City of IF :: View topic - The Atheist thread.

through

[^/[Print]\]

City of IF -> Hall of Debate

#1: The Atheist thread. Author: Chinaren, Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Posted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 8:15 pm
—
This thread is dedicated to the Atheist, and will be devoted to mockery of all forms of religion.

If you are religious, it would be best to refrain from reading this. You are of course free to start a religious thread, where the conditions will be the same for Atheists.

Firstly, let me state:

I believe that everyone has a right to believe in what they want, as long as it doesn't affect me. I also believe in the freedom to mock religions, and indeed, the freedom of religious people to mock Atheism. Don't dish it out if you can't take it is my POV.

Any claims of 'blasphemy' will fall on deaf ears. As an Atheist, the word is meaningless to me in this context.

By posting in this thread, any non-Atheist types hereby agree to be ridiculed.

You may also be interested in this post on my Blog of Lies.

Thank you for reading.

Last edited by Chinaren on Sun May 02, 2010 2:51 pm; edited 2 times in total

#2: Author: Chinaren, Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Posted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 8:16 pm
—

#3: Author: Chinaren, Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Posted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 8:16 pm
—

An Atheist believes that a hospital should be built instead of a church. An Atheist believes that a deed must be done instead of a prayer said. An Atheist strives for involvement in life and not escape into death. He wants disease conquered, poverty vanquished, war eliminated. He wants man to understand and love man.’

‘I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.’ - Steven Roberts

‘And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence.’ - Bertrand Russell

‘Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned.’

‘We must question the story logic of having an all-knowing all-powerful God, who creates faulty Humans, and then blames them for his own mistakes.’ - Gene Roddenberry

‘Without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.’ - Steven Weinberg

‘Two hands working can do more than a thousand clasped in prayer.’

‘Men rarely (if ever) manage to dream up a God superior to themselves. Most Gods have the manners and morals of a spoiled child.’ - Robert A. Heinlein

‘I have examined all the known superstitions of the world, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology.’ - Thomas Jefferson

‘Which is it, is man one of God’s blunders or is God one of man’s?’ - Friedrich Nietzsche

‘Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day; teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime; give a man religion and he will die praying for a fish.’

‘Religion does three things quite effectively: Divides people, Controls people, Deludes people.’ - Carlespie Mary Alice McKinney

‘Be thankful that you have a life, and forsake your vain and presumptuous desire for a second one.’ - Richard Dawkins

‘The Government of the United States is in no sense founded on the Christian religion.’ - John Adams, 2nd President of the United States

‘You do not need the bible to justify love, but no better tool has been invented to justify hate.’ - Richard A. Weatherwax

‘They felt that science would be corrosive to religious belief and they were worried about it. Damn it, I think they were right. It is corrosive to religious belief and it’s a good thing.’ - Steven Weinberg

‘It is not as in the Bible, that God created man in his own image. But, on the contrary, man created God in his own image.’ - Ludwig Feuerbach

#4: Author: Chinaren, Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Posted: Thu Jun 25, 2009 8:18 pm
—

#5: Author: Smee, Location: UK

Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 12:04 am
—
I just don't understand some people's need to believe in a higher power in order to function/be happy.

Each to their own though - so long as they don't try to help me 'find God'. If such a being really wanted me to find him, I'm sure he'll make himself known.

The film Devil's Advocate, one of my favourite quotes from Al Pacino playing the Devil, always makes me smile :

"Let me give you a little inside information about God. God likes to watch. He's a prankster. Think about it. He gives man instincts. He gives you this extraordinary gift, and then what does He do, I swear for His own amusement, his own private, cosmic gag reel, He sets the rules in opposition. It's the goof of all time.

Look but don't touch.
Touch, but don't taste.
Taste, don't swallow.

Ahaha. And while you're jumpin' from one foot to the next, what is he doing? He's laughin' His sick, fuckin' ass off! He's a tight-ass! He's a SADIST! He's an absentee landlord! Worship that? NEVER! "

#6: Author: Guest,

Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 12:28 am
—
I hope to claim and say that my friend thought I was a satanist, is that the same as an atheits, ok I just like to say I won't changfe anyone's POV of how they see God, you guys are already to far deep into hating him, I've never tried pushing someone to do something... And I never will. Take it from a christain(who isn't bothered by other religions, but believes that there is a flying spaceship in the bible.... ssss, don't tell anyone... ) I think none will try and change your point of view aslong as you don't change their point of view everything will be A ok... but if the person isn't sure if he has a religion or not, make sure the person feels ok to know what is right for him/her and don't bother them about religion ever again...

#7: Author: Phang, Location: Phang's House of Mints

Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 5:03 am
—

Christalnightshade wrote:

I hope to claim and say that my friend thought I was a satanist, is that the same as an atheits

No, Satanism is not the same as Atheism. Satanism, being concerned with Satan*, cannot be compared to Atheism, which believes in none o' that.

As for me, I am certainly not religious but I definitely wouldn't call myself Atheist. Especially as I am a teenager the majority of my experiences with Atheism have been a bunch of bandwagon-thunder 'trolls' and the especially 'controversial' persons who manage to get TV documentaries.

And on that note, it's ok to take the piss but isn't this thread a little mean-spirited? You're not a certain little attention-seeking tagalong in my classes (name changed for security reasons...phht) who has to 'prove' their atheism by declaring it (quite tackily, 'n' all).

*Or so one would presume. Everyone I hear of has a different idea of what Satanism entails.

Caution, comedy option incoming...: I am a Stanist.

#8: Author: Smee, Location: UK

Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:46 am
—

Quote:

you guys are already to far deep into hating him

No - you have it entirely wrong. I don't believe he exists. That's very, very, very different from hating.

#9: Author: Guest,

Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 6:50 am
—
Thank you for that phang... And why did your name change? and whois the tag along, you can p.m me. I really want ot know what you meant by those words... As I've never hated anyone's religion, I've we've had muslim people come over and we offered them halal or coshuir... Smile

#10: Author: Guest,

Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 7:00 am
—
I'm sorry for my error in judgement of your use of words Smee...

#11: Author: Phang, Location: Phang's House of Mints

Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 8:06 am
—

Christalnightshade wrote:

Thank you for that phang... And why did your name change? and whois the tag along, you can p.m me. I really want ot know what you meant by those words...

My name changed?

And really, the name isn't important. I'd just be a little uncomfortable with posting someone else's name without their knowledge or consent (not like I'd get a word in edgeways to ask her).

If I may ask, Chri, how religious would you say your area is? Just for a little understanding on cultural background, to better explain the sort of show-atheism I have here in comparison to your surroundings.

#12: Author: Guest,

Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 8:43 am
—
oh we're normal really, we have atheits and poeple with no religion, mostly we have christains who doesn't care what religion the person has aslong as the person doesn't say anything rude about each others religion, but you'd meet poeple who are really nice and caring and understanding in my area, we've got little Atheits and little poeple without religion. Mostly we worship God through prayer, not to long ago I prayed that my family would be alright, cause I'm a but superstitious really, that is how they thought I was a satanist... I've never met a satanist in my life and I've only met an atheist who was a very close friend of mine, until one day I had confusion and my friends thought I was ignoring them more... Oh dear me I've trailed off into my life in middle school. I'm sorry... I've been a christain all my life and I now have a good friend who has no religion, we really care about all the poeple in this world and we try to learn all the facts and all the doodads before we speak about religion... I hope that made sence... we'll it's mostly how I see my self and how I hope others would act aswell no matter what religion they are... the majority of our poeple are big, but not as big as china, I remember how I never could sing with songs always just open and closed my mouth when I couldn't understand the words... Smile

oh yes we've got alot of cathliks. Smile

WE've got a lot of poeple who wish they know God who has no bibles and they are sarving. About two days ago my friend went to cailitcha to talk about religion to poeple help heal them and make them have joy in their life. which is very noble. But one thing I know is poeple with no religion are very noble poeple...

#13: Author: The Meaning Of Fear, Location: In a deep, dark corner of the universe, plotting.

Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 3:41 pm
—
Well I'm an atheist myself but I'm always open to new opinions.

And I think this thread is a tad overboard. Perhaps we should tone it down a bit.

Going to post some random thoughts in the other thread in a few minutes. Go have a look.

#14: Author: Phang, Location: Phang's House of Mints

Posted: Fri Jun 26, 2009 10:06 pm
—

The Meaning Of Fear wrote:

And I think this thread is a tad overboard. Perhaps we should tone it down a bit.

Oh good, not just me then.

#15: Author: BStheGreat,

Posted: Sat Jun 27, 2009 11:15 pm
—
I'm not exactly an atheist as I recognize the possibility of a higher power. However I don't see any real differences between the polytheistic religions of Rome and Greece to the modern monotheistic religions of Christianity, Judaism, or Islam. I can't help but believe that in years to come they will be just as big of a joke as Zeus is to us now. I simply say that if there is a higher power, if there is an afterlife, may I be judged on my actions and not my beliefs. I would rather be a virtuous man of no faith than a sinner who prays for redemption every Sunday.

But to those of you who do practice and are true to a faith, I truly envy. It is something I wish I could believe.

#16: Author: Guest,

Posted: Sun Jun 28, 2009 11:07 pm
—
hello BS, We christains don't practice anything, but we do believe and have faith. I believe anyone can believe something even if their told that. We were in grade 11 we were sunday school teachers. I knew to little of how to talk to them about God, but my brother and his friend was with me on this and so I handeled the restless children and seldom talked about what the meaning in the bible was. So I hope you understand there are many others that can't explain the bible as good as others can and even beliefs can be for anyone. Though for me I don't question the higher power or the bible...

