Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Thursday = Thor's day

sivers.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 196 posts

Re: Thursday = Thor's day

#181

Post by nocman »

nollidge wrote: post #174
nocman wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"if you don't actually believe in god in the first place, than the decision to believe in god or not is just about as relevant as the decision to believe in santa claus" That's not really an a accurate statement. What a person believes doesn't determine what is relevant in this case. What does determine what is relevant is what the truth about God actually is. If God does exist, and if the Bible accurately describes…

What if you've got the wrong god? Then you're just as screwed as the atheists.

That's absolutely true. If there is one true God, you'd better make sure you've got the right one.

Re: Thursday = Thor's day

#182

Post by sofal »

arch_hunter wrote: post #155
sgk284 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the argument is fairly sound and is great at concisely explaining why religion is a product of humanity's imagination and current culture. (With all due respect, don't take this as an affront on your beliefs.) I like the argument for a number of reasons: - It beg's the question "Why do I reject those other 529 gods?" Generally there is no good answer for this other than being indoctrinated at a young age. You…

> It beg's the question "Why do I reject those other 529 gods?" Generally there is no good answer for this other than being indoctrinated at a young age. But that does not explain people who switch religions later in life. For myself, I decided that I could not be atheist after encountering spirits. My encounters with spirits disproved atheism for me, instead I am currently a Christian because that is the only religi…

This is interesting. I wouldn't say that atheism "denies" that spirits exist anymore than it denies that Russell's teapot exists. Besides, atheism still provides plenty of room for spirits should there be any evidence for them (subjective or objective). Since you have subjective evidence for spirits (which I'm not discounting), I wonder why you would make the leap from that to the validation of the entire Christian story, or why that leap has to involve a currently organized religion at all?

Re: Thursday = Thor's day

#183

Post by sofal »

reedlaw wrote: post #179
sgk284 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the argument is fairly sound and is great at concisely explaining why religion is a product of humanity's imagination and current culture. (With all due respect, don't take this as an affront on your beliefs.) I like the argument for a number of reasons: - It beg's the question "Why do I reject those other 529 gods?" Generally there is no good answer for this other than being indoctrinated at a young age. You…

I think this is a rather weak argument for the following reasons: -If God is not real, how can we explain the existence of so many counterfeits? -Most of the 529 gods that theists or Christians reject, for historical, scientific, and philosophical reasons, do not have a sound or rational basis for belief, such as Zeus or Thor. -Many Christians are familiar with the competing claims of other religions, even as espouse…

If God is not real, how can we explain the existence of so many counterfeits?

Is this not the perfect example of begging the question? In order to be a counterfeit for God, a non-counterfeit God would have to exist.

Most of the 529 gods that theists or Christians reject, for historical, scientific, and philosophical reasons, do not have a sound or rational basis for belief, such as Zeus or Thor.

I realize that Christians believe they have a sound and rational basis for belief and believe that other religions do not, but I don't believe that has been demonstrated, and it would need to be.

Many Christians are familiar with the competing claims of other religions, even as espoused by those faiths' most well-reasoned and ardent adherents, and yet still reject them.

And vice versa.

Re: Thursday = Thor's day

#184

Post by chrishaum »

VictorHo wrote: post #52
qeorge wrote: post #3

I love that we're living in a time where it's so easy to learn. Well put, Derek. Me too.

I agree with that statement, but it does pain me that this was his big takeaway. There is no decision that is more life-impacting than belief/disbelief in a God. To see someone so quickly silenced/swayed by such simple rhetoric really illustrates how many important subjects are not getting nearly as much thought as they deserve. We will spend months stressing about a job or a start-up, which might affect our lives fo…

Thank you for standing up for things of eternal importance. I wholeheartedly agree.

Re: Thursday = Thor's day

#185

Post by alanh »

grellas wrote: post #73

The logic here doesn't hold with respect to monothestic religions such as Judaism or Christianity. The Ten Commandments, which are common to these two religions, have two "tables," the first of which (commandments 1 - 5) defines the relations between God and man and the second of which defines the relations between men (6 - 10). The very first commandment is "thou shalt have no other gods before me. The next proscrip…

Replace “520 gods” with “520 religions.” (The true number of trivially unique religions is closer to the number of people who have ever lived, since many peoples' beliefs differ from denominational creeds.) “Problem” solved.

