Athiest looking for opinions...

[Darrin]

Here's some background on my beliefs:

I was raised Catholic--I went to Catholic schools for seven years. Around 16 I stopped attending church. I had a good sample of potential denominations when I was younger; I got to make the choice to stay Catholic. My father was an agnostic (we lost him in March of 2006) and my brother is an athiest.

My father--through direct and indirect actions--changed me on this subject. We are what we inherit. I punished him being gone, and used religion and the Bible to condemn him. That left me hollow, guilty, and crying. After we lost him I saw the damage religion and a lack of understanding did for the relationship and I vowed to look at the world with an open mind after that, as he did. I found that organized religion wasn't for me, especially Christianity. I played at being agnostic for awhile, however, that didn't fit.

The story of Christ, while it's proven that Jesus walked the earth and he was wise, I don't think he was any more the 'son of man' than you or me. I think that religion highlights the worst of human nature--seperation, condemnation, mystical unscientific beliefs, mass hysteria, fear of disapproval, and abusive power to name a few.

The universe is breath-takingly beautiful and mysterious. The complexity of life is awesome. It fills me with humility. My problems are less intimidating and smaller. There's never boredom; too much to consider. We need real people to solve real problems and relying on God to fill in the blanks, as politicians and clerics ask us to do, just stunts our growth. I know it stunted mine. I'm not a great mind by any means but my potential was wasted, in some measure, on too much energy towards God, and not helping my fellow man.

What are your beliefs?
What's your story?

[I Love Me Some Me]

... relying on God to fill in the blanks, as politicians and clerics ask us to do, just stunts our growth. I know it stunted mine. I'm not a great mind by any means but my potential was wasted,in some measure, on too much energy towards God, and not helping my fellow man.

What are your beliefs?
What's your story?

Sounds like a cop-out. I was raised in the church all my life. I still believe, and although I rely on God, I look for knowledge as well. Your stunted growth is not an indictment on religion or faith as much as it is an indictment on your own ambition towards filling in those blanks and helping your fellow man.

[Blake]

I believe in God, hate religion myself.

I believe the Bible is a good book with some good values that some evil men have taken and misused and abused to further their own selfish goals. They have preyed upon the fears of the masses and not only have sucked harmless, good people dry of their free will (and money) but they have pushed people such as yourself to the opposite end of the spectrum.

I grew up Southern Baptist until I got to the point where I was asking, "hey, how is it that only this small sector of believers in this corner of the world has it right and everyone else has it wrong?"......to which I realized that organized religion in and of itself is crap.

I agree that the universe is breath takingly beautiful, mysterious and complex.

The same skeptical side of me that looks at the Bible and it's inconsistencies and thinks "how can this book be 100% the one right book in the history of mankind" also sees what man has accomplished and created and I can't help but think that the universe was created by intelligent design.

What does that intelligent design mean? Right now, I don't really know. I guess until we can find the starting point and the answer as to why it was started, we'll never know.

I believe in the story of Christ, but I can't seem to wrap my head around the idea that simply "believing in Him, you won't perish but have everlasting life". There are so many problems I have with this and other facets of the Bible that it would be a thread on to it's own.

In the end, I don't really know what I am. I just know I'm still looking.

[/rambling]

[doobs]

Atheism is a belief system, just like religion. Belief in the non-existence of God is unsupported by any evidence. After all, how do you prove a negative?

Rational skeptics, or Agnostics, whatever they're called--that is, those who believe only that which has been proven by science--do not believe in either the existence or non-existence of God.

For the record, I'm a Catholic, slighly observant. I choose to believe in the existence of God. Just as an atheist chooses to not believe in the existence of God. Neither proposition can be proven. Well, not quite. I suppose God could strike down those atheists who say, "strike me down if you exist."

[whottt]

I'd describe myself as a spiritual person(or at least I try to be) but not a religious one...at least not when it comes to organized religion.

I consider there to be major differences between spirituality and organized religion...the main one being that religion is often used for manipulation and control. More often than not religion involves telling you what you should believe.



As for my beliefs...I was raised a Baptist. I went through the same crap as most people do becoming disillusioned with organized religion and the Baptist vision of god...I didn't like the fire and brimstone burn and hell stuff...saw all the pain and suffering in the world and asked what sort of god would allow this etc...

The thing that always fucked me up...what about someone who has never heard of Christ or the Baptist vision of god, or that died before they heard of it...would they then go to hell or something of that nature?

That's pretty stupid if you think about it...

So basially I always rejected that sort of, "do this or go to hell" premise.

I wouldn't say I was ever totally atheistic...but definitely agnostic at certain points...but I never considered science and spirituality or religion to be competing concepts, never...I remain amazed that so many people do.


Anyway, the more I study the history of man, the rise of civlizations, the more I study science and many theories about physics and the building blocks of life and the Universe...the more spiritual I have become. I don't think it works that way for many people...but it defeinitely works that way for me.


The fact that some sort of spiritual belief system goes hand in hand with human culture...often with similar themes arising completely independent of one another(or so it seems)....the fact that even the greatest scientific mind of our time said that energy cannnot be destroyed it only changes forms...

I definitely thing there are higher planes of existence than our own, higher forms of life than our own...


As for which religion people should believe or is the "true" one...I dont' know, I don't pretend to know....I think most of them are obviously now in a form designed for control, power, manipulation...pretty obviously.

[Blake]

Atheism is a belief system, just like religion. Belief in the non-existence of God is unsupported by any evidence. After all, how do you prove a negative?


See, I get what you are saying, but it doesn't fly. Is it a belief system that I don't believe that Bigfoot exists?

You are right that you can't, by practical means, prove a negative. This means that it's on the claimer to prove that something exists. It's not on the disclaimer to prove that it doesn't.

[I Love Me Some Me]

See, I get what you are saying, but it doesn't fly. Is it a belief system that I don't believe that Bigfoot exists?

You are right that you can't, by practical means, prove a negative. This means that it's on the claimer to prove that something exists. It's not on the disclaimer to prove that it doesn't.

To not believe in God, you have to believe that life came from non-life, order came from chaos, natural law came from randomness...etc. There are a lot of scientifically unproven things you have to put faith into when you reject the existence of God.

That's a belief system.

[doobs]

See, I get what you are saying, but it doesn't fly. Is it a belief system that I don't believe that Bigfoot exists?

You are right that you can't, by practical means, prove a negative. This means that it's on the claimer to prove that something exists. It's not on the disclaimer to prove that it doesn't.

The burden is equal on whoever is asserting a belief.

A true skeptic doesn't believe that Bigfoot doesn't exist. In other words, a true skeptic doesn't believe anything; he knows that which is proven to him. So, yes, if you believe Bigfoot doesn't exist, then you are believing in something without proof. I, for one, believe that Bigfoot doesn't exist; it's so inconsequential, though, that I wouldn't waste any time or energy trying to prove Bigfoot's non-existence. I'm comfortable with my belief.

