Are the nations shaking?

California Shaking, Cows Love It

YouTube

Originally posted by twhitehead
I think population has a lot to do with it, but far more important are two key illusions:
1. There is more global news than in the past and it focuses heavily on disasters. This gives the illusion that there are more disasters when in reality there are simply more disasters that you read about in the news.
2. We live here and now and did not live throug ons shaking" yet you seem quite uninterested in knowing whether or not they actually are.

I am interested, I'm just not rising to your baiting. You make sound comment but if you could put aside your palpable contempt for those people with a spiritual leaning, you wouldn't come across as being so scathing.

Incidentally my OP claimed nothing, I was mearly asking a question based on comment I heard from a Christian person I know, love and respect very much; but I'm not sure they were correct so I opened it up for opinion here.

PS apologies for the "last nail" comment.

Originally posted by divegeester
I am interested, I'm just not rising to your baiting. You make sound comment but if you could put aside your palpable contempt for those people with a spiritual leaning, you wouldn't come across as being so scathing.

I have looked back through all my posts in this thread and I see no sign of 'palpable contempt' for anyone. I did suggest that you might be getting 'over excited' by current events and I have since explained why I believe those who claim current events are extraordinary are succumbing to an illusion. It had nothing to do with you having a 'spiritual leaning', I am sure there are atheists who make the same error - in fact I myself have in the past.
So I can only conclude that you are talking about my behavior in other threads?

The tendency to over emphasize current events does seem to be increase when someone wants to interpret prophesy as pointing to the current time. If you look back at records of people trying to interpret prophesy, the vast majority of them interpret the prophesy as pointing to the time they live in or very soon after. Almost nobody says "OK that prophesy refers to the events of last century".

Originally posted by twhitehead
The tendency to over emphasize current events does seem to be increase when someone wants to interpret prophesy as pointing to the current time. If you look back at records of people trying to interpret prophesy, the vast majority of them interpret the prophesy as pointing to the time they live in or very soon after. Almost nobody says "OK that prophesy refers to the events of last century".

I agree with you. Prophesy is probably one of the most abused aspects of religious scripture, it certainly is in Christianity, in my opinion. Take the visions and prophesy in the book of Daniel for example, I find most of it incomprehensible; however I do believe they are prophesy and I remain interested in other people’s views on the subject. You are an atheist and I do understand that it is impossible for you to even consider that a spiritual prophesy is true, but don't you think that is putting limitations on yourself and the world around you?

I don't subscribe to Andrew Hamilton’s recent generalisation that "once you accept one irrational thought it's easy to accept another". I do however accept that for certain people that an escape from reality is more acceptable than facing facts and therefore for them, swallowing any increasing level of fiction will do – however fro them religion is a symptom of that weak cognition, not the cause (drug abuse may be another symptom). But it may also be worth remembering that it was Einstein who famously said "imagination is more important than knowledge". I believe he was trying to point out that we should not put limits on what we don't know, through the rigid application of what we do know.

Originally posted by divegeester
Haggai 2: 6-7
For thus said the LORD of hosts; yet once, it is a little while, and I will shake the heavens, and the earth, and the sea, and the dry land; 7 [b] and I will shake all nations, and the desire of all nations shall come: and I will fill this house with glory, said the LORD of hosts.

Is this scripture referring to what we are seeing in ...[text shortened]... d weather events, but more specifically in Libya, Egypt, Bahrain and wider in the economic PIGs?[/b]

If our leaders don't get a handle on the unrest, our world is about to change into
something quite ugly.
Kelly

I was thinking of Matthew 24

6 And ye shall hear of wars and rumors of wars; see that ye be not troubled: for these things must needs come to pass; but the end is not yet.

7 For nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; and there shall be famines and earthquakes in divers places.

8 But all these things are the beginning of travail.

9 Then shall they deliver you up unto tribulation, and shall kill you: and ye shall be hated of all the nations for my name's sake.

10 And then shall many stumble, and shall deliver up one another, and shall hate one another.

11 And many false prophets shall arise, and shall lead many astray.

12 And because iniquity shall be multiplied, the love of the many shall wax cold.

13 But he that endureth to the end, the same shall be saved.

Originally posted by divegeester
You are an atheist and I do understand that it is impossible for you to even consider that a spiritual prophesy is true, but don't you think that is putting limitations on yourself and the world around you?