#17: Author: The White Blacksmith,

Posted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 11:53 am
—
How can you be so insistant about your faith and the faith of those around you and yet say that none of you are practising Christians? You confuse me.

#18: Author: Chinaren, Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Posted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 1:38 pm
—

Phang wrote:

The Meaning Of Fear wrote:

And I think this thread is a tad overboard. Perhaps we should tone it down a bit.

Oh good, not just me then.

I agree! Out of here you Christians! This is an Atheist thread. Nothing here for you to see.

Crady: Practicing, as I understand it, means doing those strange rituals and obeying the weird 'rules' of your particular cult.

ie: Not eating pork, or cows are sacred, or not wearing condoms, or falling to the floor and facing a certain direction four times a day etc.

BStG wrote:

But to those of you who do practice and are true to a faith, I truly envy. It is something I wish I could believe.

Why on earth would you be envious of blind faith? The person who questions everything is the person I respect, not some lemming who does random and weird stuff* because it's written in a storybook.

As for Sunday school and the like, it disgusts me.

I certainly don't mind people being religious, as I said in the first post, but brainwashing innocent kids into your cult is truly evil. People should be given a selection of choices, if we really must have religion at all, and then they can decide for themselves when they are mature enough.

Better still, learn to believe in yourself.

I believe the US does a lot of crazy and stupid stuff, but taking religion out of schools is one thing it's got right. Something other counties should follow.

*See above.

#19: Author: Fenris,

Posted: Mon Jun 29, 2009 8:06 pm
—
...a God who could make good children as easily a bad, yet preferred to make bad ones; who could have made every one of them happy, yet never made a single happy one; who made them prize their bitter life, yet stingily cut it short; who gave his angels eternal happiness unearned, yet required his other children to earn it; who gave is angels painless lives, yet cursed his other children with biting miseries and maladies of mind and body; who mouths justice, and invented hell--mouths mercy, and invented hell--mouths Golden Rules and forgiveness multiplied by seventy times seven, and invented hell; who mouths morals to other people, and has none himself; who frowns upon crimes, yet commits them all; who created man without invitation, then tries to shuffle the responsibility for man's acts upon man, instead of honorably placing it where it belongs, upon himself; and finally, with altogether divine obtuseness, invites his poor abused slave to worship him!
- No. 44, The Mysterious Stranger
Mark Twain

#20: Author: BStheGreat,

Posted: Wed Jul 01, 2009 8:27 pm
—

Chinaren wrote:

Why on earth would you be envious of blind faith? The person who questions everything is the person I respect, not some lemming who does random and weird stuff* because it's written in a storybook.

Better to die happy and foolish than sad and right.

#21: Author: Chinaren, Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Posted: Wed Jul 01, 2009 9:18 pm
—

BStheGreat wrote:

Chinaren wrote:

Why on earth would you be envious of blind faith? The person who questions everything is the person I respect, not some lemming who does random and weird stuff* because it's written in a storybook.

Better to die happy and foolish than sad and right.

I'd rather die happy and right (such as now) And what difference does it make in the end?

#22: Author: Guest,

Posted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 8:21 am
—
*Cpie walks in* I'm not going to continue this chat and I should have never started it. We might pray everyday, but we feel it is the right thing to do, even if some of you think it is a lot of dip* stuff. Understand I however aren't going to fight about this, I thought for once you guys would just accept each others faith or even their religion... but I guess that is just a little girl dreaming away. *and fades away*

#23: Etherealism Author: vgmaster, Location: The City of Angels

Posted: Fri Jul 03, 2009 3:12 pm
—
I'm religious, but my religion is centered around love and happiness. 11 gods all committed to making sure the universe runs with no kinks. There is only one branch too. I don't like religious arguments either. I'll just ignore this thread now.... Bye.

#24: Author: Chinaren, Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2009 12:17 am
—
A couple more.

#25: Author: Chinaren, Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2009 12:21 am
—

Christalnightshade wrote:

*Cpie walks in* I'm not going to continue this chat and I should have never started it. We might pray everyday, but we feel it is the right thing to do, even if some of you think it is a lot of dip* stuff. Understand I however aren't going to fight about this, I thought for once you guys would just accept each others faith or even their religion... but I guess that is just a little girl dreaming away. *and fades away*

At the top of this thread I clearly state it's an Atheist thread. It isn't a religious discussion thread, possibly quite the opposite.

I also clearly state I firmly believe people can worship as and what they wish, as long as it doesn't affect me and mine.

#26: Re: Etherealism Author: Phang, Location: Phang's House of Mints

Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2009 9:03 am
—

vgmaster wrote:

I'm religious, but my religion is centered around love and happiness. 11 gods all committed to making sure the universe runs with no kinks. There is only one branch too. I don't like religious arguments either. I'll just ignore this thread now.... Bye.

Come back! Come back! This is relevant to my interests!

#27: Author: BStheGreat,

Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2009 10:30 pm
—

Chinaren wrote:

I'd rather die happy and right (such as now) And what difference does it make in the end?

That is a good point. It really doesn't matter how you are feeling when you die anyway. What comes after will come after, if there is an after. And if not, then nothing will occur.

#28: Re: Etherealism Author: vgmaster, Location: The City of Angels

Posted: Sat Jul 04, 2009 11:27 pm
—

Phang wrote:

vgmaster wrote:

Come back! Come back! This is relevant to my interests!

You summoned?

#29: Re: Etherealism Author: Phang, Location: Phang's House of Mints

Posted: Sun Jul 05, 2009 4:39 am
—

vgmaster wrote:

Phang wrote:

vgmaster wrote:

Come back! Come back! This is relevant to my interests!

You summoned?

Yes, indeed I did.

#30: Author: vgmaster, Location: The City of Angels

Posted: Sun Jul 05, 2009 1:25 pm
—
What did you want?

#31: Author: Phang, Location: Phang's House of Mints

Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 5:07 am
—
More info on this 11 gods thingy.

#32: Author: Scheherazade, Location: Land of Rain and More Rain (but really southwestern BC, in Canada)

Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 8:56 am
—
Just curious... Of those of you who mock Christianity (Christianity in specific, not religion in general), how many have actually read some of the New Testament?

#33: Author: BStheGreat,

Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 8:58 am
—
I have read some of it. By why should we need to read their books, when if they read ours its considered blasphemy.

#34: Author: Scheherazade, Location: Land of Rain and More Rain (but really southwestern BC, in Canada)

Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 9:10 am
—
It... actually isn't. Many Christians do read the books of other religions, and it is not considered blasphemy; it is one of the best ways to increase knowledge about other people's beliefs (the best being, of course, asking them). And you need to have information about something in order to criticize it. If you knew nothing at all about Vicki Huntington, the MLA (political office) my riding, how would you manage to mock her? Your words would have no meaning because you don't know who she is and what she's like. If you tried to write a criticism of, say, Ulysses by James Joyce without having read the book, wouldn't your words mean nothing at all?

#35: Author: Chinaren, Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 5:37 pm
—
I have read some of the bible, but frankly I've read better. The plot was pretty lame, and the writing was all over the place.

Still, I guess the writing techniques weren't very sophisticated 2k years ago, and it's been translated and whatnot so many times the original story has likely been twisted so much it doesn't even resemble the first print run.

However, to answer your question, I don't have to read a storybook* to mock religion. The whole concept is what I consider ridiculous.

*Bible, Quran or whichever.

#36: Author: vgmaster, Location: The City of Angels

Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 6:55 pm
—

Phang wrote:

More info on this 11 gods thingy.

More specific please.

#37: Author: BStheGreat,

Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 7:30 pm
—

Scheherazade wrote:

It... actually isn't. Many Christians do read the books of other religions, and it is not considered blasphemy;

Being an atheist means you have no religion. And I do seem to remember tales of books being burned by the church many a time.

And as Chinaren has said, I am simply against religion in general. For thousands of years religion has been used as a tool, nothing more, to cause war, justify hate, and cause nothing but pain. Islam, the religion of peace, has a history full of war. Christianity has long since been corrupted, and full of hypocrits. Judaism is simply an excuse for practising segregation.

No, I have not read the entire bible, especially not the new testament. There is only so many blah blah begot blah blah that I can take before I close it. Although, I am currently reading and enjoying The Bible According to Mark Twain.

#38: Author: Fenris,

Posted: Mon Jul 06, 2009 9:11 pm
—

BStheGreat wrote:

Although, I am currently reading and enjoying The Bible According to Mark Twain.

AWESOME choice.

#39: Author: Scheherazade, Location: Land of Rain and More Rain (but really southwestern BC, in Canada)

Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2009 11:33 am
—
*coughs*

Scheherazade wrote:

(Christianity in specific, not religion in general)

I can't speak for any but those who follow (or try to follow) Christ; I don't have nearly enough information.

Just because a few apples - or even most of a tree - are rotten doesn't mean that the whole forest is bad. Although some (many) people screw up and blame it on religion, that doesn't mean that religion is inherently bad; it only means that those people are lazy, don't want to take responsibility for their actions, and/or don't really understand that which they say they believe.

BStheGreat wrote:

when if they read ours its considered blasphemy.

Scheherazade wrote:

Many Christians do read the books of other religions, and it is not considered blasphemy

BStheGreat wrote:

Being an atheist means you have no religion

So then your definition of 'religion' used here seems to be "a set of beliefs based on a deity" - why not expand your definition to something like "a set of beliefs regarding spiritual matters?" That seems far more accurate in the circumstances, and one more more suited to a discussion (sorry C'ren - should this be moved to a different thread?)

