Atheism-o-phobia Part 2

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
621

[quote]swoleupinya wrote:

[quote]Magicpunch wrote:
That Jesus died and came back to life is not a metaphysical or spiritual claim.

It is purely a biological (physical) claim. If one makes such a claim, they need to show extraordinary evidence.

That there was a virgin birth is also a biological (physical) claim. Evidence is again required.

If your answer is the word ‘faith’ then why do you believe the virgin birth any more than the claim that an angel dictated the quran to Muhammad?

Any takers?[/quote]

I hate to be the one advocating for religion here… but, asexual reproduction is not unheard of. I don’t know of any examples of it in humans, but it certainly does happen in animals. Virgin birth does not (there has to be an epigenetic imprint), but it is conceivable that a woman gave birth without being schtouped by her husband or any other man… this is one of the “less” outrageous claims made in the Bible.[/quote]

Glad you think so, Catholicism wouldn’t be what it is if it didn’t have some outrageous claims.

622

[quote]swoleupinya wrote:

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]Magicpunch wrote:
Regardless of whether you think it is one of the less outlandish claims made in the bible, it is like I said, sufficiently within the physical realm to demand an explanation which can’t be dodged by “I can feel his presence” etc etc and that’s why I asked a christian to elaborate on this point.

[/quote]

We can’t elaborate on it. I’m not sure why this is such an attractive avenue of attack. It’s a faith. We call it as such. You’re not pointing out something new to the faithful. I don’t understand what explanation you want for a virgin birth. I mean, you’re seeking what, a scientific name for an anatomical and physiological anomaly? We don’t and won’t offer any such thing. It is, unashamedly, a supernatural event to us.

And yes, I feel his presence, like many here feel the presence of an existing ‘moral standard.’ Hey, maybe it’s my genome. Maybe I have a predisposition, a biological orientation. Maybe Christian theological understanding flips just the right satisfaction and pleasure switches in the old gray matter. Maybe our castoffs are missing a particular allele distribution, making a sort of self-denying individual who eventually comes out of his atheistic closet. So, you might be stuck with us. Let the reproduction wars begin![/quote]

Here, again, is where we just have to part ways… the basic, fundamental difference between atheists and the religious; whether or not faith is valid as a tool of reasoning or proof.

Incidentally, isn’t it allele patterning, not distribution? Now, I’m gonna’ have to dig through some books haven’t looked at in a long time.

[/quote]

Good job, religious folks have been saying for many millenniums that…well even though we do rely partially on the empirical (the five senses) we do not rely solely on it. Kind of like Catholics do not rely solely on the Bible. We just don’t, doesn’t make sense to us since we recognized things outside the natural realm.

623

[quote]swoleupinya wrote:

Living here, forever = does not sound that appealing.

624

[quote]swoleupinya wrote:
Is it really unreasonable to suppose that we may have developed some method of immortality by now? The tragedy of it literally brings tears to my eyes every time I consider it. [/quote]

Fascinating. Why would that be desireable (a moral end)? It would require near or even total control over reproduction. A near, if not complete, end of generational transmission. Would we really be that damn selfish, vain, to freeze human history at ourselves? Sounds…monstrous.

625

[quote]Sloth wrote:

[quote]swoleupinya wrote:
Is it really unreasonable to suppose that we may have developed some method of immortality by now? The tragedy of it literally brings tears to my eyes every time I consider it. [/quote]

Fascinating. Why would that be desireable (a moral end)? It would require near or even total control over reproduction. A near, if not complete, end of generational transmission. Would we really be that damn selfish, vain, to freeze human history at ourselves? Sounds…monstrous.[/quote]

You strike me as smart enough to come up with a few possible solutions to these problems.

626

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]swoleupinya wrote:

Living here, forever = does not sound that appealing.[/quote]

Another point we may just have to agree to disagree on. I kind of like the world that we’ve got going on here. It could use some work, but for the most part It’s bitchin’.

627

[quote]kamui wrote:

[quote]
I’m not saying evolution provided morals. Only that evolution gave us the sophistication to be able to create civilizations and be able to tell various kinds of historical counts through either myth or record or whatever that teach lessons that are always important for increasing humanity’s creativity (ability to for the species to continue and well-being for all).[/quote]

yes, but you end up with an utilitarian definition of morality.

this morality basicaly states that “it’s right to do this or that because it maximize creativity”.
not that it is right or wrong per se.

it’s an hypothetical imperative, not a categorical one.

you are left with nothing to answer to someone who say “i don’t give a fuck about creativity, so it’s not wrong for me”.[/quote]

Hmmm… I don’t know what to believe anymore. Marx’s amoralism is starting to look better but certainly not good.

