Do you believe in God?

  • Thread starter Patrik
  • 24,484 comments
  • 1,110,193 views

Do you believe in god?

  • Of course, without him nothing would exist!

    Votes: 624 30.6%

  • Maybe.

    Votes: 368 18.0%

  • No way!

    Votes: 1,050 51.4%
  • Total voters
    2,041
TenEightyOne
It wasn't, Googled it, feel that I haven't found a gap in my knowledge that I'm keen to fill* :D
Click to expand...

To be fair, the fact that BBT is screamingly unfunny is more down to Chuck Lorre and the great American tradition of "comedy" shows where the laugh track informs the audience that something "funny" just happened. Jim Parsons is just a guy getting a (very large) paycheck on a show that happens to be both very popular and a perfect example of what is wrong with sitcoms.
 
I had a moment the other day, where the sunrise was reflecting off of scattered clouds, and the sky above was blue, and the moon was up, where i just marveled. That this is a naturally occurring phenomenon that is so strikingly beautiful, and not even a rare one, is just... awe inspiring. A star, a whole star, is over there blasting away light which refracts in our atmosphere to create the most dazzling of colors. And moisture in the gas in our atmosphere is coalescing in vapor groupings at random patters based on air currents to create something else wild and beautiful for that light to bounce off of to me. And all the while there is an entire moon orbiting the planet reflecting that sunlight in yet another gentle and beautiful way. Just mind boggling when you really think about it. Such beauty just... happening on its own. We don't have to make it, we don't have to paint it or engineer it or sing it... it just happens.

Saying that it was given to us by God would only cheapen it.
 
Danoff
I had a moment the other day, where the sunrise was reflecting off of scattered clouds, and the sky above was blue, and the moon was up, where i just marveled. That this is a naturally occurring phenomenon that is so strikingly beautiful, and not even a rare one, is just... awe inspiring. A star, a whole star, is over there blasting away light which refracts in our atmosphere to create the most dazzling of colors. And moisture in the gas in our atmosphere is coalescing in vapor groupings at random patters based on air currents to create something else wild and beautiful for that light to bounce off of to me. And all the while there is an entire moon orbiting the planet reflecting that sunlight in yet another gentle and beautiful way. Just mind boggling when you really think about it. Such beauty just... happening on its own. We don't have to make it, we don't have to paint it or engineer it or sing it... it just happens.

Saying that it was given to us by God would only cheapen it.
Click to expand...
7CTK.gif
 
I dont mind people who believe one as long as they're not on the extreme and hard side.

Sadly there's like too many of them in the world. Just very sad.
 
Last edited:
I'm reading "The Age of Reason" by Thomas Paine 1794-1807. Check this out:

This quote starts out in reference to the practice of paying (literally) the church for forgiveness. He denounces it and says that it is impossible to render a crime moral by paying a third party. "Let him believe this" below means, "Let him believe it is impossible to render a crime moral by paying a third party". Ok that's the stage set then:

edit:

One more piece of background, he's talking about someone who views the world as a place of suffering before heaven (the dunghill) vs. someone who does not subscribe to religious doctrine who must see the beauty in the world.

Thomas Paine
Let him believe this, and he will live more consistently and morally than by any other system; it is by his being taught to contemplate himself as an outlaw, as an outcast, as a beggar, as a mumper, as one thrown, as it were, on a dunghill at an immense distance from his Creator, and who must make his approaches by creeping and cringing to intermediate beings, that he conceives either a contemptuous disregard for everything under the name of religion, or becomes indifferent, or turns what he calls devout. In the latter case, he consumes his life in grief, or the affectation of it; his prayers are reproaches; his humility is ingratitude; he calls himself a worm, and the fertile earth a dunghill; and all the blessings of life by the thankless name of vanities; he despises the choicest gift of God to man, the GIFT OF REASON; and having endeavored to force upon himself the belief of a system against which reason revolts, he ungratefully calls it human reason, as if man could give reason to himself.

Yet, with all this strange appearance of humility and this contempt for human reason, he ventures into the boldest presumptions; he finds fault with everything; his selfishness is never satisfied; his ingratitude is never at an end. He takes on himself to direct the Almighty what to do, even in the government of the universe; he prays dictatorially; when it is sunshine, he prays for rain, and when it is rain, he prays for sunshine; he follows the same idea in everything that he prays for; for what is the amount of all his prayers but an attempt to make the Almighty change his mind, and act otherwise than he does? It is as if he were to say: Thou knowest not so well as I.
Click to expand...
 
TexRex
"Thatcher is in power, Sade is on the radio, and the print workers have gone on strike."