I agree that religion has, is, and will be used as an excuse by people to do nasty things. Christianity is, of course, the most famous example (I don't suppose I need to mention Crusades, the Inquisitions, indulgences, etc?). However, that doesn't mean that it is nothing but an excuse. If you would actually look at Christ instead of simply dismissing him because thinking is harder than not thinking, you would see the person who Christians have been trying to be more like for 2000 years - someone who, among other things, spoke out against the hypocritical, tradition-bound practices of the time.

Oh, and as an aside, you'd probably enjoy reading Terry Pratchett 's book Small Gods - he's an excellent writer.

#40: Author: Phang, Location: Phang's House of Mints

Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2009 11:36 am
—

vgmaster wrote:

Phang wrote:

More info on this 11 gods thingy.

More specific please.

I can't, I only know all of one sentence.

Anyway, can someone get a dictionary definition of atheism all up in this thread so I can whine about strawmanning and misguidance with foundation?

#41: Author: BStheGreat,

Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2009 2:37 pm
—
Do you want me to look at him as a god or as the mortal man he was? I do not simply dismiss him because I don't agree with his teachings, some of them I follow. However I do not believe he was the son of god. Your attitude of "Embrace Jesus!" is exactly what is wrong with religion, and Christianity in specific. I don't walk around trying to convert Christians, I let them be and live my life. But Christians belief that for some reason everybody has to be Christian.

#42: Author: Chinaren, Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2009 6:59 pm
—
I've known many a christian, as well as other faiths. I don't think that everyone who is religious is bad at all. Quite contraire, some of the kindest people I've known have been religious.

I totally agree that religion, like a knife, is a tool. It can be used nicely, or not so nicely.

I started this thread in a bad mood, it had been a day where everywhere I turned people seemed to be trying to ram some god or other down my neck, but, again, I've nothing against religious people, as long as they keep their mumbo jumbo out of my face. Wink

Now, can we get back on topic please?

Here's a very bad taste joke, but it made me laugh...

BAD TASTE WARNING!!!

Priest is out walking in the middle of nowhere, when he comes across a small girl sobbing at the edge of a cliff. "What's the matter, little girl?" asks the priest.

"Well," says the girl between sobs, "my mother and father were in the car and it rolled over the edge of the cliff, and is now burning fiercely!"

The priest replies, undoing his fly, "It's just not your day, is it?"

#43: Author: Scheherazade, Location: Land of Rain and More Rain (but really southwestern BC, in Canada)

Posted: Tue Jul 07, 2009 8:04 pm
—
BS, I wasn't trying to 'convert you.' I was trying to get you to discuss the topic rationally and with some idea of the points of the other side (I'm sorry if that offends you, but you don't appear willing to look at things from my point of view. Then again, I probably look equally inflexible to you Neut

). Also, isn't telling people about Jesus rather rational, even admirable in small quantities? (not so much in large quantities, of course...). If you found an something awesome, wouldn't you like to share it with people too? Wink

Now, with respect to C'ren - thank you so much for being both clear and honest about your views - I will stop cluttering his thread. BS, if you don't mind I would like to ask you another question in a message. It's quite all right if you don't answer, but I'd be interested to know what you think.

#44: Author: Phang, Location: Phang's House of Mints

Posted: Wed Jul 08, 2009 6:02 am
—

Chinaren wrote:

keep their mumbo jumbo out of my face. Wink

*shmrk*

Mr. Chinaren, you are older than me. You should have known already that any idea seems like a good one when you're in a bad mood.

#45: Author: snow tiger, Location: u wish

Posted: Wed Jul 08, 2009 12:06 pm
—
Scherzerade i absolutely agree with you.

Some people do use Christianity as an excuse to act immature.
Chinaren I don't know what you have against religion(especially christianity) but you might actually be surprised by how logical it is.
Don't forget that some religious books were written thousands of years ago and probably written in a way easier for those living then to understand but perhaps in a more different way from that which modern day people are used to thinking.
Yea, we know you think it's all a bunch of crap but could you please, please refrain from insulting religiousness?
Afterall, you wouldn't like it if somebody insulted your way of thinking and your way of life.
Oh, and even if i'm a christain, i can read and go where i want, when i want so please don't tell me what to do.

#46: Author: BStheGreat,

Posted: Wed Jul 08, 2009 4:02 pm
—
Snow tiger, I hate to point out the obvious but you knowingly read a thread which clearly stated it was meant for atheists. We are are not making fun of your religion, simply religion in general. You are correct that you can read and go where you want whenever you want (depending on what country you are in of course) but so can we. We also are allowed to write what we want.

Chinaren said this thread wasn't meant for bashing other people, but when you put yourself in the situation it is bound to happen. That being said, I apologize if I have offended anyone. I tend to be all fire and brimstone when I debate against someone.

#47: Author: HiddenHeartsCry, Location: It's bloody here

Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 4:14 am
—

BStheGreat wrote:

But Christians belief that for some reason everybody has to be Christian.

Exactly.

#48: Author: HiddenHeartsCry, Location: It's bloody here

Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 4:16 am
—

Chinaren wrote:

BAD TASTE WARNING!!!

Priest is out walking in the middle of nowhere, when he comes across a small girl sobbing at the edge of a cliff. "What's the matter, little girl?" asks the priest.

"Well," says the girl between sobs, "my mother and father were in the car and it rolled over the edge of the cliff, and is now burning fiercely!"

The priest replies, undoing his fly, "It's just not your day, is it?"

I believe that was just what I need this morning XD

#49: Author: Phang, Location: Phang's House of Mints

Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 11:45 am
—

HiddenHeartsCry wrote:

BStheGreat wrote:

But Christians belief that for some reason everybody has to be Christian.

Exactly.

Practically every religion does that nowadays. Makes sense.

#50: Author: BStheGreat,

Posted: Thu Jul 09, 2009 2:41 pm
—
Not they Jews.

#51: Author: Guest,

Posted: Fri Jul 10, 2009 11:17 am
—
Definitions of atheists on the Web:

Atheism is the position that deities do not exist, or the rejection of theism. In the broadest sense, it is the absence of belief in the existence ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheists

atheism - the doctrine or belief that there is no God
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

atheist - someone who denies the existence of god
atheist - related to or characterized by or given to atheism; "atheist leanings"
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

atheistic - rejecting any belief in gods
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Atheist are a technical death metal band from Florida, founded in 1984, whose music combined metal riffs with subtle latin music arrangements and ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheist_(band)

The Atheist is written by Irish born playwright, Ronan Noone. His previous plays include The Lepers of Baile Baiste (Critics Pick, Boston Globe ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Atheist_(play)

The Atheist is a horror comic book originally released in April 2005 and is published by Image Comics. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Atheist_(comics)

atheist - A person who does not believe that deities exist; one who lacks belief in gods; A person who believes that no deities exist; one who denies the ...
en.wiktionary.org/wiki/atheist

An Atheist is a member of the religion that teaches that God does not exist; moreover and Atheist is someone who is convinced that God does not exist.
www.creationkid.org/dictionary.html

don’t believe in the existence of god or gods. More recently, atheists have argued that atheism only denotes a lack of theistic belief, rather than the active denial or claims of certainty it is often associated with.
www.sexed-up-atheists.com/definitions.html

atheism - Atheists In modern times, those who do not accept the monotheistic Christian God or any god. It formerly signified those who did not believe in the accepted divinity or divinities of the State or populace.
www.theosociety.org/pasadena/etgloss/ass-atm.htm

atheism - A belief that there are no gods. Greek "a-theos": without-god. [see the 'Atheism' page for complete information]
www.reasoned.org/glossary.htm

Humanism Atheism & Secularism (www.Vexen.co.uk)
www.dpjs.co.uk/dictionary.html

atheist - As used by most self-claimed atheists in means lack of belief in an organized religion. In the dictionary, an atheist is someone who do not believe in a God. ...
stobie.home.sprynet.com/work/oxymorons.htm

#52: Author: Chinaren, Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Posted: Fri Jul 10, 2009 6:42 pm
—

Quote:

An Atheist is a member of the religion that teaches that God does not exist; moreover and Atheist is someone who is convinced that God does not exist.

'

Gah, this annoys me a lot. Atheism is the lack of religion. It isn't a religion. Mad

#53: Author: BStheGreat,

Posted: Fri Jul 10, 2009 6:55 pm
—

Chinaren wrote:

‘And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence.’ - Bertrand Russell

Out of curiosity has anyone read 'Why I Am Not A Christian' by Bertrand Russell. I recommend it, it brings of quite a few good points. You can read it for free Here

#54: Author: Guest,

Posted: Fri Jul 10, 2009 9:41 pm
—
To tell you the truth c'ren there are some young children who believe atheitism is a religion, religion has no meaning to them, even if they make their beliefs of no God at all. but I do believe there are some who believe it isn't a religion that they just believe there is no holy ghost of any kind or the angels. Atheits know too much about the bible to question it to a priest, instead they use the logic of their brain and fight for their own right or belief against what is to say in the christain world, by answering the questions themselves.

#55: Author: Phang, Location: Phang's House of Mints

Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2009 12:17 am
—
Hot diggity that's a lorra lorra definitions. Sod this, you can do whatever you like here, the title of 'atheist thread' couldn't become artifact if it tried.

#56: Author: Chinaren, Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Posted: Sat Jul 11, 2009 5:47 am
—

Quote:

some young children who believe atheitism is a religion,

Yeah well, young kids know sod all.

and...

Quote:

couldn't become artifact if it tried.

#57: Author: Phang, Location: Phang's House of Mints

Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2009 9:06 am
—

Chinaren wrote:

Quote:

couldn't become artifact if it tried.

Trap sprung! Some may declare it Bonking Time, but I, I know it to be Troping Time.

...It's not Shittin' Time either.

