There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

Never mind Christians- long before this “cancel culture” bullshit started, Republicans were perfectly happy to censor the Dixie Chicks and basically destroy their careers because they dared to criticize George W. Bush.

I’ve never heard any of them say that was wrong of them, just that cancel culture is the worst thing ever.

7provincien ,

*American Christians.

01011 , (edited )

A lot more than just American xtians. There are countries where people cannot get safe, legal abortions because of the stranglehold that xtians have on the political class. Likewise access to contraceptives and even basic reproductive education within the school system. The Roman Catholic Church has been far more destructive than American xtians.

Haus ,
@Haus@kbin.social avatar

You see, it's true: Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!

rab ,
@rab@lemmy.ca avatar

All Christians

Lladra ,

Burned heretics

spiderwort ,

Actually, everybody complains about cancel culture. And Christians.

deathbird ,

Why yes, cancelling, shunning, etc is bad.

John_McMurray ,

“Everyone I disagree with are the same people”

AFC1886VCC ,

The campaigns to ban video games by Christian groups is one of the biggest examples of cancel culture in modern times.

MacNCheezus ,
@MacNCheezus@lemmy.today avatar

That’s a long time ago. Didn’t that happen in the 90s?

Anticorp ,

The 90’s weren’t that long ago to some of us. But yes, in the 80’s and 90’s they rallied hard against music, and in the 90’s and early 2000’s against video games. Something positive did come out of it though. Music albums and video games didn’t have maturity ratings before all of that campaigning from the Christian Coalition. As a parent it’s nice to have a rating flag, so you know to check the content and see if you think it’s appropriate for your children.

MacNCheezus ,
@MacNCheezus@lemmy.today avatar

My brother in Christ, I don’t know what planet you live on, but here on Earth, that was 30 years ago no matter where you live. And to my knowledge, none of the games and/or bands actually got cancelled because of it except on an individual basis (i.e. if you parents forbid you to have them at home). But in that case, we simply went to a friend’s house to play or listen to them there, so I’m not sure that this is really something worth getting all worked up over.

Anticorp ,

1990 was 34 years ago, but 1999 was only 25 years ago. When you get older, 25 years doesn’t seem like that long ago. I’m not sure if you’re implying that I’m getting worked up in your last sentence, but I’m not. I simply stated an observation. As far as the Christian Coalition, yes, they got really worked up.

Tons of albums were banned. 2 Live Crew had almost every one of their albums banned at one point or another. License to Ill by the Beasty Boys was banned. Everything from Too Short was banned. Tons of music was banned either from the radio, the record stores, or both. People went to jail over it. It was a big deal. Thankfully a lot of those bands sued and appealed, and moved the meter for artistic expression considerably, from then forwards.

oatscoop ,

You know you’re old when young people confidently explain to you things you witnessed first hand. Like Dee Snyder testifying in a Senate hearing.

josie ,
@josie@lemmy.ml avatar

Literally every accusation from a right winger is a confession

Fairgreen ,

Decades? Millennia!

CableMonster ,

So the takeaway is that when we take power we should do the bad things the previous group in power did?

essellburns ,

It’s not the same thing.

Judging behaviour and actions is entirely different to judging people for who they are.

CableMonster ,

People are compiled of their actions and behaviors so I am not really getting what you are trying to say.

essellburns ,

Some traits are inherent / congenital, historically these were used to judge and “cancel” people

Still are at times

CableMonster ,

I dont recall the religious right cancelling people due to their inherent characteristics. On the other hand, the left actively discriminates against people for the same thing.

essellburns ,

Oh really? I wonder if a religions have ever used gender to define what roles a person can have and who gets a platform?

I’m not sure if we’re just definitely terms differently or you’re lacking an understanding of history here.

The religious right has always given a voice to a small number of people and cancelled everyone else

CableMonster ,

So you are going to point to women cant be head pastors in some churches as indication that they cancel people due to inherent characteristics?

Anticorp ,

Seems like that’s the agenda these days.

CableMonster ,

Yeah, kind of sucks.

Anticorp ,

It sucks terribly.

The_Tired_Horizon ,
@The_Tired_Horizon@lemmy.world avatar

A perfect meme!

tired_n_bored ,

Real

shimdidly ,

So tone deaf.

clickyello ,

how so?

carbonara ,

Index librorum prohibitorum

lemmywinks ,

The people “ranting about cancel culture” are not the generalized group “Christians.” What can you do though? Lemmy fully embraces hate against Christians.

