More gods ?

[(Q)]

it happens among tolerant people.

Theists are intolerant when it comes to their beliefs, that much is evident.

I'll have to give up most everything, religion is just one small piece of the masses of things that have not been proven to exist. Most, if not all important concepts, are inconclusive because they are so complex.
Example - the idea that humans are any more responsible than animals for their behavior - first you would have to define the terms, "human" and "animal", and the boundary between these terms is never agreed upon.

No, you simply give up the belief in imaginary things, quite simple, really.

And yes, the boundaries between the terms 'human' and 'animal' are agreed upon, perhaps not by you, though.

What problem do you have with those terms?

 

[SnakeLord]

Originally Posted by (Q)
A black may marry a white, but if the black were Muslim and the white a Christian, do you actually think that would happen? ”

it happens among tolerant people.

Oh I do wonder where that would take place. Certainly not in a church - that would refuse outright. Certainly not in a mosque - that would refuse outright. Seems the only place that would occur is in a place that denounces religious ideals, (the tolerant people I presume?)

 

[cole grey]

Theists are intolerant when it comes to their beliefs, that much is evident.

You are right, down deep I am intolerant and want all people to live their lives just as I do mine, resulting in perfect universal stagnation and the end of human consciousness as we know it.

No. People in general are intolerant.

And yes, the boundaries between the terms 'human' and 'animal' are agreed upon, perhaps not by you, though.
What problem do you have with those terms?

Ask ten people if humans are animals. Of course people know humans are a different kind of animal, but some people here on this forum are very clear that they think humans are just animals, and the clear delineation between the terms is imagined.

P.S. snakelord - there are churches I have been to that would marry a christian and a muslim, and there are many churches more liberal than those.

 

[(Q)]

You are right, down deep I am intolerant and want all people to live their lives just as I do mine, resulting in perfect universal stagnation and the end of human consciousness as we know it.

No, theists are intolerant of those who don't believe in the same gods as they do, they must do so if they are to follow their religion. Surely, you understand that simple premise.

No. People in general are intolerant.

Intolerant about what?

Ask ten people if humans are animals. Of course people know humans are a different kind of animal, but some people here on this forum are very clear that they think humans are just animals, and the clear delineation between the terms is imagined.

Do theists believe humans are another form of animal? A good thread starter, perhaps?

 

[c7ityi_]

o theists believe humans are another form of animal?

we're not animals because we're humans. the body is animal though, but not the mind.

 

[(Q)]

we're not animals because we're humans. the body is animal though, but not the mind.

Is your insanity from the animal or the human?

 

[c7ityi_]

Is your insanity from the animal or the human?

from your animal.

 

[cole grey]

No, theists are intolerant of those who don't believe in the same gods as they do, they must do so if they are to follow their religion. Surely, you understand that simple premise.

ALL expressions of religion aren't like this. Never mind.

Intolerant about what?

Race, for example. never mind. We might as well drop this aspect of the conversation because it isn't going anywhere at all.

Do theists believe humans are another form of animal? A good thread starter, perhaps?

It is a philosophical disctinction, not a religious one. Please tell me why "humans" are more responsible for their actions than coyotes for example, without saying we are a different form of animal somehow.

 

[(Q)]

ALL expressions of religion aren't like this. Never mind.

Race, for example. never mind. We might as well drop this aspect of the conversation because it isn't going anywhere at all.

Too close to home?

It is a philosophical disctinction, not a religious one. Please tell me why "humans" are more responsible for their actions than coyotes for example, without saying we are a different form of animal somehow.

You'd have to explain why its a philosophical distinction?

God created man and the animals and allows man to kill animals, but does not allow the killing of man because man was created in the image of god. You can refer to Genesis 9:2-6.

 

[cole grey]

Too close to home?

No. The reality is, that there are other ways in which people are intolerant, besides religious - that proves my statement that people are intolerant with or without religion. But you just keep going back to this statement, so I figured we aren't getting anywhere anyway.

You'd have to explain why its a philosophical distinction?
God created man and the animals and allows man to kill animals, but does not allow the killing of man because man was created in the image of god. You can refer to Genesis 9:2-6.

That is only applicable to people who believe the bible. Everyone else is also responsible in our society - it is not a religious distinction. If I am out camping, and I see an endangered animal, I can't just shoot it. A bear can kill that animal, but I can't. Why is that? Because people are considered more responsible than animals for their actions. If your pet does something wrong, you are ultimately responsible. There is a distinction for relgious and non-religious people.