| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Gregory Gadow" |
| Date: |
02 Mar 2005 08:53:59 AM |
| Object: |
God under the microscope |
Exerpt: Psychological tests Boyer has run on children go some way to
proving our natural tendency to believe. "If you look at three- to
five-year-olds, when they do something naughty, they have an intuition
that everyone knows they've been naughty, regardless of whether they
have seen or heard what they've done. It's a false belief, but it's good
preparation for belief in an entity that is moral and knows everything,"
he says.
The full story is at
http://www.smh.com.au/news/World/God-under-a-microscope/2005/03/01/1109546864819.html
--
Gregory Gadow
techbear@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
"[T]hose who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves;
and, under the rule of a just God, cannot long retain it."
-- Pres. George W. Bush, Hypocrite, his inauguration speech, 2005
.
|
|
| User: "Randy Story" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
02 Mar 2005 11:38:03 AM |
|
|
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:4225D387.30E4C802@serv.net...
Exerpt: Psychological tests Boyer has run on children go some way to
proving our natural tendency to believe. "If you look at three- to
five-year-olds, when they do something naughty, they have an intuition
that everyone knows they've been naughty, regardless of whether they
have seen or heard what they've done. It's a false belief, but it's good
preparation for belief in an entity that is moral and knows everything,"
he says.
Kind of throws out atheists claim that children are born with a propensity
toward atheism.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
02 Mar 2005 02:39:41 PM |
|
|
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in
news:112buk9iqnd2hc7@corp.supernews.com:
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:4225D387.30E4C802@serv.net...
Exerpt: Psychological tests Boyer has run on children go some way to
proving our natural tendency to believe. "If you look at three- to
five-year-olds, when they do something naughty, they have an
intuition that everyone knows they've been naughty, regardless of
whether they have seen or heard what they've done. It's a false
belief, but it's good preparation for belief in an entity that is
moral and knows everything," he says.
Kind of throws out atheists claim that children are born with a
propensity toward atheism.
On the contrary, it shows that children know right from wrong without
having to believe in God.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"You know you're over the target when you start receiving flak."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ike" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
02 Mar 2005 06:33:52 PM |
|
|
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:1109795981.36782a9be9a9e1c65624e7c73f1b900f@teranews...
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in
news:112buk9iqnd2hc7@corp.supernews.com:
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:4225D387.30E4C802@serv.net...
Exerpt: Psychological tests Boyer has run on children go some way to
proving our natural tendency to believe. "If you look at three- to
five-year-olds, when they do something naughty, they have an
intuition that everyone knows they've been naughty, regardless of
whether they have seen or heard what they've done. It's a false
belief, but it's good preparation for belief in an entity that is
moral and knows everything," he says.
Kind of throws out atheists claim that children are born with a
propensity toward atheism.
On the contrary, it shows that children know right from wrong without
having to believe in God.
There isn't any right and wrong, except do-do in the potty and not on the
floor.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Randy Story" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
02 Mar 2005 06:15:49 PM |
|
|
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:1109795981.36782a9be9a9e1c65624e7c73f1b900f@teranews...
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in
news:112buk9iqnd2hc7@corp.supernews.com:
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:4225D387.30E4C802@serv.net...
Exerpt: Psychological tests Boyer has run on children go some way to
proving our natural tendency to believe. "If you look at three- to
five-year-olds, when they do something naughty, they have an
intuition that everyone knows they've been naughty, regardless of
whether they have seen or heard what they've done. It's a false
belief, but it's good preparation for belief in an entity that is
moral and knows everything," he says.
Kind of throws out atheists claim that children are born with a
propensity toward atheism.
On the contrary, it shows that children know right from wrong without
having to believe in God.
And how do you think that they know right & wrong without that knowledge
being given to them. The fact is without a ultimate standard which is God
none of us would know right or wrong. You cant *know* something is better
then another unless you have a built in knowledge of the *best* which is God
himself.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
02 Mar 2005 09:24:29 PM |
|
|
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in
news:112clu4f10igca7@corp.supernews.com:
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:1109795981.36782a9be9a9e1c65624e7c73f1b900f@teranews...
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in
news:112buk9iqnd2hc7@corp.supernews.com:
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:4225D387.30E4C802@serv.net...