TexasDrunk ,

Don’t like the fact that you belong to a group known for being shitty? Clean your fucking house or leave the group. Don’t tell us they don’t belong in your group. Tell them.

asexualchangeling ,

But if all the horrible people left Christianity, they wouldn’t be the dominant religion anymore, and they can’t have that!

catsarebadpeople ,

Yeah Christians are so persecuted. I feel so bad for them. Good thing you’re here to defend them or they wouldn’t be that most powerful group in the country.

lemmywinks ,

Your response makes no sense, I never said they were. I said this meme is inaccurate and that Lemmy embraces hate against Christians.

nexguy ,
@nexguy@lemmy.world avatar

Hate isn’t canceling. If people were shutting down churches or demonizing random church goers for being church goers you’d be right… but they aren’t.

DaleGribble88 ,
@DaleGribble88@programming.dev avatar

I mean… www.kiro7.com/news/…/MRGAXH5Y7RGUNIT4HSMB7EZ7A4/

nexguy ,
@nexguy@lemmy.world avatar

An anecdote is not evidence of a culture of cancelling.

DaleGribble88 ,
@DaleGribble88@programming.dev avatar

I thought that the article being from this morning would say enough, but I mean… christianpost.com/…/436-acts-of-hostility-against…

Socsa ,

Nobody would fuck with churches is churches stayed quiet and stopped trying to impose their morality on the rest of us. Because of religion we are losing fundamental human rights. I’d be pissed too.

DaleGribble88 ,
@DaleGribble88@programming.dev avatar

Ok, you are entitled to your opinion, but the claim was that Christian churches and Christian church goers weren’t being targeted or “demonized,” which I’ve shown is false. Both with an example from yesterday morning, and an aggregate data set which shows some level of significance. Now, whether you want to argue if it is deserved, or proportional, or whatever else is up to you and your morals. However, the original claim that Christians are not the target of harassment because of their religious affiliation is simply not true.

catsarebadpeople ,

Ok I’ll spell it out for you instead of joking around then. This meme is incredibly accurate. There has been nothing in human history that has caused more pain and harm than religion and Christianity is the worst offender. It absolutely deserves critique and you’re being unreasonable for saying that Lemmy is wrong for doing so.

lemmywinks ,

Delusional. Also Lemmy doesn’t criticize religion, it just promotes hatred for Christianity in the general sense. If the same memes were posted about Muslims moderators would remove them.

rab ,
@rab@lemmy.ca avatar

I actually agree with you that Islam is equal levels of shit compared to Christianity. “Islamophobia” is a bullshit word that I’m still confused why it exists. Of course people are afraid of Islam lmao.

Still though, the death tolls thanks to both religions are so high you can’t even find estimates. Who knows which one killed more millions of people.

Socsa ,

Yeah, the fact that parts of Lemmy actually seems to embrace radical Idlam because it “fights the west” is pretty uncomfortable.

catsarebadpeople ,

There you go again pretending that Christianity is being oppressed when: 1) it’s not and 2) it deserves to be so even if you weren’t full of shit it would be appropriate

FlyingSquid ,
@FlyingSquid@lemmy.world avatar

Hi, Jew here. You have no fucking idea what hatred means. Oh boo hoo, people were mean to your religion on the Internet.

I’m guessing no one ever kicked the shit out of you personally because you were a Christian. I wish I could say the same.

I’ll leave it to you to guess what religion the people who have done that to me adhered to. Hint: Not Islam, Jainism, Buddhism, Hinduism, Taoism, Confucianism, Shintoism, Baha’i, Wicca, Unitarian Universalism or any traditional indigenous religions.

seth ,

I don’t hate the believer, I hate the beliefs. /s

rab ,
@rab@lemmy.ca avatar

Why shouldn’t I hate Christians? Or Muslims? They cause nothing but pain in this world

lemmywinks ,

Christians and religious people in general make up a substantial portion of charitable work around the work. So I think that easily disproves your claim that they cause nothing but pain.

Really your statement just comes across as childish and uninformed probably because of the large amount of propaganda you consume from places like this.

Why shouldn’t you hate 55%+ of the world? Do you really believe more than half the people in the world contribute nothing but pain?

Also why didn’t you include Jews? They’re the root of Abrahamic religion and currently the “Jewish homeland” is engaging in genocide.

It’s just silly but also worrying that you could have such a skewed view of reality.

rab ,
@rab@lemmy.ca avatar

I also feel the same about Jews. There aren’t very many religious beliefs I am tolerant of.

