Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Im sorry atheists are not stupid

138 replies to this topic
GtaIvFanboy
  • GtaIvFanboy

    I Have a Foot Fetish

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 17 Aug 2013

#91

Posted 06 September 2013 - 11:40 PM

Wrong.

WELL HE WAS TO ME!!  :evilgrin:


lloydo
  • lloydo

    Count

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Aug 2006
  • None

#92

Posted 07 September 2013 - 07:49 AM

I was taking a little piss by the way guys. Both religious and atheiests are silly creations.


The Pizza Delivery Guy
  • The Pizza Delivery Guy

    If You Know What I Mean

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 Jan 2013
  • None

#93

Posted 07 September 2013 - 05:53 PM

I was taking a little piss by the way guys. Both religious and atheiests are silly creations.

So basically everyone on earth is just a silly creation?


Shah Sam
  • Shah Sam

    Shah

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Nov 2012
  • Norway

#94

Posted 07 September 2013 - 05:58 PM

To be honest, I couldn't give less of a sh*t whether Hitler was a Christian.

I agree. Why does anyone care about who was what? Being Christian doesn't make you a bad person because a bad person was Christian.

  • TheUnholy likes this

lloydo
  • lloydo

    Count

  • Members
  • Joined: 24 Aug 2006
  • None

#95

Posted 07 September 2013 - 06:24 PM

 

I was taking a little piss by the way guys. Both religious and atheiests are silly creations.

So basically everyone on earth is just a silly creation?

 

Essentially.

 

Scientifically, we originated by chance for the purpose of living out until cell death etc. Religiously, we originated from a God - who possesses the idea that unending suffering and pain is an okay creation - when perfection in life could just as easily be given to us.


TheUnholy
  • TheUnholy

    Crap Fly

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Jan 2012
  • None
  • Contribution Award [Concepts]

#96

Posted 07 September 2013 - 06:31 PM

 

To be honest, I couldn't give less of a sh*t whether Hitler was a Christian.

I agree. Why does anyone care about who was what? Being Christian doesn't make you a bad person because a bad person was Christian.

 

 

Right.  I don't give a sh*t if Hitler was a Christian because the deeds this guy had done aren't fit with the ethics. I don't ignore the fact that most of the religions give the "being good, helping people" stuff and make people live with the "good" ethics. However, it's not right to say that Atheists don't have "good" ethics, you can suppose everything bad from there. Yeah, religions could help people for being good but it isn't really right to think like "have a religion and be good". I have seen lots of non-believers that are living with "good" ethics. Don't get me wrong; all I've been trying to say both believers or non-believers could have "good" ethics, it's not all about religion but I'm saying it's a fact that religion can help someone to be nice. Me and my family's view of religion is that religion's priority should be about giving people an ethical consciousness. To be honest, I don't really care if a religion says believing in God, Jesus, Moses, Mohammad, Buddha, Messiah or whatever you call, it's about someone's faith; like I said me and my family believe that religion's priority should be giving someone morals, I don't care if someone lives his/her faith with "praying" style, it's about how somebody lives its faith. However I am an Agnostic and I don't find it right that a believer saying non-believers have no "good" ethics or a non-believer saying that every believer is bigoted and has no "good ethics" because of that. It's wrong.

  • Shah Sam likes this

na89340qv0n34b09q340
  • na89340qv0n34b09q340

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Jun 2010
  • Saint-Martin

#97

Posted 07 September 2013 - 07:36 PM Edited by zoo3891, 07 September 2013 - 07:38 PM.

 

I was taking a little piss by the way guys. Both religious and atheiests are silly creations.

So basically everyone on earth is just a silly creation?