Exerpt: Psychological tests Boyer has run on children go some way
to proving our natural tendency to believe. "If you look at three-
to five-year-olds, when they do something naughty, they have an
intuition that everyone knows they've been naughty, regardless of
whether they have seen or heard what they've done. It's a false
belief, but it's good preparation for belief in an entity that is
moral and knows everything," he says.
Kind of throws out atheists claim that children are born with a
propensity toward atheism.
On the contrary, it shows that children know right from wrong without
having to believe in God.
And how do you think that they know right & wrong without that
knowledge being given to them.
Of course it's given to them. By their parents.
The fact is without a ultimate standard
which is God none of us would know right or wrong. You cant *know*
something is better then another unless you have a built in knowledge
of the *best* which is God himself.
That's absurd. I *know* things because I learned them. Including what is
good or bad, right or wrong. I don't need an ultimate to be able to
judge between two relative values.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"You know you're over the target when you start receiving flak."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Randy Story" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
03 Mar 2005 01:10:06 PM |
|
|
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:1109820269.57d46a8a54d92c3545e5fb35c2a48a7f@teranews...
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in
news:112clu4f10igca7@corp.supernews.com:
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:1109795981.36782a9be9a9e1c65624e7c73f1b900f@teranews...
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in
news:112buk9iqnd2hc7@corp.supernews.com:
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:4225D387.30E4C802@serv.net...
Exerpt: Psychological tests Boyer has run on children go some way
to proving our natural tendency to believe. "If you look at three-
to five-year-olds, when they do something naughty, they have an
intuition that everyone knows they've been naughty, regardless of
whether they have seen or heard what they've done. It's a false
belief, but it's good preparation for belief in an entity that is
moral and knows everything," he says.
Kind of throws out atheists claim that children are born with a
propensity toward atheism.
On the contrary, it shows that children know right from wrong without
having to believe in God.
And how do you think that they know right & wrong without that
knowledge being given to them.
Of course it's given to them. By their parents.
The fact is without a ultimate standard
which is God none of us would know right or wrong. You cant *know*
something is better then another unless you have a built in knowledge
of the *best* which is God himself.
That's absurd. I *know* things because I learned them. Including what is
good or bad, right or wrong. I don't need an ultimate to be able to
judge between two relative values.
At least you admit they are relative if you only got them from your
parents. That means of course that anyone that takes your life because they
were raised that way has just as much right to do that as you do to love
them. A silly approach if you ask me.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
03 Mar 2005 01:27:02 PM |
|
|
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in
news:112eoctn37i658f@corp.supernews.com:
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:1109820269.57d46a8a54d92c3545e5fb35c2a48a7f@teranews...
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in
news:112clu4f10igca7@corp.supernews.com:
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:1109795981.36782a9be9a9e1c65624e7c73f1b900f@teranews...
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in
news:112buk9iqnd2hc7@corp.supernews.com:
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:4225D387.30E4C802@serv.net...
Exerpt: Psychological tests Boyer has run on children go some
way to proving our natural tendency to believe. "If you look at
three- to five-year-olds, when they do something naughty, they
have an intuition that everyone knows they've been naughty,
regardless of whether they have seen or heard what they've
done. It's a false belief, but it's good preparation for belief
in an entity that is moral and knows everything," he says.
Kind of throws out atheists claim that children are born with a
propensity toward atheism.
On the contrary, it shows that children know right from wrong
without having to believe in God.
And how do you think that they know right & wrong without that
knowledge being given to them.
Of course it's given to them. By their parents.
The fact is without a ultimate standard
which is God none of us would know right or wrong. You cant *know*
something is better then another unless you have a built in
knowledge of the *best* which is God himself.
That's absurd. I *know* things because I learned them. Including what
is good or bad, right or wrong. I don't need an ultimate to be able
to judge between two relative values.
At least you admit they are relative if you only got them from your
parents. That means of course that anyone that takes your life because
they were raised that way has just as much right to do that as you do
to love them. A silly approach if you ask me.
Of course I have just as much right to defend myself. Which is sillier?
Me defending myself or you praying that God will protect you from an
attacker?
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"You know you're over the target when you start receiving flak."
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Josef Balluch" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
04 Mar 2005 05:44:24 PM |
|
|
In a message sent 'round the world, Randy Story poured fuel on the fire
with the following:
....
