|
|
Post by pim on Feb 9, 2013 15:56:48 GMT 10
I guess the closest an atheist will have to a religious experience is an orgasm. Now think of the most intensely pleasurable sexual encounter you've ever had. I'm talking about a root in which your mind was blown and your loins burst asunder in a shattering and all-consuming climax. Maybe it was with a willing and enthusiastic partner of the opposite sex. Or perhaps it was with someone of the same sex. Or maybe it was a group grope. Or even something you performed and enjoyed all by yourself. Whatever! And don't feel you have to share the details or re-live the experience here on line, because I'd kinda sorta prefer you didn't. Here's the point: can you remember anything you vocalised at the most intense moment of the climax of the encounter? No you can't? That's OK!! Let me help by suggesting what you DIDN'T vocalise at that supremely sublime and intense moment. If you exclaimed anything it wouldn't have been "Oh maths!" or "Oh scientific method!" or "Oh rationalism!" Are you 100% hand-on-heart sure it would never have been "OMG!"?  |
|
|
|
Post by matt on Feb 9, 2013 16:57:31 GMT 10
I guess the closest an atheist like you guys (I don't include all atheists in this. There are atheists whose views I respect) will have to a religious experience is an orgasm. Now think of the most intensely pleasurable sexual encounter you've ever had. I'm talking about a root in which your mind was blown and your loins burst asunder in a shattering and all-consuming climax. Maybe it was with a willing and enthusiastic partner of the opposite sex. Or perhaps it was with someone of the same sex. Or maybe it was a group grope. Or even something you performed and enjoyed all by yourself. Whatever! And don't feel you have to share the details or re-live the experience here on line, because I'd kinda sorta prefer you didn't. Here's the point: can you remember anything you vocalised at the most intense moment of the climax of the encounter? No you can't? That's OK!! Let me help by suggesting what you DIDN'T vocalise at that supremely sublime and intense moment. If you exclaimed anything it wouldn't have been "Oh maths!" or "Oh scientific method!" or "Oh rationalism!" Are you 100% hand-on-heart sure it would never have been "OMG!"? What do English teachers yell out? |
|
|
|
Post by pim on Feb 9, 2013 17:15:07 GMT 10
Matt that is an extremely dumb question. I have absolutely no idea what other English teachers would vocalise in that situation, and if I'd happened to make the two-backed beast with another English teacher then I will go to my grave never ever revealing to prurient obsessives such as your rather creepy self what she might have sighed/screamed or otherwise vocalised in her moment of orgasmic ecstasy. As for my own vocalisations I can reveal to a breathless worldwide readership that they were most certainly NOT "Oh maths!" or "Oh science!" or "Oh rational discourse!" or even "Oh programmatic specificity!" And you can rule out "Oh hyper bowl!" too! My thesis here is that the most ardent atheist - and here I'd include Richard Dawkins and the ghost of Christopher Hitchens - would not be able to swear with hand on heart or on whatever part of the anatomy s/he deems appropriate - that at the moment of sexual delerium tremens that s/he has never invoked the name of some divine entity. But I could guarantee that they would not have invoked Mathematics, or Science or Rational Discourse. One could argue that our notional atheist, in this situation, is having a religious experience. Let's not begrudge it him/her  |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Feb 10, 2013 2:41:11 GMT 10
NOOOOOO !!!!!!! Now we will be inundated with yet more stupid "Atheism is a religion" bulldust.  What you mean the atheist ilk will finally be embracing the dogmatic religionists they truly are? Good on them. ...Yet we'll still have the delusional fringe in the denial camp, who'll insist it isn't. (Even though there is little or no distinction separating it) |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Feb 10, 2013 2:47:50 GMT 10
What do English teachers yell out? Imagine it'd go something like this: "That's a sentence fragment!" "That's an improper use of grammar" "There is no subject in that sentence!" "Stop using expletives!" |
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Feb 10, 2013 6:40:12 GMT 10
NOOOOOO !!!!!!! Now we will be inundated with yet more stupid "Atheism is a religion" bulldust. What you mean the atheist ilk will finally be embracing the dogmatic religionists they truly are? Good on them. ...Yet we'll still have the delusional fringe in the denial camp, who'll insist it isn't. (Even though there is little or no distinction separating it) You were right, Earl. Even though Atheism clearly is not a Religion, Veritas jumps on a headline because he wants to be with the free thinkers for just once. |
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Feb 10, 2013 6:46:50 GMT 10
But I wonder if he read this bit:
"I would go to a carol service or a friend's wedding, and there would be so much about it that I really liked – the togetherness, the rituals – but I just couldn't get past the God bit." Atheism has been caricatured as a cold, empty position, he says. "But for me, my not believing in God if anything makes my life more precious, knowing that we are here for such a tiny amount of time."