But the question of God is a much bigger question. It's a fundamental question about life, about the universe. To believe in the existence of God is no more irrational than believing in the non-existence of God. Keep in mind I'm only talking about the narrow issue of existence. Religion is another matter.

No matter how far we progress in our scientific understanding of the unvierse, there will always be room for belief in the existence of God. That issue will be with us forever.

[LnGrrrR]

What are your beliefs?
What's your story?

I'm an agnostic atheist.

My story? *shrug* I have just never felt any belief. Not too much to the story, I guess.

[LnGrrrR]

Atheism is a belief system, just like religion. Belief in the non-existence of God is unsupported by any evidence. After all, how do you prove a negative?

Rational skeptics, or Agnostics, whatever they're called--that is, those who believe only that which has been proven by science--do not believe in either the existence or non-existence of God.

For the record, I'm a Catholic, slighly observant. I choose to believe in the existence of God. Just as an atheist chooses to not believe in the existence of God. Neither proposition can be proven. Well, not quite. I suppose God could strike down those atheists who say, "strike me down if you exist."

Agnosticism is a lack of KNOWLEDGE if you want to get technical. Atheism is a lack of BELIEF.

Also, 'choosing to believe' is false. You can't 'choose to believe' anymore than you can choose to enjoy the flavor of something. You either do believe or you don't. Outside forces may influence your belief, but it's not a conscious decision on the same level as "Will I wear a red shirt today or a blue one?"

Finally, atheism is not a 'belief system'. Now, some gnostic atheists may have a 'belief system' but it is not some universal, overarching plan as most religions have.

[8ft.tall.tejano]

i personally believe that ALL religions are evil, and all propagators of said churches should be rounded up and put on an island where they could do what they have really wanted to do for all time....fight to the death....

and i'll make THAT my new religion, just so i can join the battle royale.......

but seriously i think that all religions are wrong, and whatever may be in your heart (even if it is a religion that is already in existance) is right for you and you alone...

-my path to "heaven" is different than your path because we didn't start on the same road, smell me?

-sin is dead, or at least objective.

-jesus was right, he was the son of god, as am i, and you, and everything we see. we are all part of something so much bigger, and are needed to perform the role that we are here for. a cog in a machine so to speak, with the purpose being to live as full as we know/can.

-this world is your heaven and your hell. the "afterlife" isn't your judgement for this life, what you do next time will determine that...but in this world, those who do wrong will be punished accordingly (either by peers or by life), and those who do right will be rewarded, even if doing wrong WAS your right (maybe you were put here to teach someone a lifelesson?)

and if we all carried this belief that the right faith for me isn't the same as the right faith for you , religion would be more of a matter of personal faith, and wouldn't be an issue in the public sector.....

i came to this belief system after years of studying.........

lets just hope i don't crap out and find out that bahai' was the correct path...

[baseline bum]

The burden is equal on whoever is asserting a belief.

...

But the question of God is a much bigger question. It's a fundamental question about life, about the universe. To believe in the existence of God is no more irrational than believing in the non-existence of God. Keep in mind I'm only talking about the narrow issue of existence. Religion is another matter.


It doesn't matter how big the question is; it's the exact same logic. You're making the argument that whether Bigfoot exists is a 50/50 proposition because we cannot prove it doesn't exist. In your system of logic there is nothing that doesn't exist. It either does, or it's 50/50 that it doesn't.

[Yonivore]

From where did matter come?

[Anti.Hero]

Religion teaches some great values/morals/etc.

From what I have heard, there is lots of wisdom in the bible.


Other than that though, I don't really have an opinion on religion.

I believe good people are rewarded; otherwise what reason would there be to be good.

[DarrinS]

I'd describe myself as a spiritual person(or at least I try to be) but not a religious one...at least not when it comes to organized religion.

I consider there to be major differences between spirituality and organized religion...the main one being that religion is often used for manipulation and control. More often than not religion involves telling you what you should believe.




This describes me 100%

[baseline bum]

I believe good people are rewarded; otherwise what reason would there be to be good.

It's likely that we're hard-wired to be good to each other on average because natural selection favored that trait in our evolution. Someone who is out trying to kill others is a lot more likely to be killed before he can breed as much as one who cooperates with others and gives members of the opposite sex reason to be attracted to him.

[baseline bum]

From where did matter come?

From where did the place that matter came from come?

[LnGrrrR]

The burden is equal on whoever is asserting a belief.

A true skeptic doesn't believe that Bigfoot doesn't exist. In other words, a true skeptic doesn't believe anything; he knows that which is proven to him. So, yes, if you believe Bigfoot doesn't exist, then you are believing in something without proof. I, for one, believe that Bigfoot doesn't exist; it's so inconsequential, though, that I wouldn't waste any time or energy trying to prove Bigfoot's non-existence. I'm comfortable with my belief.
.There's really no such thing as a 'true skeptic'. It's like the person who believes there is 'no truth' or no' knowledge' or something inane and retarded like that.For the most part, the accepted definition of skepticism is not believing something with proof/veracity. The default position towards phenomena such as Bigfoot is to NOT believe, as that would be a 'default' position by being the more likely.

[doobs]

It doesn't matter how big the question is; it's the exact same logic. You're making the argument that whether Bigfoot exists is a 50/50 proposition because we cannot prove it doesn't exist. In your system of logic there is nothing that doesn't exist. It either does, or it's 50/50 that it doesn't.

Well, I wouldn't put it that way. 50/50 is kind of a stupid way to put it, actually. In the case of Bigfoot, the lack of fossil record and the lack of any verifiable, documented sightings is strongly suggestive of the fact that it does not exist. You can get pretty darn close to disproving its existence; I would say it's 99/1. I believe Bigfoot doesn't exist, and so do most people, and for good reason. Bigfoot is allegedly an animal--a large animal--that lives near several populated areas in the Pacific Northwest. We would have probably seen one of them at some point.

God is another matter. And you know it. God is unseen. There is no reasonable expectation of seeing evidence of God's existence, like there is with Bigfoot. Again, in the case of Bigfoot--if Bigfoot existed, there would be a fossil record and documented sightings. Bigfoot's existence is theoretically provable. But what about God? To use your numbering scheme, the issue of God's existence is 50/50. Regardless, in both cases, belief plays a role.

[clambake]

which god is it?

[doobs]

There's really no such thing as a 'true skeptic'. It's like the person who believes there is 'no truth' or no' knowledge' or something inane and retarded like that.For the most part, the accepted definition of skepticism is not believing something with proof/veracity. The default position towards phenomena such as Bigfoot is to NOT believe, as that would be a 'default' position by being the more likely.

I'm not claiming to be a true skeptic. I'm not even saying true skeptics exist, or that true skepticism is a good thing.

NOT believing is different from believing in non-existence.

[baseline bum]

God is another matter. And you know it. God is unseen.


Strike one against God.



There is no reasonable expectation of seeing evidence of God's existence, like there is with Bigfoot.


Sure there is; miracles. God could make one of those crying Mary statues come to life and walk off, and it'd be impossible to explain through rational laws.