At least you admit they are relative if you only got them from your
parents. That means of course that anyone that takes your life because they
were raised that way has just as much right to do that as you do to love
them.
There are no rights, only privileges that we have given ourselves.
A silly approach if you ask me.
Your usual silly twaddle, if you ask me.
Regards,
Josef
For most people, religion is nothing more than a substitute for a
malfunctioning brain.
-- Gene Roddenberry
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
04 Mar 2005 03:18:18 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 11:10:06 -0800, "Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com>
wrote:
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:1109820269.57d46a8a54d92c3545e5fb35c2a48a7f@teranews...
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in
news:112clu4f10igca7@corp.supernews.com:
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:1109795981.36782a9be9a9e1c65624e7c73f1b900f@teranews...
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in
news:112buk9iqnd2hc7@corp.supernews.com:
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:4225D387.30E4C802@serv.net...
Exerpt: Psychological tests Boyer has run on children go some way
to proving our natural tendency to believe. "If you look at three-
to five-year-olds, when they do something naughty, they have an
intuition that everyone knows they've been naughty, regardless of
whether they have seen or heard what they've done. It's a false
belief, but it's good preparation for belief in an entity that is
moral and knows everything," he says.
Kind of throws out atheists claim that children are born with a
propensity toward atheism.
On the contrary, it shows that children know right from wrong without
having to believe in God.
And how do you think that they know right & wrong without that
knowledge being given to them.
Of course it's given to them. By their parents.
The fact is without a ultimate standard
which is God none of us would know right or wrong. You cant *know*
something is better then another unless you have a built in knowledge
of the *best* which is God himself.
That's absurd. I *know* things because I learned them. Including what is
good or bad, right or wrong. I don't need an ultimate to be able to
judge between two relative values.
At least you admit they are relative if you only got them from your
parents. That means of course that anyone that takes your life because they
were raised that way has just as much right to do that as you do to love
them. A silly approach if you ask me.
A person might think he has the right to kill, but society thinks it
has the right to punish him if he does.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Randy Story" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
04 Mar 2005 03:19:40 PM |
|
|
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:meih215g8985su3qmbhmdv14pt5rff5jl4@4ax.com...
On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 11:10:06 -0800, "Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com>
wrote:
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:1109820269.57d46a8a54d92c3545e5fb35c2a48a7f@teranews...
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in
news:112clu4f10igca7@corp.supernews.com:
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:1109795981.36782a9be9a9e1c65624e7c73f1b900f@teranews...
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in
news:112buk9iqnd2hc7@corp.supernews.com:
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:4225D387.30E4C802@serv.net...
Exerpt: Psychological tests Boyer has run on children go some way
to proving our natural tendency to believe. "If you look at
three-
to five-year-olds, when they do something naughty, they have an
intuition that everyone knows they've been naughty, regardless of
whether they have seen or heard what they've done. It's a false
belief, but it's good preparation for belief in an entity that is
moral and knows everything," he says.
Kind of throws out atheists claim that children are born with a
propensity toward atheism.
On the contrary, it shows that children know right from wrong
without
having to believe in God.
And how do you think that they know right & wrong without that
knowledge being given to them.
Of course it's given to them. By their parents.
The fact is without a ultimate standard
which is God none of us would know right or wrong. You cant *know*
something is better then another unless you have a built in knowledge
of the *best* which is God himself.
That's absurd. I *know* things because I learned them. Including what
is
good or bad, right or wrong. I don't need an ultimate to be able to
judge between two relative values.
At least you admit they are relative if you only got them from your
parents. That means of course that anyone that takes your life because
they
were raised that way has just as much right to do that as you do to love
them. A silly approach if you ask me.
A person might think he has the right to kill, but society thinks it
has the right to punish him if he does.
Thats the whole problem with a relative approach to ethics!!
.
|
|
|
| User: "Josef Balluch" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
04 Mar 2005 05:46:06 PM |
|
|
In a message sent 'round the world, Randy Story poured fuel on the fire
with the following:
....
A person might think he has the right to kill, but society thinks it
has the right to punish him if he does.
Thats the whole problem with a relative approach to ethics!!
In what way is that a problem, Randy?
