Something that really grinds my gears...

[Bioshock]

Ignoring the crappy family guy reference I just can not fucking stand it when sports players thanks Jesus/God and say that Jesus was watching them. My biggest pet peeve are the handful of football players who think that if they win it's because Jesus/God was watching them and wanted them to win.

First of all, it sounds all fine and dandy but it really makes it apparent that we have a horrible God. Here we have a genocide in Darfur, and millions of people dying in Africa and instead of helping them God/Jesus is watching a fucking football game? I highly doubt that if God existed that he would be watching a football game while a genocide of his people is happening. I also doubt that God would just happen to favor a particular team. God is above human, he doesn't show favoritism like us, and most likely would not value sports as much as we do (in fact, I happen to think that he values us being good citizens, and praying more then he does your ability to make a goal)

Anyway the reason I didn't post this in the Christianity thread someone else made is because this does not have to be discussed from a Christian point of view.

 

[PassiveObserver]

They rely on the god head to provide solace to their lives.
Consider this, is it better to have people believe in what they want to believe which tells them the benefits of acting in accordance with morals, or is it better to have everyone a relativist/nihilist?

I frankly don't think people can come to grips with the realization that there are no objective truths concerning meaning, morals and etc; it's better to have them hold onto the ideals they have so long as that they're able to keep religion in the private sphere and not the public.

Also, atheism is just as childish when it's taken to "piss off parents/RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE."

When approached rationally, Atheism/Agnosticism is practical but there's no sense trying to disprove/prove something that doesn't have empirical evidence for or against its existence.

 

[Justin8649]

Is it possible for you to misinterpret it anymore? Most higher beings that are worshipped/praised are omnipotent (including omnipresence). The higher being is not sitting there watching a football game giving LaDanian Tomlinson the juke moves to score a Touchdown. When sports players thank a higher being, it is a thanks for having the ability to be as good as they are. Surely they practiced and worked hard to become great athletes, but they could have been born a cripple (mentally or physically) and would not be able to do what they do. So in short, they are just happy that they have the ability to do it. They aren't claiming that a higher being was controlling them like a pawn in a chess game.

 

[Bioshock]

Yes but some people actually do claim that God was actually watching them from heaven and made it so that they would win. Those are the misguided people who DO think that their fates are controlled like pieces on a chess board.

You'd be surprised how many people actually think that, many people are misguided because the church/all religion is becoming less popular in this more science oriented society. Most people will just discard something as false because science cannot prove it.

 

[PassiveObserver]

Yes but some people actually do claim that God was actually watching them from heaven and made it so that they would win. Those are the misguided people who DO think that their fates are controlled like pieces on a chess board.

When they embrace determinism, any actions that happen to them "happen for a reason." It makes life much more livable if they think of God giving them "lessons" when something happens to them which they favor/disfavor.

You'd be surprised how many people actually think that, many people are misguided because the church/all religion is becoming less popular in this more science oriented society. Most people will just discard something as false because science cannot prove it.

Science is great, but even in its early history Philosophers of Science knew it couldn't provide all of the answers. David Hume and Scottish Skepticism pointed out the Problem of Induction, which was that we could never through causality determine a necessary future, only a probable/improbable result.

Edit: Even then, some third unexpected result can occur.

 

[Bioshock]

I know that science can't answer everything. The meaning of our existence, the beginning of the universe, etc... this is why religion is still around today. If science could provide every single answer there would be no need for religion.

 

[PassiveObserver]

If science could provide every single answer there would be no need for religion.

You're underestimating the power of tradition. If science could provide all answers to all questions and have certain knowledge, even then people would act on actions sanctified by their parents and their parents' parents.

Even in secular terms there are traditions and social values which themselves seem off the cuff as pointless. Think about how High School is portrayed in Media, and the expectations of action on the part of students and their extra curricular activities in a High School environment. In strictly secular terms, there are still protocols determined by social convention which in turn are tradition and expectation of action.

Tradition is volatile. I thought often when I was a kid that people only have their religion because their parents had brought them up with their own ideals. This is why of course we see multiple perspectives on spiritual matters; geographical and cultural boundaries.

 

[Aeroblacktyl]

Why can't we just get across the message that anything that has to do with religion is opininated. How you take it when sport players thank god is just the same, in my opinion (obviously mine), as how you take what religion you are. =/

 

[X-Act]

I'll just say that your idea of God/Jesus is seriously flawed (you're humanizing him).

 

[Samwise]

I think it might also help reinforce your message if you didn't swear so often, only considering it involves God and all.

 

[chaos]

blah blah blah how many topics on god do we have now

if they are a believer let them do their own thing

 

[Echo]

Yes but some people actually do claim that God was actually watching them from heaven and made it so that they would win.

Wow, have you ever heard of things such as metaphors?

 

[Big Bayou]

And I thought political discussion topics on Pokemon forums were bad. Do the creators of these things really think that their threads have the potential to start some meaningful dialogue or something?

Let it rest.

 

[monkfish]

When approached rationally, Atheism/Agnosticism is practical but there's no sense trying to disprove/prove something that doesn't have empirical evidence for or against its existence.

Er, you've described exactly what Agnosticism is in your argument against it..

 

[Dragontamer]

blah blah blah how many topics on god do we have now

if they are a believer let them do their own thing

Exactly.

Why can't we keep this all in one thread? There is already another religious discussion.

 

[Warthog]

Is it possible for you to misinterpret it anymore? Most higher beings that are worshipped/praised are omnipotent (including omnipresence). The higher being is not sitting there watching a football game giving LaDanian Tomlinson the juke moves to score a Touchdown. When sports players thank a higher being, it is a thanks for having the ability to be as good as they are. Surely they practiced and worked hard to become great athletes, but they could have been born a cripple (mentally or physically) and would not be able to do what they do. So in short, they are just happy that they have the ability to do it. They aren't claiming that a higher being was controlling them like a pawn in a chess game.

you stole the words out of my mouth, I tottaly agree. Now there might be a few athletes/coaches that dont think this way, they may think they are predestinted to win or something so they thank god for that, but overall I believe most are just thanking for the ability to perform and give them the chance to win etc.

 

[PassiveObserver]

Er, you've described exactly what Agnosticism is in your argument against it..

Oops. Yeah, I'm an Agnostic out of strict terms myself but there are some who take Agnosticism towards the side of the spectrum of certainty.