People created god?

[Robittybob1]

@Rob --

You know what kills trichinella and toxoplasma gondii effectively? Cooking your meat thoroughly, something that was within the grasp of even cavemen. The presence of those parasites is hardly hazardous.

Plus, how could one ancient tribe have attempted to prevent parasitic infection when they didn't even know about parasitism yet?

Even today pigs with Trichinella would get condemned. They are unfit for human consumption for the risk is too great. OK the organisms could be killed but this was not beyond the possibility errors being made, so the risk is too great.
As can be seen by the fact that the organism kept on infecting the human population even though cooking meat has been around for millennia.

 

[Pincho Paxton]

You could look at this thread another way if you were on the Religious front...

1/ Maybe man does create God in the future.
2/ God is Omnipresent.
3/ So man also makes God in the human past as well.
4/ God creates man.

The soopery-doopery paradox.

That's the first logical Religious thing I have ever read, and I wrote it!

 

[Arioch]

@Rob --

Even today pigs with Trichinella would get condemned.

But they don't. Some percentage of the pork on store shelves has trichinella in it, but most people don't become infected by eating it? Why is that? Because they cook it thoroughly and that kills all of the parasites(and it's not like rare pork tastes all that good anyways, not like a rare steak at least).

They are unfit for human consumption for the risk is too great.

Again, you're wrong. I'd be willing to bet you one million in cold, hard cash that if you gave me a piece of pork that was infected with trichinella I could easily make it safe for consumption without any special preparations. That's how sure I am of the science involved in this.

OK the organisms could be killed but this was not beyond the possibility errors being made, so the risk is too great.

Well by that logic we should just cut meat completely out of our diet all together as it can all hold parasites and bacteria. Chicken is infamous for causing salmonella(and has been for as long as we've been eating it), but I don't see any injunction, god given or otherwise, in the bible about not eating poultry. There are hundreds of parasites that you can get by eating meat, and usually cooking is a very effective way of killing them and preventing that(there are, of course, a few exceptions).

As can be seen by the fact that the organism kept on infecting the human population even though cooking meat has been around for millennia.

1. I didn't just say "cook the meat", you left out a very important word out at the end of my statement. What I actually said was to cook the meat "thoroughly". In other words you have to cook it through in order to ensure that all of the parasites are dead, and the fact that I've been eating pork all of my life and have never suffered an infestation means that the preventative treatment works. It's persistence in humans is not because eating pork is dangerous but because a large percentage of humans are either ignorant(they don't know any better) or stupid.

2. Trichinella wasn't even identified until the mid 1800s which means that the pork injunction in the bible couldn't have possibly been to prevent infection. That was back when people still thought of illness as a sign of their god's disfavor(or sorcery, depending on where you went). No, we already have an explanation for the injunction that doesn't require ancient nomads to possess knowledge that we know for a fact that they didn't have. If you've never slaughtered a pig before(and I'd be willing to bet that most people here haven't) then you wouldn't know, but the death wails of a pig are hauntingly reminiscent of human screams of pain and dead swine flesh smells eerily like dead human flesh. Combine that with the well documented fact that pork tastes just like human(to the point where various cannibalistic tribes call human "long pig") and it's easy to see why a superstitious desert tribe would shy away from eating pork.

Sorry, but as an explanation for the injunction, preventing parasitic infection doesn't add up, especially when you can just cook out any parasites that are in the meat.

 

[chimpkin]

I am happy to be a pariah most of the time...however whenever I do want to make friends or have conversation...people ignore me or pre-judge me for being atheist.

You must live in Jeebus-land...My sympathies.

I do it to some extent ( being that most people that I encounter in real life are ignorant or complete idiots) however I choose to be pariah. I’m an introvert with Asperger Syndrome so that’s double whammy for anti-social behavior stacked against me.

I suspect my wife of being Aspie. She says it's pointless to go get it diagnosed, and she does not want to have the label affixed. I concur.

Religion is about faith and your feelings…both of which are questioned and push aside by my mind for cold hard truisms.

Spirituality is indeed about feelings. You either feel it or you don't. I maintain different people are going to resonate with different practices...and some just don't have a need for spirituality at all.

I find society to be annoying and rather perplexing and filled with hypocrisy to the brim.

Isn't it, though?

Even if I’m a minority in world filled with “normal” neurotypicals I’m happy to be pariah…at least I know that I’m unique and not just another dumb “normal” sheep

Normal is a setting on a washing-machine. It's possible to be NT and still think for yourself...a lot of people just can't be bothered. It's not comfortable.

 

[Robittybob1]

@Rob --



But they don't. Some percentage of the pork on store shelves has trichinella in it, but most people don't become infected by eating it? Why is that? Because they cook it thoroughly and that kills all of the parasites(and it's not like rare pork tastes all that good anyways, not like a rare steak at least).