Again, in the case of Bigfoot--if Bigfoot existed, there would be a fossil record and documented sightings. Bigfoot's existence is theoretically provable. But what about God? To use your numbering scheme, the issue of God's existence is 50/50. Regardless, in both cases, belief plays a role.

The odds against God are pretty long too. For God, we have to completely invent some notion of the supernatural completely apart from the real world; something we cannot objectively measure but must just have faith that it's there. We have to invent something irreducibly complex that came from nothing. We'd have to believe that you could build the pyramids in one stroke instead of one brick at a time.

[clambake]

if there's only one god, why would he say "thou shalt worship no other god"?

[Yonivore]

From where did the place that matter came from come?
Exactly.

[Yonivore]

if there's only one god, why would he say "thou shalt worship no other god"?

Because humans have a nasty habit of worshipping earthly idols.

[clambake]

he didn't say earthly idols.

[Yonivore]

he didn't say earthly idols.
You're right. But, we do tend to treat earthly idols as gods...no? In fact, it was about the time He was carving this into the tablets for Moses when the rest of the Israelites were down the mountain praying to a golden calf.

[8ft.tall.tejano]

if there's only one god, why would he say "thou shalt worship no other god"?

cos he's obviously one jealous motherfucker.....why would an all powerful god need to even make his rules in stone? couldn't he just enforce it through mind control?

but my point is, if some people NEED that crutch in their life, then more power to them...sorry that you think this world sucks so much that you find a need to invest so heavily in the next.....but as long as you don't force me to believe what you do, then it doesn't bother me...

[clambake]

god thinks a golden calf is a god?

[Yonivore]

god thinks a golden calf is a god?
No, but, apparently humans did and, he was speaking to them...

[clambake]

No, but, apparently humans did and, he was speaking to them...

you mean humans were treating the golden calf the way god wants to be treated?

[Yonivore]

you mean humans were treating the golden calf the way god wants to be treated?
Humans were worshipping an idol as if it were God.

What's your point?

Religion and abortion threads never go anywhere...why do we bother?

[clambake]

Humans were worshipping an idol as if it were God.
sad that god thinks he's only worth the same worship as a golden calf.


What's your point?
why make it a commandment? doesn't make sense, at all. kinda sounds weak and whiny.

do you think god should sound weak and whiny?


Religion and abortion threads never go anywhere...
you mean kill the racket once and for all?

[td4mvp21]

I think it's normal to wonder. I believe in God and Christianity but I would lying if I told you I never had doubts. It's a hard thing to have 100% faith in something.

But I agree with you in a sense that I see the world around us with all its complexities and functions and think that there has to be a Creator. To me, that makes sense. I know to others, it doesn't at all. Also in others' defense, maybe it isn't the Christian God (although personally I do think it is).

Religion isn't something to go by however. You will always see Christians as hypocrites because they are striving to live a lifestyle that is essentially impossible in this life (according to the Bible). Humans will always ruin religion because humans are flawed. And I think a lot of Christians definitely misconstrue the Bible and make it something it's not in order to justify their actions. It happens.

I was raised pretty strong Christian, and then like you, I quit going to church at around 15 because I thought it was full of hypocrites and I witnessed firsthand the duplicity of church members. I spent the next two years agnostic and very very anti-church and anti-God. And then within the past 4-5 months I've changed a lot and I have gone back to my original beliefs. So I can understand your thinking. I think you have to believe what you feel in your heart (or head) is the thing to believe. That differs for everyone.

[clambake]

church is the worst place to worship.

[clambake]

don't sweat it

? i heard hell was hot.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Here's some background on my beliefs:

I was raised Catholic; I went to Catholic schools for seven years. Around 16 I stopped attending church. I had a good sample of potential denominations when I was younger; I got to make the choice to stay Catholic. My father was an agnostic (we lost him in March of 2006) and my brother is an athiest.

My father--through direct and indirect actions--really changed me on this subject. We are what we inherit. I punished him for being gone a lot, and used religion and the Bible to condemn him. That left me hollow, guilty, and crying. After we lost him I see the damage religion and a lack of understanding did for the relationship and I vowed to look at the world with an open mind after that--as he did. When I did, I found that organized religion wasn't for me, especially Christianity. I played with being agnostic for awhile, but that didn't fit, either.

The story of Christ, while it's proven that Jesus walked the earth and he was wise, I don't think he was any more the 'son of man' than you or me. I think that religion highlights the worst of human nature--us vs. them, condemnation, mystical unscientific beliefs, mass hysteria, fear of disapproval, and abusive power to name a few.

The universe is breath-takingly beautiful and mysterious. For there to be as much life here as there is humbling. For organisms to be as complex as they are, to consider in the known universe there is so little life--that we are unique--fills me with humility. It makes my problems less intimidating and smaller. There's never boredom; too much to consider. We need real people to solve real problems and relying on God to fill in the blanks, as politicians and clerics ask us to do, just stunts our growth. I know it stunted mine. I'm not a great mind by any means but my potential was wasted,in some measure, on too much energy towards God, and not helping my fellow man.

What are your beliefs?
What's your story?

I've heard your story many times during my paths and travels. I advise you to join your local order of the Golden Dawn. It worked for Crowley. Kinda.

[Goliadnative]

If you live in the San Antonio area, tune to 89.7 FM. This station has several call in shows. The best ones for your question might be the one at 2 to 3 pm on Thursday or Friday or the one at 5 to 7 pm on Thursday. If in the Dallas area, the station is 910 AM, same times and days.

[Yonivore]

church is the worst place to worship.
Ever notice how athiests are, more times than not, as religiously zealous in their position as are many fundamentalist Christians?

[johnsmith]

I was born and raised Catholic, around 15 or 16 I determined that the Catholics sucked. I couldn't stand church and I stopped going. When I was 23, my Grandmother died. She was the best person I ever knew in my life so far and she went to church every single day of her adult life. After she passed, I refused to accept my belief that religion is a bunch of crap because I don't want to believe that she is just dead and gone. I pray every night to her and Jesus because more than anything I hope she is living the good life somewhere.


Having said that, I don't get bothered by Athiest folk, because I too was one, and the only reason I'm not now is because I hope that my grandmother is having a good time because she fucking deserves it.













Also, I'm typing this while pooping.

[byrontx]

I do think there is a god but I don't think he is some swinging dick sitting on a cloud (or a he for that matter). Past that point it is just all a big damn mystery to me. The Christian stuff is just bronze age superstition that doesn't stand up to rational thought (like whott said). I think Jesus was trying to get the thought across that you did not have to go through established religion to have a relationship with god and he got whacked for it. Extreme dogma and mega-churches was exactly what he was preaching against, most likely. I doubt he was making claims to be any more of a deity than anyone else. If you drill religion in the head of a child before they are capable of critical thought it is hard as hell for them to ever think objectively. I am trying to protect my son from religious dogma until he is mature enough to call BS on it. Maybe we got stuck with a beginner god and it was a bit of a fvck-up. That's why children get cancer and crap like that.