Charity and religion have nothing to do with each other btw lol. People can be charitable without being religious.

Christians, for example, are only “charitable” because they are trying to recruit members. Do you have any idea how much wealth is sitting at the top of the catholic church hierarchy?

lemmywinks ,

www.google.com/search?q=religion+and+charity

rab ,
@rab@lemmy.ca avatar

You already said it yourself, the majority of the world is religious. The two things aren’t correlated though.

lemmywinks ,

Apparently you didn’t read any of the hundreds of studies mentioned there showing religious people are more charitable.

rab ,
@rab@lemmy.ca avatar

Yeah to recruit members, it’s just a business.

Ever been to eastern Europe and visited the fancy gold plated cathedrals? Notice who is driving the new Mercedes s550 parked in the parking lot, and notice what the church attendees are driving. Charitable my ass.

lemmywinks ,

You have anecdotal claims. They don’t rise to the level of proof that the studies I mentioned do. Your claim is easily proven false, it doesn’t matter if you can’t accept that.

rab ,
@rab@lemmy.ca avatar

Well, go give poland a visit, it’s not the watered down version of christianity that americans are subjected to. They literally run the entire country. That’s what happens when you let religion take over.

I’m not downvoting you btw, it’s kind of refreshing speaking to a religious person on lemmy haha

exanime ,

You have anecdotal claims. They don’t rise to the level of proof that the studies I mentioned do.

What studies? You posted a Google search and have made about a dozen claims with no backing in his thread alone

cosmicrookie ,
@cosmicrookie@lemmy.world avatar

My dude… you are debating with an account that is less than 1 day old and has less than 20 comments (most of which are with you).

Nothing good will come out of this when they need a burner account to state their beliefs

exanime ,

Ugh… Reddit all over again

Thanks for the heads up

pop ,

my brother in hell, if I believed in religion, and my religion says giving some amount to it or someone else gets me express pass to heaven, i’d be donating like crazy too. I’d be donating more if I know I’ve done horrible things and need more “blessing.”

The charity doesn’t negate the bad things religion has done.

cosmicrookie ,
@cosmicrookie@lemmy.world avatar

Charity is good. Charity in the name of god or any other purpose is bad.

gdog05 ,

If Christians didn’t hamstring non -Christian groups and government services at every turn, there would be no need for these charities and/or the most popular charities would not be the ones feeding bibles to starving people.

cosmicrookie ,
@cosmicrookie@lemmy.world avatar

I dont mind Christians being charitable. I do oppose them using it to recruits or to pressure people in need to listen to their preachings. That’s not charity that is exploitation. True charity wants nothing in return.

ZILtoid1991 ,

Religious charity work is a recruitment tactic. It exploits the vulnerable, converts them into religious people and voters. And by voting for the right, they’ll contribute to the rotting of the very same social services that churches exploit.

I work as a desk clerk in a Hungarian social institution, and the people that should be responsible for mental health instead more preoccupied with converting people to some form of christianity, all while we supposed to be “secular” on paper.

Religion and austerity are good friends.

AstralPath ,

Don’t hate individuals. Hate their doctrine.

rab ,
@rab@lemmy.ca avatar

Yeah that’s fair. I still don’t like to get very close to religious people though just due to past trauma in my life.

WldFyre ,

Don’t hate fascists, hate fascism.

CableMonster ,

What was the religion of most of the most harmful people of the 20th century?

rab ,
@rab@lemmy.ca avatar

Probably not possible to accurately know. Death tolls from all major offenders in the millions

CableMonster ,

Yeah exactly. If you look at the top bad guys of last century, the names that will roll into your head should be; stalin, mao, hitler, pol pot. And what you will notice as none of those guys had a paticular religion and were maybe even anti religion. So the idea that religion is the thing that causes the harm doesnt make any sense.

Grayox OP ,
@Grayox@lemmy.ml avatar

Hitler called himself a Christian.

CableMonster ,

Hitler was not a christian, he literally wanted to get the christian influence out of german society.

EndlessApollo ,

Hey look, Christians conveniently claiming that Christians they don’t like aren’t really Christian!

I really need to learn some slurs for Christians and start using them more

Blue_Morpho ,

In the private Tabletalk interviews Hitler talked about his deep Christian beliefs, which he had always talked about publicly. He wanted to create a German National Christian church in the same model that England has its own national Christian Church with the King as the head. (Anglicans).

If Hitler wasn’t Christian, then British Anglicans (the majority of all Christians in Britain and North Ireland) aren’t Christian either.

