A few Dawkins quotes to think about. (page 20)

unshackled

The problem with defining god is that you can make it whatever you want. So why bother at all? Why call it god?

I believe in love...but I just call it love. I love grilled cheese sandwiches....so according to all the other definitions of god I can legitimately argue that grilled cheese sandwiches are God.

sabastious

Sabastious: I think the people with most/biggest guns will inherit the Earth. Is there evidence to the contrary that I'm ignorant of?

The people you are talking about will be dethrowned by the meek and no weapon will be used.

-Sab

sabastious

I believe in love...but I just call it love. I love grilled cheese sandwiches....so according to all the other definitions of god I can legitimately argue that grilled cheese sandwiches are God.

If you believe in love then, if God is love, then God works through whether you believe in that or not. We are kind of on the same page except for a detail on the end. You think it's all chance, which is understandable and possibly a legitamate position given our dataset, and I have faith that there is an order to that chance that is in our best interests.

-Sab

cofty

It doesn't it just seems that way when you "zoom in" too far

You sound like somebody who never sees anything but pigeons in the city - open your eyes man. No animal apart from domestic pets, dies in peace. Wild animals are wonderfully equipped to kill or escape being killed.

Don't zoom in, stand back.

unshackled

You think it's all chance

That's not what I think. Sounds like a WT comment. Fact is, I don't know...and I think that is the bravest and most honest answer to the why's and how we are here.

Further, I don't trust anyone who adamantly says that they unequivocally know.

sabastious

You sound like somebody who never sees anything but pigeons in the city - open your eyes man. No animal apart from domestic pets, dies in peace. Wild animals are wonderfully equipped to kill or escape being killed.

You keep making subjective statements like "dies in peace" and then get frustrated at me when I bring up semantics, what do you want from me?

-Sab

sabastious

That's not what I think. Sounds like a WT comment. Fact is, I don't know...and I think that is the bravest and most honest answer to the why's and how we are here.

"I don't know" in many contexts is a brave a noble answer unless the subject at hand is knowable and it's used as a crutch (just a statement not an accusation).

-Sab

cofty

what do you want from me

Can't you work out what I mean by "dies in peace"? I said earlier that every animal dies of starvation, predation, cold or infection. If the world was designed to reflect the qualities of a loving god why is it thus?

I am not looking for a formal debate, its late here in the UK and I am trying to do some other work at the same time. Can't you just engage in a common sense discussion without all the smart arse point scoring?

sabastious

Can't you work out what I mean by "dies in peace"? I said earlier that every animal dies of starvation, predation, cold or infection. If the world was designed to reflect the qualities of a loving god why is ith thus?

This is a good question.

The answer involves experience more than words. There is a big difference between animals and humans and that distiction is paramount. Basically I am using the "apples and oranges" argument. I know humans suffer because I am human. If my son dies from infection I suffer; when a water buffalo's young is killed by a pack of big cats does it suffer in the same way? I don't know and wouldn't presume to know.

I'm not sure why you feel fine to equate pain with suffering?

-Sab

unshackled

IMO there is no greater stance of arrogance than saying you know the answers to the universe. Many do just that and even manage to be magnanimous while doing so.

Soooooo...on a lighter note: the Trinity is bullshit, right?

A few Dawkins quotes to think about.

Share this