:lol:

I've actually seen the book on which the movie is based on the shelf, but overlooked it. I might have to give it a try.
Click to expand...
I can't really vouch for it... I lost faith in Paolo Hewitt when as a writer for music paper Melody Maker he reviewed a Cocteau Twins EP by saying that all they will ever be are Siouxsie & The Banshees ripoffs only to perform a volte-face and praise their first LP once the rest of the music press got behind them.

But I'm digressing heavily here.
 
Last edited:
By the way, I found this little nugget today from the US Treaty of Tripoli (1796)

treaty
“As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion,-as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen,-and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.”
Click to expand...

The treaty received unanimous ratification at the time. Somehow there are Christian groups that deny that this means that the US is not somehow a "Christian Nation", but, uh... it pretty clearly does. It says specifically that the US wants no part of a holy war because it's not a nation of a particular religion. In fact, the US was founded in part on a separate of church and state (championed in part by Thomas Jefferson) and freedom of religion - specifically what this clause points out.

It's so undeniably direct to that argument.
 
Intresting video, I can't help but think Peterson is using an example with absolute terms, but either way disagree with the notion that athiests don't have a Moral code, I have never heard him talk about religion untill now, un surprsingly I would disagree with one that has religious views.

Not that it invalidates his other stances, they are on different topics and generally the ones he talks about mostly.
 
mustafur
...but either way disagree with the notion that athiests don't have a Moral code...
Click to expand...

Atheism doesn't define a moral code. Atheists can also have a moral code, but it's distinct from their opinions on gods. The moral code of an atheist is more or less by definition founded on things other than the existence of a higher power.

Humanism is quite a good example of a type of moral code that works for atheists. There are also others. If you are an atheist, you're also free to make up your own moral code that suits whatever you feel a moral code should be.
 
mustafur
Not that it invalidates his other stances, they are on different topics and generally the ones he talks about mostly.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure that there's a brick wall between his religious views and his books on general subjects such as 12 Rules To Life if reviews like this are anything to go by. I can't really tell what he "talks about mostly" since I've only really encountered his views via the above YouTube channel.

But I can't really agree with his assertion that Judeo-Christian values are the basis for human morality and western society. That Christianity is the basis for all art, music etc. I'm not trying to poison the well for his other beliefs but it's personally hard for me to find any common ground with someone whom I disagree with on such a fundamental point.
 
Last edited:
UKMikey
But I can't really agree with his assertion that Judeo-Christian values are the basis for human morality and western society.
Click to expand...

I'd definitely agree that Judeo-Christian values aren't the basis for human morality, but it seems hard to argue that Christianity hasn't had a massive influence on the structure of western societies. The laws and norms are largely based on Christian and Jewish laws and norms, even in countries like the US that are nominally secular from formation.

That's just due to how large a part of life religion was when most of these countries were formed, and being non-religious wasn't really an option. Western countries are starting to get rid of some of the muck left over from when religion and politics were intimately mixed, but it's still pretty strong in a lot of ways depending on the country.

As far as art, it seems a bridge too far to claim that any religion (or any one thing) is the basis for all art. Some art is created simply for the sake of trying it out, or because it's joyous, or any number of other reasons. Sure there's art that can be traced back to religion, but there's way too much that isn't. There's a lot of culture that is neither religion or politics, and those parts are just what they are.

Peterson has the problem that I think he makes his arguments deliberately extreme and inflammatory. It's interesting to analyse what he says if only to establish exactly why it's wrong. I think that sometimes within his arguments there is a nuanced point that could be made though, or at least some interesting discussion points that can be made. It's just unfortunate that he often doesn't make them and goes straight to what is essentially flamebait.

He reminds me a lot of Milo Yiannopoulos.
 
Imari
I'd definitely agree that Judeo-Christian values aren't the basis for human morality, but it seems hard to argue that Christianity hasn't had a massive influence on the structure of western societies. The laws and norms are largely based on Christian and Jewish laws and norms, even in countries like the US that are nominally secular from formation.
Click to expand...
I think RR's Stephen Woodford makes the point that those values predate Judeo-Christian religion, as a counter to the idea that society would have been vastly inferior without it, let alone that atheists are really Christians because they follow laws set down by God as Peterson asserts.

 
Last edited:
Maybe the ancient Greeks are the foundation of western civilization and its values, morality and philosophy in general?
 
Imari
I'd definitely agree that Judeo-Christian values aren't the basis for human morality
Click to expand...
UKMikey
I think RR's Stephen Woodford makes the point that those values predate Judeo-Christian religion
Click to expand...
I have the nagging suspicion that the Judeo-Christian values (not necessarily all of them, mind) were already prevalent and were indeed adopted by--rather than established by--the aforementioned.
 
UKMikey
I'm not sure but I think the Code of_Hammurabi predates Greek civilisation.
Click to expand...
Yes, of course they do. But I still think ancient Greeks are the main source of philosophy, values and morals for westerners. For those of the Middle East it would indeed be the Mesopotamians, Persians, etc. For Far Easterners, there would be yet another foundation civilization.