In general, it refers to a name or title whose meaning has been kinda lost due to change.

#58: Author: Mephistopheles, Location: Not where I want to be.

Posted: Sun Jul 12, 2009 5:09 pm
—
Interesting thread that has sprung up in my absence. I have read a good bit of the bible. Both testaments. I have attended some church services recently. Do I believe that there is a god that loves us all as his children? I am not sure. It is very possible. It is also entirely impossible. Man can explain a lot of the mysteries within the universe, and if he does not destroy himself, perhaps with time he can explain away all that christians rely upon god to explain. I think that those individuals who require divine guidance are best suited to be christians and have a god that scares them into being good. Those who have a conscious and are able to think for themselves don't need god. Let the sheep follow their shepherd if they need. I am of the thought that you do what you need to be happy in this shit existence. If God brings you happiness, more power to him. If you can find happiness in yourself, why screw with a good thing.

#59: Author: Crunchyfrog,

Posted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 12:13 am
—
Can agnostics post here? Very Happy

#60: Author: Phang, Location: Phang's House of Mints

Posted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 3:35 am
—

Crunchyfrog wrote:

Can agnostics post here? Very Happy

Sure, why not. I mean, I've been hanging around accosting people at the virtual doorway so I don't see why anyone should be unallowed.

#61: Author: Crunchyfrog,

Posted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 3:39 am
—
Great! I'll just go and sit on that fence over there, then. Or how about that other one on the other side?

Hmm. Just can't decide...

#62: Author: Chinaren, Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Posted: Mon Jul 13, 2009 5:28 am
—

Crunchyfrog wrote:

Great! I'll just go and sit on that fence over there, then. Or how about that other one on the other side?

Hmm. Just can't decide...

Bloody Agos! Wink

#63: Author: Fats_Masterson, Location: The Great Canadian Desert

Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2009 9:13 pm
—
Not surewhat this says about what but, in The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind by Julian Jaynes suggests that we as humans didn't develop into fully conscious creature until well after we began creating communities and societies. We were all essentially schizophrenic and that the different voices that were actually parts of our brains trying to talk to each other.

Now being not all that imaginative of a species most of these different voices shared characteristics with each other and when we began communicating with each other we noticed these similarities and grouped them as "supernatural" deities. As conscious thought became an evolutionary advantage we lost these "Gods" yet retained their stories through the oral tradition. Religion was a way of passing these stories and the knowledge that they contained, learned through experience.

Now what I find extrodinarily funny is that Religion was, at the beginning, a tool to teach and organize societies. It became an institution and eventually someone found a better way to explain the world, science. And now we have the grand church of reason. The laws of science are unbreakable, irrefutable and the ultimate rules of creation. Except that to really use the science we have, we have to have faith in an ideal we know is fundamentally wrong. (Thank you quantum physics)

Whew... That was quite a rant. Sorry guys. Like I said earlier not exactly sure what this says about anything, but I like to think about it to keep everything in persepctive.

#64: Author: BStheGreat,

Posted: Wed Jul 29, 2009 6:10 pm
—

Fats_Masterson wrote:

The laws of science are unbreakable, irrefutable and the ultimate rules of creation.

This isn't true at all. There are no definites in this world, something is only right as long as it is not proven wrong, and only wrong until it is proven right. Some things may seem irrefutable, but it is simply because an opportunity has not yet arisen to refute it.

#65: Author: The White Blacksmith,

Posted: Thu Jul 30, 2009 8:09 am
—

BStheGreat wrote:

Fats_Masterson wrote:

The laws of science are unbreakable, irrefutable and the ultimate rules of creation.

Yeah. The Earth was flat until we started sailing around it. Gravity pulled towards ONLY the centre of the earth until it was realised that someone on the side of Everest was pulled slightly towards Everest as well.

Scientific rules are only rules until they are disproven. If someone wearing rollerskates pushed on a wall and found they did not slide back, we'd have to completely revise our ideas on forces - we couldn't just call it an anomaly and ignore it. If we ignored things because they didn't fit with what we thought should happen then we'd never make any progress and experiments would be pointless.

#66: Author: sheik, Location: On the Fence

Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2009 1:29 am
—
Oh my god. It, makes sense. I came here with the intent of getting a good laugh at the warped attributes of their ideas but I'll be da_ned if they don't make sense! 18 years of being a Bible beating charlatan, a lifetime of being a mindless sheep; I didn't think, never questioned, just blindy followed through and off all the places in the world. To have opposition so bluntly thrust forward in simple laymen speak, with truth seeping through every pore of that first post. I can't...honestly. How the hell did I not see the folly behind it all?! ...I guess it came from being preached by all the ones I trusted and loved for my entire life. Sheesh. Well at least now I can safely safe I'm off the fence; for better or for worse.
Thanks Chinaren.

#67: Author: Chinaren, Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2009 2:26 am
—
No need for thanks Shake. Your salvation is reward enough for me.

#68: Author: Guest,

Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2009 2:57 am
—
Sorry I understood nothing of this. All I understood was that you talked about your people and then off the fence for better or for worse. And saving from salvation. I was like what? I cant understand big use of words, please spell it out then for those who believe their own things. I understand you say we can worship anyone we want to but aslong as it doesn't influince you.

#69: Author: The White Blacksmith,

Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2009 3:08 am
—
It seems Sheik has read the thread, listened to the arguments and decided to become an atheist when he has been a Christian all of his life.

#70: Author: Guest,

Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2009 4:45 am
—
I thought that might happen! Thanks c'ren I hope your happy, I thought you also didn't want to change others point of view. I had thoughts about being an athiets, but I'm not going to become one even if I wonder how it would be. Shiek do what you think is right, but don't try to leave your believfs behind, you can still believe there is a god out there and marry through christain ways, but you cans still be an athiest. Just don't leave yourself empty and sad. Please I don't want to see anyone with a empty space in their heart, try think things through before you make that choice.

#71: Author: Phang, Location: Phang's House of Mints

Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2009 8:48 am
—
Some stunning insight tells me Sheik is, in fact, taking the piss.

I'm not sure why I feel this way. Perhaps it's his/her exagerration. The fact that I couldn't see anyone learning anything from those demotivationals and contextless quotes if they were hit with a brick. Or maybe I just hope you're not humouring him/her because I hate that.

Also, Chri there's something...off about your posting which gives me a bad taste. Lack of experience means I can't quite place it, but...please, don't talk like these atheists are somehow lacking and in need of religion. I'll bet it's pissing Chin off! Laughing

#72: Author: Guest,

Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2009 9:09 am
—
Uh... Oh sorry about that then. All I was saying is that what sounds to me is that something sounds different in everyone posting now than earlier, it just makes me think about a space missing somewhere. Don't know why. Forgive my ramblings, I'm not a smart girl, but I can see when someone is kidding and not kidding, unless sheek was only sarcastic. But sacrasm isn't in my vocabulary becuase I don't use it. Smile

I'm just "old" Phang that is why I sounds so weird. plus My sister translates usually what I say into better sentances, because I'm afrilish. XD

#73: Author: Chinaren, Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 1:28 am
—

Phang wrote:

Some stunning insight
I'll bet it's pissing Chin off! Laughing

Nah, it's alright Phango. I'm used to listening, or rather ignoring, religious gibberings.

No offense there Crady.

Though, once again, I did say at the beginning of this thread it was for Atheists, so by coming in here (which you're free to do of course) then you tacitly agree to be offended by Atheist views, whcih are, as Sheik has recently admitted, the One True Way.

Crady wrote:

I thought you also didn't want to change others point of view

Not at all, I just said I don't try to do such. I'm quite happy if someone sheds the trap of religion and steps into the light.

Not-god be praised! Very Happy

~Waves arms about~

#74: Author: Guest,

Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 2:01 am
—
That is crued of you... :/ I think you shouldn't be happy about what you actaully make the people think in this thread, just my point of view.

#75: Author: Scheherazade, Location: Land of Rain and More Rain (but really southwestern BC, in Canada)

Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 11:00 am
—

Christalnightshade wrote:

I think you shouldn't be happy about what you actaully make the people think in this thread

wait, what? So you'll allow him to have a whole thread of his own, just so long as he doesn't actually think it matters? No offense, but your point of view seems... sort of silly, as I understand it. Could you perhaps explain what you meant?

#76: Author: sheik, Location: On the Fence

Posted: Thu Aug 06, 2009 11:52 am
—
I feel the need to clarify for Shade as she was kind enough to post on my few writings. I have been debating about my beliefs for awhile, and am still truly looking for my own reasons for beliefing in that omnipotent force. Now, obviously I can't just shake something like that off in a day. I find myself praying at night still, just that God is no longer being identified as Christ. It's strange to me, maybe with so more time spent living alone, in the Real world, I will find the answers. Who knows, maybe Atheism is truly the answer? All I know, is that with my scant knowledge of life, I am not ready to make that decision.....yet.

#77: Author: Chinaren, Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Posted: Thu Aug 06, 2009 3:00 pm
—
Now one thing I do believe is that people shouldn't believe in any one system until they're at least 25 years old, by which time they should have experienced at least a little bit of life.

#78: Author: Crunchyfrog,

Posted: Thu Aug 06, 2009 9:29 pm
—
.... unless of course it is the Flying Spaghetti Monster Laughing

#79: Author: Guest,

Posted: Fri Aug 07, 2009 6:20 am
—
What I meant by that is not being silly, if only you understand what I meant. By that I meant that when c'ren was saying halaluia and amen to him thinking of becoming one, that it was his thread that made him think about it, doubt himself, as I've doubt myself when I was asked questions that I've never answered in my entire life. As I have also thought about "how would it be to be one." Eventaully I just thought that it was not the answer to all the living things of life.