[Cant_Be_Faded]

Ever notice how athiests are, more times than not, as religiously zealous in their position as are many fundamentalist Christians?



Seriously. I mean I can count just as many wars begun by atheists for atheistic reasons as I can wars begun by christians for christian reasons.

[Blake]

sad that god thinks he's only worth the same worship as a golden calf.


why make it a commandment? doesn't make sense, at all. kinda sounds weak and whiny.

do you think god should sound weak and whiny?


you mean kill the racket once and for all?

what, did you skip Sunday School as a kid?

[Blake]

God is another matter. And you know it. God is unseen. There is no reasonable expectation of seeing evidence of God's existence, like there is with Bigfoot. Again, in the case of Bigfoot--if Bigfoot existed, there would be a fossil record and documented sightings. Bigfoot's existence is theoretically provable. But what about God? To use your numbering scheme, the issue of God's existence is 50/50. Regardless, in both cases, belief plays a role.

I think you are confusing God with intelligent design, which in it's base form is not the same thing.

I see a tower and know from experiece that it was (loosely) intelligently designed. Man has even gotten to the point where we can create other life forms in labs.

I have not, however, witnessed matter springing from non-matter on it's own. I therefore have no problem with an intelligent design theory for the universe.

That's not to say though that means that an all powerful omnipotent, omniscient God is the source of that design.

I've seen some dumbasses create some pretty cool stuff myself.

[8ft.tall.tejano]

Seriously. I mean I can count just as many wars begun by atheists for atheistic reasons as I can wars begun by christians for christian reasons.

really?
name one war on religion started by an atheist...just one...
the closest thing would be mao's cultural revolution, but that wasn't even an attack on religion as much as on old eastern culture that he felt was keeping his people behind the times...

compare that to....
the crusades, the war on terror, the spanish inquistions, the american revolution(the pilgrims first came here for religious freedom, right?), northern ireland, basically whats going on in the entire continent of africa, indi-paki war, well basically you can name or relate every war in the history of man with the exception of vietnam, korea, some campaigns in ww1 & 2, and the spanish-american war to some religious zealot who thought that his god had a bigger wang and needed to be bowed in front of...i can't wait til we as a race are past this blot in our history...

[I Love Me Some Me]

...i can't wait til we as a race are past this blot in our history...

Keep waiting...it'll never happen.

[8ft.tall.tejano]

Keep waiting...it'll never happen.

you may be right, and thats sad....

at least one day jesus/muhammad will go the same way as zeus, thor, tezcatlipoca, etc...
in the next 200-700 years maybe l.ron and joseph smith will be at their place and the next church will worship me................................................ .

[The Reckoning]

here we go again...

[101A]

What do I believe:


I believe in God, the Father Almighty,
the Maker of heaven and earth,
and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord:
Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost,
born of the virgin Mary,
suffered under Pontius Pilate,
was crucified, dead, and buried;
He descended into hell.
The third day He arose again from the dead;
He ascended into heaven,
and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty;
from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.
I believe in the Holy Ghost;
the holy catholic church;
the communion of saints;
the forgiveness of sins;
the resurrection of the body;
and the life everlasting.
Amen.

[The Reckoning]

Catholics assemble!!!!!!

[Blake]

Catholics assemble!!!!!!

"Holy atheistic thread, Popeman! what are we going to do?"

"Quick, Alterboy......to the Popemobile!"

[doobs]

I think you are confusing God with intelligent design, which in it's base form is not the same thing.

I see a tower and know from experiece that it was (loosely) intelligently designed. Man has even gotten to the point where we can create other life forms in labs.

I have not, however, witnessed matter springing from non-matter on it's own. I therefore have no problem with an intelligent design theory for the universe.

That's not to say though that means that an all powerful omnipotent, omniscient God is the source of that design.

I've seen some dumbasses create some pretty cool stuff myself.

Wow. I have no idea how you got that from my post. I'm confusing God with intelligent design? What the hell are you talking about?

My post was about the narrow issue of the existence or non-existence of God. I said that it's a 50/50 proposition. There is absolutely no evidence showing that God does or does not exist. Whereas Bigfoot's existence is theoretically provable--in fact, it should be easily proven--the issue of the existence of God is, and will always be, left to theologians and philosophers, not scientists.

I said nothing about God and evolution. Seriously . . . intelligent design?

[101A]

Catholics assemble!!!!!!

I'm not a Catholic

[Blake]

Wow. I have no idea how you got that from my post. I'm confusing God with intelligent design? What the hell are you talking about?

My post was about the narrow issue of the existence or non-existence of God. I said that it's a 50/50 proposition. There is absolutely no evidence showing that God does or does not exist. Whereas Bigfoot's existence is theoretically provable--in fact, it should be easily proven--the issue of the existence of God is, and will always be, left to theologians and philosophers, not scientists.

I said nothing about God and evolution. Seriously . . . intelligent design?

sorry man. If you don't get it by now, I'm not gonna waste your time or mine by explaining it.

for further assistance see: flying spaghetti monster

[doobs]

I'm not a Catholic

Episcopalians are the Canadians of Christianity.

[doobs]

sorry man. If you don't get it by now, I'm not gonna waste your time or mine by explaining it.

for further assistance see: flying spaghetti monster

I never said anything about intelligent design. What you wrote in response to my post is a hot, steamy pile of monkey shit, frankly. It's almost like you can't read English.
for further assistance see: hooked on phonics

I'll repeat: I'm only talking about the narrow issue belief in the existence of God and belief in the non-existence of God. Both are equally irrational beliefs. That's my point. I said nothing about religion. I said nothing about intelligent design. I said nothing about the flying spaghetti monster.

Now tell me: what the fuck did I say that has anything to do with intelligent design or the flying spaghetti monster?

[Blake]

I never said anything about intelligent design. What you wrote in response to my post is a hot, steamy pile of monkey shit, frankly. It's almost like you can't read English.
for further assistance see: hooked on phonics
I'll repeat: I'm only talking about the narrow issue belief in the existence of God and belief in the non-existence of God. Both are equally irrational beliefs. That's my point. I said nothing about religion. I said nothing about intelligent design. I said nothing about the flying spaghetti monster.

Now tell me: what the fuck did I say that has anything to do with intelligent design or the flying spaghetti monster?

What is your definition of "God"?

I say a powerful, but limited and mentally challenged flying spaghetti monster exists and created the universe. Let's say you don't. By your logic, I still have a 50/50 shot he does because you can't prove he doesn't exist.

Honestly, until you get it, that's the last I'm gonna explain to you.

[I Love Me Some Me]

What is your definition of "God"?

I say a powerful, but limited and mentally challenged flying spaghetti monster exists and created the universe. Let's say you don't. By your logic, I still have a 50/50 shot he does because you can't prove he doesn't exist.

Honestly, until you get it, that's the last I'm gonna explain to you.

You keep talking about the creation of the universe, and doobs isn't talking about that.

[Blake]

You keep talking about the creation of the universe, and doobs isn't talking about that.

when youre making arguments, you have to take into account some "if a=b, then b muct lead to c" type of theorems.