628

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

Hmmm… I don’t know what to believe anymore. Marx’s amoralism is starting to look better but certainly not good.[/quote]

If you want to be on the side of failing philosophies, go ahead. Marx was wrong about everything. Why anybody considers his stupidity even remotely relevant is beyond me. Usually stupid philosophers die off quietly, few even knowing they exist, but nope, not Marx. Somehow, his ridiculous stupidities penetrate through the murk. His only real claim to fame is that followers of his philosophies murdered hundreds of millions, other than they tiny tid bit, he is useless.

629

[quote]pat wrote:

[quote]Fletch1986 wrote:

Hmmm… I don’t know what to believe anymore. Marx’s amoralism is starting to look better but certainly not good.[/quote]

If you want to be on the side of failing philosophies, go ahead. Marx was wrong about everything. Why anybody considers his stupidity even remotely relevant is beyond me. Usually stupid philosophers die off quietly, few even knowing they exist, but nope, not Marx. Somehow, his ridiculous stupidities penetrate through the murk. His only real claim to fame is that followers of his philosophies murdered hundreds of millions, other than they tiny tid bit, he is useless. [/quote]

Okay… let’s see.

I’ve got the bathwater… got the baby…

1, 2, 3… Heave!

630

Marxism is a failed philosophy… Christianity just borrowed everything from religions/philosophies before it… Utilitarianism doesn’t stand up to the question of purpose why accomplish aforesaid purpose… maybe I’ll look into Buddhism, I know next to nothing about it.

631

[quote]Magicpunch wrote:
That Jesus died and came back to life is not a metaphysical or spiritual claim.

It is purely a biological (physical) claim. If one makes such a claim, they need to show extraordinary evidence.

That there was a virgin birth is also a biological (physical) claim. Evidence is again required.

If your answer is the word ‘faith’ then why do you believe the virgin birth any more than the claim that an angel dictated the quran to Muhammad?

Any takers?[/quote]

There could be testimony by Mary’s gynecologist (if they actually had one back then) and most on the atheists on this boar would still not believe. I’m not going to argue faith on a message board. There is enough personal testimony in both the Old and New Testaments for me to believe. Therefore, there is no burden of proof.

As I’ve said multiple times, we are all on a spiritual journey. Even atheists are searching for various things related to the unknown. I’ve found my answers and am quite comfortable, I hope you do the same.

Zeb

632

[quote]swoleupinya wrote:

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:

[quote]swoleupinya wrote:

Living here, forever = does not sound that appealing.[/quote]

Another point we may just have to agree to disagree on. I kind of like the world that we’ve got going on here. It could use some work, but for the most part It’s bitchin’.
[/quote]

No doubt, but to me Earth and Heaven are like the local movie house. There is an arcade in front before you go into watch the movie. As much fun as the arcade is, that is not really why I am there.

633

[quote]swoleupinya wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]swoleupinya wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]swoleupinya wrote:

In the case of the Bible, though, the central premises are so outlandish that there really is no burden to disprove them. Whereas, there certainly is a burden of proof upon its proponents.

[/quote]

LOL, very transparent way to try to get out of proving the Bible is wrong. If you’re not up to proving that the Bible is wrong why don’t you go ahead and explain electricity, nuclear science, quantum physics and brain surgery to me. Some think that those things are so outlandish that they can’t be real. At least the ignorant think that way.
[/quote]

The difference between electricity, nuclear science, quantum physics and brain surgery and the central claims of the Bible is that electricity, nuclear science, quantum physics and brain surgery all have results and/or evidence of their existence or efficacy that can be observed, tested and repeated.[/quote]

Oh I’m sorry I didn’t think I had to explain the comparison. You see the things above and the Bible have in common this: Simply because they are not understood by someone (or large groups of people) does not mean that they are to be laughed at mocked, or simply dismissed. This may come as a surprise but humans don’t know everything. WOW—you okay? In fact it seems that science changes every few years. Remember pluto? Enough said?

As far as God, Christ and the Bible I’ve said many times that it takes faith. As the Bible says it is impossible to please God without faith. If someone sets out to prove the existence of God it will only end in frustration as faith is the key ingredient. I don’t suspect that the Bible would put so much emphasis on faith if it was going to be proven by human standards that there is a God. That would be contradictory now wouldn’t it? At that point I would be questioning the Bible and the rolls here would be reversed.

