General / Off-Topic Atheist Goverments - The sword of reason
- Thread starter Ironwolf
- Start date
- Status
I have to agree with this.
But a militant Atheists grouping in the Galaxy, could make an exiting addition.
I think we need to get back on track to the subject of militant atheist organizations in the context of the Elite universe (presence of and administration types) and shelve the theological hair-plucking, or the thread is probably going to get re-locked by Ian. It was rare enough that it was reopened to begin with.
Nooooo!
Please don't!
It is fun!
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
We agree!
And I am all for it.
They who want it should really go for it.
Well, it can be one of those:
Independent/Imperial Dictatorship
or
Independent/Imperial Patronage
It can't be Alliance either, because alliance systems sign a bill of human rights and that would compromise it. And Imperial anything would have a tad of hypocrisy into it, due to the whole emperor affection. But that would just make it more interesting.
Interesting. What about the Federation, is there anything in its structure or setup that would allow a militant organization based on belief (or lack thereof) as a criteria for citizen participation to establish itself?
Last edited:
What makes you think it would want to?
I'm sure I remember something in the bible about God not showing himself just to prove his existence, because the whole point is to BELIEVE not merely to know.
Yes, I know it makes a convinient get-out as well, but it makes sense in context too.
Or what about other religions?
I can imagine a god like Loki would not prove his own existence just to amuse himself watching the arguments!
Remember other religions don't always model their gods as being perfect. In many polytheistic religions, the stories of the gods teach as much by the gods' moments of imperfection as by their moments of shiningly perfect shinyness, maybe more.
This is one of the problems with discussing this stuff. Most Atheists treat the big 2 as being representative of religion in general, when they are not. Therefore arguments and assumptions are all based around those 2 religions, and often simply do not apply to many other religions.
Federation has none of those governments into its domain.
Even though its democracies and confederacies are dubious in terms of who really makes a choice, due to corporation influence, it still wouldn't provide grounds for something like this.
Last edited:
Probably not, depending on the level of militancy.
They certainly wouldn't allow anyone who is going to start running around trying to stomp allover the other theocracies already in the federation.
If they just want to sit at home and grumble about how wrong/eternally damned everyone else is, that would probably be ok, I think.
In polytheistic religions, even if they didn't want to, they did manifest from time to time. Not always to reward either.
If it's an entity that never wants to do anything, then it makes no difference to an entity that doesn't exist in terms of what decisions an individual should take for their life.
No, the Islamic God is Muhammad, a false prophet that was nothing more than a street thug. He was of the line of Ishmael, the outcast, rejected son of Abraham. Folks like the call the Islamic God the Christian God, but the truth is Muhammad contorted and distorted so much and sprinkled in excuses to kill, maim and hurt--that I can safely say it is not the same.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
The burden of proof does not lie on me. I have the scientific method. It will provide answers at some point--or maybe it never will. Who knows?
The one who does have a burden of proof is the Man who proclaims there is no God. If they say that, then they have faith. I'm still waiting...
However, we all get proof when we die. One way or another, all men do.
- - - - - Additional Content Posted / Auto Merge - - - - -
It IS faith. It is faith that their belief is true. If you proclaim something is absolute without proof, then it /is/ faith.
Muhammad is the prophet...
Absolutely. But they wouldn't be likely to manifest just to prove their existence and settle the debate once and of all. Many would find the debate amusing one way or another, and many just wouldn't care. Some would probably deliberately encourage the debate.
I never said they wouldn't want to do anything. Just not what people used to thinking in terms of the Abrahamic god would expect a god to do.
I have had that discussion in the past. It was fun.
Thing is, if they have moods, then they'd also have the necessary triggers to act. It would be quite the proof after the 5th guy that gets smited instantly for trash talking them. Or some group being saved from a calamity, the god goes full troll mode and starts raining eggs, etc.
Last edited:
That is simply incorrect. Mohammed is not the Islamic god. Allah is.
Allah is the same god who told Noah to build the ark, gave the commandments to Noah, etc.
Mohamed was a prophet, a totally mortal man, who Allah used as a messenger to pass on his commands.
And most of the stuff about killing and all that, didn't come from Mohammed. It was written by later scholars, just like a lot of stuff in the Bible isn't even attributed to Jesus, it is just the interpretation of later scholars and so on.
It is not faith to not believe in gods.
It is faith to believe that gods absolutely do not and can not possibly exist.
They are not the same thing.
Well, mohamed was a man; and he used the "oldest trick in the book", claiming God was his personal tool.
He must have been a smart and interesting man.
He based his stuff on the jewish and christian fairytale.
And with some religious wars in the Galaxy, things could really get cranked up.
I am all for it!
He must have been a smart and interesting man.
He based his stuff on the jewish and christian fairytale.
And with some religious wars in the Galaxy, things could really get cranked up.
I am all for it!
Are you saying that sooner or later one of them would prove their existence just because they were in that kind of mood that day? Zeus didn't like the way he was being portrayed in the latest Hollywood blockbuster, so he reduced the studio to a smoldering hole in the ground?
Maybe. Certainly would be a hell of an entertaining week in the news:
Monday- "Michael Bay killed in localised California lightning storm."
Tuesday-"Olympian gods reveal themselves for the first time in thousands of years. Claim to have been locked in a legal battle over custody of Persephone, didn't have time to spare for humanity"
Wednesday-"Family of Michael Bay seeking legal action against Zeus"
Thursday-"Ares denies responsibility for any wars over the last 2500 years, says- "No, that lot is all on you guys. I mean seriously, I turn my back for a few millenia....."
Yep. And that's exactly what made that discussion quite enjoyable, in contrast with usual discussions on religion, which is either philosophical and calm or goes out of hand.
Quite a lot of change if psychology applies to gods. The infallible ones are kinda boring.
- Status