Regards,
Josef
As empty vessels make the loudest sound, so they that have the least
wit are the greatest babblers.
-- Plato
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
05 Mar 2005 02:47:47 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 4 Mar 2005 13:19:40 -0800, "Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com>
wrote:
"thomas p" <tonyofbexarnospam@yahoo.dk> wrote in message
news:meih215g8985su3qmbhmdv14pt5rff5jl4@4ax.com...
On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 11:10:06 -0800, "Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com>
wrote:
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:1109820269.57d46a8a54d92c3545e5fb35c2a48a7f@teranews...
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in
news:112clu4f10igca7@corp.supernews.com:
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:1109795981.36782a9be9a9e1c65624e7c73f1b900f@teranews...
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in
news:112buk9iqnd2hc7@corp.supernews.com:
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:4225D387.30E4C802@serv.net...
Exerpt: Psychological tests Boyer has run on children go some way
to proving our natural tendency to believe. "If you look at
three-
to five-year-olds, when they do something naughty, they have an
intuition that everyone knows they've been naughty, regardless of
whether they have seen or heard what they've done. It's a false
belief, but it's good preparation for belief in an entity that is
moral and knows everything," he says.
Kind of throws out atheists claim that children are born with a
propensity toward atheism.
On the contrary, it shows that children know right from wrong
without
having to believe in God.
And how do you think that they know right & wrong without that
knowledge being given to them.
Of course it's given to them. By their parents.
The fact is without a ultimate standard
which is God none of us would know right or wrong. You cant *know*
something is better then another unless you have a built in knowledge
of the *best* which is God himself.
That's absurd. I *know* things because I learned them. Including what
is
good or bad, right or wrong. I don't need an ultimate to be able to
judge between two relative values.
At least you admit they are relative if you only got them from your
parents. That means of course that anyone that takes your life because
they
were raised that way has just as much right to do that as you do to love
them. A silly approach if you ask me.
A person might think he has the right to kill, but society thinks it
has the right to punish him if he does.
Thats the whole problem with a relative approach to ethics!!
What problem would that be?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "GoDrex" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
02 Mar 2005 06:30:18 PM |
|
|
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in message
news:112clu4f10igca7@corp.supernews.com...
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:1109795981.36782a9be9a9e1c65624e7c73f1b900f@teranews...
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in
news:112buk9iqnd2hc7@corp.supernews.com:
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:4225D387.30E4C802@serv.net...
Exerpt: Psychological tests Boyer has run on children go some way to
proving our natural tendency to believe. "If you look at three- to
five-year-olds, when they do something naughty, they have an
intuition that everyone knows they've been naughty, regardless of
whether they have seen or heard what they've done. It's a false
belief, but it's good preparation for belief in an entity that is
moral and knows everything," he says.
Kind of throws out atheists claim that children are born with a
propensity toward atheism.
On the contrary, it shows that children know right from wrong without
having to believe in God.
And how do you think that they know right & wrong without that knowledge
being given to them. The fact is without a ultimate standard which is God
none of us would know right or wrong. You cant *know* something is better
then another unless you have a built in knowledge of the *best* which is
God
himself.
HAHAHAHAHA oh man thanks for that/ It was a long day ant work and I needed
that laugh. :)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Josef Balluch" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
03 Mar 2005 06:39:10 PM |
|
|
In a message sent 'round the world, Randy Story poured fuel on the fire
with the following:
....
The fact is without a ultimate standard which is God
none of us would know right or wrong. You cant *know* something is better
then another unless you have a built in knowledge of the *best* which is God
himself.
Unsupportable assertion.
Morality has been observed in animals. Got an explanation?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3014747.stm
http://www.univie.ac.at/Wissenschaftstheorie/srb/srb/animal.html
http://www.santafe.edu/~jpepper/papers/The_Age.htm
Regards,
Josef
If the belief in god were natural, there would be no need to teach it.
-- Ernestine L. Rose
.
|
|
|
| User: "Randy Story" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
03 Mar 2005 08:39:33 PM |
|
|
"Josef Balluch" <josef.balluch@sympatico.can> wrote in message
news:MPG.1c91783d6e472aa6989a11@206.172.150.13...
In a message sent 'round the world, Randy Story poured fuel on the fire
with the following:
...