Again, you're wrong. I'd be willing to bet you one million in cold, hard cash that if you gave me a piece of pork that was infected with trichinella I could easily make it safe for consumption without any special preparations. That's how sure I am of the science involved in this.



Well by that logic we should just cut meat completely out of our diet all together as it can all hold parasites and bacteria. Chicken is infamous for causing salmonella(and has been for as long as we've been eating it), but I don't see any injunction, god given or otherwise, in the bible about not eating poultry. There are hundreds of parasites that you can get by eating meat, and usually cooking is a very effective way of killing them and preventing that(there are, of course, a few exceptions).



1. I didn't just say "cook the meat", you left out a very important word out at the end of my statement. What I actually said was to cook the meat "thoroughly". In other words you have to cook it through in order to ensure that all of the parasites are dead, and the fact that I've been eating pork all of my life and have never suffered an infestation means that the preventative treatment works. It's persistence in humans is not because eating pork is dangerous but because a large percentage of humans are either ignorant(they don't know any better) or stupid.

2. Trichinella wasn't even identified until the mid 1800s which means that the pork injunction in the bible couldn't have possibly been to prevent infection. That was back when people still thought of illness as a sign of their god's disfavor(or sorcery, depending on where you went). No, we already have an explanation for the injunction that doesn't require ancient nomads to possess knowledge that we know for a fact that they didn't have. If you've never slaughtered a pig before(and I'd be willing to bet that most people here haven't) then you wouldn't know, but the death wails of a pig are hauntingly reminiscent of human screams of pain and dead swine flesh smells eerily like dead human flesh. Combine that with the well documented fact that pork tastes just like human(to the point where various cannibalistic tribes call human "long pig") and it's easy to see why a superstitious desert tribe would shy away from eating pork.

Sorry, but as an explanation for the injunction, preventing parasitic infection doesn't add up, especially when you can just cook out any parasites that are in the meat.

Not entirely true.

 

[arauca]

@Rob --



But they don't. Some percentage of the pork on store shelves has trichinella in it, but most people don't become infected by eating it? Why is that? Because they cook it thoroughly and that kills all of the parasites(and it's not like rare pork tastes all that good anyways, not like a rare steak at least).



Again, you're wrong. I'd be willing to bet you one million in cold, hard cash that if you gave me a piece of pork that was infected with trichinella I could easily make it safe for consumption without any special preparations. That's how sure I am of the science involved in this.



Well by that logic we should just cut meat completely out of our diet all together as it can all hold parasites and bacteria. Chicken is infamous for causing salmonella(and has been for as long as we've been eating it), but I don't see any injunction, god given or otherwise, in the bible about not eating poultry. There are hundreds of parasites that you can get by eating meat, and usually cooking is a very effective way of killing them and preventing that(there are, of course, a few exceptions).



1. I didn't just say "cook the meat", you left out a very important word out at the end of my statement. What I actually said was to cook the meat "thoroughly". In other words you have to cook it through in order to ensure that all of the parasites are dead, and the fact that I've been eating pork all of my life and have never suffered an infestation means that the preventative treatment works. It's persistence in humans is not because eating pork is dangerous but because a large percentage of humans are either ignorant(they don't know any better) or stupid.

2. Trichinella wasn't even identified until the mid 1800s which means that the pork injunction in the bible couldn't have possibly been to prevent infection. That was back when people still thought of illness as a sign of their god's disfavor(or sorcery, depending on where you went). No, we already have an explanation for the injunction that doesn't require ancient nomads to possess knowledge that we know for a fact that they didn't have. If you've never slaughtered a pig before(and I'd be willing to bet that most people here haven't) then you wouldn't know, but the death wails of a pig are hauntingly reminiscent of human screams of pain and dead swine flesh smells eerily like dead human flesh. Combine that with the well documented fact that pork tastes just like human(to the point where various cannibalistic tribes call human "long pig") and it's easy to see why a superstitious desert tribe would shy away from eating pork.

Sorry, but as an explanation for the injunction, preventing parasitic infection doesn't add up, especially when you can just cook out any parasites that are in the meat.

Have you mentioned about bacon ?. From were I come we eat bacon raw, we don't slice bacon in thin slices we don't have the machines , and in the desert they don't have fancy slicers , So the point become PREVENTION.

 

[Robittybob1]

You could look at this thread another way if you were on the Religious front...

1/ Maybe man does create God in the future.
2/ God is Omnipresent.
3/ So man also makes God in the human past as well.
4/ God creates man.

The soopery-doopery paradox.

That's the first logical Religious thing I have ever read, and I wrote it!