 

 

There's always agnostics, naturalists, and apatheists (which can over-lap with religion/atheism, or can be totally seperate.)


lucid121
  • lucid121

    Street Cat

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2013

#98

Posted 07 September 2013 - 07:50 PM

Lol, it is very funny people still believe in God. Although, there is no evidence of his existence. Are you going to believe some book about a supernatural being made by some Jewish people, who haven't contributed to society? Or, are you going to believe in books made by scientists/physicists ,who have managed to build atomic bombs, created satelites, made spaceships and invented electricity?

The Pizza Delivery Guy
  • The Pizza Delivery Guy

    If You Know What I Mean

  • Members
  • Joined: 29 Jan 2013
  • None

#99

Posted 07 September 2013 - 07:56 PM Edited by The Pizza Delivery Guy, 07 September 2013 - 07:57 PM.

 

 

I was taking a little piss by the way guys. Both religious and atheiests are silly creations.

So basically everyone on earth is just a silly creation?

 

 

There's always agnostics, naturalists, and apatheists (which can over-lap with religion/atheism, or can be totally seperate.)

 

Agnostics and Apatheists are just atheists who don't know it yet. Even if they later become religious, they'd still have that thought of "I didn't think there was a god at one point," looming over them, making it that much tougher to believe.

 

I always thought that naturalists believed "Mother Nature" was their creator. It sounds religious to me.


Shah Sam
  • Shah Sam

    Shah

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Nov 2012
  • Norway

#100

Posted 07 September 2013 - 08:04 PM

Lol, it is very funny people still believe in God. Although, there is no evidence of his existence. Are you going to believe some book about a supernatural being made by some Jewish people, who haven't contributed to society? Or, are you going to believe in books made by scientists/physicists ,who have managed to build atomic bombs, created satelites, made spaceships and invented electricity?

I agree with some of your post. Buy I don't find it funny that people believe in God. I'm not a theist so I don't know why some people believe in God, but I think some people need it. You know, they feel safer when they know that God "protects" them. And then there are some people who need to believe in something and they feel that religion gives their life more meaning.


lucid121
  • lucid121

    Street Cat

  • Members
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2013

#101

Posted 07 September 2013 - 08:12 PM

 

Lol, it is very funny people still believe in God. Although, there is no evidence of his existence. Are you going to believe some book about a supernatural being made by some Jewish people, who haven't contributed to society? Or, are you going to believe in books made by scientists/physicists ,who have managed to build atomic bombs, created satelites, made spaceships and invented electricity?

I agree with some of your post. Buy I don't find it funny that people believe in God. I'm not a theist so I don't know why some people believe in God, but I think some people need it. You know, they feel safer when they know that God "protects" them. And then there are some people who need to believe in something and they feel that religion gives their life more meaning.

 

I understand.


El Zilcho
  • El Zilcho

    Virtuoso

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 14 May 2008
  • European-Union

#102

Posted 07 September 2013 - 08:46 PM Edited by El Zilcho, 07 September 2013 - 08:47 PM.

The use of a God as a 'crutch' is something I can't really say I tolerate, and I'll explain why.

 

If I were on the roof of a building, and I had to jump, or felt inclined to, it would be far more comfortable to me if I imagined, or thought, there were a giant mattress waiting to cushion my fall. It might make my existence more bearable in the seconds preceding the jump, but it would be untrue. If I withhold bad news from someone to improve their day, I might be doing a temporary good, but it is not the truth.

 

So it's a question of what is better - a belief in things for their role as a crutch, a crutch that is worthless when put under reason? Despite being paper thin, it offers shade from the sun during hardship, but is torn as easily as it is put up. Or is the truth, or rather the lack of a universal truth, better to come to terms with? Delusion or the harshness of reality must be put against each other. I would say that truth, or at least the logical conclusion, is more valuable than comforting delusion. And from that, I would say allowing a belief in the Blue Cheese Jumba on the Moon, no matter how comforting, is something that should be matured out of intellectually. What makes an anthropomorphic God that much more plausible? The fact it's couched in mystery, popularity and tradition? I think not.