The fact is without a ultimate standard which is God
none of us would know right or wrong. You cant *know* something is
better
then another unless you have a built in knowledge of the *best* which is
God
himself.
Unsupportable assertion.
Many statements are unsupported, it does not mean they are not true. Maybe
people dont always have the time to give lengthy proofs when others are not
willing to pay attention.
Morality has been observed in animals. Got an explanation?
Your silly Josef, if animals had the ability to really be moral we and they
would hold them accountable when they were not. Silly, agreed?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3014747.stm
http://www.univie.ac.at/Wissenschaftstheorie/srb/srb/animal.html
http://www.santafe.edu/~jpepper/papers/The_Age.htm
Regards,
Josef
If the belief in god were natural, there would be no need to teach it.
-- Ernestine L. Rose
.
|
|
|
| User: "Josef Balluch" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
03 Mar 2005 08:54:40 PM |
|
|
In a message sent 'round the world, Randy Story poured fuel on the fire
with the following:
"Josef Balluch" <josef.balluch@sympatico.can> wrote in message
news:MPG.1c91783d6e472aa6989a11@206.172.150.13...
In a message sent 'round the world, Randy Story poured fuel on the fire
with the following:
The fact is without a ultimate standard which is God
none of us would know right or wrong. You cant *know* something is
better
then another unless you have a built in knowledge of the *best* which is
God
himself.
Unsupportable assertion.
Many statements are unsupported, it does not mean they are not true.
Is English your third language, Randy?
I said your statement is UNSUPPORTABLE.
Maybe
people dont always have the time to give lengthy proofs when others are not
willing to pay attention.
You have no proofs.
Morality has been observed in animals. Got an explanation?
Your silly Josef, if animals had the ability to really be moral we and they
would hold them accountable when they were not. Silly, agreed?
Dunno. I have no idea what you are babbling about.
Regards,
Josef
Men blaspheme what they do not know.
-- Blaise Pascal
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
02 Mar 2005 10:09:06 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 16:15:49 -0800, "Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com>
said in alt.atheism:
And how do you think that they know right & wrong without that knowledge
being given to them.
They know, when they've been told not to do something, and do it, that
they're doing what they were told not to do.
The fact is without a ultimate standard which is God
none of us would know right or wrong.
Those of us who DO know right from wrong without needing a god-myth,
feel sorry for those of you who need the myth to know.
You cant *know* something is better
then another unless you have a built in knowledge of the *best* which is God
himself.
No, we have a built-in knowledge which is us. That you need a god to
supply you with what we already have without a god merely makes you an
inferior being.
(Sorry, but you asked for it this time.)
--
rukbat at verizon dot net
"Speculating on the possible reaction to evidence is no excuse for
failing to produce the evidence."
- Wayne M. Del
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Randy Story" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
03 Mar 2005 01:07:16 PM |
|
|
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:sa3d21ll8o9sjige2riufbi6f9tcsg3hi4@4ax.com...
On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 16:15:49 -0800, "Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com>
said in alt.atheism:
And how do you think that they know right & wrong without that knowledge
being given to them.
They know, when they've been told not to do something, and do it, that
they're doing what they were told not to do.
The fact is without a ultimate standard which is God
none of us would know right or wrong.
Those of us who DO know right from wrong without needing a god-myth,
feel sorry for those of you who need the myth to know.
You cant *know* something is better
then another unless you have a built in knowledge of the *best* which is
God
himself.
No, we have a built-in knowledge which is us. That you need a god to
supply you with what we already have without a god merely makes you an
inferior being.
(Sorry, but you asked for it this time.)
Yes you have built in knowledge just as I said, the difference is it came
from an all perfect God trying to enlighten your mind with the knowlege of
himself.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Al Klein" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
03 Mar 2005 02:32:28 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 11:07:16 -0800, "Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com>
said in alt.atheism:
"Al Klein" <rukbat@pern.invalid> wrote in message
news:sa3d21ll8o9sjige2riufbi6f9tcsg3hi4@4ax.com...
You cant *know* something is better
then another unless you have a built in knowledge of the *best* which is God
himself.
No, we have a built-in knowledge which is us. That you need a god to
supply you with what we already have without a god merely makes you an
inferior being.
