Atheism-o-Phobia

BackInAction · August 27, 2010, 9:53pm

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]cueball wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:
Guys, I just shot fireballs out of my eyes. The only ones around me that saw this were my coworkers that I’m friends with. They told me they believe me, but will write about it 20 years later so I don’t lose my job (apparently, are company doesn’t like fireball shooting employees).

If you read a copy of my close employees reports 20 years from now, will you believe me? Why or why not?[/quote]

Uh, wrong again. There were lots of first hand accounts around immediately after jesus died. You know, Christianity spread during that time right?

The 20 years later are the earliest manuscript copies we have of the texts. And if you knew anything you’d realize copies of the texts that near the actual events are unheard of in ancient history.

Let me see if I can break this down for you. 20 year after jesus died is the earliest print of a biblical text we have, NOT when it was written and NOT when it was available. As in we have actual paper with actual writing from just after jesus died. That is an amazing feat. The more amazing thing is that it verified present text as un-altered. Which is un heard of. Ancient historical documents pretty much always change when copied and translated, but amazingly not the bible.[/quote]

Answer my hypothetical
[/quote]

Do you believe humans evolved from apes? : )[/quote]

sigh I’m sad you don’t want to answer my question

But we evolved from a common ancestor, yes. Obviously, you don’t believe that for some reason (in lieu of scientific research).
[/quote]

I’m also saddened you don’t want to answer my question.

Please provide the scientific proof that shows, without presumption or gap filling, we evolved from a common ancestor. [/quote]

Why do men have nipples?[/quote]

Oh sorry. I was under the assumption this was a serious discussion. Are you just trying to be cute, or dodging the progression of this discussion because you can’t provide what I’ve asked for? Which is proof of something you believe to be true. As you have done with us.[/quote]

Sorry sorry. Honestly, I don’t want to discuss evolution very much. Evolution is separate from religious belief in my mind. [/quote]

I didn’t either. I just wanted to point out you believe in something that only has evidence that supports it, but doesn’t prove it. Why is this acceptable for you, but not for us? I’ll pick it up Monday. Have a good weekend!
[/quote]

You too, buddy!

BackInAction · August 27, 2010, 9:54pm

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

Honestly, in regards to the creator, I’m not sure.

Do I believe in evolution? -Yes, it has scientific evidence that supports it.
Do I believe in the big bang? -Yes, further scientific evidence supports it.
Do I believe in the God of the Bible? -No way in hell. That God is very selfish and evil. It also seems too limiting.
Do I believe in a creator of the universe? -Perhaps, but from my point of view, I have no way of knowing.[/quote]

This is a better line of discussion. But let me pose a question. What makes you believe that, if there is a creator, he is unselfish, good, or all powerful?[/quote]

Well, to answer that question, one must define what a creator is? Only living organisms are selfish and good/evil.
[/quote]

I would even say as far as we know only man is. But if there is a creator, he created all the evil. Why couldn’t he be if not evil then at least not good?[/quote]

Well, the only “evil” in the world is the evil created by organisms. So he still doesn’t fall in the category of good or evil.

BackInAction · August 27, 2010, 9:56pm

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Whose to say god isn’t a kid in his form of existence, and we’re his science experiment? He might not even be bright in his terms.
[/quote]

I’ve actually thought about this alot. It would be like a bacteria thinking I’m his God/creator, when really, I just left the sponge out too long.

DoubleDuce · August 27, 2010, 9:56pm

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

Honestly, in regards to the creator, I’m not sure.

Do I believe in evolution? -Yes, it has scientific evidence that supports it.
Do I believe in the big bang? -Yes, further scientific evidence supports it.
Do I believe in the God of the Bible? -No way in hell. That God is very selfish and evil. It also seems too limiting.
Do I believe in a creator of the universe? -Perhaps, but from my point of view, I have no way of knowing.[/quote]

This is a better line of discussion. But let me pose a question. What makes you believe that, if there is a creator, he is unselfish, good, or all powerful?[/quote]

Well, to answer that question, one must define what a creator is? Only living organisms are selfish and good/evil.
[/quote]

I would even say as far as we know only man is. But if there is a creator, he created all the evil. Why couldn’t he be if not evil then at least not good?[/quote]

Well, the only “evil” in the world is the evil created by organisms. So he still doesn’t fall in the category of good or evil.[/quote]

How do you know? A rock falling on someone isn’t classified as evil because it’s seen as random and without intent. If there is a creator a rock falling on someone could have both those things.