  • D- Ice likes this

na89340qv0n34b09q340
  • na89340qv0n34b09q340

  • Members
  • Joined: 11 Jun 2010
  • Saint-Martin

#103

Posted 07 September 2013 - 09:04 PM

 


Agnostics and Apatheists are just atheists who don't know it yet. Even if they later become religious, they'd still have that thought of "I didn't think there was a god at one point," looming over them, making it that much tougher to believe.

I always thought that naturalists believed "Mother Nature" was their creator. It sounds religious to me.

 

 

There is no "I don't believe in a god" when you're an agnostic, it's more like "I don't think we can ever really tell if there's a god or not", and you can be an atheist, a theist, or neither if you're an agnostic because not knowing whether there's a god or not doesn't really affect whether you believe one exists or not. People you use "faith" as an excuse for religion don't know there's a god, they believe there's one, so they might claim to be agnostic theists and still be correct.

 

Apatheism is that you don't really care about whether there's a god or not (or that's how I understand it anyway). Most apatheists avoid the debate entirely and keep themselves away from religion. Agnostic apatheism is probably a thing. It's an irreligion, but not necesarilly anti-theist like atheism is.

 

Naturalism is where you believe the world is governed by certain laws of nature. Stuff like taoism and discordianism is naturalist as well as whatever you're talking about with the "mother nature" thing. It's a broad category of religions and ideologies, and some are or can be non-theist.

 

What I was trying to say is that religion doesn't boil down to atheist and theist. It's a lot more complicated than that.


Typhus
  • Typhus

    OG

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2007

#104

Posted 07 September 2013 - 09:13 PM Edited by Typhus, 07 September 2013 - 09:14 PM.

I would say that truth, or at least the logical conclusion, is more valuable than comforting delusion.

I don't know, I feel that the truth and reality are overrated concepts by sheer virtue of how boring they are. We are here on this dull little ball of mud out of sheer chance, everything we are is the result of luck and circumstance. Isn't that a depressing reality? And if delusion and fantasy can help alleviate the pain of existence, isn't that a good thing? It doesn't change the fact that we are all still pawing through blood and sh*t on a daily basis, but it helps people look beyond the filth and look to the stars.

 

I just can't believe that the truth is a good thing when all the truth means to me is an endless line of disappointment, pain, obligation, responsibility and cold, unavoidable death.

Give me a world in which we don't need street cleaners and toilet cleaners and assembly-line workers and box-stackers, and you might convince me that reality is worth a damn - but at the moment I see nothing good or pure about the world we have been plunged into. I could go on, but it would descend into pointless misanthropy, so I won't labour my point.

 

The delusion seems to be all that makes life livable, I guess that's what I'm saying.


The Yokel
  • The Yokel

    Peeling potatoes like a pro

  • The Yardies
  • Joined: 30 Mar 2007
  • Jamaica

#105

Posted 07 September 2013 - 10:05 PM

The delusion seems to be all that makes life livable, I guess that's what I'm saying.

Yes, but they make pills for that now. Religion really is obsolete.


Kristian.
  • Kristian.

    Supralux (ΛΟ)

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2011
  • None

#106

Posted 07 September 2013 - 10:22 PM Edited by _____, 07 September 2013 - 10:23 PM.

 

 

I was taking a little piss by the way guys. Both religious and atheiests are silly creations.

So basically everyone on earth is just a silly creation?

 

Essentially.

 

Scientifically, we originated by chance for the purpose of living out until cell death etc. Religiously, we originated from a God - who possesses the idea that unending suffering and pain is an okay creation - when perfection in life could just as easily be given to us.

 

I'm glad to hear that you are not a bigot. I always seemed to remember you as a nice guy.

 

 

I would say that truth, or at least the logical conclusion, is more valuable than comforting delusion.

