Should Atheism Be Considered a Cult?

[SilkkTheShocker]

And by cult, im referring to "a group whose beliefs or practices are considered abnormal or bizarre"

[kentatm]

:facepalm

[niko]

Is this your new shtick, pushing religion? Because being a Heat troll who is totally ignorant about the NBA wasn't enough?

[DukeDelonte13]

by that def. every single religion would be considered a cult too.

[JMT]

by that def. every single religion would be considered a cult too.

This.

Only in a truly irrational mind would believing in something that has never been proven to exist be considered MORE sensible than not believing in it.

[ForeverHeat]

Someone answer this. If there is no religion, then what stops people from doing wrong? Such as killing, stealing, etc.? I know there is the law, but I mean morally. There are never any consequences if you don't get caught, so whats stopping people from doing this?

[JMT]

Someone answer this. If there is no religion, then what stops people from doing wrong? Such as killing, stealing, etc.? I know there is the law, but I mean morally. There are never any consequences if you don't get caught, so whats stopping people from doing this?

Morals and religion have little or nothing in common.

The law provides the consequences...unless you believe there's a boogey man in the sky who not only made you to do wrong, but is also going to punish you for doing so.

[ForeverHeat]

Morals and religion have little or nothing in common.

How do you know what is wrong and what is right? What makes something wrong?

[magictricked]

Someone answer this. If there is no religion, then what stops people from doing wrong? Such as killing, stealing, etc.? I know there is the law, but I mean morally. There are never any consequences if you don't get caught, so whats stopping people from doing this? The same thing that keeps non belivers from doing wrong now. Natural inborn morality We don't need a law that tells us it's wrong to take another life, we don't need a religion either. we just know. Well most of us do :lol

[JMT]

How do you know what is wrong and what is right? What makes something wrong?

Mores, not morals. The mores or accepted practices set forth by a society determine the law, which is what they accept as right and wrong.

Do you really think "do unto others..." is proprietary? It's a pretty simple concept...not many people really need a book to tell them that it's a good idea...and all that's really necessary for people to live in peace and respect.

[ForeverHeat]

Morals and religion have little or nothing in common.

The law provides the consequences...unless you believe there's a boogey man in the sky who not only made you to do wrong, but is also going to punish you for doing so.

1. All common rights and wrongs, such as not lying, killing hurting others, etc can from religion first. Most laws are based on religion anyway.

2. No one is made to do anything, unless it is for a higher purpose. People have free will and will be rewarded and punished because of their actions.

[Is He Ill]

Bizarre? Like Christian/Muslim level of bizarre?

[Is He Ill]

How do you know what is wrong and what is right? What makes something wrong?

It's called empathy. If you lack it there is something wrong with you.

[bagelred]

by that def. every single religion would be considered a cult too.

Actually wouldn't atheism be the only sane belief. Every religion believes in something you can't see, hear, touch...without any credible proof of existence.

[ForeverHeat]

Mores, not morals. The mores or accepted practices set forth by a society determine the law, which is what they accept as right and wrong.

Do you really think "do unto others..." is proprietary? It's a pretty simple concept...not many people really need a book to tell them that it's a good idea...and all that's really necessary for people to live in peace and respect.

I'm not christian so I wont get into that subject, and the bible has MANY flaws, but the concept of religion is ultimately correct, in my opinion. Anyway, I'm not here to push it onto others, I was just saying what I thought.

But what I'm saying, is that in current society, and with the rules imposed (or lack there of) in the concept of atheism, is that if I do something wrong and never get caught, there is no consequence, EVER. So what is there to stop me? I could steal 10 dollars from you, and you may never know who did it.You will forget the action after a while, and the 10 dollars will run out eventually. So is the crime just, gone? This thinking cannot lead anywhere good.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Bizarre? Like Christian/Muslim level of bizarre?


Yet Atheists are ones that believe you can do anything you want, as long as you get away with it, right? :oldlol:

[JMT]

1. All common rights and wrongs, such as not lying, killing hurting others, etc can from religion first. Most laws are based on religion anyway.

2. No one is made to do anything, unless it is for a higher purpose. People have free will and will be rewarded and punished because of their actions.

1. People existed for a long time without organized religion. Good, principled people walk the earth today with no interest in, and in many cases an outright rejection of, organized religion. I know people like that, and yet they pass along to their children a good, solid set of principles to live by.

2. You misread what I wrote. I didn't say god "made you do it". Believers think God "made them", yet allows them to do as they see fit...then gets to puniish them if they made bad choices. In which case the all-powerful being is a sadist who enjoys watching people fail and then torturing them.

[DonDadda59]

And by cult, im referring to "a group whose beliefs or practices are considered abnormal or bizarre"

I don't think you'll find the answer on a message board. Best to send telepathic brain waves to the wish-granting wizard or his zombie son/self in the sky and see what answers he can provide.

If that doesn't pan out, i know a 6 armed elephant that you can talk to.

[JMT]

Yet Atheists are ones that believe you can do anything you want, as long as you get away with it, right? :oldlol:

You couldn't be more wrong. You obviously know nothing of atheism.

[embersyc]

Someone answer this. If there is no religion, then what stops people from doing wrong? Such as killing, stealing, etc.? I know there is the law, but I mean morally. There are never any consequences if you don't get caught, so whats stopping people from doing this?

A. What makes you think people don't do wrong? Our prison system and crime rates would seem to prove otherwise. Especially when you consider that there is much unreported crime taking place as well.

B. What makes me not do wrong as an Atheist is my personal belief that it is wrong to intentionally hurt other living things, either physically or mentally/emotionally.

I believe this because of previous remorse I have felt after such actions and how I have felt when such actions were committed against me.

Case in Point: In an activity is illegal, but the likelihood of getting caught is very low or punishment not severe, and nobody is hurt by it. There is absolutely nothing to stop me (or most people) from doing it.

Also image is appropriate since OP is believer:

http://i.imgur.com/sT1XM.png

[JMT]

But what I'm saying, is that in current society, and with the rules imposed (or lack there of) in the concept of atheism, is that if I do something wrong and never get caught, there is no consequence, EVER. So what is there to stop me? I could steal 10 dollars from you, and you may never know who did it.You will forget the action after a while, and the 10 dollars will run out eventually. So is the crime just, gone? This thinking cannot lead anywhere good.

What do you believe is the consequence for you if you do something wrong and don't get caught?

[Is He Ill]

Yet Atheists are ones that believe you can do anything you want, as long as you get away with it, right? :oldlol:

Is that what you think? Christians believe they can be forgiven for everything. If you have empathy towards others, religion seems like a pastime for loons. You have to be able to recognize pain in other humans. The equivalent of the Bible's Matthew 7:12.

[ForeverHeat]

What do you believe is the consequence for you if you do something wrong and don't get caught?

It is a wrong doing, and is added to the portfolio of your application for a apartment in Hell.

[ForeverHeat]

Is that what you think? Christians believe they can be forgiven for everything. If you have empathy towards others, religion seems like a pastime for loons. You have to be able to recognize pain in other humans. The equivalent of the Bible's Matthew 7:12.

You say empathy as a reason why my theory is incorrect. If empathy was enough to stop wrong doers, then prisons would be empty. But despite empathy, people still do wrong things. So empathy isn't enough to stop peoples mistakes.