#80: Author: Zeke,

Posted: Fri Aug 07, 2009 11:29 am
—
I love a discussion about religion or anti-religion. But I have to say that there were always a few of my major objections to Christianity which could be easily fixed with a few little tweaks ...

[begin rant]

1. There are no miracles. A "miracle" is just unexplained natural phenomena by definition. If God made the world, he doesn't need to break the rules. He makes the rules.

2. Prayer can make you feel good, but it doesn't accomplish miracles. God is not a genie. You can't make wishes.

3. The bible is not an Oujii board. Random passages from the Bible taken out of context make no more sense than any other book ... which leads me to number four ...

4. The bible may have been inspired by God, but it was written by humans. Moreover, the books of the bible were chosen by humans ... not necessarily divinely inspired humans at that.

5. The book of Revelations is garbage. Eschatology can be boiled down to this: your world ends when you die. The early church wasn't comfortable with the lack of closure on the bible so they added the ravings of this lunatic that probably never met Jesus.

Speaking of people that never met Jesus ...

6. Paul of Tarsus is not Jesus, as many Christian's seem to think. IMHO, Paul was kind of a jerk by modern standards. His letters to the church were suggestions, not Gospel (literally or figuratively). He can take that whole "Wives, submit to your husbands..." and shove it up his ****. As far as I'm concerned, a good Christian could toss out everything before and after the four Gospels.

When asked which is the greatest commandment, Jesus replied,

"Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it. Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets." (Matt22:37-40)

Sorry, Folks. Christianity doesn't mean you never have to make a decision again. That's what the U.S. Marine Corps is for. Semper Fi.

[/end rant]

#81: Author: Phang, Location: Phang's House of Mints

Posted: Sat Aug 08, 2009 12:11 am
—
Ah, c'est bon.

#82: Author: Exmortis, Location: Be always aware and keep one eye on the shadows... you may just find out...

Posted: Sat Aug 22, 2009 9:27 pm
—
{...Atheists... I never expected to meet......}

Well met; perhaps somebody here can assist me. I require information on this site, what I can do here and where I can start.

#83: Author: Exmortis, Location: Be always aware and keep one eye on the shadows... you may just find out...

Posted: Sat Aug 22, 2009 9:39 pm
—
It's funny...

How fragile society is as a whole, however, a man who stands alone is almost bulletproof...

...Do you know why this is....?

#84: Author: LolaTally,

Posted: Sat Aug 22, 2009 10:33 pm
—
Haha, loving this thread.
C'ren, any chance of more demotivational posters?

And btw, I'm a Wiccan with a sense of humor, so please, religion bash. I'm loving it! There's always one Christian who feels they have to refute everything said. Smile

And here's one for all of you -

Religion is for those who fear hell. Spirituality is for those who've been there.

Spiritualists, unite!

Dyslexics, untie!

#85: Author: Chinaren, Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Posted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 2:31 am
—
Ha! Good one Lolly!

I do have some more posters, but I seem to have misplaced them. Maybe at work.

And welcome to IF. Very Happy

#86: Author: Phang, Location: Phang's House of Mints

Posted: Sun Aug 23, 2009 8:04 am
—

LolaTally wrote:

Spiritualists, unite!

Dyslexics, untie!

I have some quotes in a bewk. I'll pick some out later.

#87: Author: Chinaren, Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Posted: Thu Sep 03, 2009 4:09 pm
—

#88: Author: Guyron, Location: Bucharest, Romania

Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 5:24 pm
—
So happens that my first post after a looong break will be here. Not gonna be a long post since the thread hasn't been updated in a long time as I see, so here are my 5 cents.

I'm an atheist and proud of it. That doesn't mean I don't believe in a superior... something that's out there, in a plane inaccessible to us, but that it is not an unique supreme conscience blah, blah, blah... So it's not God, Jehovah, Allah or whatever deity most people are indoctrinated with. How can I believe in a perfect entity that doesn't make its only creation perfect? And if it is a reflection of itself, that means it is also not perfect.

Anyway, here's something for all religious people to think about.

And here are my favorite passages from Umberto Eco's "The Name of the Rose":

Jorge de Burgos: Laughter is a devilish wind which deforms, uh, the lineaments of the face and makes men look like monkeys.
William of Baskerville: Monkeys do not laugh. Laughter is particular to men.
Jorge de Burgos: As is sin. Christ never laughed.
William of Baskerville: Can we be so sure?
Jorge de Burgos: There is nothing in the Scriptures to say that he did.
William of Baskerville: And there's nothing in the Scriptures to say that he did not. Why, even the saints have been known to employ comedy, to ridicule the enemies of the Faith. For example, when the pagans plunged St. Maurice into the boiling water, he complained that his bath was too cold. The Sultan put his hand in... scalded himself.

William of Baskerville: But what is so alarming about laughter?
Jorge de Burgos: Laughter kills fear, and without fear there can be no faith, because without fear of the Devil there is no more need of God.
William of Baskerville: But you will not eliminate laughter by eliminating that book.
Jorge de Burgos: No, to be sure, laughter will remain the common man's recreation. But what will happen if, because of this book, learned men were to pronounce it admissible to laugh at everything? Can we laugh at God? The world would relapse into chaos! Therefore, I seal that which was not to be said.

William of Baskerville: How many more rooms? Ah! How many more books? No one should be forbidden to consult these books freely.
Adso of Melk: Perhaps they are thought to be too precious, too fragile.
William of Baskerville: No, it's not that, Adso. It's because they often contain a wisdom that is different from ours and ideas that could encourage us to doubt the infallibility of the word of God... And doubt, Adso, is the enemy of faith.

My advice? Read the Bible, Koran or whatever books your religion has, in a matter fit for them. As simple literature. And stop believing in God, Jehovah or Allah not because I or anyone else tells you to, but because you need to start thinking for yourselves and not for whoever indoctrinated you with this nonsense.

#89: Author: Thunderbird, Location: Rising from the ashes

Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 6:51 pm
—
Very interesting statements there Guyron. Welcome to IF! I know my own tale will be exploring some of these paradoxes you've pointed out... how interesting that you bring these up.

#90: Author: HalfEmptyHero, Location: Where rolls the Oregon, and hears no sound

Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 7:03 pm
—
God hates me because I don't believe in him.

#91: Author: DeadManWalking,

Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 7:04 pm
—
Nice post Guy. But I have to say, the question in the motivational poster has been given answers before. (Not that i did not say it was answered.)

The answer most theologians give is that evil is now an intrinsic part of humanity, and that to remove it would change humanity into something it is not. Humanity has chosen to embrace evil (Main example is the Fall, with the Fruit, etc.) and God gives us the freedom to choose. (This doesn't work with Calvinism at all though.)

Second answer is kinda similar. God needs us to make our own mistakes. Like a parent with their child, they need to allow the child to stumble along and learn some things for themselves. Perhaps God learned from the Fall that simply forbidding someone something wouldn't prevent them from taking it.

Again those both have holes, but hey, what religion doesn't?

(Side Note: I'm an agnostic myself, but I went to a Catholic school for several years. You pick things up there.)

#92: Author: HalfEmptyHero, Location: Where rolls the Oregon, and hears no sound

Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 7:22 pm
—
Well, I'm no atheist, nor do I hold any other religion. Such things are not important to me, as I do not know, and perceivably never will know. However I do have a profound dislike for any of the 3 mainline religions (Christianity, Islam, and Judaism) as they have brought few benefits and many evils to the world. I am extremely fascinated on why people are so keen on believing in 'God' and so quick to dismiss the Greek Gods, or any of the other polytheistic religions. These were born far earlier and survived through rituals and exciting tales that I am less willing to sleep through.

Yet the majority of mankind dismisses all this, for a book written by a man. We laugh at the flawed Gods, who share far more traits with humanity than the one God we were supposedly based on. If we are truly the image of God, what than is that saying about him? We make excuses, and blame ourselves for things an omnipotent being could surely have foreseen.

For a being who knows and sees all, God is not very impressive. Sure, the evils of man can not, and should not be blamed on a bearded man in the sky, but how naive would he have to be to not know what we would become?

#93: Author: Guyron, Location: Bucharest, Romania

Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 7:42 pm
—

DeadManWalking wrote:

Nice post Guy. But I have to say, the question in the motivational poster has been given answers before. (Not that i did not say it was answered.)

The answer most theologians give is that evil is now an intrinsic part of humanity, and that to remove it would change humanity into something it is not. Humanity has chosen to embrace evil (Main example is the Fall, with the Fruit, etc.) and God gives us the freedom to choose. (This doesn't work with Calvinism at all though.)

Second answer is kinda similar. God needs us to make our own mistakes. Like a parent with their child, they need to allow the child to stumble along and learn some things for themselves. Perhaps God learned from the Fall that simply forbidding someone something wouldn't prevent them from taking it.

Again those both have holes, but hey, what religion doesn't?

(Side Note: I'm an agnostic myself, but I went to a Catholic school for several years. You pick things up there.)

Heck, I took seven (yep that's 7) years of my life to theology, so I'm well accustomed with the doctrine.

I've always liked the part with "God left us free will". Nonsense. What would have happened if Good would've been chosen? "And they all lived happily ever after in a land of milk rivers and ever flowing nectar from the clouds, until someone got bored and invented the club. And from that to nuclear war there was just a step." Would've been much more interesting than a woman being tricked into eating a fruit, by a demon (Asmodeus) disguised as a snake.

Religions shouldn't have holes, according to their followers, right? You can't follow a religion if you're convinced it's flawed. If you know it's not perfect, and you still follow it, then it's merely doctrine reflex. Like communism. A bad idea, badly applied.