However, if you are trying to say that God exists, but he had nothing to do with the creation of the universe, I'd like to hear that one.

[101A]

Episcopalians are the Canadians of Christianity.


Nope.

& so we won't play denominational roulette:

Methodist.

[LnGrrrR]

Seriously. I mean I can count just as many wars begun by atheists for atheistic reasons as I can wars begun by christians for christian reasons.

Really? I'd be interested to hear about wars started for atheistic reasons.

[The Reckoning]

Nope.

& so we won't play denominational roulette:

Methodist.


Methodists are Baptists who can read.

[Yonivore]

Methodists are Baptists who can read.
And drink.

[8ft.tall.tejano]

Really? I'd be interested to hear about wars started for atheistic reasons.

yeah i was still waiting for someone to reply to my last post about that....

really?
name one war on religion started by an atheist...just one...
the closest thing would be mao's cultural revolution, but that wasn't even an attack on religion as much as on old eastern culture that he felt was keeping his people behind the times...

compare that to....
the crusades, the war on terror, the spanish inquistions, the american revolution(the pilgrims first came here for religious freedom, right?), northern ireland, basically whats going on in the entire continent of africa, indi-paki war, well basically you can name or relate every war in the history of man with the exception of vietnam, korea, some campaigns in ww1 & 2, and the spanish-american war to some religious zealot who thought that his god had a bigger wang and needed to be bowed in front of...i can't wait til we as a race are past this blot in our history...

[Yonivore]

yeah i was still waiting for someone to reply to my last post about that....

really?
name one war on religion started by an atheist...just one...
the closest thing would be mao's cultural revolution, but that wasn't even an attack on religion as much as on old eastern culture that he felt was keeping his people behind the times...

compare that to....
the crusades, the war on terror, the spanish inquistions, the american revolution(the pilgrims first came here for religious freedom, right?), northern ireland, basically whats going on in the entire continent of africa, indi-paki war, well basically you can name or relate every war in the history of man with the exception of vietnam, korea, some campaigns in ww1 & 2, and the spanish-american war to some religious zealot who thought that his god had a bigger wang and needed to be bowed in front of...i can't wait til we as a race are past this blot in our history...
Usually athiests perpetrate genocides against defenseless innocents... Oh, some may have claimed to be religious but, seriously, what God-fearing man could intentionally starve 10's of millions or gas millions?

[8ft.tall.tejano]

Usually athiests perpetrate genocides against defenseless innocents... Oh, some may have claimed to be religious but, seriously, what God-fearing man could intentionally starve 10's of millions or gas millions?

hate to go bill o'theclown on you but........

NAME ONE

just one genocide caused by a known athiest for religous reasons....

i can think of plenty of "god-fearing" men who would do the same...

http://downwiththeinternet.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/hitler.jpg

http://derelictdiorama.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/george-w-bush.jpeg

http://listverse.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/big-jonestown1.jpg

http://www.theflagbearer.com/alexander_the_great.jpg

....and the list could go on forever.........

[SpursFanFirst]

Methodists are Baptists who can read.

:wtf I'm Baptist, and I read that just fine, thank you.



And drink.

Where do people get these ideas that Baptists can't drink or dance or whatever?

I was raised in the Baptist church, and there has never been such rules.
Now, we DO believe you shouldn't drink with the intention of getting drunk...but not drink, period? No.

[Yonivore]

hate to go bill o'theclown on you but........

NAME ONE

just one genocide caused by a known athiest for religous reasons....

i can think of plenty of "god-fearing" men who would do the same...

http://downwiththeinternet.files.wordpress.com/2007/11/hitler.jpg

http://derelictdiorama.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/george-w-bush.jpeg

http://listverse.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/09/big-jonestown1.jpg

http://www.theflagbearer.com/alexander_the_great.jpg

....and the list could go on forever.........
I didn't intend to give the impression they were committing genocide for religious reasons.

It's been reported that Joseph Stalin was an ordained Christian priest. I think he's been held responsible for over 50,000,000 deaths.

[Yonivore]

Mao Tse Dong, approximately 65 million dead.

[8ft.tall.tejano]

I didn't intend to give the impression they were committing genocide for religious reasons.

It's been reported that Joseph Stalin was an ordained Christian priest. I think he's been held responsible for over 50,000,000 deaths.

so then you're proving me right.............................thanks yoni...i knew we'd be friends

[8ft.tall.tejano]

Mao Tse Dong, approximately 65 million dead.

cop out...

already brought up mao, and his beef was cultural not religious.....

[Yonivore]

Kind of related, not really, but interesting video over at Reason TV

http://reason.tv/video/show/622.html

I wasn't inferring Mao Tse Dong and Stalin committed genocide for "atheistic" reasons and, to be fair, I think LgrrrR was being sarcastic when he asked that. But, I was offering these two, and there are more -- generally communists and fascists that have probably killed more people than all the religious wars combined...including Muslim-incited wars.

Seriously, it's hard to top the approximately 120 million people that died at the hands of Mao, Stalin, and Hitler.

[Heath Ledger]

From where did the place that matter came from come?

Why does it MATTER to you..?

[8ft.tall.tejano]

Kind of related, not really, but interesting video over at Reason TV

http://reason.tv/video/show/622.html

I wasn't inferring Mao Tse Dong and Stalin committed genocide for "atheistic" reasons and, to be fair, I think LgrrrR was being sarcastic when he asked that. But, I was offering these two, and there are more -- generally communists and fascists that have probably killed more people than all the religious wars combined...including Muslim-incited wars.

Seriously, it's hard to top the approximately 120 million people that died at the hands of Mao, Stalin, and Hitler.

won't lie & say that i watched the video yet...but you already agreed that hitler and stalin were christians, so subtract theirs from the total....i can agree that the chairman was pretty freggin' godless, but still he didn't kill to get the religious element from his society, he wanted what he thought were backwards cultural practices weeded out...

all i was trying to say, is that for all the good that religion provides to those that need that crutch, there is probably a dead person killed in the name of that good...and that goes for any religion...my stance isn't against faith, but dogma and the hate that it breeds...i agree that even a atheistic(sp?) person could probably carry around that same dogma to the same point, however, history has shown that more have killed in the name of some god then opposed to none...............

does that make sense?

[Yonivore]

won't lie & say that i watched the video yet...but you already agreed that hitler and stalin were christians, so subtract theirs from the total....i can agree that the chairman was pretty freggin' godless, but still he didn't kill to get the religious element from his society, he wanted what he thought were backwards cultural practices weeded out...

all i was trying to say, is that for all the good that religion provides to those that need that crutch, there is probably a dead person killed in the name of that good...and that goes for any religion...my stance isn't against faith, but dogma and the hate that it breeds...i agree that even a atheistic(sp?) person could probably carry around that same dogma to the same point, however, history has shown that more have killed in the name of some god then opposed to none...............

does that make sense?
I never claimed they were Christians, they did.

[PixelPusher]

Catholics assemble!!!!!!

Run, children...RUN!!!!