DoubleDuce · August 27, 2010, 9:58pm

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Whose to say god isn’t a kid in his form of existence, and we’re his science experiment? He might not even be bright in his terms.
[/quote]

I’ve actually thought about this alot. It would be like a bacteria thinking I’m his God/creator, when really, I just left the sponge out too long.[/quote]

There is a Simpson’s and a futurama episode around this premise.

BackInAction · August 27, 2010, 10:00pm

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

Honestly, in regards to the creator, I’m not sure.

Do I believe in evolution? -Yes, it has scientific evidence that supports it.
Do I believe in the big bang? -Yes, further scientific evidence supports it.
Do I believe in the God of the Bible? -No way in hell. That God is very selfish and evil. It also seems too limiting.
Do I believe in a creator of the universe? -Perhaps, but from my point of view, I have no way of knowing.[/quote]

This is a better line of discussion. But let me pose a question. What makes you believe that, if there is a creator, he is unselfish, good, or all powerful?[/quote]

Well, to answer that question, one must define what a creator is? Only living organisms are selfish and good/evil.
[/quote]

I would even say as far as we know only man is. But if there is a creator, he created all the evil. Why couldn’t he be if not evil then at least not good?[/quote]

Well, the only “evil” in the world is the evil created by organisms. So he still doesn’t fall in the category of good or evil.[/quote]

How do you know? A rock falling on someone isn’t classified as evil because it’s seen as random and without intent. If there is a creator a rock falling on someone could have both those things.[/quote]

I should rephrase that. “Evil” is only created when organisms are involved. A rock hitting a rock isn’t evil. A person throwing a rock at another person, killing them, is. If God through a rock at me and killed me, he would be evil too.

BackInAction · August 27, 2010, 10:02pm

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Whose to say god isn’t a kid in his form of existence, and we’re his science experiment? He might not even be bright in his terms.
[/quote]

I’ve actually thought about this alot. It would be like a bacteria thinking I’m his God/creator, when really, I just left the sponge out too long.[/quote]

There is a Simpson’s and a futurama episode around this premise.[/quote]

Ah, that’s right!

“When you do things right, people won’t be sure you’ve done anything at all.”

DoubleDuce · August 27, 2010, 10:02pm

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

If God through a rock at me and killed me, he would be evil too.
[/quote]

Couldn’t a creater do that through “natural” occurrence"

BackInAction · August 27, 2010, 10:09pm

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

If God through a rock at me and killed me, he would be evil too.
[/quote]

Couldn’t a creater do that through “natural” occurrence"[/quote]

Well, according to me (and this exercise), no.

If we’re assuming God is aware of his actions, he will be aware of the suffering that he will cause when he throws the rock. If he knows this, and throws it anyways, he will cause my suffering and death. This is an evil act.

If God is simply the cosmic force that exploded into creation (so technically just a big ball of energies), and an asteroid landed on my head, he would not have been aware of such an act (as this God isn’t aware). This would not be an evil act.

JoabSonOfZeruiah · August 28, 2010, 12:16am

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

Honestly, in regards to the creator, I’m not sure.

Do I believe in evolution? -Yes, it has scientific evidence that supports it.
Do I believe in the big bang? -Yes, further scientific evidence supports it.
Do I believe in the God of the Bible? -No way in hell. That God is very selfish and evil. It also seems too limiting.
Do I believe in a creator of the universe? -Perhaps, but from my point of view, I have no way of knowing.[/quote]

This is a better line of discussion. But let me pose a question. What makes you believe that, if there is a creator, he is unselfish, good, or all powerful?[/quote]

Well, to answer that question, one must define what a creator is? Only living organisms are selfish and good/evil.
[/quote]

I would even say as far as we know only man is. But if there is a creator, he created all the evil. Why couldn’t he be if not evil then at least not good?[/quote]

Well, the only “evil” in the world is the evil created by organisms. So he still doesn’t fall in the category of good or evil.[/quote]

How do you know? A rock falling on someone isn’t classified as evil because it’s seen as random and without intent. If there is a creator a rock falling on someone could have both those things.[/quote]

I should rephrase that. “Evil” is only created when organisms are involved. A rock hitting a rock isn’t evil. A person throwing a rock at another person, killing them, is. If God through a rock at me and killed me, he would be evil too.
[/quote]
Does not the creator have the right to do what he wills with his creation? To take back the life he gave, why does this make him evil?

JoabSonOfZeruiah · August 28, 2010, 12:32am

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:
2) Why didn’t the Jews write about Jesus? Why didn’t passing Buddhists or any Romans? Answer me that.
[/quote]

[quote] DoubleDuce wrote:
they did. There are accounts, far more than youÃ???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã???Ã??Ã?Â¢??d actually expect given his stature.
[/quote]

Please present one of these that’s Contemporaneous.[/quote]

Sure.
Mathew
Mark
Luke
John

All Jewish first hand accounts.