I don't know, I feel that the truth and reality are overrated concepts by sheer virtue of how boring they are. We are here on this dull little ball of mud out of sheer chance, everything we are is the result of luck and circumstance. Isn't that a depressing reality? And if delusion and fantasy can help alleviate the pain of existence, isn't that a good thing? It doesn't change the fact that we are all still pawing through blood and sh*t on a daily basis, but it helps people look beyond the filth and look to the stars.

 

I just can't believe that the truth is a good thing when all the truth means to me is an endless line of disappointment, pain, obligation, responsibility and cold, unavoidable death.

Give me a world in which we don't need street cleaners and toilet cleaners and assembly-line workers and box-stackers, and you might convince me that reality is worth a damn - but at the moment I see nothing good or pure about the world we have been plunged into. I could go on, but it would descend into pointless misanthropy, so I won't labour my point.

 

The delusion seems to be all that makes life livable, I guess that's what I'm saying.

 

The truth is fine. You can even live a better life than people who hide from the truth, by acknowledging the truth. Ignorance isn't bliss in the end. Knowing that we are the ones giving meaning to things, that we create most of our problems (most of them are just situations that the mind labels them as problems), that's the pathway to true bliss. Life is great if you learn to accept the inevitable and if you focus on what's important, on what you can actually do\change.

 

I could go on about this, but I don't want to sound preachy. I just wanted to share the fact that after I discovered those things (not on my own) my life has improved significantly. My life situation hasn't changed much, but I have gotten a lot better at being happy.


Typhus
  • Typhus

    OG

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 11 Sep 2007

#107

Posted 07 September 2013 - 10:32 PM

Life is great if you learn to accept the inevitable and if you focus on what's important, on what you can actually do\change.

I can't help but feel that humans must strive to remove the 'inevitable' parts of life from existence in order to truly be free. Aging and dying and even being born to begin with - don't you think that to be happy we must strive for complete control of all things instead of being driven along by the current?

Perhaps the truth of what we are is so difficult to digest because it shows us how low humans truly are. There's no Icarus flying to the sun, no Prometheus to bestow knowledge on lesser men, there's just us and all the other animals. Truth is the death of mystery, the graveyard of ambition and a stake to the heart of imagination.

And for all the wonderful intelligence of men like Dawkins and Hitchens, for all their eloquence and undeniable logic, they have never once convinced me of the beauty of a rational and purely natural world. I rejected God and found the world a duller place for it.


Kristian.
  • Kristian.

    Supralux (ΛΟ)

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2011
  • None

#108

Posted 07 September 2013 - 10:52 PM

 

Life is great if you learn to accept the inevitable and if you focus on what's important, on what you can actually do\change.

I can't help but feel that humans must strive to remove the 'inevitable' parts of life from existence in order to truly be free. Aging and dying and even being born to begin with - don't you think that to be happy we must strive for complete control of all things instead of being driven along by the current?

Perhaps the truth of what we are is so difficult to digest because it shows us how low humans truly are. There's no Icarus flying to the sun, no Prometheus to bestow knowledge on lesser men, there's just us and all the other animals. Truth is the death of mystery, the graveyard of ambition and a stake to the heart of imagination.

And for all the wonderful intelligence of men like Dawkins and Hitchens, for all their eloquence and undeniable logic, they have never once convinced me of the beauty of a rational and purely natural world. I rejected God and found the world a duller place for it.

 

I meant the truly inevitable parts, especially events that occured in the past. I think transhumanism (I think that's what you were mostly getting at) is a great idea, but for the time being you have to accept what you have in order to be happy.

 

I don't know why you find the natural\rational view of the world dull. I find it quite fascinating when I think about it, just the fact that we will always find new things about it is quite enough. It's harder to see things in a positive way if other things bother you.


Eutyphro
  • Eutyphro

    that's how I dooz it

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Aug 2005
  • Netherlands

#109

Posted 07 September 2013 - 11:01 PM

The fact that no religious person has yet had the balls to make a post in favour of believing in god makes this thread incredibly boring.