[Cant_Be_Faded]

I heard if you declare yourself atheist there is a 45% chance you have toastfucked at least once in your life.

[LnGrrrR]

Usually athiests perpetrate genocides against defenseless innocents... Oh, some may have claimed to be religious but, seriously, what God-fearing man could intentionally starve 10's of millions or gas millions?

I love your "No True Scotsman" fallacy. "Oh, they SAID they were religious, but really, they can't be." Give me a break.

[LnGrrrR]

Kind of related, not really, but interesting video over at Reason TV

http://reason.tv/video/show/622.html

I wasn't inferring Mao Tse Dong and Stalin committed genocide for "atheistic" reasons and, to be fair, I think LgrrrR was being sarcastic when he asked that. But, I was offering these two, and there are more -- generally communists and fascists that have probably killed more people than all the religious wars combined...including Muslim-incited wars.

Seriously, it's hard to top the approximately 120 million people that died at the hands of Mao, Stalin, and Hitler.

I love how you blur 'atheists' with 'communists' and 'fascists'.

[Yonivore]

I love how you blur 'atheists' with 'communists' and 'fascists'.

See how I did that? Well, I would say, at the very least all three have one thing in common; they are egocentric. And, to be fair, I contend -- regardless of their claims -- Mao Tse Dong, Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, and a whole host of other murderous communists and fascists would, by virtue of their actions and megalomania, have to be athiest, whether they professed that or something else or nothing at all.

In fact, in the company of the above three, only Adolf Hitler pretended to be doing his killing for a greater good -- as evil as his logic may have been...by all accounts, Dong and Stalin were only interested in self-preservation.

[spurster]

From where did matter come?


From where did the place that matter came from come?

It's turtles all the way down!

[baseline bum]

It's turtles all the way down!

:lmao

[TMTTRIO]

I'm a Christian and I do believe that God is real and that he created us and not some big bang theory going around. I believe he did give us free will to choose our pathway in life and the Bible as how he wants us to live if we choose to do it instead of making everybody be the same and do the same thing. Yes at times in my Christian life I have doubted it and as a human being it's hard to always believe but then sometimes when you look at life and see just how complex everything is including how we work I just can't imagine it coming from nowhere and nothing. Yes I believe in the Bible and I try to follow it the best I can but I'm not going to force my beliefs on other people. People are going to choose for themselves what they're going to believe and what they're going to do.

[baseline bum]

I'm a Christian and I do believe that God is real and that he created us and not some big bang theory going around. I believe he did give us free will to choose our pathway in life and the Bible as how he wants us to live if we choose to do it instead of making everybody be the same and do the same thing. Yes at times in my Christian life I have doubted it and as a human being it's hard to always believe but then sometimes when you look at life and see just how complex everything is including how we work I just can't imagine it coming from nowhere and nothing. Yes I believe in the Bible and I try to follow it the best I can but I'm not going to force my beliefs on other people. People are going to choose for themselves what they're going to believe and what they're going to do.

Even Leviticus? Or is the bible to be cherry-picked?

[balli]

Yeah, all these literalistic readers of the Bible should have dreads if they want to be taken seriously.

[LnGrrrR]

See how I did that? Well, I would say, at the very least all three have one thing in common; they are egocentric. And, to be fair, I contend -- regardless of their claims -- Mao Tse Dong, Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, and a whole host of other murderous communists and fascists would, by virtue of their actions and megalomania, have to be athiest, whether they professed that or something else or nothing at all.

In fact, in the company of the above three, only Adolf Hitler pretended to be doing his killing for a greater good -- as evil as his logic may have been...by all accounts, Dong and Stalin were only interested in self-preservation.

And I contend that, in fact, every person who's ever said they were atheist was actually a hard-core religious person. See how fun it is to play this game?

Being religious means believing in a religion, not necessarily following the tenets of that religion.

Being religious or not has nothing to do with those who seek power. Those who are not religious will seek power for their own ends; those who are religious will seek power for their own ends and either claim it for themselves or in the name of their God.

And atheism still does not mean either fascism or communism. To blur the lines there is ridiculous.

There are plenty of religious people who don't seek such power. There are plenty of atheists who don't either.

[LnGrrrR]

Even Leviticus? Or is the bible to be cherry-picked?

Leviticus by far is the strangest book in the Bible.

[101A]

Leviticus by far is the strangest book in the Bible.

Read Revelation much?

[Yonivore]

And I contend that, in fact, every person who's ever said they were atheist was actually a hard-core religious person. See how fun it is to play this game?
If you define religion as belief, that'd be correct. Believing there is no God is as much religious as believing there is one.


Being religious means believing in a religion, not necessarily following the tenets of that religion.
True. And, if you believe in Christianity you will try to follow the tenets. I would submit Dong, Stalin, and Hitler did not believe in whatever religions they've been associated with (either by themselves, historians, or associates) or they would not have committed the atrocities they did. Further, that none of them ascribed their actions to any faith or religious belief only further demonstrates their lack of belief and points, more credibly, to their probable athiesm.


Being religious or not has nothing to do with those who seek power. Those who are not religious will seek power for their own ends; those who are religious will seek power for their own ends and either claim it for themselves or in the name of their God.
It's in how they seek and maintain power that is the defining criteria.


And atheism still does not mean either fascism or communism. To blur the lines there is ridiculous.
I would contend fascists and communists are more likely than not to be athiests. At least, in the sense they do not believe in God or they would not be capable of their actions.


There are plenty of religious people who don't seek such power. There are plenty of atheists who don't either.
There are only so many powerful positions to be attained. Not every believer or non-believer has the opportunity, means, or strive to seek power.

[mouse]

This is really not the forum to be talking about GOD if you really want intelligent answers, after all half the posters in here actually think fuel from a plane brought down three steel framed buildings all in one day.

I could tell you all how this Earth really came about, but to be honest I don't think your little brains could handle it.

[LnGrrrR]

If you define religion as belief, that'd be correct. Believing there is no God is as much religious as believing there is one.



No, no, no. Belief is slightly different from religion. I can believe in a God, but not be religious. To me, being religious means following (a majority of)the customs/cultures/rules of that religion. Hitler believed in God, but I'm not sure if he was very religious.

Hitler did actually make mention of his belief, in a few different instances. http://www.nobeliefs.com/hitler.htm. I'm not sure if he was particularly religious though. You could say that he did not follow the tenets of the Christian faith, but many people do not. Even many Christians rule out other brands of Christians as not being 'true' followers of the faith. But Hitler definitely was not an atheist.



I would contend fascists and communists are more likely than not to be athiests. At least, in the sense they do not believe in God or they would not be capable of their actions.


Perhaps, but without statistics it's mainly mental masturbation. Still, more likely does not make them equal. Even IF atheists were more likely to be communists/fascists, that would not mean they take blame for anything initiated by communists/fascists.

As far as the seeking power goes, my point was that it is not religion or lack of religion that decides whether a person has a thirst for power.

