1. CNN Request for 'I-Reports' on religion

Comment #66241 by msv on August 29, 2007 at 12:22 pm

dropped my 2c :up:

2. Messiah

Comment #52666 by msv on June 27, 2007 at 4:52 pm

Derren Brown is a very accomplished illusionist. Has anyone tried the falling backwards trick? I can do it to myself :P Close your eyes and it's hard to stay upright without adjusting your stance. It isn't hard to imagine what an effect it would have on someone who WANTS to fall, with someone else chanting mumbo-jumbo in the background.

Yeah, your body wavers a bit with your eyes closed. If you are close enough to the couch and the seating is lower than your knees, your knees bend making you trip slightly towards the couch.

3. A Look at Regent University

Comment #47388 by msv on June 4, 2007 at 10:24 am

Justice should be unbiased and try to follow the legislations and the views/ideas that the people decided upon - not their own view on society.

To allow more power to organisation is to take power away from the individual. Getting to a homogenised consensus would be better than a statistical consensus.. trouble is, that is not a democracy.

This is mixing of church and justice AND state and justice (if the motivation is from an ideology rather than indoctrination), how the hell can this be tolerated? Justice should be unbiased! Am I missing something??

4. Aiming for knockout blow in god wars

Comment #45357 by msv on May 27, 2007 at 10:59 am

"He is a dangerous man who is causing me disturbed, sleepless nights," Professor Somerville

Thats insane. TGD was mild as hell.

"By attacking religion Dawkins thinks he is going to eliminate the world's evils, but he is so negative, so destructive in his approach, that he is escalating the conflict between warring cultures at a time when we should be seeking common ground," she said.

Attacking is the only common ground you'll get... What other common ground is there, oh wise one? I hate this bitching about anyone's approach, who cares? And who is she to say what outcome or effect Dawkins' approach will have? Does she have a supercomputer predicting the future? No, just a "hunch". Either way, why should you care of Dawkins' approach if there is no orginazation, attack his points, not the way he adresses them. That's more like religion than the points she adressed for calling Dawkins "religious".

Professor Somerville disagrees. "These atheists are so passionate, dogmatic, they have created their own secular religion." She will present "The Alternative to Richard Dawkins's God Delusional View" at the Sydney Writers Festival.

How did she not get the point that any organisation that tries to control people's thoughts is inherently evil. Critical thinking should be the norm, it allows for a society based on real, human common grounds.

5. Comic in US 'hate speech' row

Comment #44787 by msv on May 25, 2007 at 9:36 am

Vid is a bit lame tho. But still, nowhere near a hate-speech and definitely not racist (no associations with race whatsoever).

6. Comic in US 'hate speech' row

Comment #44786 by msv on May 25, 2007 at 9:34 am

Peace, and I mean that most sincerely

This is just "exaggerated" critisizm, whilst advocating peace. Sounds more like an anti-hate speech to me.

7. I Don't Believe in Atheists

Comment #44412 by msv on May 24, 2007 at 3:01 pm

God is a human concept.

Look, here it's still just a concept. A fictional character in a book.

God is the name we give to our belief that life has meaning, one that transcends the world's chaos, randomness and cruelty.

Ow, now it's also a belief that life has meaning? Where did that come from? Does it have anything to do with the fictional character in the book anymore?

To argue about whether God exists or does not exist is futile. The question is not whether God exists. The question is whether we concern ourselves with, or are utterly indifferent to, the sanctity and ultimate transcendence of human existence.

Ah, now it's also the ultimate transcendence of human existence. Yes. Sure... Still talking about the fictional character in that book? Starting to look like a virus, spreading over all concepts seen as positive, rewarding.

God is that mysterious force—and you can give it many names as other religions do—which works upon us and through us to seek and achieve truth, beauty and goodness.
God is perhaps best understood as our ultimate concern, that in which we should place our highest hopes, confidence and trust.

Piling on the random positive associations.

In Exodus God says, by way of identification, "I am that I am." It is probably more accurately translated: "I will be what I will be."

Infinite number of associations!! You've outdone yourself. Spreading like a disease, claiming everything - linked with everything. Ultimate submission in a way.

God is better understood as verb rather than a noun. God is not an asserted existence but a process accomplishing itself. And God is inescapable. It is the life force that sustains, transforms and defines all existence.

Ah, you could've stopped, you've covered everything already with "I will be what I will be."

Tell me what does the god of the BIBLE have to do with these concepts? I was under the impression the bible stated god was an omnipotent being, firmly connected to our universe, not merely concepts.

8. Freethinking Ruins All Things

Comment #42698 by msv on May 19, 2007 at 4:31 am

"But, of course, religion is man-made. Men build the temples, write the prayers, organise the rites and offer the oblations and sacrifices. That does not mean that there is no divinely inspired and true religion".

Stupidity and self-contradiction aside - how do you discern what is divine and what is not?