Yes you have built in knowledge just as I said, the difference is it came
from an all perfect God trying to enlighten your mind with the knowlege of
himself.
Funny that he's so perfect that he has no clue how to "enlighten my
mind with the knowledge of himself". You'd think a perfect,
all-knowing god would know what I'd need to believe in him better than
I'd know myself.
--
rukbat at verizon dot net
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious
conviction."
- Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)
(random sig, produced by SigChanger)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Vic Sagerquist" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
03 Mar 2005 04:50:36 PM |
|
|
on 03 Mar 2005 in alt.atheism, Al Klein dropped trou, farted, whirled,
then shouted:
On Thu, 3 Mar 2005 11:07:16 -0800, "Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com>
said in alt.atheism:
Yes you have built in knowledge just as I said, the difference is it
came from an all perfect God trying to enlighten your mind with the
knowlege of himself.
Funny that he's so perfect that he has no clue how to "enlighten my
mind with the knowledge of himself". You'd think a perfect,
all-knowing god would know what I'd need to believe in him better than
I'd know myself.
It is funny. The only "god enlightenment" I ever get is from morons like
Randy.
--
Vic Sagerquist
aa#2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
Plonked by Jason Gastrich for all eternity...
______________
As you were, I was. As I am, you will be.
--- Hunter S. Thompson
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "thomas p" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
04 Mar 2005 03:18:15 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 2 Mar 2005 16:15:49 -0800, "Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com>
wrote:
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:1109795981.36782a9be9a9e1c65624e7c73f1b900f@teranews...
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in
news:112buk9iqnd2hc7@corp.supernews.com:
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:4225D387.30E4C802@serv.net...
Exerpt: Psychological tests Boyer has run on children go some way to
proving our natural tendency to believe. "If you look at three- to
five-year-olds, when they do something naughty, they have an
intuition that everyone knows they've been naughty, regardless of
whether they have seen or heard what they've done. It's a false
belief, but it's good preparation for belief in an entity that is
moral and knows everything," he says.
Kind of throws out atheists claim that children are born with a
propensity toward atheism.
On the contrary, it shows that children know right from wrong without
having to believe in God.
And how do you think that they know right & wrong without that knowledge
being given to them. The fact is without a ultimate standard which is God
none of us would know right or wrong. You cant *know* something is better
then another unless you have a built in knowledge of the *best* which is God
himself.
Perhaps you lack such an ability. Others do not.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "wcb" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
03 Mar 2005 04:38:34 AM |
|
|
Randy Story wrote:
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:1109795981.36782a9be9a9e1c65624e7c73f1b900f@teranews...
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in
news:112buk9iqnd2hc7@corp.supernews.com:
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:4225D387.30E4C802@serv.net...
Exerpt: Psychological tests Boyer has run on children go some way to
proving our natural tendency to believe. "If you look at three- to
five-year-olds, when they do something naughty, they have an
intuition that everyone knows they've been naughty, regardless of
whether they have seen or heard what they've done. It's a false
belief, but it's good preparation for belief in an entity that is
moral and knows everything," he says.
Kind of throws out atheists claim that children are born with a
propensity toward atheism.
On the contrary, it shows that children know right from wrong without
having to believe in God.
And how do you think that they know right & wrong without that knowledge
being given to them. The fact is without a ultimate standard which is God
none of us would know right or wrong. You cant *know* something is better
then another unless you have a built in knowledge of the *best* which is
God himself.
Evolution gave that to them. because it works for survival.
Just as evolution gives bees and ants a social structure.
Just as many animals have a social structure and morality
in their herds, and packs.
Animals without such niceties do not survive.
--
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
| User: "Randy Story" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
03 Mar 2005 01:05:12 PM |
|
|
"wcb" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:422685a8$0$184$16895aa@news.airnews.net...
Randy Story wrote:
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:1109795981.36782a9be9a9e1c65624e7c73f1b900f@teranews...
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in
news:112buk9iqnd2hc7@corp.supernews.com:
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:4225D387.30E4C802@serv.net...
Exerpt: Psychological tests Boyer has run on children go some way to
proving our natural tendency to believe. "If you look at three- to
five-year-olds, when they do something naughty, they have an
intuition that everyone knows they've been naughty, regardless of
whether they have seen or heard what they've done. It's a false
belief, but it's good preparation for belief in an entity that is
moral and knows everything," he says.