[/quote]

When I say Jews, I meant the Jewish establishment, not Jews becoming Christians. Give me other accounts beyond these.

BTW, now prove that they were actually the authors of those books

[/quote]

Okay, if he was the Lord, wouldn’t you expect all Jewish first hand accounts to be of Jews becoming “christian”. Though none of those mentioned ever considered themselves anything but Jewish. And those sources are more vetted and verified for accuracy that any other writings of the time. The early church did a great job weeding out the sources with questionable authenticity.

So, how bout those alexander the great sources?

Oh, and why exactly is it that you get to set up all these special hoops that have to be jumped through to prove jesus?[/quote]

If Jesus truly was the lord, why didn’t all Jews become followers of Christ?

The reason I’m asking for more direct evidence is this is a big claim. If you look at all the things he claimed (save us from sin), all the things he did (miracles), and what happened to him when he died and resurrected, how could you be anything but suspicious of these things?

If you saw someone do these today, you would accept them on face value?

As far as the Alexander source, I’m not a Alexander the Great historian. I just know the basics.[/quote]
If God gave us free will we would expect some people not to follow him no matter how insane it is to the people that believe in him. Luke 19:41-44 gives some extra insight into the matter.

JoabSonOfZeruiah · August 28, 2010, 12:49am

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

[quote]BackInAction wrote:
Guys, I just shot fireballs out of my eyes. The only ones around me that saw this were my coworkers that I’m friends with. They told me they believe me, but will write about it 20 years later so I don’t lose my job (apparently, are company doesn’t like fireball shooting employees).

If you read a copy of my close employees reports 20 years from now, will you believe me? Why or why not?[/quote]

Uh, wrong again. There were lots of first hand accounts around immediately after jesus died. You know, Christianity spread during that time right?

The 20 years later are the earliest manuscript copies we have of the texts. And if you knew anything you’d realize copies of the texts that near the actual events are unheard of in ancient history.

Let me see if I can break this down for you. 20 year after jesus died is the earliest print of a biblical text we have, NOT when it was written and NOT when it was available. As in we have actual paper with actual writing from just after jesus died. That is an amazing feat. The more amazing thing is that it verified present text as un-altered. Which is un heard of. Ancient historical documents pretty much always change when copied and translated, but amazingly not the bible.[/quote]
@BackInAction as DoubleDuce pointed out that the texts that composed the bible were written during the times of Jesus yet you have difficulty in believing what those text say. Have you ever considered that if what these men wrote was a lie, would they die for it? I say its far more plausible that these men believed in what they wrote and saw that they and the followers of Christ would die for.

FrozenNinja · August 28, 2010, 3:00am

The purpose of posting the said video was to demonstrate that no matter how much man expands his scientific knowledge, he will NEVER understand the inner and outer workings of this vast universe.

Or the fact that our planet IN THE WAY it supports life is much of an anomoly in this part of the universe. Not to say that they’re aren’t different forms of life supported elsewhere.

Or comprehend the fact that our milky way universe is flying through space at 135 miles per second or something crazy like that. Plus the fact that they’re over 100 BILLION galaxys in the universe that might spin on their heads in reference to how different they operate.

For a universe so extremely vast and complex, certain intracacies worked out to support life on our planet just in the right way WE as a species needed it. OR the fact that Phosphorus is a pretty damn hard ingredient to find in the rest of the universe and how important it is to the creation of OUR type of life.

To me, IMO, ok this is me here, I think that it’s a little egomanic-ish of man to leave the complexities of our exsistence to chance. YES, chance. Has to do with the composition of proteins and atoms within a life bearing organism but I’m too tired to explain it. I’ma tackle it later.

kamui · August 28, 2010, 4:33am

Hello
I’m probably the worst kind of atheist you will ever meet.
I’m French
I got a “doctorat” in Philosophy and anthropology, and i am now a teacher.
And i’m obviously what you would call a liberal / anarchist / communist / socialist, like everyone else in old Europe.

I’m an atheist because i fail to see any good logical or ethical reason to believe in a Supreme Being. And, more importantly, i fail to see any good logical or ethical reason to believe in a specific Supreme Being.

I can hear and accept your arguments about the First Cause or the Prime Mover.
But a First Cause/Prime Mover is not a God : It could well be a “It” and not a “He”, a thing, a principle or a force, and not a human-like Being.
And it is not necessarily your God. It could as well be Vishnu, or Odin, or Chtulhu. If anything, it’s an aristotelician god, not a christian one.