CableMonster ,

If he wanted to create a national “church” then it would have been a church to use as a tool/organization, and he was still not a christian. Which would still be the attempted destruction of the church.

Blue_Morpho ,

So the Church of England, that is the Anglican church aren’t Christian?

George H Bush wasn’t Christian because he was Anglican?

…wikipedia.org/…/Religious_affiliations_of_presid…

And here is Martin Luther, the founder of Protestism:

“burn down Jewish synagogues and schools and warn people against them”

“to refuse to let Jews own houses among Christians”

“to give young, strong Jews flail, axe, spade, and spindle, and let them earn their bread in the sweat of their brow”

“We are at fault for not killing them.”

en.m.wikipedia.org/…/On_the_Jews_and_Their_Lies

Hitler was only doing what Martin Luther said needed to be done.

In your opinion, which branch of Christianity is actually Christian? Orthodox?

CableMonster ,

Apples and oranges. Hitler hated christians and was going to destory the church, making a state run church is not christian.

Blue_Morpho ,

Building a German National Church so that German Christians would be free to practice their faith outside of foreign control is the opposite of destroying the church. Henry VIII didn’t destroy the church.

Anglicans exist. George Bush Senior is a Christian.

Hitler was following the teachings of Martin Luther, the founder of Protestism.

CableMonster ,

No, that is not how national churches work, and I am done explaining this to you. Just trust me (and everyone else) that Hitler was not a christian.

Blue_Morpho ,

I quoted Martin Luther. “We are at fault for not killing them.” Was Martin Luther a Christian?

Hitler said he wanted to create a church in the model of the Church of England. He couldn’t have been more clear. Wanting to create a Church of Germany exactly like Church of England isn’t destroying a church.

Anglicans are Christians despite being members of the Church of England. Henry VIII didn’t destroy Christianity in England.

rab ,
@rab@lemmy.ca avatar

Christianity has killed way more than those individuals could ever dream of

CableMonster ,

Sure thing bro, commands like “love thy neighbor” just throw people into a murderous craze!

rab ,
@rab@lemmy.ca avatar

What about two commandments for cheating on your wife? A greater sin than murder lol

It only exists to control people

CableMonster ,

I will tell you this once because I feel like I am going to waste my time, but maybe it will stick. Christianity has a bunch of rules, and it has nothing to do with controlling people, it has to do with the best functioning society and what is actually good for people. It is the reason why western civilization has done so well for so many centuries. Things like cheating on your wife is bad for society and for the individuals, that is why it is prohibited. My comment is an outside observation of what the religion of christianity does, other religions have different features.

Rivalarrival ,

Christianity has a bunch of rules, and it has nothing to do with controlling people,

The rules of Christianity aren’t written in the Bible.

CableMonster ,

That is exactly where the are written.

Rivalarrival ,

Yeah, that was bait that you shouldn’t have taken.

Now I can point to the peculiar rules of every Christian sect and ask whether those rules are Christian commandments, or Clergy controls.

CableMonster ,

There are some non-christian made up rules, paticularly with the catholics, but many of the things you are referring to are differences in interpretation.

Rivalarrival ,

So, the rules of Christianity aren’t written in the Bible. They are written wherever the clergy wrote down their interpretations.

CableMonster ,

No, the rules are in the bible but people can interpret them differently. I think the issue you are probably referring to are probably the cult types that twist and turn things to not mean what they mean.

Rivalarrival ,

but people can interpret them differently.

Yes, and then they write down those interpretations. And then they judge behaviors of others against those interpretations. So the Amish interpret the Bible to establish a rule against technology. Jehovah’s witnesses interpret the Bible to establish a rule against blood transfusion. They say their rules come from the Bible, you say their rules are interpretations, and only your own interpretations are actually rules.

The clergy writes the rules. The clergy invents god in their image, and “interprets” rules that benefit themselves.

CableMonster ,

Sure, but the basis for all of their rules is the bible. And you are right in how its dangerous and that was a big problem and Martin Luther is the example of someone pointing out when they clergy got out of hand and made unbiblical rules.

Rivalarrival ,

Very good.

So the next time someone tells you the rules of Christianity aren’t written in the Bible, you’ll agree with them?

CableMonster ,

No, the rules are still in the bible…

Rivalarrival ,

You’ve already accepted the role of the clergy in writing and enforcing them.

