Was at the National Holocaust Memorial in DC today.

ChrisR comments on Feb 2, 2018:

That's so true and it is easy to jump into threads like this and to bandy partisan claims about so I hope the members here don't reduce this thread "ad Hitlerum". But I noticed similarities here in the UK: an economic recession/depression causing general hardship, caused by a banking "bubble"; ...

Davesnothere replies on Feb 2, 2018:

@ChrisR I agree it has the same roots, and uses the same fears and methods I HOPE we are better prepared.

Faith, as a term, is often misused by people of faith.

Atheistman comments on Feb 2, 2018:

Thoughts are physical entities. Thoughts affect and shape matter. The words you typed into the screen is evidence of the materialization of thought. Faith that I will achieve the goal I set for myself. I haven't yet achieved the goal, yet I have faith that one day I will. This faith is evidence...

Davesnothere replies on Feb 2, 2018:

if thoughts are physical entities, can you think yourself a new car? Can you think yourself food when starving? If this were true, no one would ever starve would they? The words I type onto the screen are not simply thoughts, they also required action, fingers moving with purpose across a keyboard. Having "faith" that you will achieve the goals you set for yourself is trusting yourself and your own abilities, your own determination.

Was at the National Holocaust Memorial in DC today.

DUCHESSA comments on Feb 2, 2018:

A side comment: We always talk about the Holocaust and its horror....but mankind never says a word about the 60 million people eliminated by Joseph Stalin....In fact, mankind never says a word about the genocide committed by the Europeans on the people of the New World... from 1492 and during ...

Davesnothere replies on Feb 2, 2018:

That is not true, you are in fact bringing it up now :), and I do as well, and it sadly does not end there, were have Armenia, and Cambodia, and Argentina, and Cameroon and, and, and . . .

Was at the National Holocaust Memorial in DC today.

kmdskit3 comments on Feb 2, 2018:

As a child went to Dachau like @Davesnothere. Still remember how sobering the experience was.

Davesnothere replies on Feb 2, 2018:

It is a severe reality check . . .

Was at the National Holocaust Memorial in DC today.

ChrisR comments on Feb 2, 2018:

That's so true and it is easy to jump into threads like this and to bandy partisan claims about so I hope the members here don't reduce this thread "ad Hitlerum". But I noticed similarities here in the UK: an economic recession/depression causing general hardship, caused by a banking "bubble"; ...

Davesnothere replies on Feb 2, 2018:

IF NOT I take heart that we are NOT Germany in 32, but America in 2017, and a lot of us are familar with our history and wont sit still for Cristal Nacht . . .

I detested that opening question, "Do you believe in God?

shockwaverider comments on Feb 1, 2018:

If you don't like it here, feel free to leave.

Davesnothere replies on Feb 2, 2018:

@shockwaverider Sounds like a plan Shock, heres to hoping future communications are less problematic

I detested that opening question, "Do you believe in God?

LeighShelton comments on Feb 1, 2018:

I really don't get at all the % of belief. especially the people who say there 99.9% sure there isn't a god. I see it as a belief or don't kind of a question.

Davesnothere replies on Feb 2, 2018:

@LeighShelton and I agree, MOST models for God would be very assholish at the very least.

I detested that opening question, "Do you believe in God?

LeighShelton comments on Feb 1, 2018:

I really don't get at all the % of belief. especially the people who say there 99.9% sure there isn't a god. I see it as a belief or don't kind of a question.

Davesnothere replies on Feb 2, 2018:

@LeighShelton You are touching directly on the main point, that is the difference between CONCEPTUAL reality or Philosphical reality, what we can envision or imagine, and PRACTCAL REALITY, what we can prove, what we can share, what is viable. This is base axiom of Russell's teapot. I cannot PROVE there is a teapot orbiting the planet, NOR is it possible to DISPROVE there is a teapot orbiting the Planet. The CONCEPT of that teapot will exist forever, and people are free to believe in it if they feel so inclined, but there is no SOUND rational reason to do so. In the Philosophical sense we do NOT know whether Thor or Ra or Hera is Real, but there is NO PRACTCAL reason to believe that is so, hence in this modern age it is ASSUMED they are fictions invented by an ancient culture, as that is the most likely conclusion. In the case of the Modern functioning religions we are in exactly the same boat. This is addressed very aptly by Bertrand Russell. PROOF of God “Here there comes a practical question which has often troubled me. Whenever I go into a foreign country or a prison or any similar place they always ask me what is my religion. I never know whether I should say "Agnostic" or whether I should say "Atheist". It is a very difficult question and I daresay that some of you have been troubled by it. As a philosopher, if I were speaking to a purely philosophic audience I should say that I ought to describe myself as an Agnostic, because I do not think that there is a conclusive argument by which one prove that there is not a God. On the other hand, if I am to convey the right impression to the ordinary man in the street I think I ought to say that I am an Atheist, because when I say that I cannot prove that there is not a God, I ought to add equally that I cannot prove that there are not the Homeric gods. None of us would seriously consider the possibility that all the gods of Homer really exist, and yet if you were to set to work to give a logical demonstration that Zeus, Hera, Poseidon, and the rest of them did not exist you would find it an awful job. You could not get such proof. Therefore, in regard to the Olympic gods, speaking to a purely philosophical audience, I would say that I am an Agnostic. But speaking popularly, I think that all of us would say in regard to those gods that we were Atheists. In regard to the Christian God, I should, I think, take exactly the same line. ” Bertrand Russell

