| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Are you an atheist? I am, and so should you.; (be one that is) | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jul 15 2009, 07:59 PM (4,788 Views) | |
| ivorythumper | Jul 17 2009, 02:04 PM Post #226 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
It's not so much that they require it as it is a defining feature. Some form of public or communal act (the literally meaning of liturgy). In that sense I suppose global warming is a religion, with the public celebration of the apotheosis rituals for Al Gore at the Academy Awards and the Nobel Conference. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Axtremus | Jul 17 2009, 02:06 PM Post #227 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
You cannot repeat yourself because you have yet to say it for the first time. The question is very straight forward: Who or what do you believe is the god of (what you call) the "man made global warming" religion? It's a simple question that can be answered with a simple sentence: The god of the "man made global warming" religion is (fill in the blank). Quoting that Michael Crichton article did not answer that question at all. Do you agree with Crichton's article? You have yet to say whether you do. Do you? If you do not, then your quoting of the article tells me nothing of what you believe; it only tells me of what Michael Crichton believed. Michael Crichton talked, in that article, of traits of pantheism and animism in environmentalism. Is environmentalism the same as "man made global warming"? You have yet to tell me whether you believe it is. Do you? If you do not believe that it is, then how does this view of environmentalism apply to "man made global warming" in your belief? The answer to the question is not there. If you think you have answered the question, you either do not understand the question, or your thinking is jumbled up by multiple different concepts that you aren't thinking straight. |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Jul 17 2009, 02:20 PM Post #228 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
it's autolatriac, Ax. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Luke's Dad | Jul 17 2009, 02:24 PM Post #229 |
![]()
Emperor Pengin
|
Religious physicists, atheist physicists, whatever. I don't need scientific evidence to know that grass is green, the sky is blue, and that God exists. I've witnessed each of these things too much to doubt it. |
| The problem with having an open mind is that people keep trying to put things in it. | |
![]() |
|
| QuantumIvory | Jul 17 2009, 03:09 PM Post #230 |
|
Senior Carp
|
|
|
"I regard consciousness as fundamental. We cannot get behind consciousness." -Max Planck | |
![]() |
|
| QuantumIvory | Jul 17 2009, 03:15 PM Post #231 |
|
Senior Carp
|
You are, of course, correct, LD. The lists I posted of God-believing scientists should have no bearing on what each of us (in our own little quantum world) believe. I merely posted them to show that very, very smart (and in some cases great) men of science do not see science and God as mutually exclusive. |
|
"I regard consciousness as fundamental. We cannot get behind consciousness." -Max Planck | |
![]() |
|
| kenny | Jul 17 2009, 03:16 PM Post #232 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Aren't religious threads just he best? |
![]() |
|
| Larry | Jul 17 2009, 04:45 PM Post #233 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
You have argued that Buddhism is a religion. What is its god? You have argued that Hinduism is a religion. What is its god? Before any attempt is made to explain to you what the god(s) of environmentalism is, you will first have to learn what religion is. Right now, you don't have a clue. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Renauda | Jul 17 2009, 06:57 PM Post #234 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
They are indeed. I'm still curious though as to whether the Judeo-Christian God has a toe to stub. |
![]() |
|
| Axtremus | Jul 17 2009, 10:37 PM Post #235 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Having god(s) is not a prerequisite for something to be considered a religion. Buddhism is an atheistic religion -- there is no "god" recognized within the religion. Hinduism is a polytheistic religion -- it recognizes many gods; to name a few: Ganesha, Shiva, Krishna, Durga, Kali, Lakshmi, Saraswati, Jagannath, Hunuman ... These are widely recognized aspects of the Buddhist and Hindu religions. Now what's your answer to the straight forward question: Who or what, do you believe, to be the god of (what you call) the "man made global warming" religion? Before you start explaining the god(s) of "environmentalism," do clarify whether you deem "environmentalism" and "man made global warming" to be one and the same. Otherwise, there is no way to tell whether anything you say regarding the god(s) of "environmentalism" also pertains to the god of the "man made global warming" religion. Since you started throwing "(s)" after "god," please also be careful to clarify whether you are talking about one god or multiple gods -- because your original claim was that the "man made global warming" religion has a god -- singular, not plural. If you want to amend your original claim to allow the "man made global warming" religion to have multiple gods, that OK; just be clear about it. |
![]() |
|
| Axtremus | Jul 17 2009, 10:43 PM Post #236 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
That's not too hard... within the Judeo-Christian self-referential system, there is a blurb about God created man in his own image; so to the extent that most men have toes that can be stubbed, one can reasonably deduce that God also most likely has toes that, as far as image goes, appear to be stubbable. Heck, within that self-referential system,as far as image goes, the expected image of God can be reasonably expected to resemble that of the average man. |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Jul 17 2009, 11:52 PM Post #237 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
I'd say the environment/ earth would qualify as the ultimate "deity" in the religion of global warming: that is what they all serve and that is what anyone who challenges their service of is considered a heretic, and will be persecuted for their heterodoxy. But really, Ax, turn down the squelch -- you are sounding screechy and pedantic. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | Jul 18 2009, 04:08 AM Post #238 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
Yes, one can "reasonably expect" that if one is so mentally constipated and shallow in their thought processes that they would call it the Judeo-Christian "self reference system", refer to the scripture that says God created man in his own image as a "blurb", and then with the critical thinking skills of a 6th grader assume that by "in his own image" that it means physical features, then yes, one would "reasonably expect" such a conclusion. If one has a more mature mind however, one would find that sarcastic, insulting, and ignorant. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Larry | Jul 18 2009, 04:15 AM Post #239 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
Now let's look at another example of your thin brain, Ax: You said:
Then, after "informing" me that having a god is not a prerequisite for something to be a religion, you turn right around in the same post and demand that environmentalism and "man made global warming" must have a god to be called a religion. Are you looking for an answer, or are you too busy trying to be a smartass and insult Christianity to use your brain for something else? The god of "man made global warming" is environmentalism, atheism, stupidity, and any other number of things.