El Zilcho
  • El Zilcho

    Virtuoso

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 14 May 2008
  • European-Union

#110

Posted 07 September 2013 - 11:12 PM

 

The delusion seems to be all that makes life livable, I guess that's what I'm saying.

 

 

Delusion making life liveable? I'd consider that problematic. You never truly believe that Icarus flew to the sun, and yet you can still find entertainment and joy in those tales. But when we allow equally improbable tales to bleed into our morality, our perspective of the world, or philosophy, then we have issues. And if anything, taking a secular route, or a philosophical one, as opposed to a religious one is far richer. It opens your mind to other conclusions, without reducing the Universe's complexity into a conveniently recognisable deity.

 

I couldn't imagine what's more boring than living under a celestial dictator, an entity that expects our thoughts to be policed, or offerings and honour granted to it. It is so very totalitarian, if I wanted that I'd take a holiday to North Korea.


TheUnholy
  • TheUnholy

    Crap Fly

  • Members
  • Joined: 17 Jan 2012
  • None
  • Contribution Award [Concepts]

#111

Posted 07 September 2013 - 11:58 PM

 

 

 

I was taking a little piss by the way guys. Both religious and atheiests are silly creations.

So basically everyone on earth is just a silly creation?

 

 

There's always agnostics, naturalists, and apatheists (which can over-lap with religion/atheism, or can be totally seperate.)

 

Agnostics and Apatheists are just atheists who don't know it yet. Even if they later become religious, they'd still have that thought of "I didn't think there was a god at one point," looming over them, making it that much tougher to believe.

 

I always thought that naturalists believed "Mother Nature" was their creator. It sounds religious to me.

 

I don't agree that Agnostics are just atheists or classified as atheists. I'm an Agnostic mostly with the disciple "Human mind lacks of getting certain information about God's existence." and I started to go Agnosticism with that, a while later I realized I am not really sure about God. And both Theism and Atheism sound false to me, in most ways. I don't agree with you because an Agnostic can defend the idea about human mind's lack of getting certain info about God's existence but he/she still can believe it (and it's called Agnostic Theism), also someone can defend the idea of the same disciple and still can be Atheist (which is called Agnostic Atheism). Apatheism always sounded me like a weary thing, they don't care if it's any God there, which I appreciate because I always wanted to get a more weary life style but I couldn't be weary like that in religion stuff. There was a dude that said a thing like "All religions, all disciplines have false sides for me." and actually I find this mostly right but I realized Agnosticism is closer to me. Also I don't know but in my opinion, Apatheism doesn't really belong to Agnostic or Atheist view. Because for me Apatheism is not giving crap about God stuff but you could be right that most Atheists include Apatheism in their views, for example one of my best friends is Atheist and he is like "Dude, you know me. I don't give a crap about the forbidden by religion or appreciated by religion." and this is kind of Apatheism and this guy classifies him as an Atheist and I can agree with your idea in some Atheists' Apatheists views or acts on belief, faith, religion, God or what you name it.


El Diablo
  • El Diablo

    "The Devil"

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 03 Aug 2002
  • Mars
  • April Fools Loser 2015

#112

Posted 08 September 2013 - 12:06 AM

ok let's be honest.

 

if you're agnostic you're just an atheist who is still in the closet :p

suck it up, come out of the closet, and join the rest of us.

  • Seattle Cracker likes this

TheFoxRiverFugitive
  • TheFoxRiverFugitive

    Big Homie

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Feb 2012
  • United-States

#113

Posted 08 September 2013 - 02:56 AM

Christian heaven is hell.

Agreed. Endless praise and tedium will drive you insane. It will never end and you can't kill yourself.

