If you chose God, you are no different than those who pick Sharia Law
[quote]Severiano wrote:
If you chose God, you are no different than those who pick Sharia Law[/quote]
Nuh UH!!!
'Cuz… our God’s BETTER than their God.
[quote]Severiano wrote:
If you chose God, you are no different than those who pick Sharia Law[/quote]
And if you pick government you are doing exactly what the national socialists did.
(and sharia law requires a government FTR)
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]Severiano wrote:
If you chose God, you are no different than those who pick Sharia Law[/quote]
Nuh UH!!!
'Cuz… our God’s BETTER than their God.[/quote]
I’m sort of surprised you actually entertain that garbage as remotely accurate Varq
Point of clarification, please:
I need a Maserati Gran Turismo S in white and a house within walking distance of the lifts in Lake Tahoe. How will these needs be provided to me by 1) God and 2) Government.
I figure God could just send his Son down to take care of the car. I mean, if he can conjour up enough wine and fishes to feed a crowd of people, a sports coupe can’t be that hard. I’m thinking a 4 bedroom, 3 bath house might be a bit trickier even for the King of the Jews.
With the gov’ts power of taxation, it should have no problem providing for my needs.
I think I’ll cast my stone with Government.
All right. I’ll play along.
Let us first, as Socrates was wont to say, define our terms.
The choice is between being dependent upon a government, OR being dependent upon God.
Which means that the choice of the one must necessarily obviate the other: If you choose government, there can be no God in your life, and if you choose God, there can be no government. Conveniently enough, we have words for the concepts of “no god” and “no government”. They are, of course, Atheism on the one hand, and Anarchy on the other.
So these are the choices the OP has given us. Atheism or Anarchy.
But neither has to be so bad.
Let’s look at Anarchy first. We conjure up an unpleasant image of the Mad Anarchist, cloaked in dark trench coat, the fiendish grin on his crazed face obscured by the dark shadow cast by his wide-brimmed hat. He clutches an old-fashioned spherical cast iron gunpowder bomb with smouldering fuze, poised to toss it into a government office before scurrying away down a dark alley.
But wait. In a true anarchy, the “anarchist” would cease to exist. In the total absence of government, an anarchist would have nothing to oppose. There would be no officials to assassinate, no buildings to bomb, no alleys down which to scurry. No cities, for that matter: it takes government to create infrastructure, and without an entity with the power to command resources on a scale that is only possible when you can extort taxes from a large population, there would be no highways, no power grid, no water or sewage systems, no sanitation systems, no telecommunications systems. There would of course be no banking, because fiat currency requires the illusion of government backing.
An existence completely devoid of government would be nomadic, agrarian, or perhaps even hunter-gatherer tribal. You would be responsible for yourself and your family, answerable to no one but God…which is to say, to the laws of nature, because none of the laws of men would exist.
One nice thing about being dependent on God/Nature: it’s not crowded at all. Imagine for a moment all of the people who are utterly dependent upon federal, state and local government for their livelihood, or for their very survival.
Now imagine all of them gone.
Okay, next is Atheism. First of all, despite all of the cliched arguments about the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany and China, there has never been a completely atheist government in the history of mankind. Kings have appealed to divine right ever since the first savage priest crowned the first savage chieftain. Totalitarian dictators make themselves figures of worship, their manifestos holy scriptures, their pronouncements commandments. They co-opt the sacred rituals of religion to serve their own purposes, demand oaths of obedience and abject servility, and punish heresy and infidelity with torture and death, just as any self-respecting theocracy would.
So a government completely without God is something that has never been tried. How would such a government look? Well, I like the description given by Hitchens, of a society built upon the philosophies of Socrates, Albert Einstein, Voltaire, Spinoza, Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, Charles Darwin, and Isaac Newton. A government that devotes the bulk of its revenue to advancements in science and education, rather than “defence”.