Sorry for the double post btw.

[JMT]

You say empathy as a reason why my theory is incorrect. If empathy was enough to stop wrong doers, then prisons would be empty. But despite empathy, people still do wrong things. So empathy isn't enough to stop peoples mistakes.

.

You could remove the word "empathy" and substitute the word "religion" or "morals" or "law" or "pizza" throughout that paragraph.

So if none of these things are enough to stop wrongdoing, why would we think there was more value to religion than empathy, law or pizza?

[D-Rose]

Ha, Christianity is far more of a cult than atheism, even by your definition. Believing in a talking snake, denying evolution, someone being born without a father, splitting of a river, etc is far more ludicrous than not believing in a God, which by the way no one has any proof of. :oldlol:

[Is He Ill]

You say empathy as a reason why my theory is incorrect. If empathy was enough to stop wrong doers, then prisons would be empty. But despite empathy, people still do wrong things. So empathy isn't enough to stop peoples mistakes.

Sorry for the double post btw.

That's because we have a planet full of crazy folks. Religion obviously couldn't save them either since atheists make up such a tiny percentage of the prison population in the U.S. We don't live in a god damn Utopia, humans have to evolve out of the survival by any means mindset that is wired into our brains atm. We can't brainwash people into believing fairytales, it doesn't solve anything.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Evolution is just a theory.

[JMT]

It is a wrong doing, and is added to the portfolio of your application for a apartment in Hell.

Not christian but you believe in heaven and hell? Interesting.

Atheists accept that the ramifications of their actions will affect them in the here and now, that society and their own conscience dictates their behavior. They don't accept the magical "get out of hell free" card that religion offers.

I'm 54 and grew up Roman Catholic. At one point in my life, the church had two categories of sin: mortal and venial. Now, it really didn't matter, because you could magically make your sins disappear by telling some guy about them in a dark room. But, unconfessed, a mortal sin sent you to hell and a venial to purgatory.

At this time, an un-baptized baby went to either hell or purgatory. Why? Oh yeah...ORIGINAL sin. The one they were born with because of Adam and Eve.

But that's not the best part. Of course, murder was a mortal sin. So was eating meat on Friday. SOOOOOO...if you were going to grab a burger on Friday afternoon, you might as well kill that neighbor kid you disliked. If you got the chance, you could confess them both away. If not, either was sending you straight to hell.

But it's ok, because the infallible Pope died, and the next infallible Pope changed stuff. YAY!!!

That has nothing to do with God, morals, law or anything. It's religion..

[ForeverHeat]

People say because we cannot prove god exists (scriptures are proof but atheists don't believe them, so lets put that aside), that god can't exist. On the flipside, because of the lack of proof, there is lack of disproof. Non one can come back to life, so no one can tell us what the real answer is. It's like aliens, we can never disprove it, so we always talk about them in the possibility there are out there. Difference is, with aliens conspiracies, they are exciting because it would be cool to see aliens. There is nothing exciting about following religions strict rules, so people shun it more. But yeah, like I was saying, religion can't be disproved.

Science on the other hand, can. Every action has a reaction, and every reaction must have had a original action. This is one of the main rules of science. Because of this, science couldn't possibly have created everything. Even if you say it created the earth, or the universe, it can't have created everything. There must of been a *spark* somewhere that begun all of this. So something other than science must be at the root of everything we see today.

[D-Rose]

People say because we cannot prove god exists (scriptures are proof but atheists don't believe them, so lets put that aside), that god can't exist. On the flipside, because of the lack of proof, there is lack of disproof. Non one can come back to life, so no one can tell us what the real answer is. It's like aliens, we can never disprove it, so we always talk about them in the possibility there are out there. Difference is, with aliens conspiracies, they are exciting because it would be cool to see aliens. There is nothing exciting about following religions strict rules, so people shun it more. But yeah, like I was saying, religion can't be disproved.

Science on the other hand, can. Every action has a reaction, and every reaction must have had a original action. This is one of the main rules of science. Because of this, science couldn't possibly have created everything. Even if you say it created the earth, or the universe, it can't have created everything. There must of been a *spark* somewhere that begun all of this. So something other than science must be at the root of everything we see today.

How are scriptures proof? Every religion has scriptures, so saying that scriptures is true disproves itself because all religions would thus be true, which is obviously impossible.

The bible, quran, torah, etc are no more valid/holy/true than Aesop's Fables or Santa Claus. There may be/are historical facts in such books, but simply because someone wrote of miracles/god doesn't mean anything.

Look at more recent religions like Scientology and Mormonism to see how religion is but a product of man and his innate desire to control others.

[ForeverHeat]

Not christian but you believe in heaven and hell? Interesting.

Atheists accept that the ramifications of their actions will affect them in the here and now, that society and their own conscience dictates their behavior. They don't accept the magical "get out of hell free" card that religion offers.

I'm 54 and grew up Roman Catholic. At one point in my life, the church had two categories of sin: mortal and venial. Now, it really didn't matter, because you could magically make your sins disappear by telling some guy about them in a dark room. But, unconfessed, a mortal sin sent you to hell and a venial to purgatory.

At this time, an un-baptized baby went to either hell or purgatory. Why? Oh yeah...ORIGINAL sin. The one they were born with because of Adam and Eve.

But that's not the best part. Of course, murder was a mortal sin. So was eating meat on Friday. SOOOOOO...if you were going to grab a burger on Friday afternoon, you might as well kill that neighbor kid you disliked. If you got the chance, you could confess them both away. If not, either was sending you straight to hell.

But it's ok, because the infallible Pope died, and the next infallible Pope changed stuff. YAY!!!

That has nothing to do with God, morals, law or anything. It's religion..

I don't believe in a lot of the stuff you mentioned, and in this case I agree with you, those particular rules make no sense. But all religions are different in some way. You can say you hate pasta, so you must hate ice cream also, just because they are both food.

[ForeverHeat]

How are scriptures proof? Every religion has scriptures, so saying that scriptures is true disproves itself because all religions would thus be true, which is obviously impossible.

The bible, quran, torah, etc are no more valid/holy/true than Aesop's Fables or Santa Claus. There may be/are historical facts in such books, but simply because someone wrote of miracles/god doesn't mean anything.

Look at more recent religions like Scientology and Mormonism to see how religion is but a product of man and his innate desire to control others.

I knew people would react like that, so I said put that aside for this particular argument.

[D-Rose]

And, I was raised a highly religious Muslim, I know your side of the debate better than you do.

I think the most logical thing to say is "I don't know" because nobody does! Religion is just an explanation and justification of our existence, and has been used for thousands of years to control men. The opiate of the masses.

[Randy]

Praise you, Richard Dawkins. You gave birth to your son, who is actually also you, who you then sent to earth to be killed to save those you created from their imperfections. Imperfections that you created. Amen.

:bowdown:

[Randy]

Evolution is just a theory.

Just like the theory of gravity. Now jump off a bridge and then come post here and tell us how that "theory" worked out for you.

[SilkkTheShocker]

People say because we cannot prove god exists (scriptures are proof but atheists don't believe them, so lets put that aside), that god can't exist. On the flipside, because of the lack of proof, there is lack of disproof. Non one can come back to life, so no one can tell us what the real answer is. It's like aliens, we can never disprove it, so we always talk about them in the possibility there are out there. Difference is, with aliens conspiracies, they are exciting because it would be cool to see aliens. There is nothing exciting about following religions strict rules, so people shun it more. But yeah, like I was saying, religion can't be disproved.

Science on the other hand, can. Every action has a reaction, and every reaction must have had a original action. This is one of the main rules of science. Because of this, science couldn't possibly have created everything. Even if you say it created the earth, or the universe, it can't have created everything. There must of been a *spark* somewhere that begun all of this. So something other than science must be at the root of everything we see today.


Exactly. Are we supposed to believe that the brain just created itself? Water just appeared out of nowhere? The gift of life just all of a sudden appeared? It has to start somewhere, plain and simple.

[SilkkTheShocker]

It is logically absurd for a finite mind (us) to deny the existence of an infinite mind (our Lord)

[D-Rose]

Exactly. Are we supposed to believe that the brain just created itself? Water just appeared out of nowhere? The gift of life just all of a sudden appeared? It has to start somewhere, plain and simple.
So you choose to believe an explanation given to you by another man? Nobody knows what happened, but science has actual proof, whereas religion is fairy tales.

[Is He Ill]

Exactly. Are we supposed to believe that the brain just created itself? Water just appeared out of nowhere? The gift of life just all of a sudden appeared? It has to start somewhere, plain and simple.

Where did God come from then?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UyHzhtARf8M

[SilkkTheShocker]

So you choose to believe an explanation given to you by another man? Nobody knows what happened, but science has actual proof, whereas religion is fairy tales.


Like ForeverHeat stated, where is this "trigger" coming from? Did science create itself? Is that what you are trying to say? :oldlol:

[Is He Ill]

Did God create itself? Is that what you are trying to say? :oldlol:

:lol I know right?

[Randy]

Like ForeverHeat stated, where is this "trigger" coming from? Did science create itself? Is that what you are trying to say? :oldlol:

Did science create itself? :roll: I've never heard that one before, and I've heard A LOT of retarded things coming from braindead fundies. Thanks.

[JMT]

It is logically absurd for a finite mind (us) to deny the existence of an infinite mind (our Lord)

Wow, that is the most convoluted logic ever.

[Is He Ill]

Praise you, Richard Dawkins. You gave birth to your son, who is actually also you, who you then sent to earth to be killed to save those you created from their imperfections. Imperfections that you created. Amen.

:bowdown:

http://assets.diylol.com/hfs/99e/b8d/326/resized/jesus-says-meme-generator-it-makes-sense-dont-worry-about-it-716d48.jpg

[SilkkTheShocker]

Did science create itself? :roll: I've never heard that one before, and I've heard A LOT of retarded things coming from braindead fundies. Thanks.


You're upset with God. You can

[KingBeasley08]

I respect a person's right to believe and practice their religion but people like OP are just annoying. Believing in a bunch of hocus pocus magicians and an alien creator is not bizarre yet you call people that actually study the laws of the universe based on what is actually observable delusional? Ok :oldlol:

[KingBeasley08]

Like ForeverHeat stated, where is this "trigger" coming from? Did science create itself? Is that what you are trying to say? :oldlol:
No one really knows. That's the key difference between science and religion. Religion takes the words of stone age/ancient/medieval scrubs as fact whereas science actually is the journey to discover the truth

[Theoo]

And by cult, im referring to "a group whose beliefs or practices are considered abnormal or bizarre"
ok thnx

[SilkkTheShocker]

I respect a person's right to believe and practice their religion but people like OP are just annoying. Believing in a bunch of hocus pocus magicians and an alien creator is not bizarre yet you call people that actually study the laws of the universe based on what is actually observable delusional? Ok :oldlol:


If God was observeable, he wouldn't be God.

[kentatm]

If God was observeable, he wouldn't be God.


:biggums:

that statement would mean the stories in the Bible are proof God is not God.

[SilkkTheShocker]

:biggums:

that statement would mean the stories in the Bible are proof God is not God.


Context. KingBeasley was talking about choosing to believe things we can personally observe. You can observe the way God wants us to live, act, his work, etc. But no one can actually view (observe) God in any kind of physical form. Thats we learn about Him from things such as The Bible, love, charity, etc. The people in The Bible only observed His words, power, etc. But did they see God? No one can. You see His work through the way he wants us to live. You can see His work whenever you walk outside, see your family, etc.

[Take Your Lumps]

Someone answer this. If there is no religion, then what stops people from doing wrong? Such as killing, stealing, etc.? I know there is the law, but I mean morally. There are never any consequences if you don't get caught, so whats stopping people from doing this?

There's always someone in these online discussions of belief/non-belief that says this and it chills me to my core that millions of people think like this.

"I have primal urges to kill, rape, and pillage everything that moves! If there is no God, then why am I not doing these things??!11 He is the only reason why I'm not stabbing you in the eye right now!!"

:facepalm

[SilkkTheShocker]

I respect a person's right to believe and practice their religion but people like OP are just annoying. Believing in a bunch of hocus pocus magicians and an alien creator is not bizarre yet you call people that actually study the laws of the universe based on what is actually observable delusional? Ok :oldlol:


So do you need to be able to actually see with your own eyes that God exists, before you believe? eek:

[JMT]

There's always someone in these online discussions of belief/non-belief that says this and it chills me to my core that millions of people think like this.

"I have primal urges to kill, rape, and pillage everything that moves! If there is no God, then why am I not doing these things??!11 He is the only reason why I'm not stabbing you in the eye right now!!"

:facepalm

Yes, and remember that those same people believe that they were created by god who gave them these primal urges to rape, kill, maim, etc.

Praise Him!

[JMT]

So you need so desperately to believe in something that it doesn't matter whether you or anyone has actually seen it with your own eyes? eek:

Fixed.

[SilkkTheShocker]

There's always someone in these online discussions of belief/non-belief that says this and it chills me to my core that millions of people think like this.

"I have primal urges to kill, rape, and pillage everything that moves! If there is no God, then why am I not doing these things??!11 He is the only reason why I'm not stabbing you in the eye right now!!"

:facepalm

From my personal experiences with Atheists, they come off as very rebellious, passive/aggresive, angry, etc. I feel like most of them have been hurt emotionally at some point in there life and they are taking that out on God.

[JMT]

From my personal experiences with Atheists, they come off as very rebellious, passive/aggresive, angry, etc. I feel like most of them have been hurt emotionally at some point in there life and they are taking that out on God.


Atheism is the denial or failure to believe in deities. That's it. Simple.

If you want to have an intelligent discussion about a topic don't include anecdotes and psychanalysis of an entire group based on your "personal experiences".

[Take Your Lumps]

If you want to have an intelligent discussion about a topic don't include anecdotes and psychanalysis of an entire group based on your "personal experiences".

Good luck with that :oldlol:

Honestly, for the most part, I don't even hold it against people of serious faith IRL when they fail to hold a rational/logical discussion on these topics. Faith is all about anecdotal evidence and personal experiences. People of faith that have no interest in the scientific method tend to rely on those same mechanisms to try and explain the world around them.

Many people are able to compartmentalize logic and faith just fine and still contribute great work to science (Francis Collins comes to mind).

[JMT]

Good luck with that :oldlol:

I forgot. It's religion, the one area in life where it supposedly only makes sense to believe what you're told by people you never knew about something they never saw.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Atheism is the denial or failure to believe in deities. That's it. Simple.

If you want to have an intelligent discussion about a topic don't include anecdotes and psychanalysis of an entire group based on your "personal experiences".


But its ok for the people supporting Atheism in this thread, to post memes and change our quotes when replying, right? The Atheists/supports have been the ones seemingly upset in this thread.

[Nick Young]

Atheism is a religion. Blind faith and trust in science.

[JMT]

But its ok for the people supporting Atheism in this thread, to post memes and change our quotes when replying, right? The Atheists/supports have been the ones seemingly upset in this thread.


Not upset at all. Bemused might be a better description of how I regard those who staunchly believe in god.

I don't begrudge anyone their beliefs or lack of same. But when you welcome a discussion about your unwavering belief in a myth, you can't expect everyone else to simply suspend common sense.

[JMT]

Atheism is a religion. Blind faith and trust in science.

No. There is nothing inherent in Atheism pertaining to science. An Atheist is defined simply someone who does not believe in a deity.

[PullupJay]

No. There is nothing inherent in Atheism pertaining to science. An Atheist is defined simply someone who does not believe in a deity.
chooses not to believe or denies the existence of?

[JMT]

chooses not to believe or denies the existence of?

Definition
a

[kentatm]

Context. KingBeasley was talking about choosing to believe things we can personally observe. You can observe the way God wants us to live, act, his work, etc. But no one can actually view (observe) God in any kind of physical form. Thats we learn about Him from things such as The Bible, love, charity, etc. The people in The Bible only observed His words, power, etc. But did they see God? No one can. You see His work through the way he wants us to live. You can see His work whenever you walk outside, see your family, etc.


umm yea... that fellow named Jesus?




Atheism is a religion. Blind faith and trust in science.

false

[SilkkTheShocker]

umm yea... that fellow named Jesus?





false
God has "no form". No one can literally see Him.

[JMT]

God has "no form". No one can literally see Him.

That is very convenient.

[Stuckey]

http://img.chan4chan.com/img/2009-07-13/1247455512582.jpg

[kentatm]

God has "no form". No one can literally see Him.

:lol

so you think Jesus was simply a false profit.

got it.

[KingBeasley08]

:lol

so you think Jesus was simply a false profit.

got it.
:lol

[Math2]

And by cult, im referring to "a group whose beliefs or practices are considered abnormal or bizarre"

So is Christianity by your argument

[Rasheed1]

Someone answer this. If there is no religion, then what stops people from doing wrong? Such as killing, stealing, etc.? I know there is the law, but I mean morally. There are never any consequences if you don't get caught, so whats stopping people from doing this?


Sounds like you believe morals can only be instilled through fear of consequences..

Some people are simply taught from a young age to value other human beings and respect life. They grow up and dont need fear to motivate them to do the right thing.

They wouldnt need a religion to guide them

[irondarts]

Just like the theory of gravity. Now jump off a bridge and then come post here and tell us how that "theory" worked out for you.
:oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol: :oldlol:

[DonDadda59]

God has "no form". No one can literally see Him.

but he walked the earth like kwai chang caine, getting into one misadventure after another as jesus. But unlike kwai chang, he didn't know kung fu so he got that ass tore up.

[Heavincent]

And by cult, im referring to "a group whose beliefs or practices are considered abnormal or bizarre"

Believing in a floating man in the sky that controls everything isn't bizarre? And believing in some red guy with a goatee and a tail who butt rapes "sinners" for all of eternity isn't bizarre?

Listen, I'm definitely not ruling out the existence of a higher power, I'm just saying that Christianity (and most organized religion) is pretty much bullshit.

[vinsane01]

lol this is a funny thread. Had some good laughs. :oldlol:

Here's my favorite:


If God was observeable, he wouldn't be God.

[miller-time]

statistically and historically it probably is more "bizarre" to not believe in god.

[bdreason]

Someone answer this. If there is no religion, then what stops people from doing wrong? Such as killing, stealing, etc.? I know there is the law, but I mean morally. There are never any consequences if you don't get caught, so whats stopping people from doing this?


My parents raised me to have morals without any kind of religion.

[Take Your Lumps]

It's clear OP doesn't understand the definition of either of the nouns in the thread title.

[brantonli]

1. All common rights and wrongs, such as not lying, killing hurting others, etc can from religion first. Most laws are based on religion anyway.

2. No one is made to do anything, unless it is for a higher purpose. People have free will and will be rewarded and punished because of their actions.

Aren't you assuming that ALL morals all over the world come from religion? That's a quite a leap of assumption.

To be fair, I think morales mostly come from religion, things like karma, or the 10 commandments. My grandmother is a Buddhist all her life and she believes very strongly in the various spirits and prays daily. But my dad isn't religious, but still follows the same moral codes. However I think religion only sets the basis of morales because when morality became an important factor in humanity, virtually everybody was religious. Religion sets the basis of the moral compass, but doesn't mean you must have religion in order to have morales.

[miller-time]

Aren't you assuming that ALL morals all over the world come from religion? That's a quite a leap of assumption.

To be fair, I think morales mostly come from religion, things like karma, or the 10 commandments. My grandmother is a Buddhist all her life and she believes very strongly in the various spirits and prays daily. But my dad isn't religious, but still follows the same moral codes. However I think religion only sets the basis of morales because when morality became an important factor in humanity, virtually everybody was religious. Religion sets the basis of the moral compass, but doesn't mean you must have religion in order to have morales.

have you considered evolutionary history though? what is moral is what is beneficial for both the individual and the species. group and reciprocal behaviour is in all social animals and it was in pre-human species long before the invention of religion. people don't kill each other because it is suggested by religion, but because people who work positively in groups are selected for.

[Dolphin]

Not killing, not lying, not whatever the **** ever didn't come from religion...it came from people. People created these values, which became social norms as did they create religions, which became social norms.

Just because these values and religions are interlaced throughout history does not mean these values wouldn't have prevailed without religion. Think about it...we created these values....we created these religions, which beheld these values for the most part, but they're not one in the same...we did not need to create one (religions) to create the other (moral values). Separate entities with religion being one of many possible tools used to promote morality.

[gigantes]

lol this is a funny thread. Had some good laughs. :oldlol:

Here's my favorite:

If God was observeable, he wouldn't be God.

well, what if he looked like captain kangaroo-- would he be observable, then?


http://www.tvparty.com/bgifs17/captain-color.jpg

http://chaddonley.files.wordpress.com/2012/05/63-captain-kangaroo-mustache.jpg

http://images.sodahead.com/polls/002671773/2654595227_CaptKangarooMr_Moose_xlarge.jpeg

[DCL]

i grew up catholic, studied the bible and went to church every week, hearing and believing in the same cavemen bullsh!t stories that was once unquestionable. but when you're a kid, that procedure wasn't by choice. it was indoctrination. you get brainwashed easily by the church. but when you get older, start to think and challenge ideas, a lot of things just don't make any friggin sense. i never had a terrible experience in life or whatever. i'm not mad at any god or turning away from him. but i just don't believe there is a god. it's not a cult. it's more like an awakening.

[Take Your Lumps]

Not killing, not lying, not whatever the **** ever didn't come from religion...it came from people. People created these values, which became social norms as did they create religions, which became social norms.

Just because these values and religions are interlaced throughout history does not mean these values wouldn't have prevailed without religion. Think about it...we created these values....we created these religions, which beheld these values for the most part, but they're not one in the same...we did not need to create one (religions) to create the other (moral values). Separate entities with religion being one of many possible tools used to promote morality.

Let's put it this way -- if morals such as not killing others "came from religion" as ForeverHeat suggests, how in the world did we survive as a species for 100,000+ years before religion was invented by man?

[RaininTwos]

If I didn't believe in anything, I don't see why I would need to engage in these pointless debates every time one comes along. I always find it funny that so many people here scoff at the idea of a god existing, yet are always responding in these religion threads. It seems like me and Shannon Elements were the only ones who ever saw the irony.

[GOBB]

Just like the theory of gravity. Now jump off a bridge and then come post here and tell us how that "theory" worked out for you.

OP got owned.

[bballer]

mind=blown by the responses to both sides of this argument.

[Pacers4ever]

mind=blown by the responses to both sides of this argument.
I've learned that in this thread it proves Athiest and Thiest can be just about as equally retarded. Very good read many retarded posters but this wouldn't be ISH without them :yaohappy:

[ForeverHeat]

People say because we cannot prove god exists (scriptures are proof but atheists don't believe them, so lets put that aside), that god can't exist. On the flipside, because of the lack of proof, there is lack of disproof. Non one can come back to life, so no one can tell us what the real answer is. It's like aliens, we can never disprove it, so we always talk about them in the possibility there are out there. Difference is, with aliens conspiracies, they are exciting because it would be cool to see aliens. There is nothing exciting about following religions strict rules, so people shun it more. But yeah, like I was saying, religion can't be disproved.

Science on the other hand, can. Every action has a reaction, and every reaction must have had a original action. This is one of the main rules of science. Because of this, science couldn't possibly have created everything. Even if you say it created the earth, or the universe, it can't have created everything. There must of been a *spark* somewhere that begun all of this. So something other than science must be at the root of everything we see today.

No one as yet has disputed or attempted to disprove this argument.

[CelticBaller]

If I didn't believe in anything, I don't see why I would need to engage in these pointless debates every time one comes along. I always find it funny that so many people here scoff at the idea of a god existing, yet are always responding in these religion threads. It seems like me and Shannon Elements were the only ones who ever saw the irony.
this, but the replies in this thread are amusing :lol

[kentatm]

If I didn't believe in anything, I don't see why I would need to engage in these pointless debates every time one comes along. I always find it funny that so many people here scoff at the idea of a god existing, yet are always responding in these religion threads. It seems like me and Shannon Elements were the only ones who ever saw the irony.


that is a ridiculous stance to take.

so if you are a real atheist you shouldn't ever respond to a thread talking about religion or atheism?

shouldn't you say the same about people of faith since there is literally no way the existence of a god can be proven?

[AlonzoGOAT]

that is a ridiculous stance to take.

so if you are a real atheist you shouldn't ever respond to a thread talking about religion or atheism?

shouldn't you say the same about people of faith since there is literally no way the existence of a god can be proven?
There's a difference between debating and responding in case you didn't know. Then there's also debating in a pointless thread like this where everyone posts here have been absolute retardation which leads to a good read for the lols. I agree I don't waste my time debating others people's beliefs on the internet.

[ForeverHeat]

Science on the other hand, can. Every action has a reaction, and every reaction must have had a original action. This is one of the main rules of science. Because of this, science couldn't possibly have created everything. Even if you say it created the earth, or the universe, it can't have created everything. There must of been a *spark* somewhere that begun all of this. So something other than science must be at the root of everything we see today.

Atheists, PLEASE explain how you believe in science despite what I claimed. Are you guys not answering because no one can dispute this? I am genuinely interested to hear your views on this.

[Is He Ill]

Science on the other hand, can. Every action has a reaction, and every reaction must have had a original action. This is one of the main rules of science. Because of this, science couldn't possibly have created everything. Even if you say it created the earth, or the universe, it can't have created everything. There must of been a *spark* somewhere that begun all of this. So something other than science must be at the root of everything we see today.

Atheists, PLEASE explain how you believe in science despite what I claimed. Are you guys not answering because no one can dispute this? I am genuinely interested to hear your views on this.

:biggums: You don't believe in science? Your question is so dumb, it's basically asking someone where god came from.

[ForeverHeat]

:biggums: You don't believe in science? Your question is so dumb, it's basically asking someone where god came from.

If my question is so dumb, may you please tell me why i'm wrong?

[Jackass18]

God has "no form". No one can literally see Him.

How do you know either way? How can you be so definite in what God is if God even exists? The simple fact of the matter is that God hasn't been proven to be anything more than a man-made concept.

[Jello]

If my question is so dumb, may you please tell me why i'm wrong?
Because your definition of science is incorrect. Science isn't a mechanism, it is a description.

[Jackass18]

Science on the other hand, can. Every action has a reaction, and every reaction must have had a original action. This is one of the main rules of science. Because of this, science couldn't possibly have created everything. Even if you say it created the earth, or the universe, it can't have created everything. There must of been a *spark* somewhere that begun all of this. So something other than science must be at the root of everything we see today.

Atheists, PLEASE explain how you believe in science despite what I claimed. Are you guys not answering because no one can dispute this? I am genuinely interested to hear your views on this.

Your paragraph doesn't really make that much sense, so I'll just say that we don't understand everything in the universe.

[Jello]

Let's put it this way -- if morals such as not killing others "came from religion" as ForeverHeat suggests, how in the world did we survive as a species for 100,000+ years before religion was invented by man?
Strawman. Killing does not have any moral load in nature. What is considered cooperative interaction can be perceived as moral but does not mean it is naturally moral.

[miller-time]

Because your definition of science is incorrect. Science isn't a mechanism, it is a description.

you could call it a mechanism of discovery.

but i love how he takes a scientific principle - every action has an equal and opposite reaction - and uses it to discredit science.

it doesn't apply though. that model is only useful for things that already exist. what happens before objects, energy, or space exists is unknown. outside of the universe it is any ones guess, which is why god can be used as a hypothesis - but it doesn't mean it is correct.

[kentatm]

There's a difference between debating and responding in case you didn't know. Then there's also debating in a pointless thread like this where everyone posts here have been absolute retardation which leads to a good read for the lols. I agree I don't waste my time debating others people's beliefs on the internet.

:rolleyes:

then stay out of the thread if you dont like the debate.

[Jello]

have you considered evolutionary history though? what is moral is what is beneficial for both the individual and the species. group and reciprocal behaviour is in all social animals and it was in pre-human species long before the invention of religion. people don't kill each other because it is suggested by religion, but because people who work positively in groups are selected for.
That's a stretch which calls upon many unproven assumptions. More like higher functioning and aware species have the ability to understand social interaction leading to the evolution and change of their behavior in response to survival pressures. This cooperative behavior, etc. under specific survival pressures(their behaviour rapidly changes in response to other survival pressures) may fit into our concept of morality but does not mean that they remain absolutely consistent. This is why you see changes in morality in the span of people's lifetimes, not generations.

[BrickingStar]

:rolleyes:

then stay out of the thread if you dont like a debate between retards.
Fixed this thread is :lol

[RaininTwos]

that is a ridiculous stance to take.

so if you are a real atheist you shouldn't ever respond to a thread talking about religion or atheism?

shouldn't you say the same about people of faith since there is literally no way the existence of a god can be proven?
What stance are you talking about?

What I made was an observation, not a stance but I did read past the first sentence...something that you clearly didn't do well. I used the words "repeatedly", signifying that people like you and others have been doing this for years and simply I do not understand why. It's just ironic that people who believe that all religion/spirituality is bologna would continually debate trolls that do so vehemently.

Stop being defensive and read.

[kentatm]

What stance are you talking about?

What I made was an observation, not a stance but I did read past the first sentence...something that you clearly didn't do well. I used the words "repeatedly", signifying that people like you and others have been doing this for years and simply I do not understand why. It's just ironic that people who believe that all religion/spirituality is bologna would continually debate trolls that do so vehemently.

Stop being defensive and read.

I read exactly what you said.

And I don't know what you think I've been doing for years when it comes to religious debates. I'm a Catholic, not an atheist.

[RaininTwos]

I read exactly what you said.

And I don't know what you think I've been doing for years when it comes to religious debates. I'm a Catholic, not an atheist.
One, never said you were an atheist.

Two, you've been debating trolls over religion(one topic that people aren't going to switch over to your side....ever) for years.

I remember the Bladers epidemic where every week there was a debate over religion and the threads would run the same course, generally have the same people posting in them and they were all pointless.

A troll is a troll, is a troll... why even bother?

[Timmy D for MVP]

http://files-cdn.formspring.me/photos/20120527/n4fc1b541d60f0.jpg

[miller-time]

That's a stretch which calls upon many unproven assumptions. More like higher functioning and aware species have the ability to understand social interaction leading to the evolution and change of their behavior in response to survival pressures.

the moral standard of a species no matter what it is is based on what is beneficial for it. some insects kill their partners during sex because it is biologically necessary. would we call them immoral? we just have the capacity to reflect on our behaviour - and yes on some conscious level we can select for it too - but it still comes down to basic biological and psychological determinants and needs.


This cooperative behavior, etc. under specific survival pressures(their behaviour rapidly changes in response to other survival pressures) may fit into our concept of morality but does not mean that they remain absolutely consistent. This is why you see changes in morality in the span of people's lifetimes, not generations.

the brain is fairly malleable, but across generations and cultures the same basic principles apply. the ability to take direction and conform to some social standards is inherent in us. that is why our morality changes over our life time. at a young age our brains are still developing and we are very egocentric. it is when neural structures are being formed. when we get to puberty our brains change again to take on a new goal - independence. so it isn't surprising moral attitudes change as well since we don't have the same brain structure over our life time.

[eriX]

Science on the other hand, can. Every action has a reaction, and every reaction must have had a original action. This is one of the main rules of science. Because of this, science couldn't possibly have created everything. Even if you say it created the earth, or the universe, it can't have created everything. There must of been a *spark* somewhere that begun all of this. So something other than science must be at the root of everything we see today.

Atheists, PLEASE explain how you believe in science despite what I claimed. Are you guys not answering because no one can dispute this? I am genuinely interested to hear your views on this.

umm you see, it's true that science can not yet prove our existence, the ultimate question of how we are created. But where did god came from?
He's there all along? How can something be created out of nothing?
Science can not yet answer everything but neither can you answer where god came from. If god came from nothing then the big bang theory have just been proved because it too as of now operates under an unknown of how everything came about.

[ForeverHeat]

See, god doesn't need to be seen to be proved. The whole concept of god is that he can't be seen, so if he is indeed real the fact you could never prove his existence scientifically would still be in line with the theory of his existence. There is a reason it is called "faith". It is called that because you need a certain amount of faith because you can't see everything, so you must believe even though it is not there.

Science cannot be right unless there is proof. This is the reason that scientists discredit god, no? The lack of proof. So when I put forth my argument, atheists were saying that there are some parts that are "unknown". Hmm.. now it sounds like you are the "crazy fools" who believe in something you cannot see, comprehend, or understand. It just is, because it is science and we're smart, right? No. Explain how science started everything. Where was the spark. Until then, atheism is wrong, unscientific (ironically) and pretty much a cult.

[eriX]

See, god doesn't need to be seen to be proved. The whole concept of god is that he can't be seen, so if he is indeed real the fact you could never prove his existence scientifically would still be in line with the theory of his existence. There is a reason it is called "faith". It is called that because you need a certain amount of faith because you can't see everything, so you must believe even though it is not there.

Science cannot be right unless there is proof. This is the reason that scientists discredit god, no? The lack of proof. So when I put forth my argument, atheists were saying that there are some parts that are "unknown". Hmm.. now it sounds like you are the "crazy fools" who believe in something you cannot see, comprehend, or understand. It just is, because it is science and we're smart, right? No. Explain how science started everything. Where was the spark. Until then, atheism is wrong, unscientific (ironically) and pretty much a cult.

So in your first paragraph you're telling us to **** logic and just believe, am i right? :facepalm
If God doesn't need to be proven because he cannot be seen is the argument to what i presented then i've just lost all, ironically, faith in humanity.

And now you're just brute forcing the fact that science haven't discovered the answers to everything. There used to people like you that practically imprisoned Galileo for saying that the Earth was not the center of the universe. And guess how that turned out to be?
And no not all of science tries to "discredit" god but instead they seek answers to the unknown of the universe and not at all motivated solely to reject religion, infact many famous scientists are religious.

Please try to stick your head outside of your bum and stop looking through your **** cause its really narrow.

[RoseCity07]

Atheism isn't an organized religion. I suppose people who don't believe in Santa Clause are also cult members by your failed logic.

[ForeverHeat]

So in your first paragraph you're telling us to **** logic and just believe, am i right? :facepalm
If God doesn't need to be proven because he cannot be seen is the argument to what i presented then i've just lost all, ironically, faith in humanity.

And now you're just brute forcing the fact that science haven't discovered the answers to everything. There used to people like you that practically imprisoned Galileo for saying that the Earth was not the center of the universe. And guess how that turned out to be?
And no not all of science tries to "discredit" god but instead they seek answers to the unknown of the universe and not at all motivated solely to reject religion, infact many famous scientists are religious.

Please try to stick your head outside of your bum and stop looking through your **** cause its really narrow.

My friend, you are struggling to understand. Faith is called faith because it is just that. The very fibre of its concept is that it cannot be proven. Science discredits it by using the concept of proof. With ironically science cannot provide either. Atleast religion has the theory that describes our origin. Science cannot even off that. Yet you believe it.

[SilkkTheShocker]

ForeverHeat is dropping some knowledge right now :applause:

[jbot]

i'm sure every belief was considered a cult at some point in time. atheism, though not even a religion, is probably older than any religion u can think of.

[DonDadda59]

i'm sure every belief was considered a cult at some point in time. atheism, though not even a religion, is probably older than any religion u can think of.

Exactly. Christianity started as a cult offshoot of Judaism just 2,000 years ago which is a tiny fraction of the time that humans have been on this Earth (I failed my Young Earth course :( ). Islam is an even younger former cult. Religions have come and gone for thousands of years. In a thousand years, it's possible Scientology will be the dominant world religion with the image of Tom Cruise as the messiah :oldlol:

[jbot]

In a thousand years, it's possible Scientology will be the dominant world religion with the image of Tom Cruise as the messiah :oldlol:
that's scarier than the made up december doomsday stuff.

[BankShot]

Someone answer this. If there is no religion, then what stops people from doing wrong? Such as killing, stealing, etc.? I know there is the law, but I mean morally. There are never any consequences if you don't get caught, so whats stopping people from doing this?

People can behave morally without religion telling them to do so. :facepalm

[Jackass18]

ForeverHeat is dropping some knowledge right now :applause:

Dude has trouble constructing a single sentence that makes sense. You're probably the same person anyways.

[miller-time]

My friend, you are struggling to understand. Faith is called faith because it is just that. The very fibre of its concept is that it cannot be proven. Science discredits it by using the concept of proof. With ironically science cannot provide either. Atleast religion has the theory that describes our origin. Science cannot even off that. Yet you believe it.

no it isn't. it is belief without proof. it doesn't matter if it can be proven or not, it is merely the belief in something without any evidence for it.

[Overdrive]

Someone answer this. If there is no religion, then what stops people from doing wrong? Such as killing, stealing, etc.? I know there is the law, but I mean morally. There are never any consequences if you don't get caught, so whats stopping people from doing this?

Atheists actually think that there's only one life you can lead, same for every other living being. So life is very precious to atheists and they understand that harming others is a wrong thing to do, because they don't want their only life to be harmed.

On the other hand there are alot of gods portrayed as forgiving huge crimes under the right circumstences. The roman catholic church allows indulgence, which means you can say sorry on your dying bed and go to heaven.

I wonder why there are so many roman catholic child molseting priests out there. Maybe they don't have to fear any consequences, because they believe in this magic wonderland afterlife?

Believers killed way more people than atheists.


See, god doesn't need to be seen to be proved. The whole concept of god is that he can't be seen, so if he is indeed real the fact you could never prove his existence scientifically would still be in line with the theory of his existence. There is a reason it is called "faith". It is called that because you need a certain amount of faith because you can't see everything, so you must believe even though it is not there.

Science cannot be right unless there is proof. This is the reason that scientists discredit god, no? The lack of proof. So when I put forth my argument, atheists were saying that there are some parts that are "unknown". Hmm.. now it sounds like you are the "crazy fools" who believe in something you cannot see, comprehend, or understand. It just is, because it is science and we're smart, right? No. Explain how science started everything. Where was the spark. Until then, atheism is wrong, unscientific (ironically) and pretty much a cult.


My friend, you are struggling to understand. Faith is called faith because it is just that. The very fibre of its concept is that it cannot be proven. Science discredits it by using the concept of proof. With ironically science cannot provide either. Atleast religion has the theory that describes our origin. Science cannot even off that. Yet you believe it.

There's enough proof for evolution, gravity and other theories out there, if you believe in rationalism and/or empirism that is.
There's only one thing left that's unproven and that's the big bang.

Most creationist guys I talked to don't believe in dinosaurs, radiocabon dating and similar stuff, because there's no empiristic evidence for it in their mind(fake bones, cannot see carbon atoms with the naked eye and so on). Why do they doubt something like this, because there's no empiristic proof, but believe in god? It got atleast the same evidentuary value.

Creationists aswell as scientists cannot disprove the other, because the human mind is incapable of discribing the things appropriatly. You cannot describe basic tastes, colours, sounds and anything like that, vanilla is vanilla, you cannot describe it to a tongueless guy, red is red, you cannot describe it to a blind guy or an a-flat tone to a deaf...you could with math and physics, but if you know it you don't believe it or atleast you can't feel it.

If a scientist could describe what he found out understandable for everyone there would be only a small place left for religion and that would be the ignition of the big bang, because men cannot describe what happened. Alot of scientists believe it was made by god, but in the last 500 years men in general believed that god made everything that men couldn't describe.

God got cornered alot since the ages of Galileo, Kepler and Kopernikus, because scientists showed models that could describe certain things to the masses(do you think an apple fell on Newton's head, because god ripped it from the tree and hit Newton with it, and he did it with a motion that made it possible for Newton to describe every falling object?)and alot of people started believing in those and took it as proven.

The difference between science and religion is that science is always questioning itself and evolves by that. Religion on the other hand isn't questioning itself. It's a sin to question god.

To put it simple in your lifetime the ipod, phone and pad were created. The creator of those was a scientist in a sense. Do you think god changed in that time? Do you think god has a timeschedule which allows men to create certain things at certain times.

I don't know how old you are, but most likely you can remember times when people couldn't communicate in realtime over the internet(atleast I hope so). So why if men and his brain was godcreated, why didn't men know how to do this 25 years ago? Do you believe I'm an actual person? Or do you believe in time in general? Is time absolute for you?

Men evolve, maybe not physically that much anymore, but our knowledge is growing else there wouldn't be inventions like some phones, computers and similar stuff. Those evolutions from Kepler to iphone make less people believe in god - unless you don't believe in god and think a rising number of atheists is not true since 1 = 2 = 3 = 5.000 = 1.000.000

If you don't believe in science at all you can't use an computer, because it was sciencemade.

[Jello]

the moral standard of a species no matter what it is is based on what is beneficial for it.
First define moral standard. You are superimposing morality, a human construct, to biological instincts.

some insects kill their partners during sex because it is biologically necessary. would we call them immoral?
Once again, you are superimposing our concept of morality on something that in nature is amoral, just necessary under survival pressures.

we just have the capacity to reflect on our behaviour - and yes on some conscious level we can select for it too - but it still comes down to basic biological and psychological determinants and needs.
Yes those basic biological instincts and behaviours are due to survival pressures and what is necessary for gene propagation, but you seem to be saying that those which are "beneficial" or "appropriate" are moral and the moral standard. That is wrong. It is just what is necessary to survive. Humans have the ability to go beyond the instinctual and value instincts and label them as moral or immoral. Disregarding all the extra morals of course.

[HardwoodLegend]

My position has always been that atheists aren't disbelievers in God. They are disbelievers in the men who are telling them about God.

Unless God is to appear before an atheist unequivocally, non-cryptically and clearly to declare his existence... with no doubt that this is a supernatural force and not a hallucination, there is no God to disbelieve.

So, essentially an atheist is a disbeliever in man. Man who comes forth and presents these claims of a god.

That's all religion is. A wide-ranging variety of claims. How is one to sift through all the bullshit since it's certain at least ONE of these muthaf*ckas is lyin and created some stories to control the populace?

[Bladers]

Yes and dont even get me started.

[LikeABosh]

Yea, NOT beilving in a magical, all powerful, being floating in the sky is what is bizarre :oldlol:

[HardwoodLegend]

Yes and dont even get me started.

Naw man, get started. Please. For the souls that are lost out there.

Explain how it makes sense to submit to one of these texts floating around out there ddescribing events we weren't there to witness and how we'll suffer endlessly for not doing so.

And, tell me which one of these texts is true. Which words ring hollow, and which don't?

[DCL]

for all you religious believers out there, think of every "miracle" you have ever experienced. if you rationalize it enough without religion, that event can always be explained without any reference to a higher being.

to many of you, your miracle was a low probability event that probably shaked your entire faith. you feel so blessed, but low probability events do happen in life. a cancer patient may go to a doctor, and the doctor might tell him he might have 0.01% of surviving. so the cancer patient goes and prays and prays and ends up surviving and defeating cancer.

well, that patient will of course feel incredibly blessed or appreciative and will probably give all his thanks to a god for the rest of his life. but was god really the helping hand in the equation? was it really a miracle or an event that cannot be explained at all? a 0.01% is low probability occurrence but it still a probability that can happen by the laws of math itself.

but what's a true miracle? it's something that cannot be explained at all. in the bible, we read stories of jesus touching a man with a cut off ear and then the ear miraculously grows back. we NEVER experience that in real life because that is a zero probability event, an IMPOSSIBLE event. only a higher being like god would have the power to make it happen. you never see a guy with a cut off arm who grows back a normal arm in real life. you never see a building collapse and then build itself back up. these are things are totally inexplicable and impossible with ZERO chance of happening. the stories of moses splitting the sea and having the israelites walk across are fantastic stories, but they are just stories.

now think about your miracle again. was that an IMPOSSIBLE event or was there still some small chance of happening anyway? of course, it's the latter but you probably refuse to rationalize with that notion.

[eriX]

My friend, you are struggling to understand. Faith is called faith because it is just that. The very fibre of its concept is that it cannot be proven. Science discredits it by using the concept of proof. With ironically science cannot provide either. Atleast religion has the theory that describes our origin. Science cannot even off that. Yet you believe it.

So by your logic i have faith in the spaghetti monster and because you cannot see it it must be real :facepalm

Honestly it's okay to believe in god and to just deny everything is just...

[JtotheIzzo]

And by cult, im referring to "a group whose beliefs or practices are considered abnormal or bizarre"

have you slayed yourself yet? If not you aren't living up to your user title.

Atheism has no structure or organization, this makes it very difficult for it to be considered anything other than a word.

[RoseCity07]

My friend, you are struggling to understand. Faith is called faith because it is just that. The very fibre of its concept is that it cannot be proven. Science discredits it by using the concept of proof. With ironically science cannot provide either. Atleast religion has the theory that describes our origin. Science cannot even off that. Yet you believe it.

Religious people make the mistake of thinking that not being able to disprove god means something. Science can't disprove the Tooth Fairy or Santa Claus. The onus of finding proof is not on science. The people who believe in god have to prove it.

Richard Dawkins uses the teapot analogy. If someone told you there was a teapot orbiting the sun but that it was too small to see with telescopes you probably wouldn't believe them. It would not become your responsibility to prove that there isn't a teapot orbiting the sun. It would be on the person who said it.

Some people use the logic that just because you can't prove or disprove god that the probability of a god is 50%. That isn't even true. If that were true then the probability of anything that you can't disprove would be 50%. We know that isn't the case. It doesn't make sense to believe the existence of god is 50/50 just because you want it to be. In reality the probability is probably a lot lower.

[Hittin_Shots]

Tell me more about this teapot.

[JMT]

My position has always been that atheists aren't disbelievers in God. They are disbelievers in the men who are telling them about God.



Than your position is incorrect and at odds with the very definition of atheist.

There's nothing to spin. Atheists do not believe in gods/deities.

It's not that hard.

[JMT]

Science on the other hand, can. Every action has a reaction, and every reaction must have had a original action. This is one of the main rules of science. Because of this, science couldn't possibly have created everything. Even if you say it created the earth, or the universe, it can't have created everything. There must of been a *spark* somewhere that begun all of this. So something other than science must be at the root of everything we see today.

Atheists, PLEASE explain how you believe in science despite what I claimed. Are you guys not answering because no one can dispute this? I am genuinely interested to hear your views on this.

You're making two unfounded assumptions.

First, that atheists by definition are firm believers in science. All atheists are are people that do not believe in a deity. If individual atheists want to hitch their wagon to a scientific theory, that's their perogative. But the two don't automatically go hand in hand.

The biggest problem people have with accepting atheism is their arrogant belief that everything must be explained to their satisfaction. If there is not a god, the believer lacks an answer. The atheist doesn't require that cosmic hand holding.

Which leads to your second fallacy, that the laws of science are absolute and can not be questioned. The laws of science are man made. Certainly you, as a believer in an almighty, know that man is imperfect. So using science to somehow corroborate the existence of a god, doesn't wash.

[HardwoodLegend]

Than your position is incorrect and at odds with the very definition of atheist.

There's nothing to spin. Atheists do not believe in gods/deities.

It's not that hard.

You're right. At the core, that's what atheism is.

But, I spin it that way to the theists around me to get them to step back and think about just how much value they're pompously placing on themselves as "messengers" and delivering forth this all important spiritual obligation for me to follow.

Everything I've heard about God has been taught to me by my fellow man. There's no way to know, but I'm not entirely sure I would have ever creatively come up the concept of a god all on my own. I don't know if I have that innate philosophical ability within me. So, at the root of it all, I'm simply disbelieving stories I've heard from men.

[Jackass18]

Naw man, get started. Please. For the souls that are lost out there.

Explain how it makes sense to submit to one of these texts floating around out there ddescribing events we weren't there to witness and how we'll suffer endlessly for not doing so.

And, tell me which one of these texts is true. Which words ring hollow, and which don't?

No, don't get Bladers started. He's trolled waaaaay more than enough already.

[Michael_Wilbon]

If you don't think evolution is a real thing you should die. You are a waste of space and a brain-washed fool.

If you believe in God, so be it, but you're probably wrong. What a ridiculous fairy tale that bullshit is.

/thread

[SilkkTheShocker]

If you don't think evolution is a real thing you should die. You are a waste of space and a brain-washed fool.

If you believe in God, so be it, but you're probably wrong. What a ridiculous fairy tale that bullshit is.

/thread


As I mentioned earlier in the thread, evolution is a theory.

[Take Your Lumps]

As I mentioned earlier in the thread, evolution is a theory.

Evolution is a theory. Veeerrry good. Good boy! AhhhYes you are! You're such a good boy! *pat*

[Overdrive]

As I mentioned earlier in the thread, evolution is a theory.

God is a theory.

Evolution atleast got some evidence. You can create new species of plants if you crossbreeding them, would that make you (a) god?

[Michael_Wilbon]

As I mentioned earlier in the thread, evolution is a theory.

For some reason you seem to think that if something is a theory then it is not true. You're wrong. Go back to school before you try and debate with people who know what they're talking about. Idiot.

[East_Stone_Ya]

http://rjosephhoffmann.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/atheism-motivation.jpg

[InspiredLebowski]

No. And I know the OP's a troll but you're all morons for entertaining the notion this long.