You'll see a lot of stuff in the novel I'm gonna start, and I'm sure those will be the subject of an intense discussion and/or critique..

#94: Author: Thunderbird, Location: Rising from the ashes

Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 7:56 pm
—
I would have discounted the Bible entirely if not for two observations:

1) The prophecies actually seem to be coming true, much as many other religions of the worlds' prophecies are appearing to manifest as well.

and

2) I have uncovered historical facts that seem to make the Bible make some sense, appears to clarify so many of its contradictions, and re-slant the whole story to become something far more... profound.

That said, such clarifications have also shattered a great many of the tenants that the churchs' faiths rely upon. Heh heh.

#95: Author: Guyron, Location: Bucharest, Romania

Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 8:21 pm
—

Thunderbird wrote:

I would have discounted the Bible entirely if not for two observations:

1) The prophecies actually seem to be coming true, much as many other religions of the worlds' prophecies are appearing to manifest as well.

and

2) I have uncovered historical facts that seem to make the Bible make some sense, appears to clarify so many of its contradictions, and re-slant the whole story to become something far more... profound.

That said, such clarifications have also shattered a great many of the tenants that the churchs' faiths rely upon. Heh heh.

1) Prophecies are ambiguous. Of course something WILL happen it all depends on where and how fast. And how accurate the prophet is. Even Nostradamus predicted a lot of events and he was follower of no religion.

2) The are also a lot of newly discovered evidences that actually present the Bible as a careful selection of gospels which they found suited for... let's not say control of the masses, but more like "guiding" the world in certain directions.

#96: Author: Thunderbird, Location: Rising from the ashes

Posted: Tue Nov 24, 2009 8:54 pm
—

Guyron wrote:

True, but some of the sequences that seem to be taking place in our modern era are all too eerily what has been predicted, some of which even being predictions that would have been unfathomable at the time they were made. Things like the unification of Europe, increased earthquake activities, the birth of the White Buffalo and so many more, all taking place in our one timeframe. It is not out of the question that according to the laws of chance and likelihoods (chaos theory) what we're experiencing could be happenstance. But the evidence is mounting every year, so far as I've seen. (Let's not discount that the Bible clearly portrays how many will turn from the faith in the latter days and even suggests that it is on the basis of learning and rationale that they do so.)

Now, too, all that said, a man once asked me a question that has been long fun to chew on: If people weren't out there MAKING the prophecies come true, how would they come true?

Quote:

2) The are also a lot of newly discovered evidences that actually present the Bible as a careful selection of gospels which they found suited for... let's not say control of the masses, but more like "guiding" the world in certain directions.

I couldn't possibly agree with you more. The Bible is likely little more than a compilation of a great many spiritual and religious texts, thrown together in a well thought out method to create a tool by which the powers that be can manipulate society. I even find that many of the original terms used in the first text have been changed and redefined so as to fit the model that the creators of the religion would see fit.

Let me make it clear that primarily, the Bible is, to me, a valid resource for determining the plan that someone or something has for us. I highly doubt it covers the whole picture and in fact, is likely a masterpiece made as much to cover UP the whole picture. The greatest lies are the ones with the strongest elements of truth woven in.

#97: Author: Zeke,

Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 8:26 am
—
The books of the bible were carefully selected from a much larger catalogue of potential documents. Is it at all suprising that the "prophecies" of the bible were occasionally correct? Talk about making prophecies come true.

Not to mention the liberal interpretation of certain things Jesus was alleged to have said. Take for example, when Jesus supposedly said "Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up." Was he aware of the literal destruction of the temple around 70 AD? If so, did he intend to literally raise it up? If so, his prophecy could be seen as false.

The modern interpretation is that he was referring to his own resurrection after three days ... but who can say whether the disciples of Jesus took a little creative license with the three days (what's three days, more or less, right?)

#98: Author: Chinaren, Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Posted: Wed Nov 25, 2009 9:46 pm
—
The bible is a storybook* and nothing more. You may as well read the future using Grimm's fairy tales, which has just as much validity and is more modern. The fact that people read things into it is a testament to the willingness and gullibility of people more than anything else.

Let's look into this some more:

There are three parts to the whole issue. Accuracy of original text, statistical probability, and the willingness of people who 'want to believe'.

Part 1. Accuracy. Or lack thereof.
The language the prediction was written in was inevitably some ancient kind, with references to life in the local lingo and with local frames of reference. Also bear in mind these people with mostly primitive savages that thought the world was flat and so forth.

So we have an ancient text, written by ignorant barbarians in a strange lingo with cultural references for the time. If that's not bad enough, then there's the translations.

We have enough trouble determining what Shakespeare meant in his plays, and he was alive only a few hundred years ago, when we have reasonable reference documents.

How accurate do you think scribblings by uneducated rednecks that have been translated fifty times over in the course of several thousand years are?

My wife does translations now, and as someone who's done professional proof reading, I can tell you that these current efforts are bad enough. I shudder to think how 'accurate' the bible is to its original text.

So we have an ancient text, written by ignorant savages in a strange lingo with cultural references to the time badly mistranslated over several thousand years. NOW people read this twaddle and 'interpret' the writing as a prediction.

I'm really going to trust the accuracy of that.

Then there's pure statistics...
Ian M Banks, in one of his excellent books, said: Throw a billion coins up in the air repeatedly, and some are going to keep coming down heads for a long time.

For example: I think there was something about 'twin towers falling in flames' in some old bunkum that people pounced on when Sep 11th happened. Prediction? Well, sure, 'cos it's bound to happen sometime.

I can predict a great catastrophe in the next ten years, and I'll wager that one happens somehow. Does that make me a prophet? Well, yes it does. But every other prediction is false!!

I'm not even go into the millions of predictions made that are "wrong" and are never mentioned.

Finally there's the 'interpretation' made by the people that 'want' to believe.
I'm not superstitions, but when an omen crosses my path that brings good or favorable auspices, I take note of it! That's 'cos I want to believe it will happen.

There are a lot of people out there reading 'facts' into any little thing. You only have to look up 'conspiracy theories' to see for yourself.

So when people 'interpret' some ancient text, they are bound to find something that 'fits' it if they look around. Then they can go crowing on about how the prophecy has come true. It's the same sort of technique used by soothsayers and those who 'speak to the dead'.

These points cover Nostrapoofus and any other so call fortune teller as well as the storybook referred to as the bible.

That's all I have to say on this. See you after 2012.

*One that wouldn't even make it to SGotM IMO.

#99: Author: Zeke,

Posted: Fri Nov 27, 2009 9:08 pm
—
What's your beef with religion?

So, some years ago when I "converted" to atheism, I had some specific problems with Christianity that I was addressing. For one, I felt that I was depending on a miracle or divine intervention to "fix" my life for me.

In retrospect, I realize that this new perspective could certainly be couched in Christian terminology--although I believe that many Christian's would not agree with my sentiment. So:

In fact, most of my Christian leaders did not agree with my above sentiments. Many felt that the bible was inerrant even in isolated verses and that context did not negate or support specific verses. Many also seemed to think of prayer as some kind of miracle making machine and not the meditative exercise that I believe it to be. Unwittingly, the inflexibility of certain leaders actually turned me into an atheist!

When I found a church that was more forgiving of different beliefs, I found myself accepting the possibility of God and an afterlife. At the very least, I found that I could benefit from the idea of redemption. If you take responsibility for your own life, you need to accept that you've made errors in judgment that have screwed up you life in some way. The idea of forgiveness can extend into your ego and provide some measure of acceptance and help you make peace with your life.

I wouldn't call myself a Christian now, and probably not even a deist. However, I think that perhaps I can call myself an agnostic. Maybe.

So, if you read this far, perhaps you will think of your own answer. Why are you an atheist? What were your reasons?

#100: Author: Reiso, Location: Western North America

Posted: Fri Nov 27, 2009 10:30 pm
—
I go back and forth on the issue of religion. Like many other things in my life, I am chronically undecided. I would probably most accurately be described as an agnostic; one open to belief, but still unconvinced (if I have that right). But even in all my indecision, there are a couple of things that have always been consistently fixed in my mind.

First, there is the popular assertion that most gods were invented to explain away natural phenomenon that we were unable to understand at the time. Thor for thunder, etc. It seems impossible to both believe that many non-mainstream religions are easily explained away in this manner, yet the big ones are somehow exempt. Sorry. Not buying it. So if it's made up, then isn't that the opposite of true?

Second, there is the amount of contradictions even within one faith. I will not list these in detail, because I do not wish to draw fire from others by being specific. Even the faithful have admitted to me that mainstream religion requires enough faith to look away from its inconsistencies. I both lack that faith and know myself well enough to know that barring certain events coming to pass which I doubt will, that I am incapable of that level of faith.

Thirdly, and most importantly for me, is the habit I have observed among many of the faithful. Whenever something good happens in their lives, the first thing they do is thank God. If it's bad, they blame him. This is disheartening to me, because in a bad situation, they use God to shield themselves from their own responsibility, and in a good situation, they don't give themselves credit for their own part. What are we really teaching people when we allow them to make God both their scapegoat and their champion? Do we not have any sense of personal accountability anymore?

So yeah, those are my religious quandaries. I'm not saying God doesn't exist. I'm not even saying I'm right. This is just my opinion. I just don't think any current organized religion has got it right. And if none of them have gotten it right by now, then how can we be sure there's anything to be right about?

Eh.

#101: Author: Chinaren, Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 1:45 am
—
Mmm, perhaps I can ask the mod of this forum to split this debate off from the main thread please? Debate isn't on topic for this thread.

That said...

Zekle wrote:

What's your beef with religion?