Would you want a Christian God to be real?

france18 comments on Jan 23, 2018:

Yes, a Christian believes that God as you say is real. I am glad that he is, he is someone who is powerful ie created the heavens and the earth. I am also glad that he does not use his power to be at the use of us pressing a button and hey presto he has compiled with our wishes, painful that may ...

Davesnothere replies on Feb 2, 2018:

"Why don't Jews believe in Jesus?" Let's understand why – not to disparage other religions, but rather to clarify the Jewish position. Jews do not accept Jesus as the messiah because: Jesus did not fulfill the messianic prophecies. Jesus did not embody the personal qualifications of the Messiah. Biblical verses "referring" to Jesus are mistranslations. Jewish belief is based on national revelation. But first, some background: What exactly is the Messiah? The word "Messiah" is an English rendering of the Hebrew word Mashiach, which means "anointed." It usually refers to a person initiated into God's service by being anointed with oil. (Exodus 29:7, 1-Kings 1:39, 2-Kings 9:3) (1) Jesus Did Not Fulfill the Messianic Prophecies What is the Messiah supposed to accomplish? One of the central themes of biblical prophecy is the promise of a future age of perfection characterized by universal peace and recognition of God. (Isaiah 2:1-4, 32:15-18, 60:15-18; Zephaniah 3:9; Hosea 2:20-22; Amos 9:13-15; Micah 4:1-4; Zechariah 8:23, 14:9; Jeremiah 31:33-34) Specifically, the Bible says he will: Build the Third Temple (Ezekiel 37:26-28). Gather all Jews back to the Land of Israel (Isaiah 43:5-6). Usher in an era of world peace, and end all hatred, oppression, suffering and disease. As it says: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall man learn war anymore." (Isaiah 2:4) Spread universal knowledge of the God of Israel, which will unite humanity as one. As it says: "God will be King over all the world – on that day, God will be One and His Name will be One" (Zechariah 14:9). If an individual fails to fulfill even one of these conditions, then he cannot be the Messiah. Because no one has ever fulfilled the Bible's description of this future King, Jews still await the coming of the Messiah. All past Messianic claimants, including Jesus of Nazareth, Bar Cochba and Shabbtai Tzvi have been rejected. Christians counter that Jesus will fulfill these in the Second Coming. Jewish sources show that the Messiah will fulfill the prophecies outright; in the Torah no concept of a second coming exists, Christians added that notion Post Hoc.

@BeeHappy posted a ten-minute video on the topic "The Bible Is Mostly Not Factual" in which a ...

Davesnothere comments on Feb 1, 2018:

It is not the interpretation of idiots which concern me, it is the actions those voting idiots take based upon those very interpretations, actions which find their way into law and policy. Tell me, if you truly believe the world is ending and Jesus coming to save you and burn me, of what concern ...

Davesnothere replies on Feb 2, 2018:

@AxeElf No, half is no so extreme as all that, that is the extreme wing of the extreme wing Actually, this is ass backwards, and our system was designed to prevent exactly this. ". If a majority of the people in this country want to be ruled by a Christian Theocracy, then that's what they should get" OUR nation was set up so that a majority would NOT be allowed to lord thier desires OVER the minority, that they would be able to live, themselves as Christians if they so desired, but that NO majority should be able to force thier idea onto ALL against thier will. OTHERWISE you cannot have Liberty for ALL, you would only have Liberty for the Majority. the Minority would be enslaved to that majority.

I detested that opening question, "Do you believe in God?

shockwaverider comments on Feb 1, 2018:

If you don't like it here, feel free to leave.