Our extremely important tradition of democracy begins with the Greeks.

UKMikey
We are all of us standing on the shoulders of giants.
Click to expand...
That may be literally true! There is a tradition of giants in the art, literature and legends of several ancient civilizations. Giant skeletons of elite tribal chieftains have been recovered and catalogued by archeologists from the bottom of numerous North American mounds and pyramids from particular US states. By "giant" we mean only 7 -7.5 feet. Neither homo sapiens, Denisovans nor Neanderthal probably ever grew much beyond that height, legend notwithstanding.
 
Last edited:
Imari
I'd definitely agree that Judeo-Christian values aren't the basis for human morality, but it seems hard to argue that Christianity hasn't had a massive influence on the structure of western societies. The laws and norms are largely based on Christian and Jewish laws and norms, even in countries like the US that are nominally secular from formation.

That's just due to how large a part of life religion was when most of these countries were formed, and being non-religious wasn't really an option. Western countries are starting to get rid of some of the muck left over from when religion and politics were intimately mixed, but it's still pretty strong in a lot of ways depending on the country.

As far as art, it seems a bridge too far to claim that any religion (or any one thing) is the basis for all art. Some art is created simply for the sake of trying it out, or because it's joyous, or any number of other reasons. Sure there's art that can be traced back to religion, but there's way too much that isn't. There's a lot of culture that is neither religion or politicPeterson has the problem that I think he makes his arguments deliberately extreme and inflammatory. It's interesting to analyse what he says if only to establish exactly why it's wrong. I think that sometimes within his arguments there is a nuanced point that could be made though, or at least some interesting discussion points that can be made. It's just unfortunate that he often doesn't make them and goes straight to what is essentially flamebait.

He reminds me a lot of Milo Yiannopoulos.
Click to expand...
Imari
I'd definitely agree that Judeo-Christian values aren't the basis for human morality, but it seems hard to argue that Christianity hasn't had a massive influence on the structure of western societies. The laws and norms are largely based on Christian and Jewish laws and norms, even in countries like the US that are nominally secular from formation.

That's just due to how large a part of life religion was when most of these countries were formed, and being non-religious wasn't realPeterson has the problem that I think he makes his arguments deliberately extreme and inflammatory. It's interesting to analyse what he says if only to establish exactly why it's wrong. I think that sometimes within his arguments there is a nuanced point that could be made though, or at least some interesting discussion points that can be made. It's just unfortunate that he often doesn't make them and goes straight to what is essentially flamebait.

He reminds me a lot of Milo Yiannopoulos.
Click to expand...
I would like to see an example of what makes you think he is like Milo, a self proclaimed provocatuer, I don't really get the same vibe from Peterson, his views are much more moderate in nature but he tends to be interviewed by alot of people who put words in his mouth and he tends to be hostile to defend himself, I can't count the amount of times interviewers have labeled him as Alt right(who are self proclaimed white nationalists), just because he has a conservertive following, he doesn't really talk about politics more about free speech and personal Responsibility.

Milo on the other hand just likes to "trigger" lefties without really bringing anything new to the table, conservertives like Ben Shipiro have called him out for it.
 
Last edited:
UKMikey
I think RR's Stephen Woodford makes the point that those values predate Judeo-Christian religion...
Click to expand...

OK, that makes sense. Modern western societies were definitely built on Christianity, but I absolutely agree that those ideas have a far longer lineage than that. Christianity is simply the last link in the chain.

As with many things I suppose, it's hard to say exactly where it begins. Is your house built on concrete foundations? Or on the packed earth underneath? The bedrock? Any of which can be logically supported assuming that you've got something meaningful and useful to say with that as a premise. If the idea is to show that atheists are Christians, then that's just using an arbitrary distinction to try and prove that up is down.

...let alone that atheists are really Christians because they follow laws set down by God as Peterson asserts.
Click to expand...

I guess that's one of those examples of Peterson being deliberately obtuse and inflammatory. A bit like Dawkins. If your religion was determined by behaviour rather than belief, it would no longer be religion.
 

Similar threads

R
  • Question
Question about counter-steering wheel assist
Replies
6
Views
2K
RNGRxGORO
R
papumania174
Are there any cars from a previous GT game that you would like to see in GT7, but will probably not make it into the game?
Replies
8
Views
770
MMX
MMX
mef
  • Poll
Digital IDs and how they will be used to control us
2
Replies
40
Views
3K
MatskiMonk
MatskiMonk
sdi_03
"More you play, More you learn" The true meaning.
2 3
Replies
88
Views
7K
Famine
Famine
GranTurNismo
Do You Agree With This Statement (GAME)
2
Replies
44
Views
3K
HenrySwanson
HenrySwanson

Latest Posts

Back