CableMonster ,

They dont write, they interpret and enforcement is done on a personal or community level typically. Its like you saying that the laws originate with the state not the constitution. No, the constitution is (supposed to be) the main document that the applicable laws are based on, states can go against it, but the basis is the constitution (or at least it is supposed to be).

Rivalarrival ,

The constitution is not the basis of law, nor is it supposed to be the basis of law. Laws do not originate from the constitution.

The constitution establishes government. The government establishes law.

If the Bible is analogous to the constitution, then the clergy is analogous to government.

To make the constitution analogous to the Bible, we would need a couple dozen different variants of the constitution, written at various times, to and from various languages. We’d have to do away with states, and the three branches. The clergy would consist of every county sheriff throughout the nation. Every sheriff would hold the full power of government, dictating what rules are important and what can be ignored. But, the sheriffs wouldn’t agree with each other on what is important.

Most importantly, we would have to remove the amendment process from the constitution, and let the sheriff’s take care of that, too.

TexasDrunk ,

That’s why you’re not allowed to eat shrimp or wear cotton polyester blends. It’s also why you can beat your slaves but not kill them. It also caused the crusades, Salem witch trials, justified slavery in the US, justified the prohibition against interracial marriage, started the KKK, actively works to have women killed if they have a non viable fetus, actively works to kill homosexuals who won’t stay in the closet, burns books, is currently committing genocide in Central Africa, molests little boys, caused the Bosnian Genocide, preaches “love thy neighbor” while lynching folks, celebrates when a trans person is shot, sends people to conversion camps that literally tortures them, molests even more kids, blames weather events on gay people, and comes to my fucking house, right to my fucking door, to try to tell me that I need to accept Yeshua ben Yosef or their magic fairy that they don’t have any real evidence of is going to spank me.

I don’t need that kind of hate to tell me not to go around murdering people. I already don’t do that. I don’t need it to tell me not to rape. The Bible says that’s cool as long as I pay her dad but I’ll go a step further and just not rape anyone. I certainly don’t need that jackass Paul telling me anything because he didn’t teach the same thing Yeshua ben Yosef taught, but there’s a whole shit pile of his rules and regulations in the New Testament. And if I wanted a drugged out weirdo telling me about the end times I’d go listen to Crazy Tommy talk about his vision of the Neverending Story while he’s dropping acid.

Practice your religion. If it keeps you from raping and killing then I’m all for it. But practice it in your closet, not on the digital street corner for all to see. Because if you do that then you already have your reward.

CableMonster ,

This is just a series of strawmen or ignorance to the subject. Why do you take time to write comments like these when they dont mean anything?

Rivalarrival ,

What was the religion of most of the most harmful people of the 20th century?

Money.

CableMonster ,

I would agree to some extent, but say it would be power/control.

Rivalarrival ,

Men will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.

CableMonster ,

The lie the new atheist movement led everyone to believe was that religion is the problem, and that when we get rid of religion then everyone will be happy and get along. America is the furthest from religion it has been in its history, are things going great?

Rivalarrival ,

On issues motivated by religion, yes, America is moving in the right direction. LGBT acceptance, reproductive rights, etc.

CableMonster ,

The whole culture is influenced by religion, its not just paticular issues. I would argue that america is literally falling apart right now, and we are in for some serious issues. I understand that much of it can be associated to other things, but I think much of it has to do with loss of purpose and morals.

Rivalarrival ,

I can see why you would think that society is failing. You are religiously motivated, and religion consistently falls on the wrong side of issues. As mentioned, LGBTQ. Society is rapidly improving for transgender individuals, despite religiously-motivated efforts to block and reverse such progress. To the religious, this is a failure of society, a degradation of morality.

To trans individuals, their friends and family, it’s a sign of improvement, and cause for hope.

Same with reproductive rights. Non-religious people believe that banning abortion creates more tragedy than it prevents. Religious people believe the opposite. So when Ohio, Kansas, and every other state that has asked the question has arrived at a pro-choice answer, religious people think it a failure, and non-religious think it progress.

Religion is losing control of the people. To the religiously-controlled, that’s a bad thing. To the non-religious, it’s a welcome relief.

CableMonster ,

I am stepping out from my personal beliefs and looking at things on a cultural level. The problem with your argument is that you are isolating everything and not looking at the overall picture. You cant just point to a thing and say that it is good but not look at the other impacts or influences that caused it to happen or are a consequence. Right now I can look at the overall situation in america and see we have people that lack purpose and unity, and many people that literally want to destroy it all and rebuild it in a false utopia. So even if you think all religion is false you should be able to recognize the overall stability it provided.