Please tell me if you wrote that because you're being an asshole or because you're stupid. I need to know in order to properly respond. It's one or the other, so clarify that point for me before we go further. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Axtremus | Jul 18 2009, 05:28 AM Post #240 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Larry, you are the one who claims that what you call the "man made global warming" religion has a god. Thats your claim, not mine. It has always been my position throughout this discussion that a religion can be a religion without having any god. If you agree with me that that god is not a prerequisite for a religion, just say so. I'm OK with that. Though recognize that that still doesn't explain why you said earlier, that the "man made global warming" religion has a god. All of my questions you quoted in the later half of your post are necessary to make sure that your answer to the original question (i.e., who or what, do you believe, to be the god of what you call the "man made global warming" religion) is unambiguously addressed. If you supposed response talks about "environmentalism," and the original question was about "man made global warming," that unless you say one way or another, there is no way to equate those two labels, "environmentalism" and "man made global warming." "God" vs. "god(s)" is also an important distinction, for some participants here actually believe that having multiple gods is nonsensical. If you not think the "a god" vs "multiple gods" distinction is inconsequential to your claim or argument, just say so and we move pass it. It's that hard to do. (IT - we had exchanges before where you claimed that god would not be god if there are multiple of them. So I actually had you in mind when I called out that "god" vs. "god(s)" distinction when I noticed that Larry switched from "a god" in his original claim to "god(s)" in his later post.) So, Larry, what's answer to the question: Who or what, do you believe, is the god of (what you call) the "man made global warming" religion?
Is that your answer? If so, thank you for providing it. (See, I said earlier that the question can be answered with a simple sentence. You could have written that outright from the start, and we could have saved ourselves many posts.) |
![]() |
|
| Larry | Jul 18 2009, 06:15 AM Post #241 |
![]()
Mmmmmmm, pie!
|
Thank you Ax, for answering *my* question. It seems that there was a third choice - a mix of sarcasm *and* stupid. |
|
Of the Pokatwat Tribe | |
![]() |
|
| Renauda | Jul 18 2009, 06:21 AM Post #242 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Can you run that again but more via negativa? Approaching it apophatically may not step on quite as many human toes. |
![]() |
|
| John D'Oh | Jul 18 2009, 06:27 AM Post #243 |
|
MAMIL
|
Well thank goodness I didn't ask what God yells when he gets his wos'name caught in his zipper. |
| What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket? | |
![]() |
|
| Axtremus | Jul 18 2009, 06:31 AM Post #244 |
|
HOLY CARP!!!
|
I can, but I don't feel like it at the moment. |
![]() |
|
| Renauda | Jul 18 2009, 06:37 AM Post #245 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Ah, that would have indeed raise yet another proportionate and interesting query. |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Jul 18 2009, 09:25 AM Post #246 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Gee Ax, it seems pretty obvious that this is a view point based on Christian theology with God being the summum bonum. There can be only one "summum bonum". The word god or gods can certainly indicate something that is worshiped (latria), or ultimately valued, etc even if it would be idolatrous to do so from a Christian perspective -- and it certainly seems that whether one thinks that the environment or Gaia or the earth or human existence is ultimately valued by the global warming crowd, the language of god or gods is applicable. But again, you are coming across as pedantic and boorish with your insistence on clarifying between god and gods. |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| jon-nyc | Jul 18 2009, 09:29 AM Post #247 |
|
Cheers
|
I think you have it backwards. |
| In my defense, I was left unsupervised. | |
![]() |
|
| John D'Oh | Jul 18 2009, 09:43 AM Post #248 |
|
MAMIL
|
It also brings us nicely back to my question regarding Mr. Richard Simmons. |
| What do you mean "we", have you got a mouse in your pocket? | |
![]() |
|
| ivorythumper | Jul 18 2009, 09:46 AM Post #249 |
|
I am so adjective that I verb nouns!
|
Tell me again how the idea that God is eternal, atemporal, infinite, omniscient, omnipotent, superessential, immutable, and simple argues that God is created in our image? |
| The dogma lives loudly within me. | |
![]() |
|
| Renauda | Jul 18 2009, 09:55 AM Post #250 |
![]()
HOLY CARP!!!
|
Or whether God is not not without legs or not not a cloud in trousers. |
![]() |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |










6:50 AM Jul 11