 

""Religion is a totalitarian belief. It is the wish to be a slave. It is the desire that there be an unalterable, unchallengeable, tyrannical authority who can convict you of thought crime while you are asleep, who can subject you to total surveillance around the clock every waking and sleeping minute of your life, before you're born and, even worse and where the real fun begins, after you're dead. A celestial North Korea. Who wants this to be true? Who but a slave desires such a ghastly fate? I've been to North Korea. It has a dead man as its president, Kim Jong-Il is only head of the party and head of the army. He's not head of the state. That office belongs to his deceased father, Kim Il-Sung. It's a necrocracy, a thanatocracy. It's one short of a trinity I might add. The son is the reincarnation of the father. It is the most revolting and utter and absolute and heartless tyranny the human species has ever evolved. But at least you can f*cking die and leave North Korea!"

Christopher Hitchens

GrandMaster Smith
  • GrandMaster Smith

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2006
  • None

#114

Posted 08 September 2013 - 09:26 AM

 

Christian heaven is hell.

Agreed. Endless praise and tedium will drive you insane. It will never end and you can't kill yourself.

 

""Religion is a totalitarian belief. It is the wish to be a slave. It is the desire that there be an unalterable, unchallengeable, tyrannical authority who can convict you of thought crime while you are asleep, who can subject you to total surveillance around the clock every waking and sleeping minute of your life, before you're born and, even worse and where the real fun begins, after you're dead. A celestial North Korea. Who wants this to be true? Who but a slave desires such a ghastly fate? I've been to North Korea. It has a dead man as its president, Kim Jong-Il is only head of the party and head of the army. He's not head of the state. That office belongs to his deceased father, Kim Il-Sung. It's a necrocracy, a thanatocracy. It's one short of a trinity I might add. The son is the reincarnation of the father. It is the most revolting and utter and absolute and heartless tyranny the human species has ever evolved. But at least you can f*cking die and leave North Korea!"

Christopher Hitchens

 

 

 

Well atleast based off Christianity this 'totalitarian system' Hitchens describes is an enforcer of the Golden Rule- basically treat others the way you wish to be treated.

 

I don't know about you but I'd much rather have that in place than the governments that are all currently running the world..


Cyper
  • Cyper

    Liberty City Lover Since 2001

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Jan 2008
  • None

#115

Posted 08 September 2013 - 10:01 AM Edited by Cyper, 08 September 2013 - 10:02 AM.

Reductio ad Hitlerum - one of the worst logical fallacies.

 

It is totally irrelevant whenever Hitler, Stalin, or Einstein was christian, atheists, muslims, or whatever. You might aswell say that ''Both Hitler, Stalin and Einstein had mustache, therefore...'' It is far more complex than that. Hitler believed in Nazism, and one could write thousands of pages about that and the economy and general situation in Germany druing the 1930s or about Hitler’s psychological status.

What’s relevant in the question is whenever there is evidence that shows belief in atheism or religion makes people commit bad actions as a direct result of their belief. Not any other belief, such as nazism.

 

Regarding whenever it’s logical to believe in God is not really relevant to the question of God’s existence. There is a lot of things that are logical. It is completely logical that someone gets in my room and throw my computer out of the window. It is completely logical that Barack Obama shows up in my student corridor. But it does not follow that it is likely for any of this to happen.

Then there are questions that does not deserve an answer. If someone claims that there is an invisible man outside of time and space this is not something that one can prove or disprove, in the same way as you can’t disprove the existence of ghosts or Santa. But yet again that isn’t a reason to believe in it. That is exactly what atheism is - contrary to popular belief - to be an atheist doesn’t mean that you know that God doesn’t exist. It means that you don’t believe it.

 

When it comes to believing in something there is two ways to do it: in an irrational way and in a rational way. There is not a shred of evidence for the existence of a God or any other supernatural beings. With ‘evidence’ I am speaking about… evidence. Evidence is based on rationality and empiricism. This means that what you want to believe, what you find comfortable, what you find consoling, what’s said in an ancient book, and so forth, is totally irrelevant. What’s relevant is logical truths, probability, and physical evidence. If you base your knowledge about the world on anything else than rationality and empiricism the only thing that is left is faith and that is just belief without evidence.

