How the Brutalized Become Brutal
On Art and Politics: A Letter to the Millennials
The Guilt-Free Phone Made Specifically for Socially Conscious Buyers
New Details About Louisiana Resident Victor White III's Shooting Challenge Police Account
Study: American Democracy 'Seriously Threatened'
sign up to get updates
Dig led by Mike Rose
Dig led by Truthdig Staff
By Fyodor M. Dostoevsky; Constance Garnett (Translator)
By Mr. Fish
More Below the Ad
Email to a friend
Get truth delivered to
your inbox every week.
If you have trouble leaving a comment, review this help page. Still having problems? Let us know. If you find yourself moderated, take a moment to review our comment policy.
By Maani, May 22, 2012 at 3:08 pm Link to this comment
Your logic is internally inconsistent, and simply ends up revealing your “true colors” as an anti-theist. You can’t on the one hand say that “People who say one way or the other with absolute certainty are fools,” and then say, “Faith is outdated, an ideal which came from ignorance.” This simply makes you the “fool” you yourself suggest, since you are claiming “abolsute certainty” that “faith is outdated.” Sorry; you can’t have it both ways.
You also err in your comment that, “The people on the creator-side believe because it gives them hope. Some use it as a reason to do good (if I don’t I’ll be punished!)
First, neither faith nor hope is necessarily the result of the other, or even connected. One can have one, or the other, or both. (Or, I suppose, neither.)
Second, there is nothing in the NT about a Christian being “punished” if s/he does not “do good.” In fact, it is stated that one CANNOT achieve salvation simply through “works,” since “For by grace are ye saved through faith, and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God, not of works, lest any man should boast.” Thus, while it is true that both “Faith without works is dead” and “Works without faith are fruitless,” one can neither achieve salvation THROUGH works, not be punished for NOT doing works.
By balkas, May 22, 2012 at 11:58 am Link to this comment
pious people do not have faith—-they have ‘religion’, a belief system, a science, an ideology.
what they have is a stubborn insistence that they know god and that their peculiar ideology-
science-knowledge is the only right one and valid for all time because it comes from an
unseeable-unuderstandable entity they call “god”.
and they are ready—as they have been thruout ages—to spill blood in defense of their thinking.
it is really a know-it all-for all time-thinking.
and ‘leaders’ to ‘lead’ them; or better said, people who control them.
By Leefeller, May 22, 2012 at 7:42 am Link to this comment
I have trouble with the talking snake!
A bit more creditability in stories would be nice, I have trouble watching movies and reading fiction, because I question why the writer made the idiot in the movie even say or do what he did, I suppose to make the move last an hour and a half?
Actually Fish makes a point, though not a very nice one for some, but I suppose this is why truth is more real then friction.
By CS, May 21, 2012 at 9:04 pm Link to this comment
People who say one way or the other with absolute certainty are fools. The people on the creator-side believe because it gives them hope. Some use it as a reason to do good (if I don’t I’ll be punished!). On the other side people feel it’s too ridiculous to have some omniscient narrator to our Universe.
Both are two sides of the same coin. Neither has any evidence damning the other. We have the ability to reason, to analyze. Saying you *know* something for a fact without any evidence to prove it is fallacious.
But that’s faith, right?
Faith is outdated, an ideal which came from ignorance. People are educated now and *still* can’t figure out that there is no definite answer. So people on both sides, keep fooling yourselves. Or perhaps embrace a quality of humanity and weigh both sides of the argument. Some of you may have done that already and decided but nothing in this existence is absolute.
I realize that another human quality is to ask “Why?” but once you find the answer to that question, the obvious end is that you stop looking.
Never stop searching, my friends.
By Maani, May 21, 2012 at 8:11 pm Link to this comment
Your view of faith and religion is hopelessly medieval, if not antediluvean. LOL. Believing in God does not automatically mean believing in a 6,000-year-old earth, much less a flat one. It doesn’t mean being a creationist or anti-science or ignorant. Many of our greatest scientists were believers (by choice, not by obligation), including Sir Francis Bacon (who gave us the “scientific method” as we know it today), Sir Isaac Newton, Faraday, Kelvin, Mendel, Leeuwenhoek, Pasteur, Carver, and Darwin. In fact, it was Darwin himself who said, “It is absurd to doubt that a man might be an ardent theist and an evolutionist…I have never been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God.”
