"Evil" is just the devil spray-painting graffiti
God count: Zero, One, or Many?
Sort:
Feb 4, 2015
0
#83
Sred wrote:
trysts wrote:
Actually, no. It is not "clear" to me that "evil" exists, since the word "evil" carries with it religious connotations. I just use "good" and "bad" for evaluations. "Evil" is for people who believe in gods
Not necessarily, for many people "acting evil" just means "acting (deliberately) immoral".
Something about Evil...I see it as something beyond "immoral acts"...
When you see it... you'll know what it is...and if you see it, it sees you right back. It is the worst thing that can happen to you. You are marked.
Feb 4, 2015
0
#84
trysts wrote:
"Evil" is just the devil spray-painting graffiti
I see you, trysts
Feb 4, 2015
0
#85
See, that's what I mean. You see "evil" as "beyond immoral acts". That's transcendent, which is probably all about going to hell and all. Totally religious.
Feb 4, 2015
0
#87
I'm not sure of the exact number, but it's definitely fewer than one.
Feb 4, 2015
0
#88
That's the second upside-down kitten I've seen this week! This is totally The Exorcist!
Feb 4, 2015
0
#89
kaynight wrote:
What's this site then Feu?
It's the playground for creative souls. (for trysts and other atheists, you can replace "souls" with "minds" lol)
Feb 4, 2015
0
#90
trysts wrote:
See, that's what I mean. You see "evil" as "beyond immoral acts". That's transcendent, which is probably all about going to hell and all. Totally religious.
I'd guess many people see it this way. Must be the total absence of religion in my life which has effectively eliminated all transcendent aspects from my language.
Feb 4, 2015
0
#91
Religion in fact is very earthbound.
Transcendence is experience.
You cannot deny something that you do not experience.
Though, it is, of course your prerogative to deny other people's experiences. In any case, this denial does have weight on other people's lives. It is the most benign and harmless of acts - denying other people's experiences. At least, regarding this matter. I'm all for it.
Feb 4, 2015
0
#92
Feufollet wrote:
Religion in fact is very earthbound.
Transcendence is experience.
You cannot deny something that you do not experience.
Though, it is, of course your prerogative to deny other people's experiences. In any case, this denial does have weight on other people's lives. It is the most benign and harmless of acts - denying other people's experiences. At least, regarding this matter. I'm all for it.
The important point about this kind of experience is that it's strictly intrasubjective and can't be communicated. There is no way for me to tell other people's transcendant experiences apart from their hallucinations.
Feb 4, 2015
0
#93
Sred wrote:
Feufollet wrote:
Religion in fact is very earthbound.
Transcendence is experience.
You cannot deny something that you do not experience.
Though, it is, of course your prerogative to deny other people's experiences. In any case, this denial does have weight on other people's lives. It is the most benign and harmless of acts - denying other people's experiences. At least, regarding this matter. I'm all for it.
The important point about this kind of experience is that it's strictly intrasubjective and can't be communicated. There is no way for me to tell other people's transcendant experiences apart from their hallucinations.
"The lady doth protest too much, methinks" 1602, Shakespeare
Feb 4, 2015
0
#94
Feufollet wrote:
Sred wrote:
Feufollet wrote:
Religion in fact is very earthbound.
Transcendence is experience.
You cannot deny something that you do not experience.
Though, it is, of course your prerogative to deny other people's experiences. In any case, this denial does have weight on other people's lives. It is the most benign and harmless of acts - denying other people's experiences. At least, regarding this matter. I'm all for it.
The important point about this kind of experience is that it's strictly intrasubjective and can't be communicated. There is no way for me to tell other people's transcendant experiences apart from their hallucinations.
"The lady doth protest too much, methinks" 1602, Shakespeare
I fail to understand. Maybe a language thing. Who is protesting?
