|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
16th January 2013, 11:59 AM | #1 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 6,023
|
Hey Atheists! Wanna see the face of God?
Oh yes you do!
Pope: everyone, even atheists, want to see the face of God Asian News (Italian site in English)
Quote:
|
16th January 2013, 12:09 PM | #2 |
The Clarity Is Devastating
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Betwixt
Posts: 20,891
|
Exodus 33 (ESV):
Quote:
So, sure, Your Holiness. Let's all line up for a peek. You first. |
__________________
"*Except Myriad. Even Cthulhu would give him a pat on the head and an ice cream and send him to the movies while he ended the rest of the world." - Foster Zygote |
|
16th January 2013, 12:15 PM | #3 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 5,012
|
|
16th January 2013, 12:18 PM | #4 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,302
|
I believe I'd rather see the body of Aphrodite, not just the face.
|
__________________
Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanlon%27s_razor |
|
16th January 2013, 12:20 PM | #5 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 6,679
|
I like the next part, where God moons Moses.
21 And the Lord said, Behold, there is a place by me, and thou shalt stand upon a rock: 22 And it shall come to pass, while my glory passeth by, that I will put thee in a clift of the rock, and will cover thee with my hand while I pass by: 23 And I will take away mine hand, and thou shalt see my back parts: but my face shall not be seen. |
16th January 2013, 12:24 PM | #6 |
Satan's Helper
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 44,024
|
|
__________________
"I am a collection of water, calcium and organic molecules called Carl Sagan" Carl Sagan |
|
16th January 2013, 12:35 PM | #7 |
Winking at the Moon
Administrator
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 16,711
|
Pope talks nonsense. Film at eleven.
|
__________________
Why can't you be more like Agatha? - Loss Leader |
|
16th January 2013, 12:41 PM | #8 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,121
|
Yep. I'd like to meet Spider-Man too.
|
16th January 2013, 12:42 PM | #9 |
Thinker
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 168
|
Is it just me, or does that guy just look evil?
|
16th January 2013, 12:49 PM | #10 |
The Jester
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 9,763
|
"Everyone secretly knows I'm right." -Every Fanatic.
|
__________________
As the size of an explosion increases, the number of social situations it is incapable of resolving approaches zero. -Vaarsuvius It's a rum state of affairs when you feel like punching a jar of mayonnaise in the face. -Charlie Brooker |
|
16th January 2013, 12:51 PM | #11 |
Thinker
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 168
|
|
16th January 2013, 01:01 PM | #12 |
Dental Floss Tycoon
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 21,371
|
I can play that game too.
Everyone, even Popey Pants, wants to touch my monkey. Love him! Liebe mein affe-mienke! Make me as happy as a little girl! |
__________________
Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone. |
|
16th January 2013, 01:03 PM | #13 |
Dental Floss Tycoon
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 21,371
|
|
__________________
Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone. |
|
16th January 2013, 01:50 PM | #14 |
Now. Do it now.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 24,804
|
Damned presumptive of the pope.
Firstly, he makes inane and baseless presumptions about what I want, without ever having met me. Secondly, he makes the ludicrous and laughable mistake of presuming that his makey-uppey omniscient, omnipotent and omni-present invisible friend, who knows everything and who existed before the universe began, actually has a face. I mean, why would you need eyes when you exist before you've invented light, and are now everywhere all the time and know everything? Why do you need a nose when you exist before air and any need to breath? Why do you need a mouth when you existed before you invented food, and when you don't ever communicate verbally anyway? So, no, I don't "wanna see the face of god". God does not exist other than in gullible minds, so I have no more desire to see the product of some deranged fantasy than I have of seeing the bizarre fantasies of other weird men on the internet, (unless they happen to be a genius artist or architect). I don't need to write that in large font for people to get the point, I trust. Mike |
16th January 2013, 01:57 PM | #15 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 21,382
|
I want to see the face of the Pope when he realizes there is no such thing.
Oh, maybe that's why he looks so mean and Sith Emperor like? |
16th January 2013, 02:01 PM | #16 |
Dental Floss Tycoon
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 21,371
|
Which raises another pressing question: why would God need a penis? The Pope and his friends are most insistent that this god of theirs is male, but why would such a being have a gender, which is simply a function of sexual reproduction? It's almost as though an ancient patriarchal people just made this God character up.
|
__________________
Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone. |
|
16th January 2013, 02:45 PM | #17 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 6,023
|
|
16th January 2013, 02:52 PM | #18 |
Thinker
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 168
|
Right. The similarities are uncanny.
|
16th January 2013, 05:19 PM | #19 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,175
|
|
16th January 2013, 05:27 PM | #20 |
Troublesome Passenger
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 21,844
|
|
16th January 2013, 05:43 PM | #21 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 6,023
|
Strictly speaking the Roman Catholic church is very strongly patriarchy flavored, but not a real patriarchy in the historical sense.
What with being ruled by "fathers" that are not fathers. |
16th January 2013, 05:43 PM | #22 |
Thinker
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 173
|
There are some gods I wouldn't mind seeing, but the old curmudgeon from the bible is not one of them.
|
__________________
Never mind what should be or what might be or what ought to be. It's what's things are that's important" Granny Weatherwax |
|
16th January 2013, 06:00 PM | #24 |
a carbon based life-form
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
|
|
16th January 2013, 06:16 PM | #25 |
Thinker
Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 128
|
That Pope dude looks so cool, spouting off about God when he himself looks uncannily like The Devil. Is that irony? Does it matter?