I think you need to seriously think about that comment of yours. Do you leave open the possibility that Father Christmas or the Easter Rabbit are real? Do you even consider the possibility that Nostradamus was on to something? If you really don't believe something, then you don't, and I really cant see how you interpret that as 'putting limitations on yourself', unless you are suggesting that we believe everything - and therefore nothing, as for every possible fact there is another conflicting one that can't co-exist.
There simply aren't enough reasons for me to even consider that prophesy in Daniel is genuine prophesy. In fact there aren't enough reasons for me to even consider that any prophesy is genuine. If I came across some really convincing prophesy, I might change my views, but then it would open a whole host of questions about how the universe works, and would contradict much of what I believe to be true, so it would have to be very very convincing.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I think you need to seriously think about that comment of yours. Do you leave open the possibility that Father Christmas or the Easter Rabbit are real? Do you even consider the possibility that Nostradamus was on to something? If you really don't believe something, then you don't, and I really cant see how you interpret that as 'putting limitations on you ...[text shortened]... ontradict much of what I believe to be true, so it would have to be very very convincing.

Comparing a person's belief in thier God to the easter rabbit is a somewhat overly dismissive mindset and an invalid test. Most of the human race believes in a supernatuaral deity of some sort, but very few believe in the easter rabbit; as a person of logic I would have thought you would have seen this is therfore not a good 'test by comparison'.

I understand your not wanting to entertain ideas of religion; most organised 'religion' sucks. My comment was not asking you to specifically consider the prophesy in Daniel, it was meant to ask you to consider (in the light of Einstein’s statement especially) that there could be more to the cosmos that science has so far determined and more to humanity than has been mapped in our DNA.

Originally posted by divegeester
Comparing a person's belief in thier God to the easter rabbit is a somewhat overly dismissive mindset and an invalid test. Most of the human race believes in a supernatuaral deity of some sort, but very few believe in the easter rabbit; as a person of logic I would have thought you would have seen this is therfore not a good 'test by comparison'.

I u os that science has so far determined and more to humanity than has been mapped in our DNA.

Comparing a person's belief in thier God to the easter rabbit is a somewhat overly dismissive mindset and an invalid test. Most of the human race believes in a supernatuaral deity of some sort, but very few believe in the easter rabbit; as a person of logic I would have thought you would have seen this is therfore not a good 'test by comparison'.
That's a poor defence. No person is capable of reliably establishing that any supernatural entity is any more plausible than another. More importantly, it is a ~2000 year head start, coupled with the crusades, inquisition, etc... along with herd mentality and indoctrination which puts your religion in the position that it has a such a higher number of subscribers than the easter bunny. This numerical advantage however has zero weight when it comes to assessing which supernatural fairy-tale entity is more plausible - indeed if it was a valid metric then by spending time in some middle eastern country one would expect you to acknowledge the majority of people there subscribe to Islam, and consequently - renounce your faith in Christianity. Or perhaps you'd acknowledge the majority of people do not subscribe to *any* particular religion, and so use this to justify your divorce from organised religion entirely.

Originally posted by Agerg
[b]Comparing a person's belief in thier God to the easter rabbit is a somewhat overly dismissive mindset and an invalid test. Most of the human race believes in a supernatuaral deity of some sort, but very few believe in the easter rabbit; as a person of logic I would have thought you would have seen this is therfore not a good 'test by comparison'.
That ...[text shortened]... ticular religion, and so use this to justify your divorce from organised religion entirely.[/b]

I'm not "defending" anything; there has been no attack as far I can see just a statement from an atheist implying that believing in the Easter bunny is the same as believing in God - and this made by a person who doesn't know what it is to believe in either! My point is that you would be hard pushed to find any adult on the planet who believes in the Easter bunny, and yet the majority of the adult world believes in God, therefore the comparison is invalid.

Perhaps some atheists could better employ their minds in the understanding of the majority of the human population, instead of defaulting to the lazy position of ridicule as a form of argument.

Originally posted by divegeester
I'm not "defending" anything; there has been no attack as far I can see just a statement from an atheist implying that believing in the Easter bunny is the same as believing in God - and this made by a person who doesn't know what it is to believe in either! My point is that you would be hard pushed to find any adult on the planet who believes in the Ea ...[text shortened]... an population, instead of defaulting to the lazy position of ridicule as a form of argument.

But the majority view, when one considers how long Christianity has had to spread it's word so to enjoy this advantage along with some dubious methods of getting new converts carries little weight. Herd mentality plays a massive part also.
For example recall your school days and suppose some teacher submitted a question to the class with two answers A or B - he asks if the class think A is true and most of them raise their hand; the fact that you might have good reason for thinking B is true is vastly overshadowed by the fact that all eyes will be upon you should you display your support for B.

The same can be true for Christianity - if everyone you know thinks Bible-God is true then you'd look damned silly for thinking some other god is true. This in itself though does not lend any weight to the truth or falsity of the Christian god. As such, a different argument is required to shoot down the easter bunny comparison.