Faced with these two options, I might choose both: I might spend half the year in the Civilised Atheist City, a devoted member of society and conscientious contributor to the wise and benevolent government, then half the time in the Savage Anarchist Wilderness, living off the land, walking daily with God in the Garden.
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
it takes government to create infrastructure, and without an entity with the power to command resources on a scale that is only possible when you can extort taxes from a large population, there would be no highways, no power grid, no water or sewage systems, no sanitation systems, no telecommunications systems. There would of course be no banking, because fiat currency requires the illusion of government backing.
. [/quote]
lmao… Now I know you’re just trolling
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
it takes government to create infrastructure, and without an entity with the power to command resources on a scale that is only possible when you can extort taxes from a large population, there would be no highways, no power grid, no water or sewage systems, no sanitation systems, no telecommunications systems. There would of course be no banking, because fiat currency requires the illusion of government backing.
. [/quote]
lmao… Now I know you’re just trolling[/quote]
You told me to play along.
You didn’t say I had to play nice.
[quote]Dr. Pangloss wrote:
With the gov’ts power of taxation, it should have no problem providing for my needs.
I think I’ll cast my stone with Government.[/quote]
Ya, but if you rely solely on the government (like everyone else I’m assuming in this little experiment) who are they taxing?
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
All right. I’ll play along.
Let us first, as Socrates was wont to say, define our terms.
The choice is between being dependent upon a government, OR being dependent upon God.
Which means that the choice of the one must obviate necessarily the other: If you choose government, there can be no God in your life, and if you choose God, there can be no government. Conveniently enough, we have words for the concepts of “no god” and “no government”. They are, of course, Atheism on the one hand, and Anarchy on the other.
So these are the choices the OP has given us. Atheism or Anarchy.
But neither has to be so bad.
Let’s look at Anarchy first. We conjure up an unpleasant image of the Mad Anarchist, cloaked in dark trench coat, the fiendish grin on his crazed face obscured by the dark shadow cast by his wide-brimmed hat. He clutches an old-fashioned spherical cast iron gunpowder bomb with smouldering fuze, poised to toss it into a government office before scurrying away down a dark alley.
But wait. In a true anarchy, the “anarchist” would cease to exist. In the total absence of government, an anarchist would have nothing to oppose. There would be no officials to assassinate, no buildings to bomb, no alleys down which to scurry. No cities, for that matter: it takes government to create infrastructure, and without an entity with the power to command resources on a scale that is only possible when you can extort taxes from a large population, there would be no highways, no power grid, no water or sewage systems, no sanitation systems, no telecommunications systems. There would of course be no banking, because fiat currency requires the illusion of government backing.
An existence completely devoid of government would be nomadic, agrarian, or perhaps even hunter-gatherer tribal. You would be responsible for yourself and your family, answerable to no one but God…which is to say, to the laws of nature, because none of the laws of men would exist.
One nice thing about being dependent on God/Nature: it’s not crowded at all. Imagine for a moment all of the people who are utterly dependent upon federal, state and local government for their livelihood, or for their very survival.
Now imagine all of them gone.
Okay, next is Atheism. First of all, despite all of the clich�©d arguments about the Soviet Union, Nazi Germany and China, there has never been a completely atheist government in the history of mankind. Kings have appealed to divine right ever since the first savage priest crowned the first savage chieftain. Totalitarian dictators make themselves figures of worship, their manifestos holy scriptures, their pronouncements commandments. They co-opt the sacred rituals of religion to serve their own purposes, demand oaths of obedience and abject servility, and punish heresy and infidelity with torture and death, just as any self-respecting theocracy would.
So a government completely without God is something that has never been tried. How would such a government look? Well, I like the description given by Hitchens, of a society built upon the philosophies of Socrates, Albert Einstein, Voltaire, Spinoza, Thomas Paine, Thomas Jefferson, Charles Darwin, and Isaac Newton. A government that devotes the bulk of its revenue to advancements in science and education, rather than “defence”.