This is one of those things that you struggle to comment on because the arrogance kinda leaves you speechless. So even ATHEISTS secretly need (and perhaps even DESIRE?) the teachings of Christ? Is that the implication? Someone has a problem with "definitions". It's either me or him. I'll give you a clue: it ain't me. EQ |
16th January 2013, 06:41 PM | #26 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 6,260
|
Yes.
You think Ratzinger is arrogant? Dinesh D'Souza had said that anyone who ever heard or read Nicean Creed is physically incapable of not believing it. In other words, all atheists (and Muslems, Hindus, etc.) who heard the gist of Christ's teachings actually believe, and are lying about their disbelief. |
__________________
Gamemaster: "A horde of rotting zombies is shambling toward you. The sign over the door says 'Accounting'" |
|
16th January 2013, 06:48 PM | #27 |
Philosophile
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 35,981
|
|
16th January 2013, 07:26 PM | #28 |
a carbon based life-form
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
|
|
16th January 2013, 07:32 PM | #29 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,909
|
It kinda sounds like the Pope has atheists and agnostics confused. Agnostics are the ones who would dearly love to actually see someone's god. Atheists mostly have given up on such silly nonsense.
By the way, I am an agnostic and I know I'm silly. I still jump at the idea of someone having actual good proof of their deity existing. Eventually I'll become mature and jaded enough to give up that silly hope but for now...I'm still young and silly. |
__________________
A quick reminder to all participants that although incomprehensibility is not against the Membership Agreement, incivility is. Please try and remember this, and keep your exchanges polite and respectful. -arthwollipot |
|
16th January 2013, 07:44 PM | #30 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,175
|
|
16th January 2013, 07:47 PM | #31 |
a carbon based life-form
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
|
|
16th January 2013, 08:16 PM | #32 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,909
|
Oh I'm not picky. I'll take solid proof of almost any deity, though there are some deities I personally hope are not real. Some versions of the Christian god are really scary and mean. Many older deities are pretty nasty too. It would be pretty bad to find out that Durga or Sekmet are real since such a revelation would probably be followed by my screaming painful death.
|
__________________
A quick reminder to all participants that although incomprehensibility is not against the Membership Agreement, incivility is. Please try and remember this, and keep your exchanges polite and respectful. -arthwollipot |
|
16th January 2013, 08:46 PM | #33 |
Nasty Brutish and Tall
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Canberra
Posts: 17,691
|
What does God, need with a
|
16th January 2013, 08:51 PM | #34 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 8,131
|
When did Sméagol become Pope?
|
__________________
I have no idea what you're trying to say, but I'm still pretty sure that you're wrong. -Akhenaten I sometimes think the Bible was inspired by Satan to make God look bad. And then it backfired on Him when He underestimated the stupidity of religious ideologues. -MontagK505 |
|
16th January 2013, 08:53 PM | #35 |
Smelling fishy
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Home is wherever I'm with you
Posts: 27,388
|
I have a mirror already.
|
__________________
Nobody exists on purpose, nobody belongs anywhere, everybody's gonna die. Come watch TV. "...untrustworthy obnoxious twerp." - CFLarsen |
|
17th January 2013, 10:47 AM | #36 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 22,841
|
|
18th January 2013, 02:02 AM | #37 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,915
|
I'm not horribly offended by this. Darth Ratzi believes god is a real thing, chooses to believe that even without any evidence, and his entire framework is built on that presumption. I prefer to believe only in real things, choose which things I believe are real based on the evidence for them, and I want to know what I can about real things. If god was a real thing and god's face mattered, I'd want to see the face of god. Since god is either imaginary or hiding in such a way that the universe is progressing as if he/she/it doesn't exist, then I have no desire to see the face of god, any more than I have a desire to see the face of a unicorn. Still, given Ratzi's preexisting delusion, his statement does follow, and I can see why he'd believe it. It isn't true, but it requires less doublethink than the original error of thinking he made.
|
__________________
"Everyone takes the limits of his own vision for the limits of the world." - Arthur Schopenhauer "New and stirring things are belittled because if they are not belittled, the humiliating question arises, 'Why then are you not taking part in them?' " - H. G. Wells |
|
18th January 2013, 04:15 AM | #38 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 22,331
|
Patriarchy doesn't mean strictly biological fathers in any incarnation.
For a start the same rights of the pater familias applied for the Romans (from which the RCC got their trappings and father figure pretenses) even to young married people who hadn't procreated yet. Actually being a father had nothing to do with it. Second, it applied to adopted children too. Third, and most crucially, it also extended to wives, servants, freedmen, slaves, etc. If you had something like a freedman and two slaves working for you, but no children, congrats, you're still a pater familias anyway. But of course, deriving anything from its origins would be a genetic fallacy. Nevertheless it will serve as an example instead. Anyway... A patriarchy, or its current meaning, really has nothing to do with being a biological father. It's just a way to say that the males are in charge, and women are subordinate to the men. Which I think sums up the RCC and its ideology to this day very very well. |
__________________
Springfield Heights Institute of Technology poster child |
|
18th January 2013, 05:40 AM | #39 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 6,023
|
In politics or in religion?
I was thinking in terms of the Patriarchs in the Old Testament. Where the male head of an extended family was also the highest authority. Sure that included slaves and various other non-genetically related dependents. That's a far cry from anything a Roman Catholic priest is. |
18th January 2013, 05:43 AM | #40 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Sep 2003
Posts: 6,023
|
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|