A Possible New Way of Classifying Atheists/Agnostics

[bocablkr]

Open question for David Sklansky,

I am a little confused on you views on God. After reading most of you posts I thought you were an Atheist (including this one). However, in another post it appears that you believe that a God created the Universe and then basically left it alone to evolve as it may. Do you believe that the Universe was created by some supernatural being? Then you are not an Atheist. Not sure what you would be called. Personally, I am an atheist and have never believed in God.

[einbert]

[ QUOTE ]

I prefer to think of Solomon as a realist.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well even Jesus when through some very disillusioning and depresssing times in his life. I think it's safe to assume that Solomon did too. For any person to climb to such knowledge within a lifetime, I think it would be necessary.

[Duke]

[ QUOTE ]
"The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be;
and that which is done is that which shall be done:
and there is no new thing under the sun." - Ecclesiastes 1:9

[/ QUOTE ]

This can't be used against David unless it's also used against, say, Adam.

~D

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be;
and that which is done is that which shall be done:
and there is no new thing under the sun." - Ecclesiastes 1:9

[/ QUOTE ]

This can't be used against David unless it's also used against, say, Adam.

~D

[/ QUOTE ]

Why?

[KidPokerX]

This won't work for many different reasons I will discuss later.

[Girchuck]

But at least one thing did change and its big.

Humans have the capacity to utterly destroy themselves as a species now. The option of species suicide was not available when Ecclesiastes wrote his lament.

This option of species suicide is a technological innovation of 20th century. I predict that this option will become easier and cheaper in the 21st century and it represents a unique challenge to the existance of humanity. If we are to avoid exercising our annihilation option, we will need to change our thinking.

[sexdrugsmoney]

[ QUOTE ]
But at least one thing did change and its big.

Humans have the capacity to utterly destroy themselves as a species now. The option of species suicide was not available when Ecclesiastes wrote his lament.

This option of species suicide is a technological innovation of 20th century. I predict that this option will become easier and cheaper in the 21st century and it represents a unique challenge to the existance of humanity. If we are to avoid exercising our annihilation option, we will need to change our thinking.

[/ QUOTE ]

Kind of like the reverse of the creation of mankind and/or the planet, and a return to how things were before we were here?

The thing that has been (non-existence of man and/or earth) is that which shall be. (non-existence of man and/or earth)

But it's true they can choose to annihilate themselves, and you also make a good point about humans needing to change their thinking if they are to avoid this, however I personally think it's an impossible goal.

Yet I'm a pessimist. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Cheers,
SDM

[KidPokerX]

Look, if I had to vote I would vote no. Plain and simple.