Hahaa! Where do I start?

I'll just give my main two beefs:

I often get repulsed by someone trying to thrust their primitive and often absurd beliefs on me.

If people actually did something useful instead of praying and the other hooey that comes with it, the human race would probably have colonized the solar system by now. The amount of time and effort wasted on (all) religions is frankly staggering.

Zink wrote:

So, if you read this far, perhaps you will think of your own answer. Why are you an atheist? What were your reasons?

I don't need a reason to be an Athiest, it's the natural state of things. I should ask you why you feel the need to be a religious person.

However, I'm not asking, 'cos I don't care that much.

#102: Author: Smee, Location: UK

Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 2:39 am
—
I don't want a city full of separate threads about religion - it's a divisive subject. But please re-read Chinaren's opening post in this thread before replying and make sure you're on topic.

#103: Author: Tikanni Corazon, Location: Running through the plains of my mind, my wolf spirit at my side (but doing so in the UK!).

Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 10:13 am
—
I have been both Atheist and Christian, and now I am neither. When I was Atheist, I felt that I needed answers that only religion could give. So I moved on to Christianity. And for a while I was satisfied with it. But I hadn't really read the Bible properly, only heard what the vicar had to say. Then some Jehovahs Witnesses came a knockin' on the door one day, and, stupidly, they persuaded me to read the Bible myself. And all that time I was thinking that the message sent out from this book was one that preached peace and love towards your fellow man/woman.
But I find it hard to trust a god who commands 'Thou shalt not kill', then permitts it in other parts of the Bible. No, no, no, no, no!
So, I told Christianity to shove it, and now I just believe in my own private beliefs (the details of which I will not bore you all with). It does not centre around a religion, but it's what I believe, and that's all that matters.

Last edited by Tikanni Corazon on Fri Dec 18, 2009 2:07 pm; edited 1 time in total

#104: Author: Smee, Location: UK

Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 10:48 am
—
To shift the focus to a more recent 'religion' to rear it's ugly head.

#105: Author: Zeke,

Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 8:13 pm
—
I'm sorry if I got off-topic, folks. I wasn't intending to start a debate. I just thought, you know, everyone seems to have reasons for deciding to follow certain beliefs. Atheism is no exception.

That sort of probing can get a little personal, though. red

If you google "atheist bumper stickers" there are few gems, I see. My favorites have got to be "Real men don't have imaginary friends." and "There is no God, so I guess nobody loves you." Very Happy

#106: Author: Kalanna Rai, Location: The Frozen North

Posted: Sat Nov 28, 2009 9:10 pm
—
I'm agnostic.

I find both the atheists and the fundamentalists funny.

Atheists because they don't keep the option open. Fundamentalists because they believe it HAS to be there.

All I believe is that there might be someone(s) or something(s) out there and I'm not going to piss them off by telling them they're fake. At the same time I'm not going to believe what anyone else says about them because, and pardon my blunt foul language, how the fuck do they know?

That is all I have to say about that. Goodnight.

#107: Author: Chinaren, Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Posted: Sat May 01, 2010 5:50 am
—

Kalanna Rai wrote:

I'm agnostic.

Atheists because they don't keep the option open.

Agnostic = basically someone who's too chicken to make their mind up.

I actually was moved enough to write a religious story: Hehe.

#108: Author: Phang, Location: Phang's House of Mints

Posted: Sun May 02, 2010 9:02 am
—

Chinaren wrote:

Agnostic = basically someone who's too chicken to make their mind up.

Alternatively, someone who believes that such things are entirely unknowable. This can (rarely, though) be combined with religious belief - a sort of 'We'll never know, but I believe in it anyway'.

Considering you have apparently just ignored Kalanna's reasoning to imply she is a chicken, you're starting to play up to a stereotype yourself, Chin.

#109: Author: Chinaren, Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Posted: Sun May 02, 2010 2:49 pm
—

Pha wrote:

Chinaren wrote:

Agnostic = basically someone who's too chicken to make their mind up.

Alternatively, someone who believes that such things are entirely unknowable. This can (rarely, though) be combined with religious belief - a sort of 'We'll never know, but I believe in it anyway'.

Nah, I stand by my statement. It is the Atheist thread after all. Not the "can't make up my mind" thread. I have enough trouble with CMUMM people who stand in the line in front of me at McDonalds and um and er, even though they've had plenty of time to decide on something as they've been in the line for the past five minutes. Mad

McDonald agnostics! Confused

ng wrote:

Considering you have apparently just ignored Kalanna's reasoning to imply she is a chicken, you're starting to play up to a stereotype yourself, Chin.

I have a stereotype? Wow, that's awesome. Although if it's a stereotype of myself, then surely that would be because it's me?? Anyway, Off Topic

#110: Author: Zeke,

Posted: Mon May 03, 2010 8:03 am
—
Speaking of someone who can't make up their mind, I'd consider myself an agnostic.

Obviously, the objective evidence for the existence of a god is pretty non-existant--not that it would matter. Some people can't even "believe" in evolution, despite nearly universal scientific consensus and overwhelming scientific evidence. So obviously scientific credibility is not enough for some people.

But on the other hand, it is logically impossible to prove that an omnipotent God DOESN'T exist. If God exists, he ain't no genie, that's for sure. And he's not very nice, to put it delicately.

For me, I think it is more a cultural thing. I can't escape the pressures of the Christian culture. The prejudice against atheism in the U.S. is overwhelming. I could imagine a Muslim president before a public atheist.

#111: Author: Crunchyfrog,

Posted: Mon May 03, 2010 9:09 am
—

Chinaren wrote:

Pha wrote:

Chinaren wrote:

Agnostic = basically someone who's too chicken to make their mind up.

Alternatively, someone who believes that such things are entirely unknowable. This can (rarely, though) be combined with religious belief - a sort of 'We'll never know, but I believe in it anyway'.

McDonald agnostics! Confused

*sits on the fence throwing McFlurries at C'ren* Laughing

#112: Author: Phang, Location: Phang's House of Mints

Posted: Mon May 03, 2010 11:47 am
—
So...people who don't/can't decide on which puny burger to have are wimps? Heheheh. Has anyone else noticed faith-based matters tend to bring up all sorts of odd allegories?

#113: Author: Shillelagh, Location: Kansas

Posted: Mon May 03, 2010 12:02 pm
—
I used to be agnostic. There is a difference between not knowing and not being able to decide. Though, as I experience more and more of the world, I'm fairly certain that there has to be some higher power out there. Or, at the very least, I'm fairly certain that I'd like to pretend there is one out there, and for me to pretend there's enough evidence to prove that he exists.

That being said, I'm firmly a deist. I have absolutely no belief that He would meddle in our affairs in any way. It would be far too self-centered of me to believe that He has nothing better to do than view the Earth as an interactive soap opera. I should hope that He has better, more interesting, and more important things to do than help me out with a math test or some other such trivial nonsense.

#114: Author: D-Lotus, Location: Hollywood, USA

Posted: Tue May 04, 2010 2:48 pm
—
I have a hard enough time understanding what religion is to even begin to figure out what is meant by "atheism". I ask you- are these concepts anything more than constructs of our mind or of our society?

#115: Author: Vikas Muralidharan,

Posted: Tue May 31, 2011 8:46 am
—
Im spiritual, not religious Wink

#116: Author: Guest,

Posted: Tue May 31, 2011 10:06 am
—
Hello, I am spiritaul and I am a christain, but what I was once told. It's better to pray when you really need it than to pray and not mean it... How you like my point of view.

#117: Author: The White Blacksmith,

Posted: Tue May 31, 2011 10:39 am
—

Kalanna Rai wrote:

All I believe is that there might be someone(s) or something(s) out there and I'm not going to piss them off by telling them they're fake.

Ah, Pascal's Wager. I was waiting for that to come up.

Personally, I would probably count as an atheist. I don't think about it much, because I really don't see the point of arguing about theology. If atheists and agnostics are trying to convince people who've been brought up religiously that they should have the freedom to choose their religion* then why argue so hard to persuade them that they're wrong? We should also bear in mind that "personal" viewpoints are generally shaped by the media and opinions we're exposed to, even when we don't realise. I'm certain that my parents would be fine if I chose to have a religion. I'm also certain that, being non-religious themselves (though brought up religious) they have brought me up to believe in the constantly changing and modified theories of the world as presented by Science.

I largely read what, in most countries, might be considered fairly left-wing media (though in England it's actually more like center-right) and although I am aware that it is pushing a certain viewpoint, I am much more likely to reject very conservative media or very liberal media for having a bias if and when I read it. I have my opinions and I pay attention to media that agrees with and reaffirms my opinions, which is why I don't think theological debate will help anyone. People are much more likely to reach their own opinions if they cut themselves off from the debate rather than if they immerse themselves in it.

*It's in the Universal Declaration of Human rights, guys. Articles 19 and 20. Look it up.

#118: Author: HalfEmptyHero, Location: Where rolls the Oregon, and hears no sound

Posted: Tue May 31, 2011 2:02 pm
—
An atheist's view:

Theists: Fools who believe in fairy tales
Agnostics: Cowards who are too afraid to make a decision
Atheists: Right

A Theist's View:

Theists: Right (but only if you believe in the same thing as me!)
Agnostics: Cowards who are too afraid to make a decision
Atheists: Fools who are arrogant enough to believe they know what happened

An Agnostic's View:

Theists: They might be right, they certainly think so
Agnostic: Hey! We both admit that we don't know the answer! That's cool I guess.
Atheists: They might be right, they certainly think so

My View:

Who cares?