Kind of throws out atheists claim that children are born with a
propensity toward atheism.
On the contrary, it shows that children know right from wrong without
having to believe in God.
And how do you think that they know right & wrong without that knowledge
being given to them. The fact is without a ultimate standard which is
God
none of us would know right or wrong. You cant *know* something is
better
then another unless you have a built in knowledge of the *best* which is
God himself.
Evolution gave that to them. because it works for survival.
Just as evolution gives bees and ants a social structure.
Just as many animals have a social structure and morality
in their herds, and packs.
Animals without such niceties do not survive.
Animals *kill* each other to survive. Now evolution works toward some good,
sounds like evolution just gained intelligence to me.
.
|
|
|
| User: "wcb" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
03 Mar 2005 09:30:05 PM |
|
|
Randy Story wrote:
"wcb" <wbarwell@mylinuxisp.com> wrote in message
news:422685a8$0$184$16895aa@news.airnews.net...
Randy Story wrote:
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:1109795981.36782a9be9a9e1c65624e7c73f1b900f@teranews...
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in
news:112buk9iqnd2hc7@corp.supernews.com:
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:4225D387.30E4C802@serv.net...
Exerpt: Psychological tests Boyer has run on children go some way
to proving our natural tendency to believe. "If you look at three-
to five-year-olds, when they do something naughty, they have an
intuition that everyone knows they've been naughty, regardless of
whether they have seen or heard what they've done. It's a false
belief, but it's good preparation for belief in an entity that is
moral and knows everything," he says.
Kind of throws out atheists claim that children are born with a
propensity toward atheism.
On the contrary, it shows that children know right from wrong without
having to believe in God.
And how do you think that they know right & wrong without that
knowledge being given to them. The fact is without a ultimate standard
which is
God
none of us would know right or wrong. You cant *know* something is
better
then another unless you have a built in knowledge of the *best* which
is God himself.
Evolution gave that to them. because it works for survival.
Just as evolution gives bees and ants a social structure.
Just as many animals have a social structure and morality
in their herds, and packs.
Animals without such niceties do not survive.
Animals *kill* each other to survive. Now evolution works toward some
good, sounds like evolution just gained intelligence to me.
Animals usually kill only what they eat. Not like religous whackos, those
who do not believe as they do, those they label heretics, witches or
infidels.
Animals do not devise fiendish tortures for each other.
Religous fanatics have done so for millenia. Animals do not teach hate.
Religous fanatics do.
Overall, I say animals are far more naturally moral than men
with their hateful religions.
We need more animals and less religous believers.
Hey god, I'll trade you Randy for 6 racoons and a pair
of possums. I'll settle for squirrels if racoons are
too much.
--
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory Gadow" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
04 Mar 2005 09:26:16 AM |
|
|
Randy Story wrote:
The fact is without a ultimate standard which is God
none of us would know right or wrong.
And which god is your standard? And why that god and no other? What the Jewish
God and Christian God and Muslim God present as standards are all different, not
to mention the Baha`i God, the Wiccan God, the Hindu gods (all three or four
thousand of them), the Greek gods, the Roman gods, the Egyptian gods....
--
Gregory Gadow
techbear@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
"[T]hose who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves;
and, under the rule of a just God, cannot long retain it."
-- Pres. George W. Bush, Hypocrite, his inauguration speech, 2005
.
|
|
|
| User: "Hagar" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
04 Mar 2005 04:43:36 PM |
|
|
Even though I am a Republican, it is very scary when our chosen leaders
evoke the guidance of this nebulous god-thing to lead them through life and
make decisions based on some thousands of years old biblical nonsense.
These are the same people who claim that life could never be created by
nature, because the odds are tens of billions to one against a single cell
amoeba being created randomly, but find it perfectly normal that a
full-blown god is created without any odds problems by the same process.
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:42287E18.A675F100@serv.net...
Randy Story wrote:
The fact is without a ultimate standard which is God
none of us would know right or wrong.
And which god is your standard? And why that god and no other? What the
Jewish
God and Christian God and Muslim God present as standards are all
different, not
to mention the Baha`i God, the Wiccan God, the Hindu gods (all three or
four
thousand of them), the Greek gods, the Roman gods, the Egyptian gods....