First time replying to your posts. Hello Pincho.
You are very right, I don't think man has invented God yet. We are still trying to work out what to say about G.
And in some time in the future G will make Man in His image .... I think we are still one step from the Ape. We are not there yet.

 

[aaqucnaona]

No, a fly has a body and I can see it and touch it so it is from this realm. I doubt anyone has seen God or touched God. It is not the same in any way.

Doesn't that make it even more insane? Atleast one can see the fly.

The burden of proof is on yourself if you want to believe in God, not on someone else.

I disagree. The burden of proof is always on the one making the claim, not the one asking for its justification. This is a well established priniciple in philosophy, logic and rhetoric and I find it hard to believe that u would use it in this way. :bawl:

"God does not change what any people may have
until they change whatever they themselves have."-Koran

Doesn't that suggest a causal relation rather than a supernatural/agential one?

 

[-ND-]

Doesn't that make it even more insane? Atleast one can see the fly.

No, why would it be?

I disagree. The burden of proof is always on the one making the claim, not the one asking for its justification. This is a well established priniciple in philosophy, logic and rhetoric and I find it hard to believe that u would use it in this way. :bawl:

It has been justified, with my first post (#62) Even if I claim God exists or even if I have invented a God, do you control anything I receive from Him or it?

Well establish huh? It is also well established in The Koran that I can not make anyone believe in God unless God Himself acts on it or you have faith.

Doesn't that suggest a causal relation rather than a supernatural/agential one?

Nope. If you have faith you will get to see what God can do. I don't except you to understand quotes, you think like a machine rather than a human.

 

[chimpkin]

If you have faith you will get to see what God can do.

So the lens of faith is needed to see a series of causally unrelated events as caused by supernatural agency.

 

[Robittybob1]

So the lens of faith is needed to see a series of causally unrelated events as caused by supernatural agency.

Is that what it takes? Try it and see if it works.

 

[-ND-]

So the lens of faith is needed to see a series of causally unrelated events as caused by supernatural agency.

Faith and discipline multiplied by years. If indeed it is true faith and discipline. If you lie, you lie to yourself and you just wasted your time because you won't be any closer to B than you were when you started at point A.

I don't know about these unrelated events of supernatural agency, if you mean magic, than no. If you mean something out of the ordinary, not a coincidence, maybe a little inspiration or hint, sure.

 

[chimpkin]

What's the difference between a prayer and a magickal working?
If you pray and it happens, how is that different from seeming to cause something via a spell?

 

[Saturnine Pariah]

What's the difference between a prayer and a magickal working?
If you pray and it happens, how is that different from seeming to cause something via a spell?

Prays are your own thoughts that you say out loud in order to think that you are doing somthing for someone but in reality your not doing anything at all. Same thing for magical happenings, if you believe strongly enough that it will happen then your mind makes it happen, but the reality is that it was an illusion from the start to the end.

 

[Saturnine Pariah]

People should respect each other without the need to believe in fairy tales.

Thank you! That is got the be the truest phrase i've heard yet. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pmwBPsB0oaE&feature=related

 

[Pincho Paxton]

No, why would it be?



It has been justified, with my first post (#62) Even if I claim God exists or even if I have invented a God, do you control anything I receive from Him or it?

Well establish huh? It is also well established in The Koran that I can not make anyone believe in God unless God Himself acts on it or you have faith.



Nope. If you have faith you will get to see what God can do. I don't except you to understand quotes, you think like a machine rather than a human.

You talk as though you are in contact with God, and that is the power relationship that is used in the thread. By suggesting that you are in contact with God...quote... "I receive from him..." You are trying to give yourself an advantage in argument power. It works in your mind like this...

"I have a connection with God, people must listen to what I have to say."

But what you don't acknowledge is your subconscious lying to you...

"This will win you the argument, they must listen to you now."

And even deeper in your subconscious is a childhood message...

A/ "If you want people to listen to you, you need an adult authority."

becomes....

B/ "An authority higher than an adult is God."

becomes.....

C/ "The highest authority wins the argument."


Which is all psychological. As a child you were sometimes ignored, adults had the authority to say what goes. Adults however listened to God. So you decided to take on God as your authority to win arguments.

This is the power that people want to gain from religion in some cases.

 

[aaqucnaona]

No, why would it be?

A fly being able to talk to u is an extraordinary claim. However, it is one that can be verified or denied by our senses. Being able to talk to a god is an even more extraordinary claim, and whats more, for all practical purposes this god is imaginary. Thats why its more insane.

It has been justified, with my first post (#62) Even if I claim God exists or even if I have invented a God, do you control anything I receive from Him or it?

No, I dont control that but its a another matter altogether whether the god exists in the first place, for the existence is a hypothesis about a hypothetical being existing and doing things like giving u things. THAT is something that I have all the right to question, judge and reason on.