You are certainly entitled to your disdain. But don’t misrepresent what faith and religion uphold.
By Big B, May 21, 2012 at 7:16 pm Link to this comment
No airborne855, the cartoon is not profoundly stupid. People who believe that an invisible man in the sky snapped his fingers 5000 years ago and people magically appeared, they are profoundly stupid.
Jeebus! this is 2012. Grow the fuck up people. Its time to put childish things behind us. There is no boogie man in your closet, and there is no “god” watching over us.
By rend it, May 21, 2012 at 11:28 am Link to this comment
Of course,, incest!! Finally a proper explanation of why we are so retarded in mean cognitively disabled.
By balkas, May 21, 2012 at 10:40 am Link to this comment
well, if there is god, then, no one can be godless.
and if there is no god, once again one cannot be godless; but, of course, not godfull, either.
and if there is god, s/he/it cannot possibly need a person’s [eternal?] defense of whatever kind.
so, what are the godologists and other ‘godfull’ people defending if, obviously, god—in order to be
god—can defend self from people he self made?
but, of course, my dears, they are defending their feelings about a ‘deity’; and if they feel frightened,
insecure, angry, hateful because s’mone says that there is no god, they do not blame selves for such
feelings—they blame the people who say there is no god out there; ie, outside our skins.
and the feelings ‘godfull’ people have acquired solely came from learning from age two or three and keep
learning thruout their lives.
so, it is all a matter of thinking, which generates feelings; feelings generating thinking/talking…. all of it
generating for an eternity discord, insecurity among all of us; or hate, not only for the ‘godless’, but even
most ‘godfull’ people.
so, to be quite short and to the point, all anyone can think-talk about is about one’s feelings. and i am
aware i am doing just that.
and i am not much perturbed because ‘godfull’ people think as they do. i am, tho, sad, ruefull about so
much hate that organized ‘religions’ spread just in order to defend their own opinions.
at least they cld defend them without anger, hatred? not, likely they ever will!!
By Airborne855, May 21, 2012 at 8:22 am Link to this comment
The Bible is the Jewish system of belief hijacked by nincompoops. Jewish scholars have known for centuries that there were homo sapiens on earth at least 100,000 years before Adam and Eve, whose story takes place c. 3760 BCE.
By Airborne855, May 21, 2012 at 8:19 am Link to this comment
How profoundly stupid.
By elisalouisa, May 21, 2012 at 6:02 am Link to this comment
Too common, too gross. too far Mr. Fish.
By Marian Griffith, May 21, 2012 at 1:42 am Link to this comment
But if you take the biblical stories literal this is what must have happened. The bible says that humanity started with two people who had children, who in turn had children. It either is daddy having children with his daughters or brothers marrying sister.
Or it is another example that you can not take the bible literally and living as if it is unalterable truth is going to land you in a moral black hole (and yes, there are men who argue that it is ok for them to have sex with their daughters because the bible does not include them in list of people they can not have sex with).
By Donna Fritz, May 21, 2012 at 1:42 am Link to this comment
Well he does bring up a good question. If you buy the
A&E story, who did their kids breed with?
By Maani, May 20, 2012 at 10:56 pm Link to this comment
Do you mean “here” on this particular thread? Or “here” on TD? If the former, I had reason to comment. If the latter, I don’t judge the entirety of a website by a handful of offensive items. TD is still worth the time for many of its articles.
By momtotyandlog, May 20, 2012 at 7:24 pm Link to this comment
Then Maani, why are you even here?
By Maani, May 20, 2012 at 5:30 pm Link to this comment
Jesus in bed with Freddie Mercury. Adam and Eve suggesting incest. Seems like TD is trying to outdo AlterNet in the depth of its anti-theist depravity and insult. Can’t say I’m surprised. Seems to be the zeitgeist. Sad.