Faced with these two options, I might choose both: I might spend half the year in the Civilised Atheist City, a devoted member of society and conscientious contributor to the wise and benevolent government, then half the time in the Savage Anarchist Wilderness, living off the land, walking daily with God in the Garden. [/quote]
Atheism deals with belief, not existence. Belief does not change truth. A society without gravity wouldn’t be one that lived in the present world but in which no one acknowledged the force gravity.
Maybe I misunderstand the question, but what you are discussing seems to be a question about belief and not reality. It’s 2 different questions and the reason I answered like I did.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]Varqanir wrote:
[quote]Severiano wrote:
If you chose God, you are no different than those who pick Sharia Law[/quote]
Nuh UH!!!
'Cuz… our God’s BETTER than their God.[/quote]
I’m sort of surprised you actually entertain that garbage as remotely accurate Varq[/quote]
Surely you have been around me long enough to discern when I am making an ironic statement.
[quote]usmccds423 wrote:
Ya, but if you rely solely on the government (like everyone else I’m assuming in this little experiment) who are they taxing?
[/quote]
Don’t tax you. Don’t tax me. Tax the guy behind the tree.
- Russel B Long
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Atheism deals with belief, not existence. [/quote]
I beg to differ. Atheism deals with the possibility of existence without belief.
No indeed. But one’s perception of truth can certainly be influenced by what one believes.
A society “without gravity”(i.e. one that doesn’t acknowledge gravity) would, in order for its beliefs to gain traction*, have to be one situated in zero gravity, where there would not be, as there is on our present world, a preponderance** of evidence for the force we call gravity.
The question was, “would you rather be dependent on God for all your needs, or on Government”. It’s an either/or proposition, and I described the two options as I envisioned them. By my definition of “being dependent on God” (and not government) and “being dependent on Government” (and not God), I would choose either one, as each has its attraction. By someone else’s definition, I might choose neither.
- that was a pun
** that was too
[quote]pabergin wrote:
… be completely and utterly dependent on the government for provision of your needs
OR
be completely and utterly dependent on God (even if atheist etc) for provision of your needs? [/quote]
There is little difference between the belief in God or Government. Religion and statism are one and the same.
If there is a creator then everything is dependent on god. If there is no god then everything is dependent on man. I would say, that depending on if you believe in a god, you already live in one of the 2 scenarios in the original question. So, if you believe in god, you already believe you are in a world wholly dependent on god. To answer the question it would then be necessary to hypothesize if you?d rather live in the present world, or an imaginary world where no god existed (and vice versa for the atheist).
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]pabergin wrote:
… be completely and utterly dependent on the government for provision of your needs
OR
be completely and utterly dependent on God (even if atheist etc) for provision of your needs? [/quote]
There is little difference between the belief in God or Government. Religion and statism are one and the same.[/quote]
But religion and belief in god are different things.
Well we have them both now and things are not so great. There was a time when it was only God and things did not go so well ie the dark ages. So in name of the game government, they can be killed.
[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
[quote]pabergin wrote:
… be completely and utterly dependent on the government for provision of your needs
OR
be completely and utterly dependent on God (even if atheist etc) for provision of your needs? [/quote]
There is little difference between the belief in God or Government. Religion and statism are one and the same.[/quote]
But religion and belief in god are different things.[/quote]
In my analogy god is the state.
Statism is its own religion.
[quote]streamline wrote:
Well we have them both now and things are not so great. There was a time when it was only God and things did not go so well ie the dark ages. So in name of the game government, they can be killed.[/quote]
Lifty, why do you bother with 2 accounts?
Just use one please.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
[quote]streamline wrote:
Well we have them both now and things are not so great. There was a time when it was only God and things did not go so well ie the dark ages. So in name of the game government, they can be killed.[/quote]
Lifty, why do you bother with 2 accounts?
Just use one please. [/quote]
Hey, I only have one and have just started posting again after almost 2 years away from PWI forums.