I don’t believe in any God because i refuse to choose between Odin, Vishnu and Chtulhu and because I see God as an anthropomorphic and anthropocentric projection.

It doesn’t mean I reject or refuse the Sacred itself.
In fact, i see it everywhere. In the stars, in a qawwali song, in a zen Koan, in the shadows and the lights of a Catholic Cathedral, in the smile of a child, or in the eyes of my cat.

I simply don’t need to give it a first name, a beard, a white tunic, a son or a passive aggressive behavior…
I don’t need to repesent “It”, at all. and especially not in a human form. I just try to feel “It”, respect “It” and live “It”.

If you really want to call “God” the beauty of the Universe, it’s fine for me.
But more often than not, i found that what the “true believers” call “God” is nothing more than their (human, too human) pride.

Personnaly, I have no name for It, so i will remain silent. And btw, “to remain silent” is one of the first meanings of the word “mystic”…

ephrem · August 28, 2010, 4:47am

[quote]kamui wrote:
Hello
I’m probably the worst kind of atheist you will ever meet.
I’m French
I got a “doctorat” in Philosophy and anthropology, and i am now a teacher.
And i’m obviously what you would call a liberal / anarchist / communist / socialist, like everyone else in old Europe.

I’m an atheist because i fail to see any good logical or ethical reason to believe in a Supreme Being. And, more importantly, i fail to see any good logical or ethical reason to believe in a specific Supreme Being.

I can hear and accept your arguments about the First Cause or the Prime Mover.
But a First Cause/Prime Mover is not a God : It could well be a “It” and not a “He”, a thing, a principle or a force, and not a human-like Being.
And it is not necessarily your God. It could as well be Vishnu, or Odin, or Chtulhu. If anything, it’s an aristotelician god, not a christian one.

I don’t believe in any God because i refuse to choose between Odin, Vishnu and Chtulhu and because I see God as an anthropomorphic and anthropocentric projection.

It doesn’t mean I reject or refuse the Sacred itself.
In fact, i see it everywhere. In the stars, in a qawwali song, in a zen Koan, in the shadows and the lights of a Catholic Cathedral, in the smile of a child, or in the eyes of my cat.

I simply don’t need to give it a first name, a beard, a white tunic, a son or a passive aggressive behavior…
I don’t need to repesent “It”, at all. and especially not in a human form. I just try to feel “It”, respect “It” and live “It”.

If you really want to call “God” the beauty of the Universe, it’s fine for me.
But more often than not, i found that what the “true believers” call “God” is nothing more than their (human, too human) pride.

Personnaly, I have no name for It, so i will remain silent. And btw, “to remain silent” is one of the first meanings of the word “mystic”…[/quote]

…mighty fine first post, even if it took you two years to write it!

JoabSonOfZeruiah · August 28, 2010, 4:52am

[quote]kamui wrote:
Hello
I’m probably the worst kind of atheist you will ever meet.
I’m French
I got a “doctorat” in Philosophy and anthropology, and i am now a teacher.
And i’m obviously what you would call a liberal / anarchist / communist / socialist, like everyone else in old Europe.

I’m an atheist because i fail to see any good logical or ethical reason to believe in a Supreme Being. And, more importantly, i fail to see any good logical or ethical reason to believe in a specific Supreme Being.

I can hear and accept your arguments about the First Cause or the Prime Mover.
But a First Cause/Prime Mover is not a God : It could well be a “It” and not a “He”, a thing, a principle or a force, and not a human-like Being.
And it is not necessarily your God. It could as well be Vishnu, or Odin, or Chtulhu. If anything, it’s an aristotelician god, not a christian one.

I don’t believe in any God because i refuse to choose between Odin, Vishnu and Chtulhu and because I see God as an anthropomorphic and anthropocentric projection.

It doesn’t mean I reject or refuse the Sacred itself.
In fact, i see it everywhere. In the stars, in a qawwali song, in a zen Koan, in the shadows and the lights of a Catholic Cathedral, in the smile of a child, or in the eyes of my cat.

I simply don’t need to give it a first name, a beard, a white tunic, a son or a passive aggressive behavior…
I don’t need to repesent “It”, at all. and especially not in a human form. I just try to feel “It”, respect “It” and live “It”.

If you really want to call “God” the beauty of the Universe, it’s fine for me.
But more often than not, i found that what the “true believers” call “God” is nothing more than their (human, too human) pride.

Personnaly, I have no name for It, so i will remain silent. And btw, “to remain silent” is one of the first meanings of the word “mystic”…[/quote]
You sound so much like my anthropology teacher that I had for a class in the summer but I am pretty sure he is not french. Btw what was your concentration in philosophy.

Fletch1986 · August 28, 2010, 5:24am