Iconoclastic Atheist Turns To Belief In God

[rainjack]

[quote]Boscobarbell wrote:
Never said this was a trial. But there is burden of proof in any debate format, whether you choose to recognize it or not. And read over the posts preceding these, as well as similar threads debating god’s existence. Theists continually equate their inability to prove with the atheists’ inability to DISPROVE. My point is that the equation is flawed. [/quote]

You’ve missed the point in each of my posts, and with good reason - what with the bunny rabbit analogy screaming to get out.

I enetered this little fray in defense of those that believe. Not for what they believe, but the elitist bigotry in their treatment by a few of those elitists that actually feel sorry for them. If you feel the debate is over something different than that, then that is your mistake.

I won’t prove my God to you. I can’t. Faith dictates that you believe in something not seen. I can’t prove what I can’t present to you in a tactile form. You win the debate, or at least the way you’ve framed it, by default.

It’s called a debate, exercise for the mind. I like to test my beliefs in forums of open exchange.

And yes, as a matter of fact, I do believe that my analogy was that good. Or are you prepared to prove he doesn’t exist? Nope, didn’t think so. Which means that, thus far anyway, my Pink Bunnyrabbit remains on equal standing with all other purported dieties. [/quote]

I have no desire to disprove your analogy, your God, or your lack of one. But in the same vein, I will not ridicule your beliefs. To paraphrase you - I don’t care what your beliefs are. My problem in this ‘debate’ is that those on the athiest side seem to equate condescension with logic - Insults with proof - and elitism with enlightenment. Proving the existence of a pink bunny rabbit, or lack thereof, is none of my concern.

[quote]And, by the way, the terms “hypocrisy” and “stupidity” are yours, not mine. If the analogy made you feel that way, perhaps you need to further test YOUR beliefs in such open exchanges.

You stick to your beliefs, and I’ll stick to mine. I don’t need anyone telling me, or suggesting that I need to look at my beliefs. They are solid, they are unshakeable, and they are not now, nor have they been, open to ‘exchanges’.

[lizard_king]

[quote]bamit wrote:
lizard king,
Have you ever read and studied the bible, if so please send me a private message and we will discuss this passage in great detail? If not please do not post adolescent comments.
[/quote]

Oh, just chill and don’t take everything so seriously. Yes, I have read the Bible and several works concerning it. I found C.S. Lewis’ Mere Christianity to be a good read. And no, I’m not an Atheist (not that there’s anything wrong with that {in a Jerry Seinfeld voice, for those with no humor.}) So relax, take a deep breath-- and on with our show…

[Boscobarbell]

[quote]Professor X wrote:

Your bunny beliefs are ignorant ramblings. [/quote]

While your beliefs about an invisible, unknowable, unprovable creator of life are coherent and cogent. Oh, I get it.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

You made it up.[/quote]

Yup. Just like the original, oral tales which later formed the Bible’s primary narrative was made up. But at least I admit it.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
It isn’t based in any old text, doesn’t have any structure of values, and teaches no true life lessons. [/quote]

So, by your logic, if someone a few hundred years from now pulls out my Pink Rabbit text, it will somehow be valid because it’s old? I look at things differently…bullshit is bullshit, regardless of how young or old it might be. Things either stand upon their strengths or they don’t.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

I didn’t make up God… [/quote]

No, you are correct. Someone else did, eons before you were born. You have simply chosen to perpetuate the myth.

Professor X wrote:…and wouldn’t profess to know what color “he” is.

It’s called sarcasm, Prof. Look into it. But why don’t you know your god’s color? You know he is infallible, know that he is omnipresent, that he is Good, that he provides for us the moral compass by which we guide our lives, etc., etc., etc. So why wouldn’t you know what color he is? Seems like you have a pretty good handle on everything else…

Professor X wrote: I believe in God, as has been stated many times before, because I realize the complexity and order of things that you clearly take for granted. A) Our concept of reality only scratches the surface. B) The order of electrons, neutrons, and protons are not chaotic. They have specific order and function. C) The force of life that intiated them is clearly not some misshappened blob of nonconformity that accidentally works every once in a while. D) It is a machine with purpose. You choose to ignore this and assume that it simply happened.

I added the letters so I could respond more specifically to each point.
A) True, but with each passing day, month, and year our understanding of our universe expands. Although I still don’t see how your statements points to the presence of a god.
B)Untrue. See Quantum Physics. All sorts of chaos, things developing from nothingness, etc.
C)Care to provide proof? And how did you come to the belief that atheists think the laws of nature/physics/etc. only work “once in a while?”
D) I choose to believe that the universe is as we see it. You choose to add silly notions like “purpose” in order to wrap your mind around the beautiful, random complexity of our world.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

I am still waiting on being shown why the thought of a creator should be shunned simply because “he” hasn’t walked right in front of you and slapped you.[/quote]

Just as I am still waiting to be shown why my Pink Bunnyrabbit should be shunned just because you haven’t heard of him until today.

[quote]Professor X wrote:

A)Question, do you believe in wind? B)Why do bumble bees fly when they are aerodynamically designed to not be able to? Science says they shouldn’t…but they do. C)Science comes up short on many aspects that are skipped over by evolutionists and athiests…the strongest of which is the original power of life itself. [/quote]

A)I believe in wind because I can observe it, can witness its affect on the environment, and can make predictions on future storms based upon my observations on previous ones. Your point?
B) Simply untrue. Bumblebees certainly don’t have the aerodynamic grace of sparrows, of course, but their sheer wing speed generates enough lift to overcome their bulbous mass. No big mystery, really.
C) This is commonly referred to as “The Argument from Ignorance.” Basically, you are trying to claim that if science is–as of this very moment–incapable of fully explaining each and every phenomenon, then God must be the answer to fill in the blanks. But the answer, unfortunately for Deists, is simply that the universe is awesome and complex. There is much we know, much we don’t yet know. But nothing among that continuum points to some external, supernatural “thing” as the solution to all our questions.

[Boscobarbell]

[quote]rainjack wrote:

You stick to your beliefs, and I’ll stick to mine. I don’t need anyone telling me, or suggesting that I need to look at my beliefs. They are solid, they are unshakeable, and they are not now, nor have they been, open to ‘exchanges’.

[/quote]

Sounds fair to me. And, btw, whether you choose to examine your own beliefs or not isn’t my concern. Nor, in fact, do I really care if you engage in exchanges or not. My whole point, which I guess you missed, was that such negativity never orginated from my posts, which were intended as merely intellectual jousting. Peace…

[Moriarty]

[quote]Right Side Up wrote:
This has been discussed before, but once again…
I think agnosticism is the belief that one CANNOT know whether or not a god/God exists, not merely that one doesn’t know.
[/quote]

From Merriam-Webster:
Agnostic:
a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and probably unknowable.

The key word there is “probably”.

“Probably unknowable” is, for our purposes here, vastly different from “Cannot be known.”

[Professor_X]

[quote]Boscobarbell wrote:

Just as I am still waiting to be shown why my Pink Bunnyrabbit should be shunned just because you haven’t heard of him until today.

[/quote]

Gawd, your arguments are worse than JeffR’s. I take that back. You aren’t quite that bad. I will humor you, however. You have avoided the questions I have asked more than once before so I will type them again. That pink rabbit must be clogging up quite a few brain cells. In fact, I will letter them so that you don’t get confused.

A) What are the basic teachings of your pink rabbit?

B)What life lessons are taught or illustrated by your pink rabbit?

C)What written word do you use to relate to the teachings of your pink rabbit?

D)How has your rabbit affected your decisions in life?

E)If your pink rabbit is the ulitmate force of good, what is the ultimate force of evil? Our world, as someone as bright as you already knows, is based on balance between opposites.

Once you answer these, then we can talk about why your rabbit deserves as much contemplation as the Christian God or the established singular entity of any other religious base.

[haney]

[quote]Boscobarbell wrote:

While your beliefs about an invisible, unknowable, unprovable creator of life are coherent and cogent. Oh, I get it.

[/quote]

Well since your bunny is so great maybe he can explain what awaits in the after life, explain away the Bible, explain away that Jesus Character, etc…

Professor X wrote:

You made it up.

Yup. Just like the original, oral tales which later formed the Bible’s primary narrative was made up. But at least I admit it.

SO all of it is made up? or are parts of it? which parts? Next you will be telling me Lincoln didn’t exist, that really kennedy was really the only one who was assinated, and the we made the whole lincoln story up.

Professor X wrote:
It isn’t based in any old text, doesn’t have any structure of values, and teaches no true life lessons.

So, by your logic, if someone a few hundred years from now pulls out my Pink Rabbit text, it will somehow be valid because it’s old? I look at things differently…bullshit is bullshit, regardless of how young or old it might be. Things either stand upon their strengths or they don’t.

Well I guess it would all depend upon the claims of the bunny for us to say it is flat out made up or not. You are calling the Bible bs. what are you using to call it that. Common sense? Ok common sense says the NT is unlike any other document. That there are over 500 witnesses that claim He rose from the dead. That the church suffered persecution every century until it was declared state religion.
Common sense says it should not have survived.

http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nowayjose.html

Professor X wrote:

I didn’t make up God…

No, you are correct. Someone else did, eons before you were born. You have simply chosen to perpetuate the myth.

Lets see. Science doesn’t know how the universe begin but you are sure God was made up?

Professor X wrote:…and wouldn’t profess to know what color “he” is.

It’s called sarcasm, Prof. Look into it. But why don’t you know your god’s color? You know he is infallible, know that he is omnipresent, that he is Good, that he provides for us the moral compass by which we guide our lives, etc., etc., etc. So why wouldn’t you know what color he is? Seems like you have a pretty good handle on everything else…

Well if you want to get techincal the Bible says Jesus was copper color. So there you have it!

Professor X wrote: I believe in God, as has been stated many times before, because I realize the complexity and order of things that you clearly take for granted. A) Our concept of reality only scratches the surface. B) The order of electrons, neutrons, and protons are not chaotic. They have specific order and function. C) The force of life that intiated them is clearly not some misshappened blob of nonconformity that accidentally works every once in a while. D) It is a machine with purpose. You choose to ignore this and assume that it simply happened.

I added the letters so I could respond more specifically to each point.
A) True, but with each passing day, month, and year our understanding of our universe expands. Although I still don’t see how your statements points to the presence of a god.

We have not come as far as we think we have. Our understanding is so great we can’t even duplicate the pyramids. Something that was done over 3,000 years ago, but we understand so much more now don’t we?

B)Untrue. See Quantum Physics. All sorts of chaos, things developing from nothingness, etc.

Show me where life formed from nothing, and then this nothing became more complex, from this complexity it desired to survive.

C)Care to provide proof? And how did you come to the belief that atheists think the laws of nature/physics/etc. only work “once in a while?”

no comment

D) I choose to believe that the universe is as we see it. You choose to add silly notions like “purpose” in order to wrap your mind around the beautiful, random complexity of our world.

Professor X wrote:

I am still waiting on being shown why the thought of a creator should be shunned simply because “he” hasn’t walked right in front of you and slapped you.

Just as I am still waiting to be shown why my Pink Bunnyrabbit should be shunned just because you haven’t heard of him until today.

For some reason I think you are making up the bunny. I am always willing to listen to this imperical proof of why this bunny exists, and makes sense. It would also have to stand up to the reasoning that I have for my current faith.

Professor X wrote:

A)Question, do you believe in wind? B)Why do bumble bees fly when they are aerodynamically designed to not be able to? Science says they shouldn’t…but they do. C)Science comes up short on many aspects that are skipped over by evolutionists and athiests…the strongest of which is the original power of life itself.

A)I believe in wind because I can observe it, can witness its affect on the environment, and can make predictions on future storms based upon my observations on previous ones. Your point?

His point is if GOd is the driving force of the universe He is like the wind you can’t see Him, but you can see His effect on the world around Him.

B) Simply untrue. Bumblebees certainly don’t have the aerodynamic grace of sparrows, of course, but their sheer wing speed generates enough lift to overcome their bulbous mass. No big mystery, really.
C) This is commonly referred to as “The Argument from Ignorance.” Basically, you are trying to claim that if science is–as of this very moment–incapable of fully explaining each and every phenomenon, then God must be the answer to fill in the blanks. But the answer, unfortunately for Deists, is simply that the universe is awesome and complex. There is much we know, much we don’t yet know. But nothing among that continuum points to some external, supernatural “thing” as the solution to all our questions.

You want evidence that proves a God we want evidence that proves there is not one. You argument is just as blind. You hide behind “we have scientific evidence”, and then you fully admit there is a lot we don’t know. You also don’t asknowledge that the so called “evidence” you have is always changing. Some evidence! It is true today, and then in ten years your scientist are claiming it is wrong. So what happens in 50 years when science comes up short again, and they finally we have been wrong the whole time? Oh wait, you are certain so it doesn’t matter.

[haney]

[quote]haney wrote:
Boscobarbell wrote:

While your beliefs about an invisible, unknowable, unprovable creator of life are coherent and cogent. Oh, I get it.

Well since your bunny is so great maybe he can explain what awaits in the after life, explain away the Bible, explain away that Jesus Character, etc…

Professor X wrote:

You made it up.

Yup. Just like the original, oral tales which later formed the Bible’s primary narrative was made up. But at least I admit it.

SO all of it is made up? or are parts of it? which parts? Next you will be telling me Lincoln didn’t exist, that really kennedy was really the only one who was assinated, and the we made the whole lincoln story up.

Professor X wrote:
It isn’t based in any old text, doesn’t have any structure of values, and teaches no true life lessons.

So, by your logic, if someone a few hundred years from now pulls out my Pink Rabbit text, it will somehow be valid because it’s old? I look at things differently…bullshit is bullshit, regardless of how young or old it might be. Things either stand upon their strengths or they don’t.

Well I guess it would all depend upon the claims of the bunny for us to say it is flat out made up or not. You are calling the Bible bs. what are you using to call it that. Common sense? Ok common sense says the NT is unlike any other document. That there are over 500 witnesses that claim He rose from the dead. That the church suffered persecution every century until it was declared state religion.
Common sense says it should not have survived.

http://www.tektonics.org/lp/nowayjose.html

Professor X wrote:

I didn’t make up God…

No, you are correct. Someone else did, eons before you were born. You have simply chosen to perpetuate the myth.

Lets see. Science doesn’t know how the universe begin but you are sure God was made up?

Professor X wrote:…and wouldn’t profess to know what color “he” is.

It’s called sarcasm, Prof. Look into it. But why don’t you know your god’s color? You know he is infallible, know that he is omnipresent, that he is Good, that he provides for us the moral compass by which we guide our lives, etc., etc., etc. So why wouldn’t you know what color he is? Seems like you have a pretty good handle on everything else…

Well if you want to get techincal the Bible says Jesus was copper color. So there you have it!

Professor X wrote: I believe in God, as has been stated many times before, because I realize the complexity and order of things that you clearly take for granted. A) Our concept of reality only scratches the surface. B) The order of electrons, neutrons, and protons are not chaotic. They have specific order and function. C) The force of life that intiated them is clearly not some misshappened blob of nonconformity that accidentally works every once in a while. D) It is a machine with purpose. You choose to ignore this and assume that it simply happened.

I added the letters so I could respond more specifically to each point.
A) True, but with each passing day, month, and year our understanding of our universe expands. Although I still don’t see how your statements points to the presence of a god.

We have not come as far as we think we have. Our understanding is so great we can’t even duplicate the pyramids. Something that was done over 3,000 years ago, but we understand so much more now don’t we?

B)Untrue. See Quantum Physics. All sorts of chaos, things developing from nothingness, etc.

Show me where life formed from nothing, and then this nothing became more complex, from this complexity it desired to survive.

C)Care to provide proof? And how did you come to the belief that atheists think the laws of nature/physics/etc. only work “once in a while?”

no comment

D) I choose to believe that the universe is as we see it. You choose to add silly notions like “purpose” in order to wrap your mind around the beautiful, random complexity of our world.

Professor X wrote:

I am still waiting on being shown why the thought of a creator should be shunned simply because “he” hasn’t walked right in front of you and slapped you.

Just as I am still waiting to be shown why my Pink Bunnyrabbit should be shunned just because you haven’t heard of him until today.

For some reason I think you are making up the bunny. I am always willing to listen to this imperical proof of why this bunny exists, and makes sense. It would also have to stand up to the reasoning that I have for my current faith.

Professor X wrote:

A)Question, do you believe in wind? B)Why do bumble bees fly when they are aerodynamically designed to not be able to? Science says they shouldn’t…but they do. C)Science comes up short on many aspects that are skipped over by evolutionists and athiests…the strongest of which is the original power of life itself.

A)I believe in wind because I can observe it, can witness its affect on the environment, and can make predictions on future storms based upon my observations on previous ones. Your point?

His point is if GOd is the driving force of the universe He is like the wind you can’t see Him, but you can see His effect on the world around Him.

B) Simply untrue. Bumblebees certainly don’t have the aerodynamic grace of sparrows, of course, but their sheer wing speed generates enough lift to overcome their bulbous mass. No big mystery, really.
C) This is commonly referred to as “The Argument from Ignorance.” Basically, you are trying to claim that if science is–as of this very moment–incapable of fully explaining each and every phenomenon, then God must be the answer to fill in the blanks. But the answer, unfortunately for Deists, is simply that the universe is awesome and complex. There is much we know, much we don’t yet know. But nothing among that continuum points to some external, supernatural “thing” as the solution to all our questions.

You want evidence that proves a God we want evidence that proves there is not one. Your argument is just as blind. You hide behind “we have scientific evidence”, and then you fully admit there is a lot we don’t know. You also don’t acknowledge that the so called “evidence” you have is always changing. Some evidence! It is true today, and then in ten years your scientist are claiming it is wrong. So what happens in 50 years when science comes up short again, and they finally say we have been wrong the whole time? Oh wait, you are certain so it doesn’t matter.
[/quote]

[Boscobarbell]

Prof X: So let me see if I get this straight…if I make up a whole book about the wisdom my Pink Bunnyrabbit provides, the teachings he sows, the kind of world he has bestowed upon us, THEN you’ll be willing to talk about whether or not he is an actual deity? So whether or not something actually exists is secondary…what is important to you are the fables and myths surrounding the belief?

Or lets take it a step further. What if my Pink Bunnyrabbit handed me the bible one night, and whispered in my ear “They say this is the work of god, but they are evil and manipulative. This is really the book of the Pink Bunnyrabbit, and contains all my teachings.” (What, you don’t believe my Bunnyrabbit said that to me? Why not?) There, is that better? Now we have an unseen, supernatural deity with its own book of scriptures. Happy now?

Now, go to it. Debate away and prove that my Pink Bunnyrabbit god doesn’t exist.

[Boscobarbell]

[quote]haney wrote:
Well since your bunny is so great maybe he can explain what awaits in the after life, explain away the Bible, explain away that Jesus Character, etc…[/quote]

Hey, who said you get to make the rules? My Bunnyrabbit explains what he sees fit about our world, often in ways our mortal brains can’t understand. And my Pink Bunnyrabbit tells me that Jesus was a great…though, sadly, mortal teacher.

[quote]haney wrote:

SO all of it is made up? or are parts of it? which parts? Next you will be telling me Lincoln didn’t exist, that really kennedy was really the only one who was assinated, and the we made the whole lincoln story up.[/quote]

All of the parts that pretend to tell us about god and other silly supernatural beliefs. Lincoln’s assasination is well-documented by corroborating, contemporaneous observers. Indeed, there is even physical evidence remaining from the event. Nice try, though…

[quote]haney wrote:
Well I guess it would all depend upon the claims of the bunny for us to say it is flat out made up or not. [/quote]

How can you, a mere mortal, presume to know enough to refute the words of a deity like the Pink Bunnyrabbit?

[quote]haney wrote:

Lets see. Science doesn’t know how the universe begin but you are sure God was made up?[/quote]

All I’m certain of is that I’ve never heard nor seen any sort of God, and anyone who has posited such a claim is unable to show me the proof that one exists. I’m not even certain the universe “began;” what if it, instead of your god, is infinite, stretching back forever in time?

[quote]haney wrote:

Our understanding is so great we can’t even duplicate the pyramids. Something that was done over 3,000 years ago, but we understand so much more now don’t we?
[/quote]

Another untruth. We could certainly rebuild the pyramids using modern technology. It certainly won’t ever happen, of course, given that there is no financial incentive, but that doesn’t mean we wouldn’t know how.

[quote]haney wrote:

Show me where life formed from nothing, and then this nothing became more complex, from this complexity it desired to survive.[/quote]

“Show” you…how would one do that. You could instead, if you chose, listen to molecular biologists and the like describe how the transition from simple chemical reactions to the “negative entropy” of life occurred. But somehow I believe you’d choose not to hear such information. And, by the way, life doesn’t “desire” to survive in any Darwinian sense, at least not the way you might “desire” a cheeseburger. Mutations are either successful, and thus replicate, or not. But that is a typical deist misconception about evolution, so you are forgiven.

[quote]haney wrote:

For some reason I think you are making up the bunny. I am always willing to listen to this imperical proof of why this bunny exists, and makes sense. It would also have to stand up to the reasoning that I have for my current faith.[/quote]

Oh, thou heathen, thou non-believer in Bunnydom. So now I have to provide proof for my Bunny, but you require no similar logic for your god. Instead you have…what?..“reasoning?” Oh, please, do tell us what that reasoning is so we can see how well it survives our scrutiny.

[quote]haney wrote:

You want evidence that proves a God we want evidence that proves there is not one. [/quote]

To reiterate a previous post…you’ve posited the existance of an entity not acknowledged by everyone. I.E., we both acknowledge the existence of a physical, tangible universe. To that, however, you’ve added precisely one entity: God. Now it’s up to you to prove it exists. (Look at it another way…you and I are in court contesting a contract, but you say you have a signed addendum which absolves you of any financial obligation. Wouldn’t it be up to you–the person claiming the existence of something not agreed upon–to provide proof of its existence? Makes sense, right? Yet deists refuse to abide by these laws of logic. My guess is that they do so not out of choice but, rather, because they have no choice. Because the belief in the supernatural must, by its very nature, derive merely from faith and NEVER from testable proof.

Which is fine…god bless you, as your ilk are fond of saying. But just don’t pretend that your beliefs derive from anything more, because that is where you begin to insult our intelligence.

Oh, and regarding science and its evolving sets of knowledge: where did you ever get the notion that atheists believe in an unchanging, infallible religion called “science.” All science is is our attempt to describe the world as we know it and make predictions based upon those observations. That’s the beauty of science…sometimes they get it wrong!! But it is subject to debate, to testing, and–unlike god–is always DISPROVABLE. Science merely provides me with the tools to better understand my world.

Is it wrong? Often. Is it evolving? Always. And with each evolution our understanding of our world broadens and deepens.

Theists, on the other hand, embrace the unknown and the untested. Because in those murky shadows their gods can shine bright. And every time science chips away at man’s ignorance, the gods have one less place to hide.

[Gestalt]

[quote]
Now, go to it. Debate away and prove that my Pink Bunnyrabbit god doesn’t exist. [/quote]

I personally think the Pink Bunnyrabbit is a little silly. I understand the point you are trying to make, but silly just the same.

Here is how I see the theist:

“I am awed by the complexity and mere existence of life and unable to fathom how this amazing force could come into existence. The universe is so vast and complex that I have a hard time imagining a universe that has no beginning nor an end. If the universe did have a beginning, how could that have happened? What could have caused it? Well, let me open up this book that was written thousands of years ago when our ancestors were filled with ignorance and superstition–a book that has so many inconsistencies and contradictions than hundreds of different religions have spun off this one book. Oh, it says there is a God and He created the entire universe in 6 days and He loves me. I’m a believer.”

There are many things we do not know about life and the universe; we may never know all of the answers. But it is more than a little strange to me that you feel you can attribute those things which still remain mysteries to some deity that was created in the superstitious minds of mankind thousands of years ago.

Feel free to believe whatever superstitions you wish to believe, but do not be surprised if those of us with a higher dose of reality poke fun at you for believing in Super Santa Claus.

Be your own god.

[battlelust]

bosco,
I am now convinced. I have decided to throw away my arbitrarly-arrived-at pantheism and dedicate my existence to prosletyzing for the Pink Bunny (may his name be praised forever). No, on second thought, I’ll convert to Christianity as it is just as plausible as Pink Bunny (m.h.n.b.p.f.), Odin, or Shakti. Humans are fascinating in that we create things (metaphysics, morals, laws, justice, causes, epistomologies, Gods, etc.), and then forget that WE created them. Our ideas take on an independent existence. Science and religion are both attempts to organize and explain the chaos that scares us shitless. Both fail.

[Gestalt]

[quote]mindeffer01 wrote:
…The arrogance of youth and lack of experience is amazing.
[/quote]

Strange, I was thinking the same thing about you.

So, Mental Muscle, to help distinguish the difference between whether you are just throwing a tantrum, or if you actualy have a foundation for your position, answer this. Would you rather believe in something like God and find out in the end that you were wrong, or not believe in something like God and find out in the end that you were wrong? Either way I’d be interested in your rationalle.

Sounds like Pascal’s Wager. If God exists and I believe, I go to heaven. If I disbelieve I go to hell. However, if God does not exist, there is no benefit nor detriment to either believe or disbelieve.

The problem with that is that I do not believe. Believing in a god is not like throwing the dice and hoping for a seven. And which god exactly should I believe in? Odin? Then I should be out killing people so I can go to Valhalla. Or how about Zeus? Or maybe Ra? Mithras? To you, those gods are all myth. Someday your god will be known as just myth as well.

BTW. what is your I.Q.? How was this determined? What are your numbers on Squat, bench, and deadlift. Or are you just one of those poseurs?[/quote]

Are you planning to ask me out on a date, mindeffer01? You seem very interested in me for someone who seems to have so much animosity towards me. I will not answer those questions since no matter what I say, you will think I am lying to you. However, you can take a look at my profile if you would like–sorry, but my phone number is not on there; you will have to PM me for that.

kisses

[haney]

[quote]Boscobarbell wrote:

Hey, who said you get to make the rules? My Bunnyrabbit explains what he sees fit about our world, often in ways our mortal brains can’t understand. And my Pink Bunnyrabbit tells me that Jesus was a great…though, sadly, mortal teacher.
[/quote]

Who is making rules I am asking for more about your belief. You are insulting mine. I am asking that you give some reasoning, but I guess that is where your argument falls apart.

All of the parts that pretend to tell us about god and other silly supernatural beliefs. Lincoln’s assasination is well-documented by corroborating, contemporaneous observers. Indeed, there is even physical evidence remaining from the event. Nice try, though…

We have have four testimonies that say Christ existed. That He died on a cross, and rose again. We have a belief in that being springing up in the first century. They under went numerous persecutions all because they claimed He was God. Peter and Paul died in rome under Nero’s orders. Peter could of easily said I renounce Christ, and lived. Oh but He chose to die for his lie. If you would of read point one of the link I sent you would of seen that the last person you would want to deify is someone who was crucified. Oh wait though this faith that I believe in that survived against all odds is just me being illogical! So there is proof of Christ. You are just dismissing it, because it doesn’t come out the way you want it.

How can you, a mere mortal, presume to know enough to refute the words of a deity like the Pink Bunnyrabbit?

I think Prof. X is right about your arguments. All you are doing with this bunny is providing Circular reasoning. I have yet to say “Well God said it then that is it.” I am trying to offer you answers, you are just giving the run around.

All I’m certain of is that I’ve never heard nor seen any sort of God, and anyone who has posited such a claim is unable to show me the proof that one exists. I’m not even certain the universe “began;” what if it, instead of your god, is infinite, stretching back forever in time?

Well a man who uses quantum physics should know time does not really exist. I am certain I have never seen nor heard George Washington. He must be made up!

haney wrote:

Another untruth. We could certainly rebuild the pyramids using modern technology. It certainly won’t ever happen, of course, given that there is no financial incentive, but that doesn’t mean we wouldn’t know how.

Really? Show me an article that says we know how to do it, and we know how they did it? Just one?
If we are so much better than our ancestors why are we just barely getting around to reinventing some of the things that they had already done?

Why the Electric Battery was Forgotten

haney wrote:

“Show” you…how would one do that. You could instead, if you chose, listen to molecular biologists and the like describe how the transition from simple chemical reactions to the “negative entropy” of life occurred. But somehow I believe you’d choose not to hear such information.

Oh I get it! I could hear someone tell me how it all happened. Then 10 years later tell me wait we were wrong, It happened differently. It is not that I am not listening to what they say. It is that I “am” listening to what they say, and it keeps changing. It is nice that we know that life came from chaos, but we can’t duplicate it. We can’t know for sure that it ever became more complex, but you are certain it happened? The reason why I choose not to accept it is becuase they don’t know they are guessing!

And, by the way, life doesn’t “desire” to survive in any Darwinian sense, at least not the way you might “desire” a cheeseburger. Mutations are either successful, and thus replicate, or not. But that is a typical deist misconception about evolution, so you are forgiven.

Thanks you are too kind. Darwin was a crack who stole his idea to begin with.

haney wrote:

Oh, thou heathen, thou non-believer in Bunnydom. So now I have to provide proof for my Bunny, but you require no similar logic for your god. Instead you have…what?..“reasoning?” Oh, please, do tell us what that reasoning is so we can see how well it survives our scrutiny.

I will give you logic and proof for Christ. You won’t accept it, but hey I will give you some. Atleast I am not insulting your believes

To reiterate a previous post…you’ve posited the existance of an entity not acknowledged by everyone. I.E., we both acknowledge the existence of a physical, tangible universe. To that, however, you’ve added precisely one entity: God. Now it’s up to you to prove it exists. (Look at it another way…you and I are in court contesting a contract, but you say you have a signed addendum which absolves you of any financial obligation. Wouldn’t it be up to you–the person claiming the existence of something not agreed upon–to provide proof of its existence? Makes sense, right? Yet deists refuse to abide by these laws of logic.

Insert Jesus Christ. Now you have to prove the documents concerning Him are frauds.

My guess is that they do so not out of choice but, rather, because they have no choice. Because the belief in the supernatural must, by its very nature, derive merely from faith and NEVER from testable proof.

I will go with written record of my proof. No one from the historical documents denies He exists.

Which is fine…god bless you, as your ilk are fond of saying. But just don’t pretend that your beliefs derive from anything more, because that is where you begin to insult our intelligence.

I understand that faith is required to believe in God, but to say He does not offer evidnece of His existance shows your ignorance. You choose to ignore what He offers. That is fine, and I don’t comaplain, it is your eternity,

Oh, and regarding science and its evolving sets of knowledge: where did you ever get the notion that atheists believe in an unchanging, infallible religion called “science.” All science is is our attempt to describe the world as we know it and make predictions based upon those observations. That’s the beauty of science…sometimes they get it wrong!! But it is subject to debate, to testing, and–unlike god–is always DISPROVABLE. Science merely provides me with the tools to better understand my world.

Glad to see you admit God is not Disprovable.

[quote]

Is it wrong? Often. Is it evolving? Always. And with each evolution our understanding of our world broadens and deepens.

Theists, on the other hand, embrace the unknown and the untested. Because in those murky shadows their gods can shine bright. And every time science chips away at man’s ignorance, the gods have one less place to hide.[/quote]

I am just not as gullable to fall for every conspiracy theory that comes out of the scientist mouth. I listen to the ideas, and when there is some certainity I will believe. To this day there is none. It is nice to see that you have determined how much better than our ancestors we are. Maybe you can tell me why it took us 2k years to duplicate the battery? Oh that is right we are smarter than they were!

[haney]

[quote]MentalMuscle wrote:

The problem with that is that I do not believe. Believing in a god is not like throwing the dice and hoping for a seven. And which god exactly should I believe in? Odin? Then I should be out killing people so I can go to Valhalla. Or how about Zeus? Or maybe Ra? Mithras? To you, those gods are all myth. Someday your god will be known as just myth as well.
[/quote]

Voltaire said the same thing a few hundred years ago. They turned His house into a Bible print shop 50 years after He died.

[SkyzykS]

mental muscle,
You become a target when you lash out at others with an aire of superiority,but can only back it up with not only un-original, but realy juvenile thought.
As far as why I asked the other questions- to flush you out as the bitter little hoax that you are.
Now check my spelling like a good little girl.HAHAHAHAHA-HAHAHAHA!
Oh, you might not have a sense of humor, after all, neither did Neitzche.

[SkyzykS]

And another thing,
I don’t do this to actually prove a point Mental Muscle, I do this just to screw with people like you, like shooting fish in a barrel. Me and my girlfriend then read these and laugh our asses off. It realy is kind of fun.
Thanks.

[lothario1132]

Something wonderful happened today.

I am now an elitist, because I think religion is superstition. Evidently, I have no respect for anybody, and I’m a no-good poopy-pants as well. This is after I apologized for my original post which I guess was a bit inflammatory for certain people on this forum.

Not one of you – mindeffer, haney, ProX, etc. – will be able to show that your belief system isn’t the same as superstition. The fact that I recognize this makes me an a jerk, and when I have the bare-assed audacity to say it to y’all, it means that I am looking down on you as well. Will somebody please give RJ a suppository or something? Good grief.

As to the Pink Bunny, I think it is heresy to praise his name. Anybody who knows the true path to enlightenment knows that the Green Bunny is the right one. The Green Bunny tells us in his infinite wisdom that we must kill all Pink Bunny believers for their heretical beliefs. When I was in the desert, I had visions of the Green Bunny. He came to me and said:

“Put down that bong, O Chosen One. Let my light which shines forever fill your mind, and let you have the knowledge of the One Way.”

So I wrote down what the Green Bunny told me, and I have been rewarded many times over. I bought a lottery scratch-off ticket the other day, and won five dollars. BUT I ONLY PAID ONE DOLLAR FOR IT!!! The rewards in this life for the followers of the Green Bunny are great indeed, for he has shown me that whatsoever you let go shall come back to you fivefold.

Bosco, this is your final warning:

Convert or die, bitch!

[Gestalt]

[quote]haney wrote:
Voltaire said the same thing a few hundred years ago. They turned His house into a Bible print shop 50 years after He died.
[/quote]

And your point…?

mindeffer01 wrote:
Me and my girlfriend then read these and laugh our asses off. It realy is kind of fun.

Are you sure she is laughing WITH you?

[Gestalt]

[quote]Professor X wrote:
People don’t cry when losing someone because of future events. They cry because that person is longer there on this earth…in this life. If I came and took your children away and promised to bring them back in 30 years, you wouldn’t be saddened at all? If I kidnapped your wife but left a note reading, “I’ll drop her off at 9pm on December 28, 2030”, you wouldn’t worry about it? Your comment, again, was elitist and was ignorant enough to ignore the human condition. Congratulations, you are on a roll.[/quote]

Although no analogy is perfect due to the nature of analogies, yours has one major flaw: You neglected to mention paradise.

Sure, I would be upset if you took my children or my wife for 30 years or … however long. However, if I knew that you would take them somewhere where everything was perfect, they would have everything they had dreamed about and they would be forever surrounded by those they love and those who love them, I would not miss them nearly as much as if I had just been taken from me.

I would still miss my wife–as soon as the dishes started piling up in the sink and my refridgerator began to empty, but then I’d head down to the nearest club, pick up a couple T-Vixens and have myself a good time. Hell, if she is going to live in paradise, I am going to have a good time too!