On a side note, how old are you? I read an interesting article about atheism and young males. Seems that about 90% are young males. Just wondering if you fall into that demographic. No big deal.

Zeb

[/quote]

And, this is where the debate ends. You have decided that “faith” is an acceptable tool for understanding. I will never agree to this.[/quote]

You don’t have to agree to anything, that’s why God gave you free will. The rest is between you and God someday.

[quote]I’m 35, married and have two kids. I didn’t acknowledge my atheism until I was 30… spent most of my life running from it. Reality is some scary shit, so I understand why most people choose religion over it.
[/quote]

You’re going to take the Obama tack I see. Wow you guys are so smart I just shudder in your presence. LOL. How does it go? we stupid people cling to our guns and religion, mostly because we’re scared. Is that it? Ha ha, I think it takes a great deal of courage to step out as a believer. If you don’t think it takes courage to believe in an unseen God then I don’t think you know what courage is. It takes less courage to live your life thinking that someday you will simple cease to exist. How is that courageous? I can do whatever I want in this lifetime, if someone strikes me on the cheek I don’t have to turn the other cheek I’m an atheist I write my own moral code - Bla Bla Bla…I hope you can do better than that. I could make a great argument that you are taking a very short-term gain (not courageous) for a long-term loss.

634

[quote]Sloth wrote:
Would we really be that damn selfish, vain, to freeze human history at ourselves? Sounds…monstrous.[/quote]

Seems more and more that the Christian right wants to either freeze or revert human history.

635

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Magicpunch wrote:
That Jesus died and came back to life is not a metaphysical or spiritual claim.

It is purely a biological (physical) claim. If one makes such a claim, they need to show extraordinary evidence.

That there was a virgin birth is also a biological (physical) claim. Evidence is again required.

If your answer is the word ‘faith’ then why do you believe the virgin birth any more than the claim that an angel dictated the quran to Muhammad?

Any takers?[/quote]

There could be testimony by Mary’s gynecologist (if they actually had one back then) and most on the atheists on this boar would still not believe. I’m not going to argue faith on a message board. There is enough personal testimony in both the Old and New Testaments for me to believe. Therefore, there is no burden of proof.

As I’ve said multiple times, we are all on a spiritual journey. Even atheists are searching for various things related to the unknown. I’ve found my answers and am quite comfortable, I hope you do the same.

Zeb[/quote]

Nice cop out.

636

[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
No doubt, but to me Earth and Heaven are like the local movie house. There is an arcade in front before you go into watch the movie. As much fun as the arcade is, that is not really why I am there.[/quote]

That is a pretty terrible worldview to have.

637

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Ha ha, I think it takes a great deal of courage to step out as a believer.[/quote]

Yes it takes courage to be part of the masses.

638

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Magicpunch wrote:
That Jesus died and came back to life is not a metaphysical or spiritual claim.

It is purely a biological (physical) claim. If one makes such a claim, they need to show extraordinary evidence.

That there was a virgin birth is also a biological (physical) claim. Evidence is again required.

If your answer is the word ‘faith’ then why do you believe the virgin birth any more than the claim that an angel dictated the quran to Muhammad?

Any takers?[/quote]

There could be testimony by Mary’s gynecologist (if they actually had one back then) and most on the atheists on this boar would still not believe. I’m not going to argue faith on a message board. There is enough personal testimony in both the Old and New Testaments for me to believe. Therefore, there is no burden of proof.

As I’ve said multiple times, we are all on a spiritual journey. Even atheists are searching for various things related to the unknown. I’ve found my answers and am quite comfortable, I hope you do the same.

Zeb[/quote]

Nice cop out.[/quote]

Not at all, faith is important to God otherwise it would not have been stated so in scripture so very clearly. We can argue about it but I will never be able to conclusively prove the existence of God. How in the world is that a cop out? But it is a great savings of time and trouble. The good part is someday you will see that I was right, but by then it will be too late. That will suck for you. Sorry.

639

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Ha ha, I think it takes a great deal of courage to step out as a believer.[/quote]

Yes it takes courage to be part of the masses.[/quote]

More so than part of the ruling class.

640

[quote]ZEB wrote:

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]ZEB wrote:
Ha ha, I think it takes a great deal of courage to step out as a believer.[/quote]

Yes it takes courage to be part of the masses.[/quote]

More so than part of the ruling class.
[/quote]

lol

Share whatever drugs you take man, I wanna be that high.