There is One God and one mediator between God and man, the man Christ Jesus
Feb 4, 2015
0
#96
@Sred
"The lady doth protest too much, methinks" is a quotation from the 1602 play Hamlet by William Shakespeare. It has been used as a figure of speech, in various phrasings, to indicate that a person's overly frequent or vehement attempts to convince others of something have ironically helped to convince others that the opposite is true, by making the person look insincere and defensive. (Wikipedia)
The "lady" here refers to you and other atheists. It has been my observation that the "vehemence" of atheists to deny the existence of God is just as "extreme and RELIGIOUS" as those who do believe in God.
Feb 4, 2015
0
#97
Feufollet wrote:
Religion in fact is very earthbound.
Transcendence is experience.
You cannot deny something that you do not experience.
Though, it is, of course your prerogative to deny other people's experiences. In any case, this denial does have weight on other people's lives. It is the most benign and harmless of acts - denying other people's experiences. At least, regarding this matter. I'm all for it.
I'd have to agree with Sred, Feufollet. A person is incapable of denying your inner experiences since they're all yours, but once you start communicating an inner experience then that person can tell you whether or not they understand you--whether of not you make sense to them. For instance, if a person says they have lived an assortment of past lives and the veracity of their experience is based upon an inner feeling they have, then it is the same thing as saying what you dreamt of last night. It has the reality of a dream.
So when speaking of an innate experience of a god which you remember originally forming yourself, without any outer influence, since the age of four, then it would be reasonable to assume you cannot recall from where your god experience was inspired from. It is not reasonable to me to think that your notion of a god was not influenced by a society full of god images, language, etc. I believe it is nurture over nature
In other words, you keep saying I am denying your experience, but I'm not denying your experience. I'm questioning the way you communicated your experience. See?
Feb 4, 2015
0
#98
trysts wrote:
Feufollet wrote:
Religion in fact is very earthbound.
Transcendence is experience.
You cannot deny something that you do not experience.
Though, it is, of course your prerogative to deny other people's experiences. In any case, this denial does have weight on other people's lives. It is the most benign and harmless of acts - denying other people's experiences. At least, regarding this matter. I'm all for it.
I'd have to agree with Sred, Feufollet. A person is incapable of denying your inner experiences since they're all yours, but once you start communicating an inner experience then that person can tell you whether or not they understand you--whether of not you make sense to them. For instance, if a person says they have lived an assortment of past lives and the veracity of their experience is based upon an inner feeling they have, then it is the same thing as saying what you dreamt of last night. It has the reality of a dream.
So when speaking of an innate experience of a god which you remember originally forming yourself, without any outer influence, since the age of four, then it would be reasonable to assume you cannot recall from where your god experience was inspired from. It is not reasonable to me to think that your notion of a god was not influenced by a society full of god images, language, etc. I believe it is nurture over nature
In other words, you keep saying I am denying your experience, but I'm not denying your experience. I'm questioning the way you communicated your experience. See?
It doesn't matter how many ways I try to communicate my experience, trysts...your own vehemence (yours and other atheists, I've noticed), are extremely closed to it.
For example, I speak of "experience", the one - sred - calls it "hallucination", the other, you, trysts, calls it "dreams"...it is quite condescending (I'd feel offended, if there was any fear of intellectual insuperiority on my part. but there isn't )
also, you keep saying how "I come up with the idea" or "forming it myself"....and I keep trying to convey to you that it isn't something " I formed", "came up with", "invented", or "created"...
It's like you've so boxed yourselves up within your own intellectual limitations that nothing outside that can exist.
Feb 4, 2015
0
#99
Wow, how this has broken apart. I want to thank JamieKowalski for the last relevant post on the OT. The virulent dialog between factions here is not what I intended with this discussion. Perhaps I shouldn't have revealed my own position, or, God(s) help us, perhaps this descent into invective, even if rather casual, is inevitable on this kind of forum.
To the person who responded to my "atheist, swear to God" comment: Please, you must be kidding me.
trysts, "bad" is really just a "fluffy" servant of evil, if you ask me.