Davesnothere replies on Feb 2, 2018:

@shockwaverider I did not use all caps, I used Ittermittant caps, which in online speak indicates emphasis. You are probably correct, I have a TBI from my time in service and the Your, You're is something I am forever editing, THANKS, for the catch :) Yes, I am not angry. Why do you assume I am angry by saying I detest the formation of a question? I also said "VERY poorly framed " I detest tea too, do you think I have some emotional dislike of tea, that I am angry at tea?de·test verb dislike intensely No anger involved. This really seems to be a BEE in your Bonnet. Why is this ""IF you cannot even define what you are talking about, or consider it beyond human understanding, how is it you can claim to know anything about it and keep your intellectual integrity intact?" Upsetting? It is a pointed question. If you yourself cannot define God, and your asking me if I believe in it, how could I answer. I oft use a term, "The Smoky God", because a great many people of faith follow this God. It is an undefined God, a God which cannot be defined, which is in fact beyond human comprehension, but which religions never tire of making claims about. Which is oxymoronic, if God is beyond the keen of the human mind and yet human make endless claims they believe about the self same god model, they are openly contradicting themselves. I have found that when folks take issue with this point, they oft follow that notion, and have never been confronted with that before. One of the early responders actuall confirmed that, btroje claimed it is a mystery to him, which I see as a claim that the God he believes in is MYSTERIOUS, a mystery, yet beyond doubt he has concrete ideas about that God. Nothing is concrete in a mystery is it?

I detested that opening question, "Do you believe in God?

Paul628 comments on Feb 1, 2018:

I agree with being ignostic/igtheist. I just tell people I'm an atheist so I don't have to explain what an ignostic is again. Even spell-check thinks I'm spelling agnostic/atheist wrong.

Davesnothere replies on Feb 2, 2018:

@Paul628 I have a LOT of them from online debating . . .

I detested that opening question, "Do you believe in God?

LeighShelton comments on Feb 1, 2018:

I really don't get at all the % of belief. especially the people who say there 99.9% sure there isn't a god. I see it as a belief or don't kind of a question.

Davesnothere replies on Feb 2, 2018:

I do not get the Gnostic Atheist either. If there is not evidence FOR a God (s), and the burden lies upon the claimant, how does the failure of said claimant to prove their claim become proof of lack in a universe we can scantly see 1% of? That itself is hubris is it not? It seems to as much a position of Faith as that of a theist. A Theist believe there is a God and is convinced that is the truth and they have knowledge of that via some personal experience = Gnostic Theist An Atheist who is convinced there is No God and is convinced by the lack of evidence that no such thing exists or could ever exist = Gnostic Atheist BOTH are maling hard claims of KNOWLEDGE, that they KNOW of a certainty that there is or is not a God, however someone might be defining that term. BOTH seem to me to be conflating a belief with knowledge, they believe in God so strongly and have had personal experiences they feel validate their belief and falsely equate that to actual proof, to real knowledge, or they have done enough research to find zero evidence across a large enough spectrum to assert there is no valid reason to believe the claims with out evidence, and then leap from an assumption about practical reality(no evidence equals no God) to an assertion about philosophical reality ( no evidence means there can be no God) Both are faith based positions. What is most perplexing is why anyone would assume such a burden of proof by making the hard assertion "there is no God", now I would have to prove that, and that is no more possible than proving the Supernatural God.

I detested that opening question, "Do you believe in God?

David1955 comments on Feb 2, 2018:

I don't think anybody truly likes that question, or takes much notice of the figure people choose. As an atheist I ask the question differently: Are you 100% certain that there is no evidence for the existence of ANY God? Any and All. Answer, yes. Now if anyone would care to provide some evidence,...

Davesnothere replies on Feb 2, 2018:

That is the SE appraoch, applying the socratic method, highly effective in one on one conversations.

@BeeHappy posted a ten-minute video on the topic "The Bible Is Mostly Not Factual" in which a ...

Davesnothere comments on Feb 1, 2018:

It is not the interpretation of idiots which concern me, it is the actions those voting idiots take based upon those very interpretations, actions which find their way into law and policy. Tell me, if you truly believe the world is ending and Jesus coming to save you and burn me, of what concern ...