Rivalarrival ,

I am stepping out from my personal beliefs

Yeah, you’re not. There is no objective viewpoint underpinning your arguments. They are based entirely on your subjective opinion, and are only valid for those sharing your opinion.

Right now I can look at the overall situation in america and see we have people that lack purpose

That you cannot see my “purpose” says more about your vision than it says about me.

many people that literally want to destroy it all and rebuild it in a false utopia.

Yes, I would like to see religiosity slowly and systematically destroyed, and society rebuilt on humanistic principles rather than “theistic” concepts that benefit no one but the clergy.

CableMonster ,

One thing that has make me successful is that I have the ability to step out and make decisions and opinions that are almost entirely objective.

You are right that you can have purpose outside of religions, but typically the purpose is vapid, or in the case of people like antifa, directly harmful.

And one thing you will find is that most of the “humanistic principles” you desire are based on religion, and the ones that are not tend to be a negative on society.

Rivalarrival ,

One thing that has make me successful is that I have the ability to step out and make decisions and opinions that are almost entirely objective.

That may indeed be true, but you have not done that here.

CableMonster ,

Or you just dont have that same ability and just cant recognize your own biases.

Rivalarrival ,

You have not presented any objective basis for any of your opinions. You have stated a belief that society is somehow failing (I’m paraphrasing from memory) but you haven’t stated or otherwise identified any sort of objective foundation for that belief.

I have presented an opposing opinion, supported with my subjective foundations, to whit: the advancement of LGBTQ acceptance and reproductive rights. You’ve pointed to some nebulous concepts, and (falsely) declared them objective truths. (Again, paraphrasing).

You keep claiming the ability to maintain objectivity, but you have not even demonstrated comprehension of the concept.

CableMonster ,

If you want specifics that is fine, you just have to ask. The main problem that I think is happening is that people dont have any real purpose outside of religion. What they tend to have is beliefs in things that are manufactured problems, or there is no real solution to, or are not problems as all. For example, antifa will burn down cities to fights against racism or something, when of all the problems that we have, racism is pretty small. Or on the other hand the bigger problem is that maybe the majority dont have any purpose at all and will just seek out pleasure, which is society killer.

Rivalarrival ,

The main problem that I think is happening is that people dont have any real purpose outside of religion

That is a subjective opinion. That is your subjective opinion. That is not you separating yourself from your own beliefs. That is not you presenting an objective fact to support your opinion, or taking a broader look at culture. That is you presenting your opinion.

There’s nothing wrong with developing a subjective opinion, until you claim it is something other than a subjective opinion.

Do not elevate opinions beyond the mind that created them.

CableMonster ,

Sure its subjective, but the results of known, so we can make a judgment on their value as purposes.

Rivalarrival ,

Yes, we certainly can.

The main problem that I think is happening is that people dont have any real purpose outside of religion

My judgment is that this opinion is a crock. The value I place on it is “worthless drivel”.

My judgment and value is, of course, a subjective opinion itself, with no inherent value greater (or lesser) than your own.

CableMonster ,

Of course that is your opinion, you have been trained by the modern atheist types that religion is bad and that when its gone the world will be a better place. That idea is so obviously wrong with just a momentary glace at history.

Rivalarrival ,

You’ve been brainwashed by the clergy into that mindset. That idea is so obviously wrong with just a momentary glance at rationality.

CableMonster ,

What if you were brain washed into what you believe? What are the chances there is a God in your guestimation?

Rivalarrival ,

Ah, we’re going to explore Pascal’s wager?

There is a distinct possibility that God exists. There’s another distinct possibility…

Scientists conduct experiments. Trials. They want to see if a drug is effective, so they arrange two groups of people, give one the drug, and the other a placebo. A “blinded” study. They hide as much of the study as the can from the participants, to rule out confirmation bias and other experimental errors.

When these scientists discover that their subjects have become aware of experimental conditions, the data is contaminated from that point forward.

Scientists don’t just conduct experiments on people. They also conduct experiments on lab rats. They have a grand purpose for each and every rat in their study, but that purpose is to further development of a drug that will be used to save humans. They are completely unconcerned with the lives of their rats. The wants, needs, and noble purposes the rats might have for their own rat society.

The interesting part is when the scientists realize that the rats have discovered the scientists, the experiment. When they comprehend the objective of the scientists. What happens when the rats become unblinded to the experiment?

To answer your question, the likelihood that the Christian god exists is about as high as the likelihood of God being the principal investigator in some cosmic study, and our reward for discovering him is annihilation.