[Yonivore]

No, no, no. Belief is slightly different from religion. I can believe in a God, but not be religious. To me, being religious means following (a majority of)the customs/cultures/rules of that religion. Hitler believed in God, but I'm not sure if he was very religious.

Hitler did actually make mention of his belief, in a few different instances. http://www.nobeliefs.com/hitler.htm. I'm not sure if he was particularly religious though. You could say that he did not follow the tenets of the Christian faith, but many people do not. Even many Christians rule out other brands of Christians as not being 'true' followers of the faith. But Hitler definitely was not an atheist.
I'm not sure you can make the definitive claim Hitler believed in God. Nothing he did in his latter life revealed a belief in a higher power.


Perhaps, but without statistics it's mainly mental masturbation. Still, more likely does not make them equal. Even IF atheists were more likely to be communists/fascists, that would not mean they take blame for anything initiated by communists/fascists.
Unless it is precisely because of a communist's or fascist's lack of belief that failed to restrain their actions.

Yes, people who claim to be Christian (or religious) perpetrate heinous crimes -- sometimes in the name of their belief or on the sincere belief it is in accordance with their belief. But, my contention is, at the core of their being, they do not believe in a higher power simply because they allowed their own motivations (or interpretation of their belief system) cause them to do something any objective person would know is anathema to a belief in God.


As far as the seeking power goes, my point was that it is not religion or lack of religion that decides whether a person has a thirst for power.
But, a belief in a higher power is more likely to restrain an abuse of power than is a belief in nothing more than self.

[Blake]

I would contend fascists and communists are more likely than not to be athiests. At least, in the sense they do not believe in God or they would not be capable of their actions.


Do they invade other countries in the name of atheism?

No. Argument over, move along.

[Cartman]

Anyone who thinks man came from an Ape deserves to be one.

[Yonivore]

Do they invade other countries in the name of atheism?

No. Argument over, move along.
What kind of sense does that make? Of course, they don't -- who was ever motivated by non-belief? But, instead, they are unrestrained in their actions by a lack of accountability to a higher power.

[Last Comic Standing]

After reading some of these posts I am convinced man came from an ape! :lmao

[Darrin]

Atheism is a belief system, just like religion. Belief in the non-existence of God is unsupported by any evidence. After all, how do you prove a negative?

Stop watching Fox News now. It is not a belief system; it is a classification. As for the second sentence :rolleyes That argument is schoolyard.



Rational skeptics, or Agnostics, whatever they're called--that is, those who believe only that which has been proven by science--do not believe in either the existence or non-existence of God.

They're called atheist.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/agnostic
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/atheist

[Blake]

What kind of sense does that make? Of course, they don't -- who was ever motivated by non-belief? But, instead, they are unrestrained in their actions by a lack of accountability to a higher power.

so then what point are you trying to make here?

the point on the opposite side is that wars were started for religious reasons.

[Yonivore]

so then what point are you trying to make here?

the point on the opposite side is that wars were started for religious reasons.
No, the opposite of a religious war is one that is absent a religious context.

[Darrin]

What kind of sense does that make? Of course, they don't -- who was ever motivated by non-belief? But, instead, they are unrestrained in their actions by a lack of accountability to a higher power.

Atheism isn't non-belief. You have to believe religion has the answers to have that attitude. I look at current belief systems like I look at the Greek gods: it's a fairy tale someone made up a long time ago and has been disproven by science. It is history, motivation, and art, but it's not real. And when it's motivation it is sad. Reality is much more interesting and promotes more peace.

[Darrin]

No, the opposite of a religious war is one that is absent a religious context.

Religion and war have very similar arguments and effects on the masses.

[LnGrrrR]

I'm not sure you can make the definitive claim Hitler believed in God. Nothing he did in his latter life revealed a belief in a higher power.

What revealed that he didn't? The very fact that he often referred to belief in God in his own diary should be enough to state that he believed. Belief is subjective, and if the subject professes that belief then it's tough to say he didn't. You can say he didn't follow the beliefs WELL, but that's not the same argument. I can say that of all the people who claim Jesus was a 'warrior', or those who claim that Jesus wanted us to have money to make us happy.

No person follows all the beliefs of their chosen religion.



Unless it is precisely because of a communist's or fascist's lack of belief that failed to restrain their actions.

Yes, people who claim to be Christian (or religious) perpetrate heinous crimes -- sometimes in the name of their belief or on the sincere belief it is in accordance with their belief. But, my contention is, at the core of their being, they do not believe in a higher power simply because they allowed their own motivations (or interpretation of their belief system) cause them to do something any objective person would know is anathema to a belief in God.


And I would argue your contention is wrong. What YOU claim is anathema to God is certainly not what others claim. Do you think homosexuality is a sin? How about abortion? What about using the Lord's name in vain? What of slavery?

What about other topics? Are people predetermined to go to heaven before birth? Is the only way to Heaven by admitting Jesus as a savior? All different people who claim to be Christian have varying beliefs on these subjects. In fact, some people would argue that any form of torture is anti-Christian.

No one person has a stranglehold on "what is a Christian value".

To claim, as you do, that 'in the core of their soul they do not believe' is a pointless argument. I can claim that at your core you believe you are a zebra. It has no weight to it.


But, a belief in a higher power is more likely to restrain an abuse of power than is a belief in nothing more than self.

What makes you think that? DO you have proof? I see no reason that the chances of a religious person to abuse power isn't just as great as a non-religious person to abuse power. As I said upthread, a person's willingness to seek out/abuse power has nothing to do with their religious beliefs, or lack thereof.

[LnGrrrR]

No, the opposite of a religious war is one that is absent a religious context.

I disagree. The opposite of a religious war would be a war to deny people the ability to profess faith. IIRC, something similar to what Stalin did. Anything which would outlaw religion, or explicitly kill believers. That would be a war started for 'atheistic' reasons.

By your definition, the war in Iraq would be 'atheistic'. Yes, it was not started for religious purposes, but it was also not started for ANTI-religious purposes.

[Yonivore]

I disagree. The opposite of a religious war would be a war to deny people the ability to profess faith.
That, too, is a religious war because it has a religious context.


IIRC, something similar to what Stalin did. Anything which would outlaw religion, or explicitly kill believers. That would be a war started for 'atheistic' reasons.
If, in fact, those were the reasons, you'd be correct. Stalin didn't kill people because of what they believed but because of the freedom and indepence those beliefs gave them. It threatened his power.


By your definition, the war in Iraq would be 'atheistic'. Yes, it was not started for religious purposes, but it was also not started for ANTI-religious purposes.
Huh?

[LnGrrrR]

Huh?

To sum up, you believe that any war started due to religious reasons (whether they be FOR or AGAINST religion) is a religious war.

I think the point that was being made was that some wars have been started with the express purposes of spreading a religious faith, while there have only been a few wars where the express purpose was to DENY faith in any religion.

[Blake]

After reading some of these posts I am convinced man came from an ape! :lmao

I am convinced that Mark Cuban came from an ape

[Blake]

No, the opposite of a religious war is one that is absent a religious context.

really? is that what Webster said is the definitive opposite of a religious war?

this thread is losing IQ points by the minute.

