello, theocracy with a fundamentalist US Supreme
Court who will ensure church and state are joined
at the hip like clergy and altar boys.
America 1776-Jan 2001 RIP
"As democracy is perfected, the office of president
represents, more and more closely, the inner soul
of the people. On some great and glorious day the
plain folks of the land will reach their heart's
desire at last and the White House will be adorned
by a downright moron." --- H.L. Mencken (1880 - 1956)
Religion is the original war crime.
-Michelle Malkin (Feb 26, 2005)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: Double Standard for where it comes from. |
18 Nov 2005 07:48:29 PM |
|
|
On 18 Nov 2005 10:44:25 -0800, "Jericho" <wasteofcarbon@yahoo.com>
wrote:
I've been reading through lots of postings and one thing occurs to me.
When asked where "God" comes from, the religious answer is "I don't
know but he created the universe." And this is supposed to be an
acceptable answer.
When the athiest is asked where the universe comes from the answer is
"I don't know but we're getting evidence that it came from (..lots of
text..) and we're trying to find the answers to the things we don't
know". And this is unacceptable to the religious posters.
Why is their "I don't know" with no evidence whatsoever okay, but our
"I don't know" with lots of supporting evidence not. I'm looking for a
religious type to give me a clear answer (good luck) for the double
standard or at least open their eyes to the similarities and difference
in arguments.
Jerricho
One is reminded of "The Sound of Music": "Dream the impossible
dream..."
Thomas P.
"Life must be lived forwards but understood backwards"
(Kierkegaard)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: Double Standard for where it comes from. |
18 Nov 2005 07:45:58 PM |
|
|
on 18 Nov 2005 in alt.atheism, dear sweet Jericho
(wasteofcarbon@yahoo.com) made the light shine upon us with this:
Why is their "I don't know" with no evidence whatsoever okay, but our
"I don't know" with lots of supporting evidence not.
The evidence is not in their favor. In fact, some of it debunks their
fantasy world enough to cause them to either change it (rationalize it to
make a square peg fit a round hole), or deny relity comletely.
--
Uncle Vic
aa#2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
----
"The world is only 5-6 thousand years old does not mean the planet
earth is only 5-6 thousand years old. There have been many worlds
created and destroyed on this planet. The creation of the planet is
described in Genesis 1. The creation of the world is described in
Genesis 2. Two different kind of creations." --Eric Brze
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