 

Furthermore, we do not need religion for our society. Science protects out society. It is because of science we have great medical care, it’s because of science its been possible for us to sit in front of a computer. It’s because of moral and political philosophy that we believe in equality of women, that we condemn slavery and other forms of racism. Because a constitution can change. Morality is not absolute, and even if it was, I would not like an absolute morality. I want an intelligent morality. The morality found in the Koran for example could hardly be called intelligent. The fact that religious people then cherry pick and neglect the bad bits and keep the acceptable bits from their holy books is another question. Regarding the golden rule, ‘’God’’ or Jesus did not come up with it, Confucius did it 551–479 BC. Christianty have just applied it. The golden rule is not very well thought out either. If one should treat other’s like oneself want to be treated, that that a  Sadomasochistic person should treat others in the same way he or she likes to be treated… It’s neither a logical or very pleasant rule to follow.

  • El Zilcho likes this

GrandMaster Smith
  • GrandMaster Smith

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2006
  • None

#116

Posted 08 September 2013 - 10:18 AM

God is simply one of the innumerous theories that humans believe to be the origins of the universe and life. 

 

Some people believe the big bang was the origins of everything, if someone doubts this theory then do they become an a-big bang theory-ist? What about those who doubt the infinite multiverse theory, do they become a a-multiverse-ist?

 

Since none of those theories are actually provable at this point in time, would you identify with all the titles mentioned above alongside being an atheist?

 

Why don't atheists just coin up a term to show you don't believe in anything as related to our origins at all, why is only god? And the majority of the time atheists only talk about Christianity based faiths, do they only acknowledge and research that one religion?


Cyper
  • Cyper

    Liberty City Lover Since 2001

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Jan 2008
  • None

#117

Posted 08 September 2013 - 10:37 AM Edited by Cyper, 08 September 2013 - 10:41 AM.

God is simply one of the innumerous theories that humans believe to be the origins of the universe and life. 

 

Some people believe the big bang was the origins of everything, if someone doubts this theory then do they become an a-big bang theory-ist? What about those who doubt the infinite multiverse theory, do they become a a-multiverse-ist?

 

Since none of those theories are actually provable at this point in time, would you identify with all the titles mentioned above alongside being an atheist?

 

Why don't atheists just coin up a term to show you don't believe in anything as related to our origins at all, why is only god? And the majority of the time atheists only talk about Christianity based faiths, do they only acknowledge and research that one religion?

 

You missed two of my points.

 

First, you have to evaluate what theory of all given theories seems to have the highest probability to be true.

 

Secondly, it is not your belief in a specific theory that is relevant. What's relevant is the evidence for the theory that you believe in. On the contrary, someone who does not believe in theory X should then demostrate evidence to why he or she discard it. People who discard a theory without explaining why should hardly be taken seriously. Just because you believe in something does not make it true.

 

So why discard God but not other theories related to our origins?

 

Because there is not a single shred of evidence for the existance of a God. Because God does not really explain anything. Because these ''other theories'' are not only rational, but supported by massive amount of evidence.

 

 

What you then personally have faith in is not interesting to hear about.


GrandMaster Smith
  • GrandMaster Smith

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2006
  • None

#118

Posted 08 September 2013 - 11:49 AM

 

God is simply one of the innumerous theories that humans believe to be the origins of the universe and life. 

 

Some people believe the big bang was the origins of everything, if someone doubts this theory then do they become an a-big bang theory-ist? What about those who doubt the infinite multiverse theory, do they become a a-multiverse-ist?

 

Since none of those theories are actually provable at this point in time, would you identify with all the titles mentioned above alongside being an atheist?

 

Why don't atheists just coin up a term to show you don't believe in anything as related to our origins at all, why is only god? And the majority of the time atheists only talk about Christianity based faiths, do they only acknowledge and research that one religion?