#119: Author: Murport, Location: Louisiana

Posted: Tue May 15, 2012 12:31 am
—

Scheherazade wrote:

Just curious... Of those of you who mock Christianity (Christianity in specific, not religion in general), how many have actually read some of the New Testament?

I was born and raised in a rural part of the deep south. I was in church twice per week. Church and everything about religion was poured over me from an early age. I've read the Old and New Testaments. I only recently became Atheist. There was no defining moment for me just a build up and as I get older I tend to employ more common sense.

I don't really think I mock religion. It's all in good fun. It doesn't matter where you stand on the issue, one thing is certain. Not very many in the debate that will debate it without trying to completely debunk the other one. I just tell people how I feel and let the issues stand on their own. Confused

#120: Author: sagittaeri,

Posted: Tue May 15, 2012 3:42 am
—
I'm agnostic, and I'm proud of it. Smile

There's a big difference between not being able to decide, and submitting to the knowledge that there isn't enough evidence to prove anything either way. I understand how some people are religious, though, and I understand how someone can be perfectly rational about it as well. It all depends on how one defines "faith". Some people think it's shutting your eyes and covering your ears to all evidence to the contrary. But, I believe the more beautiful definition is the ability to believe in something when there is no evidence. Having no evidence is not the same as having contradictory evidence. You don't have evidence that your partner never cheated on you, but you can still believe. Shutting oneself from contradictory evidence, however, is taking the beauty out of the word "faith".

So, just to be intentionally provocative. The term "lack of beliefs" actually describes agnostics a lot better than atheists. When one "denies the existence of god", that's technically a belief because one has decided to shut themselves to the other possibilities. Don't bring in the "evidence" argument in, because, as a physicist, I can definitely tell you that science did not disprove the existence of a higher power. How can it? There is no measurement that can disprove something so abstract, even if we have the technology to perform the measurement. Well, maybe one day we can have the ability, but not today, and not for decades at least.

#121: Author: Chinaren, Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Posted: Tue May 15, 2012 5:00 am
—
Strange how things work. I dropped by this old place for the first time in a while, and found my old thread resurrected!

Hey there Saggy and Morpork! Welcome to IF! Though I don't frequent these shores these days, I'm still around, despite the best efforts of those who would seek to thwart me.

Anyway, back on topic...

Quote:

But, I believe the more beautiful definition is the ability to believe in something when there is no evidence.

Fairy snuff, can't argue with that one. Seems to define 'faith' to me very well. However...

Quote:

When one "denies the existence of god", that's technically a belief

How is that a belief? It's the lack of belief, as I thought I'd made clear all along. Much like black is a lack of color. I can't see how this is a logical 'argument at all'.

Quote:

because one has decided to shut themselves to the other possibilities

Again, your logic fails you. The first part of the sentence doesn't mean I haven't considered other possibilities at all. Quite the contrary.

As a, I like to think, logical and intelligent* person I've considered the fairy tales people call religions, and discounted them. I've not discounted, for example, the possibility that the Earth was seeded by aliens for life (which I find far more believable than just about any religion), or that, in fact, I am dreaming all this.

So. Now, I shall return to whence I came.

*and also drunk

#122: Author: sagittaeri,

Posted: Wed May 16, 2012 1:53 pm
—

Chinaren wrote:

How is that a belief? It's the lack of belief, as I thought I'd made clear all along. Much like black is a lack of color. I can't see how this is a logical 'argument at all'.

To illustrate my point: say we have theory X, but we currently have no ability to prove X either way. When you have a lack of belief, you say "X could go either way". When you start choosing sides, however, by saying "X is false" despite the fact we have no scientific measurement to test this theory, that's a belief. So, X in our case is "does a higher power aka god exist". Note that I'm not referring to a specific god.

Quote:

Well, perhaps I should've been clear. By "other possibilities", I am referring to a higher power aka god. I'm not restricting the definition of god to a christian god, say, or even a religious one. It's really more of an abstract concept at this point.

I love discussing/debating/arguing religion. That, and politics, and anything else that could be controversial. Very Happy

#123: Author: Chinaren, Location: https://www.NeilHartleyBooks.com

Posted: Fri May 18, 2012 2:41 am
—

sagittaeri wrote:

Chinaren wrote:

How is that a belief? It's the lack of belief, as I thought I'd made clear all along. Much like black is a lack of color. I can't see how this is a logical 'argument at all'.

A cunning argument, but I'd put it like this: People say there is a deity, but when asked for proof/evidence, they fail to provide any, usually pointing to their god book and using that, which is far from proof. Whereas for science there's lots of stuff that's at least circumstantial evidence, or there are theories about how things work and so on, and as we advance, more of this is proved true/false.

Basically if I say there's an invisible imp standing next to you, the onus is on me to convince you that's the case. Anyone can say anything otherwise.

Quote:

Valid point, and as I mentioned before, I think it's more likely Earth was seeded by an advanced alien race than some 'god'. Of course, what people refer to as 'god' could also be a hugely advanced alien life form, and I often wonder if people would worship it in the same way if this was proven to be true. Confused

#124: Author: sagittaeri,

Posted: Fri May 18, 2012 3:58 am
—

Chinaren wrote:

For your example, I would expect the following reactions:

Atheist (rational): Until we have scientific evidence, there is no invisible imp.
Atheist (dismissive): There's definitely no invisible imp no matter what anyone says, because it's just silly.
Theist (rational): I will have faith that it exist as long it hasn't been proven otherwise.
Theist (dismissive): Doesn't matter what science says...it exists.
Agnostic: Maybe there's an invisible imp. Maybe there isn't. I can't prove it either way.

One thing is clear: agnostics definitely embody the term "lack of belief". Atheists, however, can be argued to have some form of "belief", though, it's not the same as the theists.

It is important to understand that science cannot prove the existence of a higher power at this moment. This is not the same as saying it doesn't exist. It's just saying we currently lack the capability for such experiment. It is also important to note that in science, a theory is only a scientific theory if it's disprovable. Now, since the subject we're talking about is not disprovable, it basically says that science can have no contribution in this subject. So, unfortunately, atheists can't quote science as their witness. They can use philosophy, however, which is also pretty powerful.

#125: Author: MissedtheMarx, Location: EST Timezone

Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 10:50 am
—
So, first off, this is my first post in this forum, and I'm just getting introduced to everything. I read the rules and everything, hope I don't transgress here by saying/doing anything against the general etiquette.

It seems to me that the basic standard of evidence that science/skepticism holds as the baseline is confusing to some. In the mind of a skeptic, for something to be considered true, it has to have some proof. The highest standard of proof is the ability to use a piece of information to predict something, and if it has the ability to allow for accurate predictions consistently, then it is well founded.

Falsifiable ideas are usually weak because they cannot be proven wrong because they have a poor track record of prediction for the reason that they are not meant to be used for that. Nor can they be proven wrong because they defy all attempts to sense them by their very definition. However, they can also not be proven true. For a skeptic, it is important that they should be given evidence of why something is true, and not lack of evidence for their falsehood. To assert that something exists requires evidence, to not acknowledge the existence of something that has no evidence is not a belief, but rather it is agnosticism.

Ergo, most atheists are agnostic, but their stance is, "I do not believe there is a god because there is no reason to. I do not assert that there is a god, but I proceed in all things like there is none, in the same way I proceed in all things as though there is no Santa, Easter Bunny, Leprechauns, etc."

#126: Author: Vishal Muralidharan, Location: City Of IF!

Posted: Fri Aug 08, 2014 8:07 pm
—

MissedtheMarx wrote:

Ergo, most atheists are agnostic, but their stance is, "I do not believe there is a god because there is no reason to. I do not assert that there is a god, but I proceed in all things like there is none, in the same way I proceed in all things as though there is no Santa, Easter Bunny, Leprechauns, etc."

I'm sorry, but atheism and agnosticism are not mutually exclusive terms. Atheism deals with belief, Agnosticism deals with knowledge. So when I call myself an Agnostic Atheist, what I'm saying is that I don't know for certain whether god exists or not, but I do not believe in god.

Also, the highest standard of proof is not the ability to use it to predict anything. It is just evidence that can conclusively, undeniably, prove a point.

For reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnostic_atheism

Anyhow, welcome to IF! Thumbs Up

I hope you have a great time here, and I'm looking forward to seeing you on the SG side of the city! Very Happy

#127: Author: MissedtheMarx, Location: EST Timezone

Posted: Sun Aug 10, 2014 4:40 am
—

Quote:

Wasn't my saying that most atheists are agnostics tacitly stating that they aren't mutually exclusive? By saying that a group is inclusive in another group, doesn't that mean that I would obviously disagree with the statement that one such group is exclusive at the same time?

Sorry, if you only meant to clarify my point, then that's fine, but I thought I made it clear that there is a distinction between the two groups and that most atheists would also describe themselves as agnostic.

Quote:

Also, the highest standard of proof is not the ability to use it to predict anything. It is just evidence that can conclusively, undeniably, prove a point.

And the best way you can prove a point with science is by using it for predictive purposes. Quantum Theory is very poorly understood by modern scientists, however it doesn't need to be understood in the sense that scientists can intuitively use what they know to find answers. They do math to predict and describe things, and their predictions are incredibly accurate. It's always important in science to be able to predict something, because that adds an incredible amount of clout to a theory that can accurately predict a future event. Evolution would not have any credibility if we could have not used our knowledge of geological strata and the theory to predict where Tiktaalik was.

Quote:

Anyhow, welcome to IF! Thumbs Up

I hope you have a great time here, and I'm looking forward to seeing you on the SG side of the city! Very Happy

Thanks much, friend! Smile

City of IF -> Hall of Debate

output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT - 8 Hours

Page 1 of 1