CableMonster ,

That was a long answer to say that you think with near certainty that there is no God, and that evolution would be the explaination?

Rivalarrival ,

Don’t put words in my mouth. I said absolutely nothing about evolution.

I will be happy to summarize: for all you know, belief in God could end the universe.

CableMonster ,

I guess you can summarize, the question was “What are the chances there is a God in your guestimation?”

Rivalarrival ,

I answered your question, at length. You skipped over the first sentence in my lengthy response.

There is a distinct possibility that God exists. There’s another distinct possibility…

The likelihood that the Abrahamic god exists is equal to the likelihood that the Principal Investigator god exists, and if it turns out that those two are one and the same, you are responsible for annihilating all existence.

I have no reason to believe either of these scenarios is true, but both are distinctly possible.

CableMonster ,

That is a non answer.

Rivalarrival ,

It was a non question.

CableMonster ,

I very directly asked a question and your answer was not an answer. Your opinions are really not interesting enough for me to keep asking over and over.

Rivalarrival ,

If you want a better response, try asking a better question.

CableMonster ,

It was a simple question, if you dont want to give a clear answer, that is your decision.

Rivalarrival , (edited )

Alright, I addressed one aspect of your question. Let’s hit another. You inquired about probability.

The probability of rolling a 6 on a standard 6-sided die is 1 in 6. 1 actual solution from 6 possibilities. 1 in 6.

What’s the probability as we go to dice with more and more sides? The more possible solutions, the less likely any particular solution will occur.

Rolling a 6 on 1d8 is theoretically 1 in 8, assuming we actually have a die, we actually roll that die, and we actually get a result. The chance of rolling a 6 on a 1d8 is less than 1 in 8 when “it landed in the campfire” is a possible outcome. That additional possibility doesn’t make it 1 in 9, though, because “it shattered when it hit the table” is another possible outcome. “A meteor came through the roof and destroyed the die before it landed”.

The set of possible outcomes of throwing a 1d8 is only 1 in 8 when we exclude every possibility except a single number between 1 and 8.

When we talk about the probability of the existence of a particular god, we can’t limit the set of possible solutions to a finite number. we aren’t just selecting between all of the gods ever actually conceived of by mankind, but all gods that can be conceived of, all gods that can’t be conceived of, and the complete absence of a god at all.

The probability of god is one in an infinite number of possibilities.

1/♾️

Mathematically, this concept is indistinguishable from zero. That doesn’t actually mean impossible: it just means that the mathematical discipline of “probability” is not equipped to describe the selection of a single (or finite) solution from an infinite set.

Asking the probability of of God is like asking the molecular formula of free speech, or the temperature of a vacuum, or how many kilograms are in a mile. The question is meaningless.

My previous answer ignored the impossibility of your question, and attempted to address your intended meaning instead.

When you can tell me the proper temperature for baking a pound of philosophy, I’ll answer your question directly.

CableMonster ,

1/♾️ = zero, its not just close to zero.

You use too many words to answer the question. The question is not meaningless, literally I used the word guestimation, as in give it a wild guess. You writing an extremely long response to a question I can answer in a couple sentences doesnt make you look smarter, it just makes you kind of annoying.

Rivalarrival , (edited )

1/♾️ = zero, its not just close to zero.

I didn’t say it was close to zero. I said it was mathematically indistinguishable from zero. “Mathematically indistinguishable from” and “=” are synonymous. Distinguishing between 0 and 1/♾️ would require the use of a tool other than mathematics. I do not know of a useful tool for addressing such a distinction. I do not think there is much utility in even considering such a distinction. I would say (and have said) that even contemplating such a distinction is meaningless.

You understand the 1/♾️=0 concept by simple recitation, not by comprehension. When you actually comprehend the meaning of that concept, you will understand why your question is indeed meaningless.

Asking for the probability of God’s existence is like asking for vernier calipers to measure an amp of electrical current. Probability is a very useful tool, but the “measurement” it provides is entirely irrelevant to the object we are trying to to measure. It’s the wrong tool for the job.

CableMonster ,

“Mathematically indistinguishable from” and “=” are synonymous

No, it is zero, this is not an argument, I am just telling you the answer to the math problem.

And again, not answering the question doesnt make you look smarter, it makes you one of those annoying teens that think they are smart but dont have experience to know what actual smart people are.

Rivalarrival ,

I’m sorry you don’t like my answer to your question. What answer would you have preferred I given you?