Well establish huh? It is also well established in The Koran that I can not make anyone believe in God unless God Himself acts on it or you have faith.

Well established in logic is something that is verifiably infered through reasoning while the well established in Koran means something taken to be true purely on faith and belief. And no, its not my job to have faith, its the job of the claimant to explain his claim. He should explain to me 'why' rather than having me explain to him 'why not'.

Nope. If you have faith you will get to see what God can do. I don't except you to understand quotes, you think like a machine rather than a human.

NO, If I have faith I will incorrectly identify a supernatural agengy behind something like the efficacy of prayers which can naturalistically be explained by a placebo effect or behavorial changes like a positive state of mind. What do u mean, I think like a machine? Am I supposed to colour my reason with illogical biases and emotions to think like a human? Itsn't a cold, rational, naturalistic, logical, unbaised, disinterested reasoning the better ideal to pursue?

 

[-ND-]

What's the difference between a prayer and a magickal working?
If you pray and it happens, how is that different from seeming to cause something via a spell?

I don't really know, most of the time I pray for wisdom and for my family. To make good and right decisions.

I have never prayed for material things.

 

[-ND-]

You talk as though you are in contact with God, and that is the power relationship that is used in the thread. By suggesting that you are in contact with God...quote... "I receive from him..." You are trying to give yourself an advantage in argument power. It works in your mind like this...

"I have a connection with God, people must listen to what I have to say."

But what you don't acknowledge is your subconscious lying to you...

"This will win you the argument, they must listen to you now."

And even deeper in your subconscious is a childhood message...

A/ "If you want people to listen to you, you need an adult authority."

becomes....

B/ "An authority higher than an adult is God."

becomes.....

C/ "The highest authority wins the argument."


Which is all psychological. As a child you were sometimes ignored, adults had the authority to say what goes. Adults however listened to God. So you decided to take on God as your authority to win arguments.

This is the power that people want to gain from religion in some cases.

Your first paragraph is a lie and your opinion. It is not what is. I am not trying anything, I pasted a quote from The Koran and you babel. ohh its not fair, blah blah blah blah.

You figured me out man what can I say. I guess me being a normal human being is out of the question, growing up not know what believing in God is and maybe one day when I grew older I decided to read The Koran and see what it said. That is out of the question, because you are also a normal human being and what struck me did not strike you. You come here and falsify my life, what I actually and truly have done up until this point in life and God knows how many others for what purpose? To show display of wisdom? Knowledge perhaps?

I may have this power or authority you speak of or perhaps I don't, I know I spoke the truth and honestly. You can't say the same from what we know about each other.

 

[-ND-]

A fly being able to talk to u is an extraordinary claim. However, it is one that can be verified or denied by our senses. Being able to talk to a god is an even more extraordinary claim, and whats more, for all practical purposes this god is imaginary. Thats why its more insane.

If a person claims to talk to God (full blown conversation) someone praying does not count or a one way conversation and he can verify it by telling God to speak and everyone hears it, I think that is verified enough.

No, I dont control that but its a another matter altogether whether the god exists in the first place, for the existence is a hypothesis about a hypothetical being existing and doing things like giving u things. THAT is something that I have all the right to question, judge and reason on.

No you don't control anything, if he exists or does not. That is the end of that no need for nonsense.

Well established in logic is something that is verifiably infered through reasoning while the well established in Koran means something taken to be true purely on faith and belief.

Comment above disproves this. You don't need faith or belief to understand that you do not control anything from God I receive whether I made him up or he exists. Which is true you don't.

And no, its not my job to have faith, its the job of the claimant to explain his claim. He should explain to me 'why' rather than having me explain to him 'why not'.

It is your job if you want to believe in God. Contrary of what you might have heard from others, God does not allow anyone single person to make anyone believe in God unless He allows it. So, it is your job if you want to believe if you don't hey good for you I could care less.

NO, If I have faith I will incorrectly identify a supernatural agengy behind something like the efficacy of prayers which can naturalistically be explained by a placebo effect or behavorial changes like a positive state of mind. What do u mean, I think like a machine? Am I supposed to colour my reason with illogical biases and emotions to think like a human? Itsn't a cold, rational, naturalistic, logical, unbaised, disinterested reasoning the better ideal to pursue?

I respect your opinion of not wanting to be wrong. If you don't want to have faith don't. I am not here to convert lol.

What I mean is you are 2D, as a matter of fact most people on here are 2D. You forget that there are things around you that don't sometimes don't always make sense, but you insist that the favor goes towards your cause instead of staying in the middle where it belongs for the time being. (I don't mean 2D literally it is a metaphor for the way you think.)