Davesnothere replies on Feb 1, 2018:

@AxeElf your Op touched on it briefly, as follows "what had his knickers in a twist was that like 48% of the average people on the street in America believed that the stories in the Bible were literally true. I was thinking, "Why worry about the idiots? Just appreciate that there is a rational way to understand the Bible, even if half the people who believe in it lack that deep understanding of it." Attacking the interpretations of the idiots while saying that the more erudite understanding doesn't concern you as much seems like the epitome of the low-hanging fruit." 48% is nearly half the population, and that same HALF think the Earth is in the end times, many of them think the Ark tale literal and the Earth itself 6000 years old and evolution a lie of the Devil. AND they are actively legeslating twoard their beliefs, legeslating their religious ideology into law. A MAJORITY of the GOP in officestated recently that they think Christianty should be the national Religion, which would make America a Theocracy like the Talibhan. This same demographic deny climate science, think it is a hoax as they await the return of Jesus ANY DAY. WORSE, this element has a hard fringe to it. The worst aspects of it do almost unimaginable things, like Christian Evagelical Churches who fund Extremist Hebrews who want to blow up the Temple mount, because the Temple Mount MUST GO, for the third temple to be built, for the Prophecy to be fulfilled in order for Jesus to return. They fundraise for this every year. In politics they have created a great many organizations the sole purpose of which is to get candidates of their religious view into office, so they can enact their religion into law. I suggest you read this to get an idea of how this has grown in recent years. https://www.amazon.com/Family-Secret-Fundamentalism-Heart-American/dp/0060560053

I detested that opening question, "Do you believe in God?

shockwaverider comments on Feb 1, 2018:

If you don't like it here, feel free to leave.

Davesnothere replies on Feb 1, 2018:

@shockwaverider Assumptive of you. First, I am not angry at all, your reading anger into that, I detest questions which are ill framed as they are rather impossible to answer intelligently and honestly. Second, i do not see any hostility in the post at all, it is a query, a pointed one. Why you view it as hostile is beyond me. THIS "You seem to be schooling the rest of us about how stupid the site is to ask if you believe in god, which you detest." is nonsensical. It is incoherent to ask if I believe in "God" without specifying WHAT god your talking about. There have been THOUSANDS of them in human history. DO you meanThor, or Ra, or Ganesh, or Tetragrammaton, or Jehovah, or Yaweh, or Allah? To ask "Do you believe in God falsely assumes ALL people believe or disbelieve or fail to believe in the very same iddeation of God that you hold, and frankly I have no clue what that is. So I have no idea what you are asking me by that question, it is assumptive. Further Shock, it is patently impossible for me to detest what I am not even able to define, if I am not even certain what the hell you are asking me about, I cannot detest it. THIS "You apparently feel that each word needs to be defined to the nth degree." is more or less Philosophy 101, we cannot have a serious discourse about anything unless we agree beforehand what the heck we are talking about. If we use loaded language like "God" which carries with it the vast and individual definition of billions of believers of diverse faiths across an expanse of history, and then simply expect others to assume they will think of God as the writer does, we are in a bubble. No Hindu will see that as a Muslim, no Muslim as a neo pagan, no neo-pagan asa wiccan, no wiccan as a Buddhist; ad infintum. "As if there isn't a common colloquial understanding."--there is not, in fact the religions disagree on definitions, and these disagreements have caused schism after schism over the centuries, causing the three main religions to split into multiple sects which do not agree on definitions or dogma. A "common colloquial understanding" would be just that, colloquial, ie a common usage WITHIN a sect or religion, like that of the Christian God, which is the Primary use of that Term "God"; so should one assume the site itself religiously bigoted, discriminating against those not of a Judeo Christian or western background on a Global platform? Kind of why I pointed it out, no point in offending without intention is there? No Shock, you did not ask me anything. You TOOK my question to your breast as hostile, when that was not it's intent, and then reacted with open hostility via your response "If you don't like it here, feel free to leave.", because what, I dared to question why it was phrased ...

I detested that opening question, "Do you believe in God?

Treasurehunter comments on Feb 1, 2018:

Suggest an improved answer.

Davesnothere replies on Feb 1, 2018:

A simple change of terms would work. "Do you believe in the idea of a deity of any type?

I detested that opening question, "Do you believe in God?

Paul628 comments on Feb 1, 2018:

I agree with being ignostic/igtheist. I just tell people I'm an atheist so I don't have to explain what an ignostic is again. Even spell-check thinks I'm spelling agnostic/atheist wrong.

Davesnothere replies on Feb 1, 2018:

Most folks unaquainted with Philosophy dont know the term, but it is more precise, and much more apt for me. and I made a note for the explanation, who wants to type all that over and over?

I detested that opening question, "Do you believe in God?

BanjoTango comments on Feb 1, 2018:

At last, a thinking approach to the phenomena. I made that point a few answers ago in another thread, that discussing a god was misleading, but it seemed to go over the heads of most of the commentators. As a general question though, its probably going to have to be about the best general ...

Davesnothere replies on Feb 1, 2018:

A simple change of terms would work. "Do you believe in the idea of a deity of any type?