--
Gregory Gadow
techbear@serv.net
http://www.serv.net/~techbear
"[T]hose who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves;
and, under the rule of a just God, cannot long retain it."
-- Pres. George W. Bush, Hypocrite, his inauguration speech, 2005
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "GoDrex" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
02 Mar 2005 06:29:00 PM |
|
|
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in message
news:112buk9iqnd2hc7@corp.supernews.com...
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:4225D387.30E4C802@serv.net...
Exerpt: Psychological tests Boyer has run on children go some way to
proving our natural tendency to believe. "If you look at three- to
five-year-olds, when they do something naughty, they have an intuition
that everyone knows they've been naughty, regardless of whether they
have seen or heard what they've done. It's a false belief, but it's good
preparation for belief in an entity that is moral and knows everything,"
he says.
Kind of throws out atheists claim that children are born with a propensity
toward atheism.
I don't think anyone ever said that - they've said that all children are
born atheists. They have no belief in god(s) until someone else tells them
to.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ike" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
02 Mar 2005 06:30:08 PM |
|
|
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in message
news:112buk9iqnd2hc7@corp.supernews.com...
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:4225D387.30E4C802@serv.net...
Exerpt: Psychological tests Boyer has run on children go some way to
proving our natural tendency to believe. "If you look at three- to
five-year-olds, when they do something naughty, they have an intuition
that everyone knows they've been naughty, regardless of whether they
have seen or heard what they've done. It's a false belief, but it's good
preparation for belief in an entity that is moral and knows everything,"
he says.
Kind of throws out atheists claim that children are born with a propensity
toward atheism.
I used to argue that children are not born atheist since atheism and theism
are liguistic phenomena. However I just had an epiphany which shewed me that
everyone in the world is an atheist, since whatever people believe in can't
be God.
.
|
|
|
| User: "J Forbes" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
02 Mar 2005 06:59:30 PM |
|
|
Ike wrote:
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in message
news:112buk9iqnd2hc7@corp.supernews.com...
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:4225D387.30E4C802@serv.net...
Exerpt: Psychological tests Boyer has run on children go some way to
proving our natural tendency to believe. "If you look at three- to
five-year-olds, when they do something naughty, they have an intuition
that everyone knows they've been naughty, regardless of whether they
have seen or heard what they've done. It's a false belief, but it's good
preparation for belief in an entity that is moral and knows everything,"
he says.
Kind of throws out atheists claim that children are born with a propensity
toward atheism.
I used to argue that children are not born atheist since atheism and theism
are liguistic phenomena. However I just had an epiphany which shewed me that
everyone in the world is an atheist, since whatever people believe in can't
be God.
That's not what athiesm is, though. You only need a belief in god to
be theist, it doesn't matter that god is make-believe.
--
Jim
Visit the Selectric Typewriter Museum!
http://www.selectric.org
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ike" |
|
| Title: Re: God under the microscope |
02 Mar 2005 07:24:54 PM |
|
|
"J Forbes" <jforbspam@fastmail.fm> wrote in message
news:SjtVd.3822$L17.3083@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
Ike wrote:
"Randy Story" <rstorynw@olypen.com> wrote in message
news:112buk9iqnd2hc7@corp.supernews.com...
"Gregory Gadow" <techbear@serv.net> wrote in message
news:4225D387.30E4C802@serv.net...
Exerpt: Psychological tests Boyer has run on children go some way to
proving our natural tendency to believe. "If you look at three- to
five-year-olds, when they do something naughty, they have an intuition
that everyone knows they've been naughty, regardless of whether they
have seen or heard what they've done. It's a false belief, but it's
good
preparation for belief in an entity that is moral and knows
everything,"
he says.
Kind of throws out atheists claim that children are born with a
propensity
toward atheism.
I used to argue that children are not born atheist since atheism and
theism
are liguistic phenomena. However I just had an epiphany which shewed me
that
everyone in the world is an atheist, since whatever people believe in
can't
be God.
That's not what athiesm is, though. You only need a belief in god to
be theist, it doesn't matter that god is make-believe.
I think it matters because there is no rational definition of such a belief.
At some level everyone who calims an irrational belief knows it is a lie,
hence all people are atheisits.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