 

You missed two of my points.

 

First, you have to evaluate what theory of all given theories seems to have the highest probability to be true.

 

Secondly, it is not your belief in a specific theory that is relevant. What's relevant is the evidence for the theory that you believe in. On the contrary, someone who does not believe in theory X should then demostrate evidence to why he or she discard it. People who discard a theory without explaining why should hardly be taken seriously. Just because you believe in something does not make it true.

 

So why discard God but not other theories related to our origins?

 

Because there is not a single shred of evidence for the existance of a God. Because God does not really explain anything. Because these ''other theories'' are not only rational, but supported by massive amount of evidence.

 

 

What you then personally have faith in is not interesting to hear about.

 

 

There is zero evidence for anything precluding our spacetime continuum and all that is within it, at all. It is something we are completely incapable of proving or disproving at this time so any theory is just as rubbish as the next since no matter how much we believe one theory may be true, there's no way to empirically prove it. 

 

But yes, I personally do believe an immaterial eternal, extremely powerful source of energy that is conscious is most definitely logically possible and I think could actually explain a lot. Reality imo makes much more sense with the idea of there being an intelligence behind it's design. 


Jackal.
  • Jackal.

    Don't you f*cking look at me!

  • Cyclop 9
  • Joined: 19 Jan 2011

#119

Posted 08 September 2013 - 12:42 PM

Essentially atheists are better than Christians because when they do something "good" they do it purely as a good thing not to permit them passage to some "paradise". Essentially Christians are only acting with common decent because they don't want to go to hell. Whereas atheists are just doing it to be nice, well most of the time anyway. There's always ulterior notices I suppose.

El Zilcho
  • El Zilcho

    Virtuoso

  • The Connection
  • Joined: 14 May 2008
  • European-Union

#120

Posted 08 September 2013 - 12:52 PM Edited by El Zilcho, 08 September 2013 - 01:01 PM.

 

There is zero evidence for anything precluding our spacetime continuum and all that is within it, at all. It is something we are completely incapable of proving or disproving at this time so any theory is just as rubbish as the next since no matter how much we believe one theory may be true, there's no way to empirically prove it. 

 

But yes, I personally do believe an immaterial eternal, extremely powerful source of energy that is conscious is most definitely logically possible and I think could actually explain a lot. Reality imo makes much more sense with the idea of there being an intelligence behind it's design. 

 

 

 

It's very easy to say you can't prove / disprove something, but then we must consider all manner of things that cannot be disproved, but are nonetheless so unlikely as to be discounted. The Flying Spaghetti Monster does this well; you can't disprove its existence, and yet it is a satire on religious belief precisely because it is so absurd, and in the same grey area of "yeah but you can't disprove" as theistic Gods. The likelihood of a Universal God that resembles in action or intellect a species that evolved on the small planet of Earth, one that is conveniently moral, or recognisably an 'architect' is also outlandish. Why would our concepts, as Hume said, of why a house must be designed by intelligent hands, therefore be extrapolated to the Universe?

 

Secondly, and perhaps most importantly, a God answers nothing. I hate to mention this, because it is abused so often in debate, but Occam's Razor is useful here. Essentially, the simpler answer is usually the correct one; what is more likely, that the Universe existed in some form, forever, or that a God existed in some form, forever, and made the Universe? If we can't comprehend the infinity of the Universe, and whatever may have existed before (or whether that question is even relevant at all) then why insert a cosmic middleman? It simply raises further questions; who created God? If no one did, then God might as well be left out of the model - because if you attest that God was always extant, then we can attest the same for the Universe, albeit in different form.

 

It only adds more questions, and injects into the whole affair that sordid arrogance that the Universe "was probably made by an intelligence, because we're intelligent and we make things, so I'll assume the Universe came about in the same way." It's bunkum.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users