CableMonster ,

An actual answer would be- “My guess is that the is W% chance there is a God, X% chance of pure evolution, Y% chance of simulation theory and Z% chance of this other one or something else”.

When you do the thing where you write 20 paragraphs about simple concepts and pretend its deep, its just eyerolling.

Rivalarrival ,

And on what basis am I evaluating those possibilities? You suggested probability, mathematically, and yet you recognized that mathematically, W, X, Y, and Z are all zero.

You are standing at a welding table, with tool clamping your part to the bench, and you’re asking me to tighten it up for you. I keep telling you that the tool you’re using is a micrometer, not a C-clamp, and you keep calling me an idiot for not knowing how a clamp works.

I patiently explain that even if we ignore the idiocy of using an expensive, precision instrument for work holding, a micrometer is physically incapable of being tightened enough to secure your workpiece properly. And you tell me to shut up and crank it down.

I can think of three possible routes past this impasse. To stay with probability, we can find some way of limiting the infinite possibilities to a finite, (albeit unknown) number of possibilities, so that our probabilities are no longer 1/♾️, or “zero”. Or, we can abandon probability and delve into a field of mathematics that can accept infinities. Or, we can leave mathematics behind, and move to philosophy.

I look forward to your next ad hominem.

CableMonster ,

Yeah I get it you keep a lot of words to convey very little meaning. I am fully able to use a micrometer, but you for some reason think its impossible, so you inability to do the task doesnt mean its impossible.

You are the one that erroneously has been using infinity not me. If you have no explaination for the existence of humans its fine, but then dont use math to pretend its relevent to this situation.

Rivalarrival ,

You are the one that erroneously has been using infinity not me.

I clearly explained why I was using infinite. This is the first time you have challenged my use of infinite. I eagerly await a rebuttal against my infinite argument.

If you have no explaination for the existence of humans

When did “existence of humans” enter the discussion? I thought we were discussing the existence of god(s). The probability of humans existing is 100%.

but then dont use math to pretend its relevent to this situation.

You brought math into the discussion, not I. I initially assumed you were speaking colloquially, and I responded with my “Pascal’s wager” answer. Only when you doubled down and demanded probability did I respond with my mathematical, 1/♾️ answer.

If you don’t like the answer, ask a different question.

CableMonster ,

So long story short you will never be able to answer the original question? Too complicated?

Rivalarrival ,

Indeed, it is a complex question.

How many answers do you want? I’ve given you the colloquial answer; I’ve given you a reasoned, rational answer, and I’ve given you the simple, mathematical answer 1/♾️, which you recognize and acknowledge to be zero.

I’ve answered you three separate times, respectfully and considerately, while ignoring your insults and denigration. I’ve patiently clarified and explained those answers, with reason and analogy, while you have mocked and belittled.

I’m going to move on from your question now, and ask one of my own: as a person you have mocked and denigrated and insulted and belittled, what would you now have me know about religion in general, and/or yours in particular?

CableMonster ,

I was just looking for a simple answer a human would give to another, but you seem to just keep writing long comments with midwit logic.

Rivalarrival ,

Isn’t that how it always goes? We look for simplicity, and find unexpected complexity.

So, what would you have this midwit understand about religion?

CableMonster ,

It was never even about religion, but you had such an inability to answer a simple question that it got lost in your feeling of being intelligent.

queue ,
@queue@lemmy.blahaj.zone avatar

Yeah they’re just the loudest and proudest people who wear crosses around their neck and only vote for other people who are loud and proud of their Christian love wanting to ban anything remotely “sinful.” Everyone knows that Christians are the most oppressed in the West! Truly no one knows how hard it is to be a follower of the majority belief, and never need to defend it from the state.

Also here’s a brief list of things Christians tried to cancel in the United States: Comic books, rock and roll, jazz, dungeons and dragons, magic the gathering, radio, television, other forms of Christianity, anything remotely queer, Italians, Irish, Chinese, Jews, abolitionists, civil rights marchers, feminists…

And here’s the entire list of times Christians were oppressed by laws pushed by non-Christian groups/state actors in the United States and the West in general:

CileTheSane ,
@CileTheSane@lemmy.ca avatar

Truly no one knows how hard it is to be a follower of the majority belief

That’s the thing, it is the majority belief (well over 50% of the population) and yet the draconian over reach you are complaining about does not have the support of nearly 50% of the population. Therefore there must be a large number of Christians that are also against it. They are on your side. I don’t know why you are trying so hard to insist they are your enemy.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •