Atheism vs. Theism

[HardwoodLegend]

I don't know where theists get off saying I don't understand the value of "faith" as an atheist.

Yes, I do. I have faith. It's just a faith instilled in a different conclusion than yours.

Given that humanity has demonstrated a propensity to lie and create methods of control over its own populace, I have faith that all of these religions are fabrications for moral guidance.

Your faith is that a book written thousands of years ago detailing events you weren't there to witness holds all the answers and path to salvation.

If there is a God, I don't know why he would punish me for using logic and then reward you for blindly accepting any random body of writing as "The Truth".

[SilkkTheShocker]

Studies show most Atheists suffer from some type of mental sickness.

[bmulls]

Studies show most Atheists suffer from some type of mental sickness.

:rolleyes:

You spend at least one day a week worshiping your imaginary friend, and yet you sit here and claim atheists suffer from mental sickness. Please tell me you see the irony.

[HardwoodLegend]

Studies show most Atheists suffer from some type of mental sickness.

:lol @ "Studies"

Even if all of those studies were foolproof and accurate, you're still left with "most". What does that say about the minority of atheists who are sane and clear-minded? Probably that they're of genius status, and we know that geniuses are few and far in between.

And, as far as the "most" with mental sickness, what does that say about God that he would damn them for all eternity for being infected with a disease they can't control? Where's the "love" and "forgiveness" for them?

Wake up. Your gospel is a sham designed to provoke fear and get you to toe the line of society.

[DCL]

:rolleyes:

You spend at least one day a week worshiping your imaginary friend, and yet you sit here and claim atheists suffer from mental sickness. Please tell me you see the irony.

:oldlol:

[HardwoodLegend]

"When you understand why you dismiss all other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours."

Stop and think of the sheer number of gods you are saying are false. You've got the winning lottery ticket, huh? All on good ole faith!

[Jello]

:lol @ "Studies"

Even if all of those studies were foolproof and accurate, you're still left with "most". What does that say about the minority of atheists who are sane and clear-minded? Probably that they're of genius status, and we know that geniuses are few and far in between.

And, as far as the "most" with mental sickness, what does that say about God that he would damn them for all eternity for being infected with a disease they can't control? Where's the "love" and "forgiveness" for them?

Wake up. Your gospel is a sham designed to provoke fear and get you to toe the line of society.
How do you come to the conclusion that theyre of genius status? It doesn't follow.

[PistonsFan#21]

I don't know where theists get off saying I don't understand the value of "faith" as an atheist.

Yes, I do. I have faith. It's just a faith instilled in a different conclusion than yours.

Given that humanity has demonstrated a propensity to lie and create methods of control over its own populace, I have faith that all of these religions are fabrications for moral guidance.

Your faith is that a book written thousands of years ago detailing events you weren't there to witness holds all the answers and path to salvation.

If there is a God, I don't know why he would punish me for using logic and then reward you for blindly accepting any random body of writing as "The Truth".

Please tell me more about how scientists witnessed the big bang and the evolution of bacteries into apes and humans :applause:

[BrickingStar]

I have no idea why you care so much about what people believe in as if it offends you but you should rename this thread to atheism vs christianity cause clearly that's what you are refering to by "damning you to hell" or talks about the gospel and not general theism. ie the bible dosn't represent theism but just a sub part of it.

[HardwoodLegend]

Please tell me more about how scientists witnessed the big bang and the evolution of bacteries into apes and humans :applause:

Please tell me more about how they present these explanations as theories and not dogma.

[HardwoodLegend]

I have no idea why you care so much about what people believe in as if it offends you but you shoul rename this thread to atheism vs christianity cause clearly that's what you are refering to by "damning you to hell" or talks about the gospel and not general theism. ie the bible dosn't represent theism but just a sub part of it.

You're right about the renaming.

It's not that I care a whole lot, but it is slightly annoying when people take a holier-than-thou attitude and think they're special because of their virtue of "faith".

[Nanners]

I don't know where theists get off saying I don't understand the value of "faith" as an atheist.

Yes, I do. I have faith. It's just a faith instilled in a different conclusion than yours.

Given that humanity has demonstrated a propensity to lie and create methods of control over its own populace, I have faith that all of these religions are fabrications for moral guidance.

Your faith is that a book written thousands of years ago detailing events you weren't there to witness holds all the answers and path to salvation.

If there is a God, I don't know why he would punish me for using logic and then reward you for blindly accepting any random body of writing as "The Truth".

well said. as someone who considers themself to be agnostic, i agree.

[BrickingStar]

You're right about the renaming.

It's not that I care a whole lot, but it is slightly annoying when people take a holier-than-thou attitude and think they're special because of their virtue of "faith".
I see, just keep in mind that not all theist are part of any religion (or specifically christian as you are refering to this thread) or have any "holier-than-thou attitude because there isn't anything for them to follow strictly by.

[shlver]

I don't understand how the fact that religion has been exploited supports the conclusion it is manmade. Looking at the nature of humans and their instincts is sufficient to understand the source of religion.

[PistonsFan#21]

Please tell me more about how they present these explanations as theories and not dogma.

Ok so you basically saying that we have no proof of who is wrong or right? You either blindly believe in one or the other

[Jello]

You're right about the renaming.

It's not that I care a whole lot, but it is slightly annoying when people take a holier-than-thou attitude and think they're special because of their virtue of "faith".
Focus on the message, not the messenger. What's slightly annoying are people like you that try to keep an air of being intellectual than you make fallacious errors in logic because of your bias.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Focus on the message, not the messenger. What's slightly annoying are people like you that try to keep an air of being intellectual than you make fallacious errors in logic because of your bias.

This.

Atheists are the most arrogant people you will ever come across. The OP doesn't know what the hell he is talking about

[Take Your Lumps]

This.

Atheists are the most arrogant people you will ever come across. The OP doesn't know what the hell he is talking about

Calls OP arrogant. Proceeds to dismiss him entirely.

:applause:

[G-train]

Athiests are the most naive people in the universe.

[miller-time]

All Atheists generalize the behaviour and beliefs of religious people.

[HardwoodLegend]

Athiests are the most naive people in the universe.

Everyone in the universe is naive.

I have never met two theists who were exactly alike. Everyone has their own personalized beliefs and subtle disagreements about what "God" is and what its intentions are even if they share the same religion. It all comes off as being arbitrary selections based on who knows what. Is it based on what "sounds good"? Or on what "feels right within"?

There's such a wide array. Perhaps there is a god, but the only sensible form of theism I can see is that it's a god that doesn't care about being believed in and certainly wouldn't punish or reward based on who makes the right selection about which door it's hiding behind.

It's not so much a matter of intellect as I hyperbolically make it seem. It's more an issue of plain common sense.

[CelticBaller]

ISH's Religion thread #102434564678

[HardwoodLegend]

My better judgment knew how fruitless these threads are.

[miller-time]

My better judgment knew how fruitless these threads are.

What exactly was your point though? Did you have a question, this is kind of how you get the ball rolling. All you've done is made a few broad statements about religious people in general. Do you at least have a specific point we can discuss?

[Budadiiii]

Religious people are retards and inferior to the rest of society. 80% of the worlds population are brainwashed morons. Homo-sapiens :applause:

[boozehound]

Ok so you basically saying that we have no proof of who is wrong or right? You either blindly believe in one or the other
No, clearly not. First of all, most major christian religions accept evolution as compatible with their belief. second, there is no belief in science. Science is the formation of falsifiable explanations of observable (i.e. Natural) phenomenon (which is why it can be compatible with your belief in the supernatural). The whole point is that scientific explanations arent set in stone. They are subject to revision when they fail to explain the patterns in the data. which is why they have been so robust and created almost everything you use on a daily basis (F1 hybrid food plants, computers, combustion engines, modern medicine, etc.) All of these things are built upon the scientific method as an approach to understand our world.

[InspiredLebowski]

Let's talk about cookies. I feel like I'm the only person that likes macadamia nut cookies.

[DCL]

if you run out of toilet paper, do you guys have the bible as backup?

[miller-time]

if you run out of toilet paper, do you guys have the bible as backup?

I think it is acceptable to at least use genesis and leviticus.

[CelticBaller]

Religious people are retards and inferior to the rest of society. 80% of the worlds population are brainwashed morons. Homo-sapiens :applause:
:facepalm

[Micku]

Studies show most Atheists suffer from some type of mental sickness.

lol. Never heard of that.

People that believe in a deity or whatever is more happy than the people who do not believe tho.

I think that the more tech grows and the more understanding that we would have on our planet and universe, the less people will need religion and say a supernatural being created that or this. Not saying it'll go away though. As long as humans exist, I think there will always be people who will believe in the supernatural. We just need to educate people on being more science literate and knowing the basics on several fields I think.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Atheists are the same people that grew up in a broken home, picked on at school, and probably beaten by their drunken stepfather. They are just taking their anger out on God by refusing to believe in Him.

[HardwoodLegend]

Atheists are the same people that grew up in a broken home, picked on at school, and probably beaten by their drunken stepfather. They are just taking their anger out on God by refusing to believe in Him.

Not true in my case. It's a simple philosophical conclusion I've reached. What's your reasoning for not believing in gods that differ from yours?

And, as for those sample cases you bring up, why would a creator who is supposed to be the embodiment of Love itself hold their anger against them in the end? People on Earth do far more speaking on God's behalf than it does. It would be nice if it decided to be as talkative and demonstrative as it supposedly was thousands of years ago.

What's with all the hiding and secrecy?

[PistonsFan#21]

No, clearly not. First of all, most major christian religions accept evolution as compatible with their belief. second, there is no belief in science. Science is the formation of falsifiable explanations of observable (i.e. Natural) phenomenon (which is why it can be compatible with your belief in the supernatural). The whole point is that scientific explanations arent set in stone. They are subject to revision when they fail to explain the patterns in the data. which is why they have been so robust and created almost everything you use on a daily basis (F1 hybrid food plants, computers, combustion engines, modern medicine, etc.) All of these things are built upon the scientific method as an approach to understand our world.

Ok but that still doesnt change the fact that the science is saying that the world was created from the big bang and that humans evolved from bacteria. isnt that the theory? All im saying is you either believe that with no proof whatsoever or you can believe in God as the creator with also no proof. Its all about faith

[miller-time]

Ok but that still doesnt change the fact that the science is saying that the world was created from the big bang and that humans evolved from bacteria. isnt that the theory? All im saying is you either believe that with no proof whatsoever or you can believe in God as the creator with also no proof. Its all about faith

Wait are you saying that neither evolution or the big bang theory have any proof?

[PistonsFan#21]

Wait are you saying that neither evolution or the big bang theory have any proof?

yea pretty much. its all speculation and theories. The creation of universe was millions of years before the first animals and even dinosaurs. Let alone humans. Dont tell me theres a way to actually go back that far or even proofs that confirm it. As far as evolution its true to some extent. But i dont believe that humans evolved from bacteria into fishes and then into apes and finally into humans. And there is no proof of that neither.

[miller-time]

yea pretty much. its all speculation and theories. The creation of universe was millions of years before the first animals and even dinosaurs. Let alone humans. Dont tell me theres a way to actually go back that far or even proofs that confirm it. As far as evolution its true to some extent. But i dont believe that humans evolved from bacteria into fishes and then into apes and finally into humans. And there is no proof of that neither.

Every star you look at you are looking back in time (sometimes billions of years). We don't need to go back in time to see what was happening at the early stages of the universe because light and other radiation from those events is still traveling towards us.

[Legend of Josh]

My better judgment knew how fruitless these threads are.

You knew the thread, topic/subject or whatever was fruitless, yet you created the thread anyway.

A very common attribute for atheists (especially young adults, thinking they understand the entire world around them, and that the average Christian is a mindless moron) is that atheists always have God on the brain. They're highly intrigued and mentally mind-raped by "how it all started" ... "what really happens after we die" ... "is there anything else to us, or are we the complete beginning, middle and end?" - and whatever other respective questions that mankind has been asking himself since the beginning of the human conscience mind.

The average (again, especially young adult type, etc) atheist will say something along the lines of "nah man, I'm not thinking of God all the time, none of that really mentally stimulates me, God doesn't exists, so why would he be on the brain full-time" etc. Atheists almost always try and paint the picture that they're not always thinking of God, possibilities of some sort of afterlife, etc. - but that couldn't be any further from the real truth. The real truth that is in their head, all the time.

Again, you creating this thread is a dead giveaway.

1) You're constantly thinking of God, the possibility of there being a God, etc.

2) Even though you know and even acknowledge a discussion about such is a dead-end, with nothing really gained. Nothing new really learned. No new "I think I'm finally seeing the LIGHT!" or something even further solidifying your faith in no God. Yet still, you're intrigued, mind-raped by God enough to start a discussion about it.

3) You graduated from simply thinking about God, to wanting to engage in conversation with others about God, see their opinions (from both believers and non-believers alike) and maybe even argue, belittle, or deepen your non-belief because here @ ISH, the majority is atheist (LOL, again, the young I know everything type) ... and because of that religious folks (especially Christians, which is the intended target you're attempting to get into quarrels with) find themselves getting gang-raped by a bunch of pissed off atheists who get extreme pleasure in unleashing their insults and opinions on the internet. A safe place where some atheists feel in their "comfort zone" and hurl insults at Christians.

4) You think about God some more.

5) You find another outlet to get into the God debate. Whether it's friends, family members you're comfortable talking to about, other internet sources. Anything you can to get your fix because you're addicted to talking about and having open discussions about God.

6) You think about God some more.

7) Rinse and repeat 1-6

:oldlol:

The basic and real truth is that while you claim you don't believe in God, you can't stop thinking about God. Why is that, you think?

Atheism is like the world's newest and coolest religion. It's not some fad or anything like that, but it is something that a lot of younger people are finding highly entertaining, and for some really nerdy social misfits they find likewise atheists (especially on the 'net, in fact ISH is a hotbed for these nerdy social misfits) ... and to some degree, it helps them feel "accepted" like they're a part of something. Something important. Something that is rare, uncommon and involves "free thinkers" and those of higher intelligence than these, closed-minded, moronic *believers* ... you feel like this is your calling. You feel like atheism is where you "fit in"

You're probably the type who watches YouTube videos of The Atheist Experience, and comments something to the effect of "GO MATT! GO! GET 'EM DAWG!"

:oldlol:

[Legend of Josh]

Atheists are the same people that grew up in a broken home, picked on at school, and probably beaten by their drunken stepfather. They are just taking their anger out on God by refusing to believe in Him.

Funny, under your username it says "RETARD SLAYER" ... I think it's safe to assume who the ree ree is, no?

:facepalm

It's comments like this that make it even easier for atheists to "do their thang" ... but maybe there's hope. Maybe you're just trolling. I hope so.

[miller-time]

Atheism is like the world's newest and coolest religion. It's not some fad or anything like that, but it is something that a lot of younger people are finding highly entertaining, and for some really nerdy social misfits they find likewise atheists (especially on the 'net, in fact ISH is a hotbed for these nerdy social misfits) ... and to some degree, it helps them feel "accepted" like they're a part of something. Something important. Something that is rare, uncommon and involves "free thinkers" and those of higher intelligence than these, closed-minded, moronic *believers* ... you feel like this is your calling. You feel like atheism is where you "fit in"

This might be true to some degree. But you also have to acknowledge that this is the first time in recent history that atheists are actually able to come out. How many people have been atheists in the past but have had to keep it a secret? The numbers aren't just growing because it is popular, they are also growing because they simply can. Fear of being ostracized is decreasing, however that isn't true for everywhere.

[Legend of Josh]

This might be true to some degree. But you also have to acknowledge that this is the first time in recent history that atheists are actually able to come out. How many people have been atheists in the past but have had to keep it a secret? The numbers aren't just growing because it is popular, they are also growing because they simply can. Fear of being ostracized is decreasing, however that isn't true for everywhere.

I agree with you. But, it wasn't like atheists were being hunted like witches and burned at the stake either.

Also, and this is just my opinion, I feel like the poles have shifted to your very point. It's almost as if you're a believer, you're automatically labeled an idiot. Unable to think for yourself. Brainwashed. Maybe back in the day atheists were heavily mocked and ridiculed, but today, wouldn't you agree it seems almost the opposite, especially when talking about young adults, and even young teenagers.

I think even now today, and especially in the future, believers will become the outcasts. Believers will become the taboo. Believers will become the misinformed, uneducated (or at least thought to be), those of less intelligence, etc.

Are there dumb as shit believers out there? Yes, most certainly. However, I think it's a bit unfair for a typical average atheist these days (especially the younger newly enlightened type) to label any and all believers as dumbasses, etc. without really having a solid understanding of the whole God debate thing. Many atheists are very quick to pull the trigger and insult a religious person (ESPECIALLY a Christian) without any real merit behind it.

While there are many religious people who think/feel they're intellectual superior to non-believers, there are certainly WAY MORE atheists who feel they're the ones who are mentally superior, and that believers are WAY MORE mentally inferior. Like a rabbit v. turtle race comparison level. Religious people don't go around mocking atheists 24/7 365, but we know atheists do. I'm not saying ALL religious or ALL atheists, I'm just saying on average.

The part I really don't get... is why Christianity is attacked so fiercely? Why do atheists hate Jesus Christ so much? Let's suppose JC never even lived. Let's suppose there is no God, etc ... why exactly are so many atheists just THAT ragingly mad at Christ? I mean, I'm talking real hardcore insults, jokes, mockery. I've always found that interesting and enigmatic.

I think many atheists hate Jesus Christ more than say a Hitler, Stalin or even Judus haha. Why?

[RidonKs]

A very common attribute for atheists (especially young adults, thinking they understand the entire world around them, and that the average Christian is a mindless moron) is that atheists always have God on the brain
that's not a common attribute for atheists, it's a common attribute for anybody even remotely interested in the mysteries of life. and i'm not just talking about the metaphysical questions like "what started it all" and "is there life after death", though that's obviously part of it.

mostly i'm talking about the questions that arise from the inevitable shortcomings of whatever explanations we've managed to scrape together to understand our everyday human affairs, both personal and social. we certainly still don't have much of a grasp on any of it as far as i can tell. most generally, what's human nature? what's our primary psychological drive? survival instinct? love thy neighbour and cooperation? a will to power? how do we navigate the pros and cons of emotions like guilt, resentment, or the institutions of dependence and authority that are at once so helpful and yet so harmful? how the f*ck do we reconcile the fact that we live our entire lives on a core assumption that we're the center of the universe that revolves around us.... but everyone else does to? what justifies our love and our hate and our passions, or is their very nature the fact that nothing justifies them, and more than that, nothing should justify them? should we question them? why should i obey my parents? for how long should i obey my parents? is cynicism towards the political life acceptable or is a failure to participate in the great problems of the world the one unacceptable decision a human can make? is hedonism the only way out? should i deride that lazy bum on the street or consider how he got there? am i in it for myself or are we all in it together?

our social sciences have compiled an unbelievably thorough record of peoples behavioural tendencies... but that's all they are. tendencies that remain totally inapplicable at the individual level and still far too subject to a myriad of circumstance at the general level to give them any predictive weight. the hard questions persist and remain mysterious.

it's THOSE mysteries that are precisely what makes life interesting and fun and worth thinking critically about and contemplating with others. at the end of the day, experiencing all of that mumbo jumbo is what makes us human beings.

so finally, it's the limits of our understanding that make people consider god on a serious level, regardless of self identity or social affiliation, christian, jew, atheist preaching at the pulpit, satanic cult leader, buddhist monk, w/e. because the thing about god is that he/she/it is among the most multifaceted concepts humans have ever created. the fact that god is infinite by definition only underscores that fact. from the most restricted version of theism to the broadest pantheism, they all fundamentally serve the same purpose. to make sense of that which is beyond our senses and seemingly, perhaps even permanently, beyond the very tool of the rationality that even allows us to consider this shit. try to reduce all the conflicts and paradoxes and everyday dilemmas to a simplicity thats actually within the constraints of our thinking capacity.

and really, in my opinion at least, if the endgame is getting answers, it's all an effort in futility. if your endgame is enjoying the process itself, well, you're in luck. but it's all still worth thinking about, and if upon reflection of all the mysteries of life, you can't find room for at least some idea of "god", well all i can suggest is that you keep reflecting.


thats what i think anyway

more on the topic of what you guys are talking about, there is a definite shift coursing through modern society. it was only a matter of time before our secular politics would eventually come to bear on our religious convictions. organized faith in the traditional sense is unquestionably receding. and for the americans here, most of you probably, your country is among the most religious in the world so your view is a little skewed in terms of global trends.

[knickswin]

I am an atheist who has NO PROBLEM with Jesus Christ (who probably didn't even exist). The message of LOVING THY BROTHER is great. I am down with love, considerateness, and empathy. To me, they give life meaning.

HOWEVER there is no God and anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional and/or in denial.

[gigantes]

nice work, OP. fair points and an interesting topic.

i've thought about all this before and i have an answer:


everyone in the world is religious, whether they like it or not, admit to it or not.


every modern human is 'cursed' with one of the worst drawbacks in history...... i.e., a brain that self-recognises. therefore, a brain that glimpses so much more than itself.

something like that, anyway.

religion is nothing more and nothing less than an attempt to make sense of the cosmos and to give order and security to one's life. people who try to live a life without the comforting answers of religion, community, family and so forth are generally the sickest / most needy of all people in society.

that's my early run-through, in any case.
sane? or full of excrement?


EDIT: ridonks showed up?!? YES....!

[Legend of Josh]

I just have another general question I've been curious about for some time now. Why do many atheists always seem so angry.

[miller-time]

I agree with you. But, it wasn't like atheists were being hunted like witches and burned at the stake either.

Well they have been. And they are to this day. It is actually still illegal in some countries to be an atheist, and if you are found out you can be sentenced to death or imprisonment. In fact it is kind of insulting to say that they haven't been persecuted in any way. In the same way it would be insulting to flat out deny that any person or group of people have been persecuted.


Also, and this is just my opinion, I feel like the poles have shifted to your very point. It's almost as if you're a believer, you're automatically labeled an idiot. Unable to think for yourself. Brainwashed. Maybe back in the day atheists were heavily mocked and ridiculed, but today, wouldn't you agree it seems almost the opposite, especially when talking about young adults, and even young teenagers.

I think it really just comes down to where you are. If I attended a Christian school or fundamentalist church I would expect some mocking and name calling (at least in some places - not all) - and if I were still a child or even teenager I would probably hide my atheism. Also in American politics it is very unlikely an open atheist will for the near future be able to become president.


Are there dumb as shit believers out there? Yes, most certainly. However, I think it's a bit unfair for a typical average atheist these days (especially the younger newly enlightened type) to label any and all believers as dumbasses, etc. without really having a solid understanding of the whole God debate thing. Many atheists are very quick to pull the trigger and insult a religious person (ESPECIALLY a Christian) without any real merit behind it.

People change. I was far more arrogant and vocal when I was younger. This happens in all groups though. Although I do have to say that I have encountered religious people calling out atheists for attacking them when all they've really tried to do is challenge their belief system. The believer might not like it, and they have the right to be offended, but just because they are offended doesn't make them right. If they tried to leave the conversation/debate and the atheist kept harassing them then I would say that is an attack. But if it is in the confines of the discussion then it is not.


While there are many religious people who think/feel they're intellectual superior to non-believers, there are certainly WAY MORE atheists who feel they're the ones who are mentally superior, and that believers are WAY MORE mentally inferior. Like a rabbit v. turtle race comparison level. Religious people don't go around mocking atheists 24/7 365, but we know atheists do. I'm not saying ALL religious or ALL atheists, I'm just saying on average.

I can't agree or disagree with that. I honestly don't know how to find that out. Either way I'm not bothered. If someone wants to try and flaunt their imagined superiority then they probably have other issues they need to deal with.


The part I really don't get... is why Christianity is attacked so fiercely? Why do atheists hate Jesus Christ so much? Let's suppose JC never even lived. Let's suppose there is no God, etc ... why exactly are so many atheists just THAT ragingly mad at Christ? I mean, I'm talking real hardcore insults, jokes, mockery. I've always found that interesting and enigmatic.

I think many atheists hate Jesus Christ more than say a Hitler, Stalin or even Judus haha. Why?

I can't speak for all atheists, but not a lot of them don't hate Jesus at all because they don't believe he existed - or he at least isn't who the bible portrays him to be. Again is Christianity being attacked or is it being challenged? Remember this is a belief system that right now has a very strong influence over society. Most atheists are secularists, and that is where there motivation for challenging Christianity comes from. If Christianity were in a vacuum and people were able to believe it without it influencing other people then no one would care. Believe what you want. The problem is that it does influence our laws and politics.

[PistonsFan#21]

Every star you look at you are looking back in time (sometimes billions of years). We don't need to go back in time to see what was happening at the early stages of the universe because light and other radiation from those events is still traveling towards us.

SO there is proof that earth was created by the big bang because of the radiation from the stars?? i dont see what point you are trying to make here...

[miller-time]

SO there is proof that earth was created by the big bang because of the radiation from the stars?? i dont see what point you are trying to make here...

I was responding to your point about whether we can "go back" and study the universe in its infancy. And we can because all of that information is right in front of us now. We don't need to go back in time to understand how the universe formed we just need to look up (and also do a bit of physics and that).

[Inactive]

Please tell me more about how scientists witnessed the big bang http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcds5Ob59Dg

http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/research/gr/public/bb_pillars.html




and the evolution of bacteries into apes and humans :applause:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZCL3gv9kEM

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/05/100513-science-evolution-darwin-single-ancestor/

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v465/n7295/full/nature09014.html

[PistonsFan#21]

I was responding to your point about whether we can "go back" and study the universe in its infancy. And we can because all of that information is right in front of us now. We don't need to go back in time to understand how the universe formed we just need to look up (and also do a bit of physics and that).
There is no information or proof that dates back billions of years ago. If there was the big bang would be a fact and not a theory. Like i said they can only suppose what happened. Stars dont add any truth to the big bang.

[miller-time]

There is no information or proof that dates back billions of years ago. If there was the big bang would be a fact and not a theory. Like i said they can only suppose what happened. Stars dont add any truth to the big bang.

The fact is that stars and galaxies are billions of light years away (and moving away from us). The theory is the model used to explain this phenomena. Theories don't become facts, theories explain facts.

[PistonsFan#21]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcds5Ob59Dg

http://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/research/gr/public/bb_pillars.html



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZCL3gv9kEM

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/05/100513-science-evolution-darwin-single-ancestor/

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v465/n7295/full/nature09014.html

So...i asked you to tell me more more about how they WITNESSED it. Because the OP claimed that we weren`t here to witness the saying of the bible which means its false according to him. not some explanation they try to come up with. and even in that big bang theory link it says:

''Although generally accepted as the model for the origin and evolution of the universe, the Big Bang theory is not complete. For example, it does not explain what caused the initial expansion or why galaxies formed.''

[PistonsFan#21]

The fact is that stars and galaxies are billions of light years away (and moving away from us). The theory is the model used to explain this phenomena. Theories don't become facts, theories explain facts.

This is my point exactly. Atheists try to mock religions but they fail to see that the big bang is just a theory and not a proven fact. Its just a supposition of what might have happened.

If you think about it they consider the big bang as their God.

[miller-time]

This is my point exactly. Atheists try to mock religions but they fail to see that the big bang is just a theory and not a proven fact. Its just a supposition of what might have happened.

If you think about it they consider the big bang as their God.

The distinguishing difference is that it is based on empirical evidence. Observations can be repeated and experiments can be performed. We can disprove the big bang theory. At least we know the facts the theory is based on exist.

And I don't know of anyone that worships the big bang theory? If new evidence comes along people will discard the idea.

[Inactive]

So...i asked you to tell me more more about how they WITNESSED it. not some explanation they try to come up with.There isn't some atemporal scientist out there, just watching things unfold. No one can personally witness past events. That doesn't mean that we can't examine evidence, and understand what happened. Do you reject the existence of the world prior to your earliest memory? Do you reject the existence of anything that you don't personally witness?



and even in that big bang theory link it says:

''Although generally accepted as the model for the origin and evolution of the universe, the Big Bang theory is not complete. For example, it does not explain what caused the initial expansion or why galaxies formed.''So? We don't know what it was like before the big bang, or what caused the big bang. That doesn't falsify observational evidence of the big bang. Knowing that it happened ≠ Knowing what caused it ≠ Knowing what preceded it.

[PistonsFan#21]

There isn't some atemporal scientist out there, just watching things unfold. No one can personally witness past events. That doesn't mean that we can't examine evidence, and understand what happened. Do you reject the existence of the world prior to your earliest memory? Do you reject the existence of anything that you don't personally witness?


So? We don't know what it was like before the big bang, or what caused the big bang. That doesn't falsify observational evidence of the big bang. Knowing that it happened ≠ Knowing what caused it ≠ Knowing what preceded it.

my friend did you even check my reply on the 1st page? i know sometimes sarcasm is not as evident on the internet but this is exactly what i wanted to prove to the OP

[PistonsFan#21]

The distinguishing difference is that it is based on empirical evidence. Observations can be repeated and experiments can be performed. We can disprove the big bang theory. At least we know the facts the theory is based on exist.

And I don't know of anyone that worships the big bang theory? If new evidence comes along people will discard the idea.

This is true. But that is the problem. There were numerous times scientists came up with a theory and then changed it later on to something different. And might change it again sometime in the future. There is nothing set in stones.

Yes the experiences can be repeated and all that but it doesnt mean that just because they can repeat it its necessarily the cause of the creation of the universe. There might be some other causes that they have yet to discover or simply cant understand.

To me its all about belief and faith

[Inactive]

my friend did you even check my reply on the 1st page? i know sometimes sarcasm is not as evident on the internet but this is exactly what i wanted to prove to the OPSo, your problem with the OP was entirely semantic? Based on the word "witness"? Or do we need to get into a discussion about how inferences drawn from evidence, which make falsifiable predictions, and are experimentally verified, are not the same as metaphysical speculation, and "just so" stories?

[PistonsFan#21]

So, your problem with the OP was entirely semantic? Based on the word "witness"? Or do we need to get into a discussion about how inferences drawn from evidence, which make falsifiable predictions, and are experimentally verified, are not the same as metaphysical speculation, and "just so" stories?

My problem with the OP is that he used ''not being a witness'' to disprove religions. So i asked him if he was able to witness the big bang because thats what he believes in...that simple. I even bolded that part to let him understand thats what i was referring to

[Inactive]

My problem with the OP is that he used ''not being a witness'' to disprove religions. So i asked him if he was able to witness the big bang because thats what he believes in...that simple. I even bolded that part to let him understand thats what i was referring toI don't think he meant witness literally.


This is true. But that is the problem. There were numerous times scientists came up with a theory and then changed it later on to something different. And might change it again sometime in the future. There is nothing set in stones. Why is this a problem?

As we're able to measure things more accurately, and observe more, our theories get refined.


Yes the experiences can be repeated and all that but it doesnt mean that just because they can repeat it its necessarily the cause of the creation of the universe. There might be some other causes that they have yet to discover or simply cant understand.There are certainly a lot of things which have yet to be discovered, or understood. If there weren't, no one would want to become a scientist.


To me its all about belief and faithIt's the opposite. Faith is all about believing in something without, or in spite of evidence. Science is all about believing whatever the best evidence tells you. There are very few things which you have to take for granted, in order to do science.

[HardwoodLegend]

I just have another general question I've been curious about for some time now. Why do many atheists always seem so angry.

Sometimes you may be mistaking frustration over stupidity for anger.

I find many religious zealots to be idiots, and I can't believe they can't open their eyes and realize how dumb they're being.

[Nanners]

I just have another general question I've been curious about for some time now. Why do many atheists always seem so angry.

this is a joke right? my guess this "athiest anger" that you perceive is probably due to the fact that atheists have zero morals and multiple mental defects.

if you arent kidding, maybe you can answer me this: why do so many christians always seem so angry? also why do so many muslims seem so angry? why do so many human beings in general seem angry regardless of their religion?

[Legend of Josh]

this is a joke right? my guess this "athiest anger" that you perceive is probably due to the fact that atheists have zero morals and multiple mental defects.

if you arent kidding, maybe you can answer me this: why do so many christians always seem so angry? also why do so many muslims seem so angry? why do so many human beings in general seem angry regardless of their religion?

I wasn't kidding at all. There's angry folks of any and all religions, but I think we can all agree atheists "seem" the most angry of all respectively. There's obviously no proof or backed scientific study of something such as this, just speaking in general terms.

You don't agree. That's fine. Maybe you were offended.

[Inactive]

I wasn't kidding at all. There's angry folks of any and all religions, but I think we can all agree atheists "seem" the most angry of all respectively. There's obviously no proof or backed scientific study of something such as this, just speaking in general terms.

You don't agree. That's fine. Maybe you were offended.I don't see it.

I do think there are some atheist kids who think they're being rebellious, and want to confront people with it, but in general I'd guess that atheists are, if anything, less emotionally volatile.

[Nanners]

I wasn't kidding at all. There's angry folks of any and all religions, but I think we can all agree atheists "seem" the most angry of all respectively. There's obviously no proof or backed scientific study of something such as this, just speaking in general terms.

You don't agree. That's fine. Maybe you were offended.


you thought wrong.

as long as we are making broad generalizations - muslims, jews and christians all seem a lot "angrier" than atheists to me.

[Legend of Josh]

you thought wrong.

as long as we are making broad generalizations - muslims, jews and christians all seem a lot "angrier" than atheists to me.

How is what you bold'd from me something "you thought wrong" (meaning me being wrong) ? ... I don't see it being wrong or an inaccurate statement. You think religious people seem angrier; I feel atheists are. Atheists have the chip on their shoulder. IMO, much more than those who belong to a religious organization.

I mean come on dude, just admit so many atheists await for any and all opportunities to jump into a religious conversation (be it RL or here on the internet) and engage in a negative way. Atheists are way more quick to blast religious people with harsh insults and belittling smug remarks right from the very beginning of any such discussion.

Different people, different experiences I suppose.

[miller-time]

How is what you bold'd from me something "you thought wrong" (meaning me being wrong) ? ... I don't see it being wrong or an inaccurate statement. You think religious people seem angrier; I feel atheists are. Atheists have the chip on their shoulder. IMO, much more than those who belong to a religious organization.

I mean come on dude, just admit so many atheists await for any and all opportunities to jump into a religious conversation (be it RL or here on the internet) and engage in a negative way. Atheists are way more quick to blast religious people with harsh insults and belittling smug remarks right from the very beginning of any such discussion.

Different people, different experiences I suppose.

I disagree, but as I said before this isn't something we can really prove. But lets say for arguments sake it is true. What is your point?

[Legend of Josh]

I disagree, but as I said before this isn't something we can really prove. But lets say for arguments sake it is true. What is your point?

There is no real point. Just a personal observation.

[BuGzBuNNy]

I disagree, but as I said before this isn't something we can really prove. But lets say for arguments sake it is true. What is your point?
http://207.58.151.151/forum/showpost.php?p=3388625&postcount=85:old

:oldlol: cmon son. Didn't take but a few seconds

[miller-time]

http://207.58.151.151/forum/showpost.php?p=3388625&postcount=85:old

:oldlol: cmon son. Didn't take but a few seconds

3 or 4 years ago. And as I just said. So what?

I don't even remember making that post, so I'm not sure if I am angry, frustrated or just taking the piss?

Plus it is only one instance. How long have you known me? How often have I been angry? Even if you find more posts like that, how much time do you think I am spending in that state of mind? Everyone gets angry and frustrated - it doesn't mean they always are.

[BuGzBuNNy]

3 or 4 years ago. And as I just said. So what?

I don't even remember making that post, so I'm not sure if I am angry, frustrated or just taking the piss?

Plus it is only one instance. How long have you known me? How often have I been angry?
Idk what his point was, I do agree though. But I'm looking from this side of the fence

[miller-time]

Idk what his point was, I do agree though. But I'm looking from this side of the fence

But I wasn't even necessarily disagreeing with him. So how is there even a fence?

[BuGzBuNNy]

But I wasn't even necessarily disagreeing with him. So how is there even a fence?

I disagree, but as I said before this isn't something we can really prove. But lets say for arguments sake it is true. What is your point?
:confusedshrug: you're making this way more difficult than it needs to be

[miller-time]

:confusedshrug: you're making this way more difficult than it needs to be

No I saw it, which is why I prefaced disagreeing with necessarily. His conclusion is based on anecdotal evidence. He could be right but who knows?

What I'm not saying is that there are more angry Christians than atheists. Which would be a straight up dichotomous disagreement.

[Nanners]

How is what you bold'd from me something "you thought wrong" (meaning me being wrong) ?


what i bolded is something that "you thought wrong" because the part that was bolded says "I think we can all agree that....." and i dont agree with you. it doesnt look like anybody agrees with you.


Atheists have the chip on their shoulder. IMO, much more than those who belong to a religious organization.

I mean come on dude, just admit so many atheists await for any and all opportunities to jump into a religious conversation (be it RL or here on the internet) and engage in a negative way. Atheists are way more quick to blast religious people with harsh insults and belittling smug remarks right from the very beginning of any such discussion.

Different people, different experiences I suppose.

im not admitting something that is not true. if you want to discuss generalizations based on internet experiences then you should just admit that all catholics are child molestors (or child molestor enablers at best)

the fact that you argue with atheists on the internet, the fact that atheists hit you with "harsh insults and belitting smug remarks" (lmao) does not mean that atheists have a chip on their shoulder, and it doesnt mean they are "angry"

[eurobum]

http://insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=8301201&postcount=75


Yeah, judging by your post and others (Glide2keva, Go Getter) in this thread you can see how much pacific and respectful people atheists are compared to the "religious nuts" :roll:

Why wouldn't I make fun of them? It's not that they believe in God - that's fine. It's that they're nuts. I make fun of nuts people.

And they don't even know the very dogma they subscribe to. The story of Noah is from the Old Testament, which is only included in the Bible because of its creation myth and few other outstanding elements that are important to Christianity (such as the Fall of Man so it could be used by Christianity to guilt humanity). As a whole, the Old Testament is of the Jewish canon with most of the literature being MYTHOLOGICAL no different than the Gods of Mount Olympus, the Nordic Gods of Valhalla, Winnie The Pooh, other fictional stuff (most of it written 600 BC when the Hebrews were exiled in Babylon). Why does Jesus mention it? Because he was a Jew and it was part of their holy scripture.

And yes, Jesus was a historical figure. He existed. A Jewish man wanting to re-interpret religion, relationship to God (Yahweh) and more (there's only ONE Yahweh, MJ DA GOD). Doesn't mean he walked on water or was the son of God, LOL. Maybe he himself believed he was the son of God, in which case he was probably a schizophrenic, delusional man. Or he knowingly conned people into thinking he was the son of God in order to further his agenda. Either way, people believed him and deityfied him. You think this is unlikely? It happens today even that people are mystified by charismatic, public personalities and embellish accounts/events of the person. Tex Winther is lying through his teeth when claiming Wilt Chamberlain shot 'dunking' free throws or whatever by the way, c'mon.

To literally believe in the story of Noah's Ark is nuts. To believe in God and take out of biblical allegories higher points of meaning, morality, justification of existence -- OK, that's not (totally) nuts.

Think about this, religious people. If we consider a cosmic calendar, consisting of 12 months of which January 1st at 00:00.0000000000001 AM is the birth of the universe. When do human beings come into the picture? Somewhere around December 31st 11.53 PM (or so, don't recall the exact time). Humans are such an insignificant organism in the macro perspective, yet you think we are special, chosen beings by the Bearded Guy upstairs. What about the other 14 billion years before humans existed; what was God doing in that time period? Or was the Earth created 4000 years ago? LOL.

To me, religion is a thing of duality. I respect people's spirituality and the belief of something higher than man, though I don't subscribe to this idea myself. I'm rational a man of science and reason. But extremists turn me off. Why not respect their belief? Because it's because of people like them we were set back as a species. Set back at least 1500 years. 1500 years of technological advancement we missed out on because generations of religious nuts suppressed scientific advancement that didn't adhere to their view on God.

2500 years ago there were some astronomers of antiquity who believed the Earth was round, the Earth was NOT the center of the universe (they did however believe the Sun was). They couldn't prove it yet because they lacked the tools and the mathematics, but some were very close. One did actually prove the Earth was round, an Egyptian mathematician. Because of the persecution of these and ANYONE who had similar thoughts until the f*cking renaissance around 1600 AC these ideas went underdeveloped for so long. Think of where we would be as a species, as a society had these things not been hindered. We would've been on Mars by now no doubt. Cancer? Hunger? Poverty?

Two millennia of technology we missed out on because extremists hanged people who in antiquity didn't believe Zeus and his gang. In the Roman empire and dark ages it was people who didn't believe in Jesus as the son of God and the list goes on.

So yeah, pardon me if I'm not gonna be all nice to nutty religious people.

[KingBeasley08]

Athiests are as crazy as religious people. Argue so hard about shit they don't even believe in lmao

[miller-time]

Athiests are as crazy as religious people. Argue so hard about shit they don't even believe in lmao

I'd say their response is proportional to the amount of arguments they have to hear about religion. If people claimed unicorns were true every day of the week they would probably talk about that too.

[Rasheed1]

I wouldnt call myself an atheist, but will I say that the reason atheist come at religious people the way they do is because atheist are looking at religion in the same way as they look at any other thing to decide if it is true or not.

Christians (for example) on the other hand, can laugh and understand how ridiculous OTHER religions sound, but they cannot see their own religion in that ridiculous light.

For a person like me, who used to be a christian, but stopped after I kept doing the math (and it wasnt adding up), it is like having a conversation about whether or not Santa Clause is real or whether the Easter Bunny is real. I think atheist gets animated because to them? it is a very ridiculous idea (the idea that these religions and their Gods are real)

When I decided to find out once and for all if Jesus was real and if the Bible was the holy book christians proclaimed it to be? that when I learned that it was not, and I accepted that because it is obvious if Iam being honest with myself. It takes time to disown the idea of going heaven and all the other beliefs that keep people tied to religion, but IMO it was one of the best things I ever did. It freed me from using that archaic code to rule my life.

[KingBeasley08]

I'd say their response is proportional to the amount of arguments they have to hear about religion. If people claimed unicorns were true every day of the week they would probably talk about that too.
Just sit back and laugh. Instead they spaz out like little children doing all this research trying to convince someone that isn't gonna be convinced. I always found athiests to be losers in a way, no disrespect to some of the people here

[chosen_one6]

Just sit back and laugh. Instead they spaz out like little children doing all this research trying to convince someone that isn't gonna be convinced. I always found athiests to be losers in a way, no disrespect to some of the people here

You think they're losers because they don't believe in what you believe in?

[Rasheed1]

Just sit back and laugh. Instead they spaz out like little children doing all this research trying to convince someone that isn't gonna be convinced. I always found athiests to be losers in a way, no disrespect to some of the people here

doesnt make alot of sense.. they should just sit back and do no research? they would be winners if they just laughed? :oldlol: Im laughing right now

[chosen_one6]

How is what you bold'd from me something "you thought wrong" (meaning me being wrong) ? ... I don't see it being wrong or an inaccurate statement. You think religious people seem angrier; I feel atheists are. Atheists have the chip on their shoulder. IMO, much more than those who belong to a religious organization.

I mean come on dude, just admit so many atheists await for any and all opportunities to jump into a religious conversation (be it RL or here on the internet) and engage in a negative way. Atheists are way more quick to blast religious people with harsh insults and belittling smug remarks right from the very beginning of any such discussion.

Different people, different experiences I suppose.

Much like religious people love to inject their religious belief's into almost any ongoing event, whether it be related to their life or an event that doesn't concern them?

[KingBeasley08]

doesnt make alot of sense.. they should just sit back and do no research? they would be winners if they just laughed? :oldlol: Im laughing right now
What's the point in arguing? You aren't convincing anyone. That whole 'winner' shit is part of the problem. They take the whole argument like its a contest and come off as big losers. It is impossible to 'win' against a religious person

[Rasheed1]

Much like religious people love to inject their religious belief's into almost any ongoing event, whether it be related to their life or an event that doesn't concern them?


you just reminded me of religious people who attribute everything that happens to God. It gets tough not to talk about the subject with religious people because most everything they do is guided by god (according to them).

"we would have never got this _______ if it wasnt for the grace of God"

"God works in mysterious ways.. I knew praying would fix everything"

sometimes, I just have to call a TIMEOUT so we can go over what they just said :oldlol:

that talk screams out for a challenge, and I think many non-believers fall into that

[Rasheed1]

What's the point in arguing? You aren't convincing anyone. That whole 'winner' shit is part of the problem. They take the whole argument like its a contest and come off as big losers. It is impossible to 'win' against a religious person


I only used the term 'winner' because you called them losers for trying to argue and use research to prove whatever point.

Like I said earlier.. Atheists generally argue the point because it is almost impossible not to..

Like I said, if you hear someone (a grown man or woman) arguing that Santa Clause is real? you arent going to just laugh it off. You might laugh while you point out how ridiculous it is, but you wont always just laugh and say "why try?"

I mean the spaghetti monster is totally a ridiculous idea, and if someone were seriously argue that it is real? they get laughed and ridiculed at the same time.

I understand how religious feel disrespected by atheists, but there is almost no other way to view religion if you arent religious. You can tolerate it as long people dont keep saying silly things in front of you.. If they do that? then people feel the need to challenge it (because it is usually easily challenged)

[chosen_one6]

you just reminded me of religious people who attribute everything that happens to God. It gets tough not to talk about the subject with religious people because most everything they do is guided by god (according to them).

"we would have never got this _______ if it wasnt for the grace of God"

"God works in mysterious ways.. I knew praying would fix everything"

sometimes, I just have to call a TIMEOUT so we can go over what they just said :oldlol:

that talk screams out for a challenge, and I think many non-believers fall into that


Exactly. And this is why I believe atheists get so aggravated by religious nutcases.

I'm not an atheist, I'm more agnostic than anything. However, when I scroll through my facebook and see "Thank god for giving me another day" when they wake up in the morning, or "I'm so happy I didn't get kicked out of school for so many absences. #godprovides" it makes me want to go on a rant. However, I hold back because everyone is entitled to their opinion and their belief's. I used to try to convince people of what I believed in but then realized it's pointless. Religion is so deeply rooted in our society that it's acceptable to believe in magic and fairy tales, as long as you attribute it to some widely regarded god of some sort, whether it be "god", "allah", "shiva, vishnu, and brahma" or whomever it is they look up to and the respective book.

[SilkkTheShocker]

Im yet to meet an Atheist that didn't come off as mentally unstable.

[HardwoodLegend]

Im yet to meet an Atheist that didn't come off as mentally unstable.

I'm still waiting for you to wake up one day, come to your senses and laugh at yourself for being a gullible dumbass all these years.

I'm mentally stable. I used to be religious as I was raised that way. No problems in the home forced me to "abandon God" either. I just learned the power of critical thought.

[dn41]

While Religion is most definately BS, it's actually pretty clever to believe in a God (if you are not completely brainwashed of course). Religion is a tool (kind of like a medicine) that helps you deal with various aspects of your life, especially to cope with grief and loss. Just imagine being a parent of a child that dies, this would be absolutely devestating for religious and nonreligious people alike but religious people have access to lets call it the "heaven wonder pill". This "pill" enables them to believe that their child is now in a better place and in a reunion after life. For nonreligious people this option doesn't exist and while their belief is very likely the truth it's also much more brutal .. basically my child is death and doesn't exist anymore and I won't see it again.
And the good thing for religious people is that they never will notice that they were wrong. That's why you will never convince religious people no matter how good the arguments because it's not about the truth, they just want to keep their medicine.

[BuGzBuNNy]

You guys talk about Christians/religious people as if we spoke a different language and weren't everyday folks you see around town, at school or at work, etc :oldlol:

I'm still waiting for you to wake up one day, come to your senses and laugh at yourself for being a gullible dumbass all these years.

I'm mentally stable. I used to be religious as I was raised that way. No problems in the home forced me to "abandon God" either. I just learned the power of critical thought.
Why respond to that, or better yet, why respond to him

[nightprowler10]

I'd say their response is proportional to the amount of arguments they have to hear about religion. If people claimed unicorns were true every day of the week they would probably talk about that too.
I completely disagree with what Christians believe in and see fundamental flaws in their dogma. Living in white suburbia, I am surrounded by people who always utter the name of their lord in everything and sometimes I feel suffocated by the amount of Christian propaganda around me. Yet I've never in my adult life started a religious argument with anyone who believes in what I believe to be fantasies. I mean, what's the point? What will you accomplish by doing so except stroke your own ego and alienate a person? Isn't knowing that you're right good enough that you would feel the need to show other people up? And I'm including situations where a person is actively trying to convert you or something. All you gotta do is walk away, not insult something the dude's believed in his whole life.

[Rasheed1]

As far as why challenge the religious stuff? For me, I think sometimes it gets to point where you gotta say "c'mon son"! Its difficult to play along 100% of the time.

http://www.audibletreats.com/Media/newspics/EdLover-CMonSon-Ep16.jpg

[nightprowler10]

It's not about playing along though. I don't let people think I'm a Christian ffs. I just ignore their religious stuff.

[Rasheed1]

It's not about playing along though. I don't let people think I'm a Christian ffs. I just ignore their religious stuff.


what do you do when people ask you to pray for them?

or when you have people who equate everything to god, and even try to tell you that you yourself could have god's graces again if you just believe?

for me, at some I just tell them why I'm not a christian anymore and what I believe.

On the internet? its the internet, and the internet is a different animal (we're talking religion right now).

I always wondered why people are scared to talk politics and religion... Those are the 2 subjects that tell you the most about a person.

[nightprowler10]

what do you do when people ask you to pray for them?

or when you have people who equate everything to god, and even try to tell you that you yourself could have god's graces again if you just believe?

for me, at some I just tell them why I'm not a christian anymore and what I believe.

On the internet? its the internet, and the internet is a different animal (we're talking religion right now).

I always wondered why people are scared to talk politics and religion... Those are the 2 subjects that tell you the most about a person.
You're telling me that you tell people "no I won't pray for you because I don't believe in the existence of a god?". I mean, we're not talking about religion anymore then. People skills man. If someone asks you that question then that means they're in a bad place and you tell a white lie to make them feel better.

If someone tries to convert me (multiple people have) I just tell them politely that I don't see things the way they do and change the topic. People of all kinds can be handled without you having to challenge everything they believed in their whole lives.

As for your last sentence, I find out about people based on their actions in certain situations, not by finding out their religious beliefs and political affiliations. People will believe one thing and do another. One of those is more important than the other.

[HardwoodLegend]

You guys talk about Christians/religious people as if we spoke a different language and weren't everyday folks you see around town, at school or at work, etc :oldlol:

I have a lot of Christian family members and friends. I don't ever spark up a debate with them or anything whenever they say they will "pray for me" or assume that I'm religious too.

They'd probably be shocked to find out how strong my atheist sentiment is, lol.



Why respond to that, or better yet, why respond to him

I don't know. No self control. I agree that I should have left it alone. I shouldn't have even made this thread.

[Rasheed1]

You're telling me that you tell people "no I won't pray for you because I don't believe in the existence of a god?". I mean, we're not talking about religion anymore then. People skills man. If someone asks you that question then that means they're in a bad place and you tell a white lie to make them feel better.

lol no I say something like "I dont pray, but Im pulling for ya. If you need something? let me know.


If someone tries to convert me (multiple people have) I just tell them politely that I don't see things the way they do and change the topic. People of all kinds can be handled without you having to challenge everything they believed in their whole lives.

I dont think Im using the conversation as an opportunity to challenge folks. But if it comes up? it just does. In fact im the one that is usually challenged over why am I NOT a christian. I wont beat christians over the head, but I will say what I believe, and if they dont agree? then they just dont :confusedshrug: we can still be cool

In RL, the people I know already know what I think and I know many different kinds of people from many different walks of life.... We always seem to still respect and love each other even though we dont all have the belief systems.


As for your last sentence, I find out about people based on their actions in certain situations, not by finding out their religious beliefs and political affiliations. People will believe one thing and do another. One of those is more important than the other.

that's cool, but people talking religion and politics doesnt need to be a taboo subject, and I dont feel it necessary to walk around on eggs shells all the time when dealing with religious people. People's actions matter, but so do things like religion and politics. to me, it is what it is. Saying "they'll never change" isnt necessarily true. I was religious myself. I know people evolve grow and change.

[nightprowler10]

Did you leave Christianity on your own or did someone convince you? I'm not saying people won't change, just that people won't change because of your/my opinions and need to find their own paths.

I didn't mean that you should avoid the subject like the plague though. I guess I had the mental picture of my FB friends picking fights with religious people for thanking their lord or that "Joakim Noah vs Biblical Noah" thread where it seemed like posters were simply looking for a debate. Those are the situations where I'd think to myself that there's no point in arguing anything and just move on. I mean, if someone tries to constantly "save me" I'll definitely let them know where the line is, so I don't think there's anything wrong with you're saying as long as you're not outright disrespectful.


lol no I say something like "I dont pray, but Im pulling for ya. If you need something? let me know.

I'd ask the question that why even say "I don't pray"? Saying the rest would be perfect in that situation. Why would you feel the need to differentiate yourself from that person before offering your help?

[Rasheed1]

Did you leave Christianity on your own or did someone convince you? I'm not saying people won't change, just that people won't change because of your/my opinions and need to find their own paths.

It was a combination... No one person convinces you to do anything at a single point in time when it comes to religion. When I began to think in a totally rational manner in terms of religion as well as the rest of my life? thats when the process was put into motion. People who dont believe in my god would bring up logical points.. I'd argue them and that point in itself wouldnt convince me, but the accumulation of issues forces you (or at least it forced me) to go and research everything I could about christ, god, my religion, other religions. I was always taught that my god was the god of order. He is the truth. So I figure if I search for the truth? then he'll be at the end of the road when I get there.


I didn't mean that you should avoid the subject like the plague though. I guess I had the mental picture of my FB friends picking fights with religious people for thanking their lord or that "Joakim Noah vs Biblical Noah" thread where it seemed like posters were simply looking for a debate. Those are the situations where I'd think to myself that there's no point in arguing anything and just move on.

yeah on the internet, the conversation gets warped. I dont think there is any value in taunting people when they do their religious thing (like say 'praise the lord for this or that'). But in RL I f*ck with and am related to alot of christians, muslims, jews, (sh*t even rastas and 5% god's and earths :oldlol: ). And the conversations are different because its face to face and we connect as human beings as well as whatever religion we believe in. But I know some feverishly religious people, and sometimes you have slow them down with a good "cmon son"!




I mean, if someone tries to constantly "save me" I'll definitely let them know where the line is, so I don't think there's anything wrong with you're saying as long as you're not outright disrespectful.







I'd ask the question that why even say "I don't pray"? Saying the rest would be perfect in that situation. Why would you feel the need to differentiate yourself from that person before offering your help?

mostly because I dont. I dont do that. I do not think it is something I should avoid admitting. Me offering to be a support for this person in any way I can is my version praying. I offer to actually do something to assist (I wouldnt say all that).

I mean if I asked a muslim to pour out a lil liquor for my nephew, he prolly read me the riot act :oldlol:

j/k For real tho. Im just basically saying that I dont want to try beat religious people up about it like people do on the net, but sometimes it just comes up and I just say what I believe without overdoing it.

[nightprowler10]

but sometimes it just comes up and I just say what I believe without overdoing it.
When it all really boils down to it, the overdoing it part was exactly what I've been trying to advocate against.

I completely agree that debates on the internet tend to get warped. I think my problem is mostly with people who (ironically) get a holier than thou attitude on the net and we see things get completely out of hand.

[miller-time]

Yet I've never in my adult life started a religious argument with anyone who believes in what I believe to be fantasies. I mean, what's the point? What will you accomplish by doing so except stroke your own ego and alienate a person? Isn't knowing that you're right good enough that you would feel the need to show other people up? And I'm including situations where a person is actively trying to convert you or something. All you gotta do is walk away, not insult something the dude's believed in his whole life.

I'm not so much talking about starting arguments as much as being engaged in either discussions or activism. A lot of the motivation for atheists to be heard is to promote secularization. If atheism is represented in the public and political arena then policies can be made that don't encroach on their lives.

There will always be atheists that just like the sound of their own voice and engage in pointless debates all of the time, but there are also reasons to not just turn away and agree to disagree. Religion does have an effect on the way society functions whether it is through law or just social interaction, and hiding away won't do anything to change these problems.

[hoopaddict08]

Wait are you saying that neither evolution or the big bang theory have any proof?

Evolution has just as much questions as any religion. DNA is incredibly complex and how can meaningful and precise information be created by accident? Through mutation and natural selection.

Just look around you. So much life on this world hold a similarity in symmetry. Half of my face is identical to the other. The same with a dog, cat, horse, and so on. Random mutation and natural selection does a pretty crappy job of explaining this.

[miller-time]

Just look around you. So much life on this world hold a similarity in symmetry. Half of my face is identical to the other. The same with a dog, cat, horse, and so on. Random mutation and natural selection does a pretty crappy job of explaining this.

Bilateral symmetry came pretty early in our evolutionary past. You know when they say "we share x amount of DNA with y animal"? These are the genes they are talking about. The ones that give order and structure and basic cellular function are the earliest to have developed and because evolution is a nested hierarchy they are genes we all share.

[BuGzBuNNy]

Bilateral symmetry came pretty early in our evolutionary past. You know when they say "we share x amount of DNA with y animal"? These are the genes they are talking about. The ones that give order and structure and basic cellular function are the earliest to have developed and because evolution is a nested hierarchy they are genes we all share.
How do you explain the mind? I'm really interested in knowing how it fits in with evolution or better yet the big bang theory. The existence of a mind is atop the list of "where the hell did this come from?" or "how the hell did that happen?"

[hoopaddict08]

How do you explain the mind? I'm really interested in knowing how it fits in with evolution or better yet the big bang theory. The existence of a mind is atop the list of "where the hell did this come from?" or "how the hell did that happen?"


Or how about new genetic cell information forming? In order for a new species to come about there has to be a gain in information. Mutation and natural selection do not explain this.

[miller-time]

How do you explain the mind? I'm really interested in knowing how it fits in with evolution or better yet the big bang theory. The existence of a mind is atop the list of "where the hell did this come from?" or "how the hell did that happen?"

First of all it doesn't fit in with the big bang theory at all because it is trying to model a completely different phenomenon. The mind has as much to do with the big bang theory as it does with theories on cloud formation.

This gives a pretty good description of the earlier stages how the nervous system developed

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_nervous_systems

Once early nervous systems came into being the basis for more complex development could begin. Over millions of years specialization occurred and animals became more proficient and adaptable for surviving in different environments. Social animals were very successful and the more altruistic and self sacrificing the animal could be towards its group the more likely that group would survive. As time goes on and the social species (ancestral apes) become more complex they could spend more time caring for their young - giving the young more time to develop after birth. Neural capacity is now allowed to increase again and with it so does development of abstract thought and reasoning.

This is a very abridged version and I might edit it later - I'm sure some of it is wrong. I've been on holidays for 3 months (uni is only just going back this week) so my mind is kind of lazy and mushy right now lol.

[miller-time]

Or how about new genetic cell information forming? In order for a new species to come about there has to be a gain in information. Mutation and natural selection do not explain this.

I'll explain with your quote. This is what you wrote:


Or how about new genetic cell information forming? In order for a new species to come about there has to be a gain in information. Mutation and natural selection do not explain this.

Random mutation - deletion

Or how about new cell information forming? In order for a new species to come about there has to be a gain in information. Mutation and natural selection do not explain this.

Random mutation - insertion

Or how about new cell forming? In order for a new species to come about there has to be a gain in information. information Mutation and natural selection do not explain this.

Random mutation - translocation

Or how about new cell forming? In natural for a new species to come about there has to be a gain in information. information Mutation and order selection do not explain this.

Random mutation - duplication

Or how about new cell forming forming? In natural for a new species to come about there has to be a gain in information. information Mutation and order selection do not explain this.

Random mutation - inversion

how Or about new cell forming forming? In natural for a new species to come about there has to be a gain in information. information Mutation and order selection do not explain this.

Random mutation - translocation

how Or do not explain this forming forming? In natural for a new species to come about there has to be a gain in information. information Mutation and order selection about new cell.

Random mutation - duplication

how Or do not explain this forming forming? In natural for a new species to come about there has to be a gain in information. In natural for a new species information Mutation and order selection about new cell.




So this is what we started with:

Or how about new genetic cell information forming? In order for a new species to come about there has to be a gain in information. Mutation and natural selection do not explain this.

This is what we ended with:

how Or do not explain this forming forming? In natural for a new species to come about there has to be a gain in information. In natural for a new species information Mutation and order selection about new cell.

Is that the same thing or a new thing? Do this over and over for millions of years and see what we get.

[hoopaddict08]

I'll explain with your quote. This is what you wrote:



Random mutation - deletion

Or how about new cell information forming? In order for a new species to come about there has to be a gain in information. Mutation and natural selection do not explain this.

Random mutation - insertion

Or how about new cell forming? In order for a new species to come about there has to be a gain in information. information Mutation and natural selection do not explain this.

Random mutation - translocation

Or how about new cell forming? In natural for a new species to come about there has to be a gain in information. information Mutation and order selection do not explain this.

Random mutation - duplication

Or how about new cell forming forming? In natural for a new species to come about there has to be a gain in information. information Mutation and order selection do not explain this.

Random mutation - inversion

how Or about new cell forming forming? In natural for a new species to come about there has to be a gain in information. information Mutation and order selection do not explain this.

Random mutation - translocation

how Or do not explain this forming forming? In natural for a new species to come about there has to be a gain in information. information Mutation and order selection about new cell.

Random mutation - duplication

how Or do not explain this forming forming? In natural for a new species to come about there has to be a gain in information. In natural for a new species information Mutation and order selection about new cell.




So this is what we started with:

Or how about new genetic cell information forming? In order for a new species to come about there has to be a gain in information. Mutation and natural selection do not explain this.

This is what we ended with:

how Or do not explain this forming forming? In natural for a new species to come about there has to be a gain in information. In natural for a new species information Mutation and order selection about new cell.

Is that the same thing or a new thing?

This is really messy and confusing to read. I'm struggling to even keep my eyes open but I will look it over tomorrow after work. Goodnight man.

[G-train]

But for this book (Bible) we could not know right from wrong.


I have been driven many times upon my knees by the overwhelming conviction that I had no where else to go.


"Surely God would not have created such a being as man to exist only for a day! Man was made for immortality"

What do atheist American's think of these quotes?

[miller-time]

This is really messy and confusing to read. I'm struggling to even keep my eyes open but I will look it over tomorrow after work. Goodnight man.

It could have been better. But essentially each line has a random mutation which slightly changes the sentence. All you really need to look at is the original quote:


Or how about new genetic cell information forming? In order for a new species to come about there has to be a gain in information. Mutation and natural selection do not explain this.

And then see how it has changed with random mutations:


how Or do not explain this forming forming? In natural for a new species to come about there has to be a gain in information. In natural for a new species information Mutation and order selection about new cell.

The new sentence is not the same as the old one, it means something else - essentially it is a new thing. We didn't necessarily put in new information, we just used what was there by copying, shuffling, and removing elements.

[G-train]

What do atheists from any nation think of this quote:


"In the absence of any other proof, the thumb alone would convince me of God's existence. "

[miller-time]

What do atheists from any nation think of this quote:

It was probably written by a normal person before 1859 or a scientifically illiterate or ignorant person after 1859.

[G-train]

It was probably written by a normal person before 1859 or a scientifically illiterate or ignorant person after 1859.

Regardless of when it was written, it was written by Isaac Newton.

You should read up on him. He has a Wikipedia page.

[miller-time]

Regardless of when it was written, it was written by Isaac Newton.

You should read up on him. He has a Wikipedia page.

So I was right.

[G-train]

So I was right.

Yes because you googled it.

[miller-time]

If Newton believed in god then their must be a god. Thread over.

True. I better get into alchemy then too. This iron isn't going to turn into gold all by itself!

[miller-time]

Yes because you googled it.

Well I can't really prove that one way or another. But I actually thought it was a young earth creationist quote than a Newton quote.

[G-train]

If Newton believed in god then their must be a god. Thread over.

No I am suggesting that perhaps the greatest scientist in history's observations/philosophy/thoughts on God should perhaps be considered, even if your brain is rock hard.

[AboveTheRim.]

I grew up a Christian, going to Presbyterian church until I was 18. In the last few years I have gotten fed up with people who call themselves Christians solely because they go to church. It doesn't matter what they do the rest of the time, but as long as they get their 60 minutes in on Sunday, they are almighty. I don't consider myself Christian anymore. I do believe in God, but don't need a label to prove that to myself.

[AboveTheRim.]

If Newton believed in god then their must be a god. Thread over.
Science is a liar, sometimes.

[G-train]

I grew up a Christian, going to Presbyterian church until I was 18. In the last few years I have gotten fed up with people who call themselves Christians solely because they go to church. It doesn't matter what they do the rest of the time, but as long as they get their 60 minutes in on Sunday, they are almighty. I don't consider myself Christian anymore. I do believe in God, but don't need a label to prove that to myself.

Ah yes, the Western Christian. USA has been blighted by many.
It is behavior far from the teachings of the one they claim to follow.
His teachings are quite interesting if you study them.

[miller-time]

Science is a liar, sometimes.

Only when it is counter to religious claims though.

If they said they could identify Jesus' blood through DNA analysis and carbon dating, creationists would be running through the streets praising science.

[AboveTheRim.]

Only when it is counter to religious claims though.

If they said they could identify Jesus' blood through DNA analysis and carbon dating, creationists would be running through the streets praising science.
Was just quoting Sunny :D

http://b.vimeocdn.com/ts/389/045/389045359_640.jpg

[G-train]

Well I can't really prove that one way or another. But I actually thought it was a young earth creationist quote than a Newton quote.

What do you think of the 1937 lecture "Religion und Naturwissenschaft" by Max Planck?

[G-train]

I disagree. It's a personal belief. Only your own thoughts on it should matter. Plenty people smarter than me believe in god, plenty don't. It doesn't effect my beliefs.

I disagree with your disagreeing.

Your mind isn't open to the in depth study of others and their point of view?

I think it's ironic that many atheists I talk to claim to be free thinking, but simply just believe what they read in a Senior level text book and refuse to consider any other line of thinking.

[G-train]

Only when it is counter to religious claims though.

If they said they could identify Jesus' blood through DNA analysis and carbon dating, creationists would be running through the streets praising science.

Creationists are scientists. They praise science daily.

[miller-time]

What do you think of the 1937 lecture "Religion und Naturwissenschaft" by Max Planck?

I don't know it.

[G-train]

I don't know it.

I recommend reading it to get a well rounded view on a few topics.

[G-train]

Quote:
But for this book (Bible) we could not know right from wrong.

Quote:
I have been driven many times upon my knees by the overwhelming conviction that I had no where else to go.

Quote:
"Surely God would not have created such a being as man to exist only for a day! Man was made for immortality"


What do atheist American's think of these quotes?

I would really like to hear Yankee thoughts on these quotes by perhaps their greatest leader ever?
He lived post 1859 btw for those who are into that date.

[G-train]

What text book says there is no god?

I'm referring to young people that read a Biology text book in high school or college, take it as 'gospel' then refer to themselves as free thinking former theists.

[miller-time]

I'm referring to young people that read a Biology text book in high school or college, take it as 'gospel' then refer to themselves as free thinking former theists.

But if they read the bible and took it as gospel then that is ok?

[steve franchise]

Oh this thread again. Same posters, same arguments, same bullshit. Rinse and repeat.

Classic ISH. :cheers:

[miller-time]

Oh this thread again. Same posters, same arguments, same bullshit. Rinse and repeat.

Classic ISH. :cheers:

And this thread wouldn't be complete without this post! Thanks for being as derivative as the rest of us. :cheers:

[steve franchise]

And this thread wouldn't be complete without this post! Thanks for being as derivative as the rest of us. :cheers:

Repped.

[G-train]

But if they read the bible and took it as gospel then that is ok?

If they read it and find it to be false then no, it's not ok.

If they read it and find it to be true then it's ok.

What I am referring to are people that are in their teens and early 20's that think they know the truth of the universe and aren't open to spirituality, let alone God.

[miller-time]

If they read it and find it to be false then no, it's not ok.

If they read it and find it to be true then it's ok.

What I am referring to are people that are in their teens and early 20's that think they know the truth of the universe and aren't open to spirituality, let alone God.

So if they read the bible and conclude that it is nonsense then that is unacceptable?

[Jackass18]

What's the point in arguing? You aren't convincing anyone. That whole 'winner' shit is part of the problem. They take the whole argument like its a contest and come off as big losers. It is impossible to 'win' against a religious person

There are various reasons people argue even if they know they won't convince the other side. One of the reasons I do it is because I want to see various points of view and different sides to things. If we all just sit back, say "agree to disagree" at the beginning and don't really discuss anything, then what's the point?

[shady6121]

http://www.atheistmemebase.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/024-Hypocrite-God.jpg

http://i.qkme.me/3q64ej.jpg

http://i.qkme.me/6ig6.jpg

[HardwoodLegend]

God the original G meme is hilarious.

http://i.qkme.me/361s64.jpg

[shady6121]

http://i.qkme.me/3pugpo.jpg

http://i.qkme.me/354vuu.jpg

http://i.qkme.me/pqd.jpg

http://i.qkme.me/29dt.jpg

http://i.qkme.me/cts.jpg

[InfiniteBaskets]

I do think it's interesting that most message boards will have threads of Atheists VS Theists as opposed to Islam VS Christianity VS Buddhism VS Judaism.

I suppose part of this has to do with the US demographic having access to computers, but these threads would be vastly different if you had actual other religions chiming in.

Atheism vs. Theism is actually just Atheism vs. Christianity on here. Would the Christians on this site have a problem with Atheists rejecting Judaism for the same exact reason they reject Christianity, or would they tell them that their reasoning for theism rejection is inappropriate for all religions?

[Dresta]

All Atheists generalize the behaviour and beliefs of religious people.
Most theists obfuscate and equivocate to hide the contradictory nature of their moronic beliefs.

edit: oh yes, and why are theists counted as a united group when they spend more time reviling and killing each other than they do atheists?

[Dresta]

Regardless of when it was written, it was written by Isaac Newton.

You should read up on him. He has a Wikipedia page.
Isaac Newton was a superstitious person living in an age of superstition. He also believed in the power of alchemy, do you believe that too?

Next...

[LJJ]

I do think it's interesting that most message boards will have threads of Atheists VS Theists as opposed to Islam VS Christianity VS Buddhism VS Judaism.

I suppose part of this has to do with the US demographic having access to computers, but these threads would be vastly different if you had actual other religions chiming in.

Atheism vs. Theism is actually just Atheism vs. Christianity on here. Would the Christians on this site have a problem with Atheists rejecting Judaism for the same exact reason they reject Christianity, or would they tell them that their reasoning for theism rejection is inappropriate for all religions?

I think it's Atheism versus Theism because it's far, far easier to come up with legitimate arguments for simply "a god could exist" than it is to argue for all the inane, nonsensical, contradicting ramblings in any of the particular holy books or particular religious doctrines.

Once you get down to the nitty gritty origins of any religion, whether you take Christianity or Islam or Judaism or Buddhism of whatever, it becomes pretty hard to defend the true merit and legitimacy of it.

[Dresta]

I think it's Atheism versus Theism because it's far, far easier to come up with legitimate arguments for simply "a god could exist" than it is to argue for all the inane, nonsensical, contradicting ramblings in any of the particular holy books or particular religious doctrines.

Once you get down to the nitty gritty origins of any religion, whether you take Christianity or Islam or Judaism or Buddhism of whatever, it becomes pretty hard to defend the true merit and legitimacy of it.
But in many cases that would be deism not theism, and deists would have more cause to ally with ateists than theists. It's that many people don't even know what their own position is in regard to God - which is why they're often vague and ambiguous. Still, there's a huge jump from believing in the need for a Creator, to thinking that this Creator has you in mind/talks to you/watches you etc.

[miller-time]

But in many cases that would be deism not theism, and deists would have more cause to ally with ateists than theists. It's that many people don't even know what their own position is in regard to God - which is why they're often vague and ambiguous. Still, there's a huge jump from believing in the need for a Creator, to thinking that this Creator has you in mind/talks to you/watches you etc.

Wouldn't theists just be a broad subset of deists?

I think debates on religion between atheists and believers should be at the deistic level. That part of the picture needs to be confirmed before we can debate things at a theistic level.