Re: Thursday = Thor's day

#186

Post by nocman »

ericb wrote: post #156
nocman wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"if you don't actually believe in god in the first place, than the decision to believe in god or not is just about as relevant as the decision to believe in santa claus" That's not really an a accurate statement. What a person believes doesn't determine what is relevant in this case. What does determine what is relevant is what the truth about God actually is. If God does exist, and if the Bible accurately describes…

Pascal's wager only makes some semblance of sense when you consider one possible god with a simple "damned if you don't" heuristic. Throw in all the possible gods that have come before and after (Ra, Zeus, Freyja, Odin, The Moonies) and the wager starts to look pretty bad when you have to pick the "right one."

I don't see how you went from my post to Pascal's wager. Please explain.

Re: Thursday = Thor's day

#187

Post by bertm »

nfnaaron wrote: post #178
VictorHo wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm merely pointing to the fact that many extremely intelligent individuals have given atheism a lot of thought and come out on both sides of the fence. Of all major world issues, topics of study, etc., I cannot think of another with bigger potential implications. Your statement that "religious belief should be an individual thing" is exactly the mindset that I am trying to address. The existence of a God is fact, or…

"The existence of a God is fact, or not fact. It's either true for everyone, or false for everyone." The existence of God is both fact and not fact, until you look in the box.

Good QM joke...

Re: Thursday = Thor's day

#188

Post by hugh3 »

nske wrote: post #163
hugh3 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's really interesting is that Portugese is one of the few European languages which doesn't follow this pattern, since at some point someone decided it was heretical to name days after those silly Pagan gods. So they have: * Domingo – Sunday * Segunda-feira – Monday * Terça-feira – Tuesday * Quarta-feira – Wednesday * Quinta-feira – Thursday * Sexta-feira – Friday * Sábado – Saturday Domingo is the Day of the Lord…

In greek it is rather similar: * Monday -> Δευτέρα ("second") * Tuesday -> Τρίτη("third") * Wednesday -> Τετάρτη ("fourth") * Thursday -> Πέμπτη ("fifth") * Friday -> Παρασκευή ("preperation") * Saturday -> Σάββατο ("sabbath") * Sunday -> Κυριακή ("of the lord) That version is being used since the time of the Roman Empire, before that, Greeks used the babylonian model that named days after planets -which in turn had…

So how many civilizations have _not_ had seven-day weeks?

Re: Thursday = Thor's day

#189

Post by reedlaw »

sofal wrote: post #183
reedlaw wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is a rather weak argument for the following reasons: -If God is not real, how can we explain the existence of so many counterfeits? -Most of the 529 gods that theists or Christians reject, for historical, scientific, and philosophical reasons, do not have a sound or rational basis for belief, such as Zeus or Thor. -Many Christians are familiar with the competing claims of other religions, even as espouse…

If God is not real, how can we explain the existence of so many counterfeits? Is this not the perfect example of begging the question? In order to be a counterfeit for God, a non-counterfeit God would have to exist. Most of the 529 gods that theists or Christians reject, for historical, scientific, and philosophical reasons, do not have a sound or rational basis for belief, such as Zeus or Thor. I realize that Christ…

Let me put it another way: what is the basis for the vast majority of humankind's belief in a deity of some sort? If the idea has no basis in reality, then can someone demonstrate the reason for this belief with the same degree of intellectual rigor that is demanded from Christians for their beliefs? Dismissing it as mere superstition is inadequate. An evolutionary hypothesis would be quite hard to prove.

Re: Thursday = Thor's day

#190

Post by tjogin »

huherto wrote: post #165
twp wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Comparing the belief in Christ with the belief in Zeus ... for a Christian it may actually be insulting? Why? Why the double standards? We both find belief in Zeus ridiculous. What's fundamentally different about the Christian God in 2000 AD and the Greek God in 0AD? What statement can you make that is valid for the Christian God but is plainly ridiculous when you replace the word "God" with the word "Zeus"?

because Christians are people too...they have feelings. I am not arguing that the Christian God is more logical than Zeus. But be careful to bring it up on date if you don't want to end up in an argument like this one. Respect the religious beliefs of other people because they are important for them.

Why though? I mean, we generally don't think it is important to respect other people's irrational beliefs — why is this one any different from all the other irrational beliefs a person can hold?
Post reply on HN