Originally posted by Agerg
But the majority view, when one considers how long Christianity has had to spread it's word so to enjoy this advantage along with some dubious methods of getting new converts carries little weight. Herd mentality plays a massive part also.
For example recall your school days and suppose some teacher submitted a question to the class with two answers A or B - tian god. As such, a different argument is required to shoot down the easter bunny comparison.

You are without realising it dismantling your own position.

The debate is whether or not it is reasonable to compare the belief in (or in actual fact non-belief in) the Easter bunny with a belief in God. Whether or not Christianity is or isn't driven through some mass social derivative of Asch's experiments in conformity, is neither here not there.

In fact in saying what you are saying, you are merely underlining the fact that there is no conformity attached to believing in the Easter bunny, but a high conformity in believing in God - therefore you strengthen my position: that a comparison between the two beliefs is in fact invalid.

Originally posted by divegeester
You are without realising it dismantling your own position.

The debate is whether or not it is reasonable to compare the belief in (or in actual fact non-belief in) the Easter bunny with a belief in God. Whether or not Christianity is or isn't driven through some mass social derivative of Asch's experiments in conformity, is neither here not there. ...[text shortened]... fore you strengthen my position: that a comparison between the two beliefs is in fact invalid.

I disagree; I'm infact arguing there is no correlation between number of subscribers to religion X and the plausibility of X; and so any logical person should reject this line of defence immediately.
The appeal to numbers is a red herring here.

Originally posted by Agerg
I disagree; I'm infact arguing there is no correlation between number of subscribers to religion X and the plausibility of X. With a rational mindset, and neglecting the argumentum ad populum fallacy it is perfectly reasonable to ask why belief in your god or the truth of certain prophesies is anymore plausible than the existence of an easter bunny.

Ask 10 ...[text shortened]... person has any means to validly establish one supernatural claim is anymore valid than another.

The argunment you used in your previous post, to explain the numbers of believers in God was social conformity. I am agreeing with you (for the sake of the argument) and further stating that there is no conformity pressure to believe in the Easter Bunny - therefore comparing a belief in the Easter bunny to believing in God is not a valid.

I think you are now moving your goal posts from that of global conformity and reducing your sample size to #1 of each group (1 believer in God and one in the Easter Bunny) and comparing what you regard as the irrationality of both beliefs to be the same in that scenario - is that correct?

Originally posted by divegeester
The argunment you used in your previous post, to explain the numbers of believers in God was social conformity. I am agreeing with you (for the sake of the argument) and further stating that there is no conformity pressure to believe in the Easter Bunny - therefore comparing a belief in the Easter bunny to believing in God is not a valid.

I think you ...[text shortened]... u regard as the irrationality of both beliefs to be the same in that scenario - is that correct?

Sorry, I adjusted my post because I noticed I was saying the same thing over again - and this is poor form on my part (unfortunately I realised this too late).

Basically my contention is that you wrote:
"Comparing a person's belief in thier God to the easter rabbit is a somewhat overly dismissive mindset and an invalid test. Most of the human race believes in a supernatuaral deity of some sort, but very few believe in the easter rabbit; as a person of logic I would have thought you would have seen this is therfore not a good 'test by comparison'."

and I challenge strongly the notion that a numbers argument is even admissible in this setting. A logical person should not consider the numbers argument valid unless the greater numbers possessed some qualities, attributes, or demonstrable insight which qualified their view on this subject. This is not the case with religious adherence. My appeal to social conformity was an attempt, in part, to account for this phenomenon of mass adherence to your religion.

For you second paragraph - that is true(apart from moving goal posts - I believe I've been consistent with my argument...perhaps I have failed to show this); but I don't see what it takes away from my main argument here.
To simply conform to the majority view for no reason than it is the majority, is an inherently unstable strategy given that one tends to move into areas with a different majority view from time t o time.

Originally posted by divegeester
Comparing a person's belief in thier God to the easter rabbit is a somewhat overly dismissive mindset and an invalid test. Most of the human race believes in a supernatuaral deity of some sort, but very few believe in the easter rabbit; as a person of logic I would have thought you would have seen this is therfore not a good 'test by comparison'.

You misunderstood me. I said nothing about what you - a believer - should do with regards to your God. I was pointing out that I have as little belief that your God (or any god) exists as you have with regards to the Easter Bunny. I think it is therefore a perfectly good 'test by comparison'. I fail to see why other peoples opinions (with regard to belief in God) have any bearing on the matter. The issue is solely - if I truly don't believe something, why do you see that as putting limitations on myself.

My comment was not asking you to specifically consider the prophesy in Daniel, it was meant to ask you to consider (in the light of Einstein’s statement especially) that there could be more to the cosmos that science has so far determined and more to humanity than has been mapped in our DNA.
I am sure there is more. However, I am equally sure that that 'more' does not include the Easter Bunny nor prophesy. You rule out the Easter Bunny but cant understand me ruling out prophesy.