|
|
|
|
Post by pim on Feb 10, 2013 7:08:37 GMT 10
pim your response is disturbing. it is beneath me to even reply But it is not beneath me to marvel at your splendid split infinitive. |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Feb 10, 2013 11:13:45 GMT 10
What you mean the atheist ilk will finally be embracing the dogmatic religionists they truly are? Good on them. ...Yet we'll still have the delusional fringe in the denial camp, who'll insist it isn't. (Even though there is little or no distinction separating it) You were right, Earl. Even though Atheism clearly is not a Religion, Veritas jumps on a headline because he wants to be with the free thinkers for just once. If you were as 'free thinking' as you claim, why would you keep insisting that atheism isn't a religion? If I were a free thinker, ought I not come to that conclusion on my own? Or is "free thinking" synonymous with "atheist (religious) dogma". |
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Feb 10, 2013 11:16:07 GMT 10
Free thinking excludes being preached to and following a badly written book of fiction like the Bible. If you were truly 'free thinking' you would abandon the rubbish in the Bible and think for yourself, not be a sheep who blindly follows a God who doesn't exist.
|
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Feb 10, 2013 11:16:25 GMT 10
And yes, I came to that conclusion by myself!
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Feb 10, 2013 11:29:37 GMT 10
Free thinking excludes being preached to and following a badly written book of fiction like the Bible. If you were truly 'free thinking' you would abandon the rubbish in the Bible and think for yourself, not be a sheep who blindly follows a God who doesn't exist. If I weren't a free thinker, I would do everything you just said without question... Just so you know, "Free thinking" doesn't necessarily mean "adopt an atheistic mindset" |
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Feb 10, 2013 11:36:01 GMT 10
It means thinking for yourself, not blindly following a bloody book.
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Feb 10, 2013 11:38:54 GMT 10
So everything you've learned didn't come from a person or book, slarti?
I guess you've never been to school then.
If you have, then I guess you aren't a free thinker either.
--Which is it?
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Feb 10, 2013 11:47:35 GMT 10
It is perhaps understandable that one species out of millions of species, stuck out on a lonely rock in the backwaters of a mediocre solar system, in a mediocre galaxy, would dream up some story that the entire universe was created by a being that just happens to be in the same form of that one lonely species, for the sole purpose of that one species having eternal life. Honestly, how believable is that? What an enormous ego that species must have! How does any of that follow from what is found in the Bible? |
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Feb 10, 2013 11:50:42 GMT 10
So everything you've learned didn't come from a person or book, slarti? I guess you've never been to school then. If you have, then I guess you aren't a free thinker either. --Which is it? There's a difference between ONE Book and thousands of books. Just thought I'd point out the bleedin' obvious that seems to elude you. |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Feb 10, 2013 11:52:58 GMT 10
The Bible isn't one book, either.
It's 66 books.
It had 40 authors
And it was written over 1500 years.
Want to move any other goal posts?
|
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Feb 10, 2013 12:20:26 GMT 10
Apart from the fact that all that does is explain why it is badly written and tells lots of lies, care to explain then why it's referred to as " The Bible" as opposed to "The Bibles"?
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Feb 11, 2013 4:34:30 GMT 10
Apart from the fact that all that does is explain why it is badly written and tells lots of lies, care to explain then why it's referred to as " The Bible" as opposed to "The Bibles"? It was canonized. The word "Bible" comes from the Greek "ta biblia to hagia", "the holy books" (plural) (..And if it were so badly written, why is there yet to be a proven contradiction that hasn't been answered? Is it that the Bible doesn't have any, or just that skeptics aren't that smart? --It isn't like they haven't had time.) |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Feb 11, 2013 4:48:13 GMT 10
I suggest they wear a Tea Cosy on their heads while doing the sermon ...And you accuse others of being insane? Tsk. |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Feb 16, 2013 2:13:12 GMT 10
"yet to be a proven contradiction that hasn't been answered?"They've been answered alright, but the answers are utter tripe. ;D Your unwillingness to consider the answer doesn't diminish it in the slightest. |
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Feb 16, 2013 7:00:01 GMT 10
Your unwillingness to consider that there is no God diminishes you.
|
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Feb 17, 2013 3:36:37 GMT 10
Your unwillingness to consider that there is no God diminishes you. Not at all. I have life more abundantly. |
|
|
|
Post by Occam's Spork on Feb 17, 2013 3:46:40 GMT 10
|
|
|
|
Post by slartibartfast on Feb 17, 2013 7:03:16 GMT 10
Your unwillingness to consider that there is no God diminishes you. Not at all. I have life more abundantly. More abundantly than what or whom? Certainly not me. I don't spend a single second of any day of any year and waste it on worshipping some fanciful creature that doesn't even exist. So I'm miles in front! ;D |
|