[Yonivore]

really? is that what Webster said is the definitive opposite of a religious war?

this thread is losing IQ points by the minute.
I don't think Webster defines antonyms. You're thinking of Roget.

[Yonivore]

To sum up, you believe that any war started due to religious reasons (whether they be FOR or AGAINST religion) is a religious war.
No, not true. Some people claim religious reasons for wars started for other reasons.


I think the point that was being made was that some wars have been started with the express purposes of spreading a religious faith, while there have only been a few wars where the express purpose was to DENY faith in any religion.
I don't know. The Muslim invasion of the West and Northern Africa that preceded the crusades was an effort to stamp out Christianity through violence as well as cultural immersion.

Many religious wars are started for both reasons; to deny one their choice of faith while demanding they adopt the faith of the aggressor. But, regardless, I contend the most people have met their demise in conflicts (genocides) that had absolutely nothing to do with religion.

[LnGrrrR]

Many religious wars are started for both reasons; to deny one their choice of faith while demanding they adopt the faith of the aggressor. But, regardless, I contend the most people have met their demise in conflicts (genocides) that had absolutely nothing to do with religion.

I will agree here that wars started for a stated religious purpose are actually started due to the desire of the person/group starting them for increased power.

[Blake]

I don't think Webster defines antonyms. You're thinking of Roget.

thanks.

I looked it up. antonym of genius: Yonivore

[Yonivore]

thanks.

I looked it up. antonym of genius: Yonivore
Hey, I'm not the one that doesn't know the difference between a thesaurus and a dictionary...an antonym and a definition.

[Yonivore]

What’s So Great About Christianity (http://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2008&month=11)


IN RECENT YEARS there has arisen a new atheism that represents a direct attack on Western Christianity. Books such as Richard Dawkins’ The God Delusion, Christopher Hitchens’ God Is Not Great, and Sam Harris’ The End of Faith, all contend that Western society would be better off if we could eradicate from it the last vestiges of Christianity. But Christianity is largely responsible for many of the principles and institutions that even secular people cherish—chief among them equality and liberty.
Good digest, I recommend it. Not just this month but, every month. Subscription is free and they'll even mail it to you.

[LnGrrrR]

What’s So Great About Christianity (http://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2008&month=11)


Good digest, I recommend it. Not just this month but, every month. Subscription is free and they'll even mail it to you.

I disagree with many of the atheists who attack theists as superstitious/causing all our problems/etc etc. I'm fine with you believing whatever you want, as long as you don't bring it into politics without a secular reasoning behind your logic.

[Winehole23]

The story of Christ, while it's proven that Jesus walked the earth and he was wise, I don't think he was any more the 'son of man' than you or me. I think that religion highlights the worst of human nature--seperation, condemnation, mystical unscientific beliefs, mass hysteria, fear of disapproval, and abusive power to name a few. Agree, with this qualification: it also represents the best. Unity, praise, wisdom, peacemaking, striving for righteousness and mercy.


We need real people to solve real problems and relying on God to fill in the blanks, as politicians and clerics ask us to do, just stunts our growth. I know it stunted mine. I'm not a great mind by any means but my potential was wasted, in some measure, on too much energy towards God, and not helping my fellow man. This insight is important, but may based on a false antithesis. Matthew 25: 31-46


but seriously i think that all religions are wrong, and whatever may be in your heart (even if it is a religion that is already in existance) is right for you and you alone...At the end you come very close to saying all religions are right.


-jesus was right, he was the son of god, as am i, and you, and everything we see. The sole vote for pantheism in the thread.


-this world is your heaven and your hell. The only heaven worth having, and the only hell worth fearing IMO.


I believe good people are rewarded; otherwise what reason would there be to be good.Counterpoint: The Book of Job.



I believe in God, hate religion myself. I'm fine with religions. It's mainly the religious I can't stand.


I believe the Bible is a good book with some good values that some evil men have taken and misused and abused to further their own selfish goals. If the matter at issue were trivial, nobody would be bothered by its misuse.


The same skeptical side of me that looks at the Bible and it's inconsistencies and thinks "how can this book be 100% the one right book in the history of mankind" also sees what man has accomplished and created and I can't help but think that the universe was created by intelligent design. We certainly didn't make it, and our attempts to redesign it inspire humility, when they do not horrify.


I believe in the story of Christ, but I can't seem to wrap my head around the idea that simply "believing in Him, you won't perish but have everlasting life". There are so many problems I have with this and other facets of the Bible that it would be a thread on to it's own.You're not a pharisee. That's much to your credit, IMO.


In the end, I don't really know what I am. I just know I'm still looking.

[/rambling]I could be wrong, but I doubt the the honest seeker will be denied in the end.


Also, 'choosing to believe' is false. You can't 'choose to believe' anymore than you can choose to enjoy the flavor of something. You either do believe or you don't. Outside forces may influence your belief, but it's not a conscious decision on the same level as "Will I wear a red shirt today or a blue one?"Tend to agree, but I do believe that you can fake it 'til you make it. How else do very young people acquire religion?


Finally, atheism is not a 'belief system'. Now, some gnostic atheists may have a 'belief system' but it is not some universal, overarching plan as most religions have. True, but the question it addresses is provincially religious. It may not be a system, but that is because it has only one dogma: there is no god.

If atheism puts science on God's throne, it may be fairly argued (following Paul Feyerabend here) that it relaunches itself as a religion.


Ever notice how athiests are, more times than not, as religiously zealous in their position as are many fundamentalist Christians?The irreligious are not less zealous in their self-love than the pious, but IMO they are not more so either. So yes, there is a resemblance. Anyone with very strongly developed opinions will tend to defend and promote them energetically. Whether this is peculiar to religion or the lack of it is doubtful IMO.



Originally Posted by Yonivore http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/images/Style_Templates/Flashskin/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?p=2960127#post2960127)
But, a belief in a higher power is more likely to restrain an abuse of power than is a belief in nothing more than self.




What makes you think that? DO you have proof? I see no reason that the chances of a religious person to abuse power isn't just as great as a non-religious person to abuse power. As I said upthread, a person's willingness to seek out/abuse power has nothing to do with their religious beliefs, or lack thereof. Yonivore characterizes religion somewhat typically as a moral restrainer (katechon), but he seems to think it's the only one. For the rest of us, there's conscience.

[Darrin]

Religion does serve one purpose--it brings people hope. It can be easy to be attacked and lose the ability to see past someone's wronging you. IT means hope is open to the interpretation of personality, and that is a daunting life to lead. If there's one aspect of religion I miss, that is the only one.

[SnakeBoy]

From where did matter come?

All matter was formed during the big bang. See, there was nothing in the universe and then there was a big explosion of light and energy and everything was formed out of that. The top scientific minds agree that this is how the universe was formed. They're still trying to figure out what caused the big bang but not having much luck. It's like someone or something just wanted light and flipped a switch...a real puzzle.

[Yonivore]

All matter was formed during the big bang. See, there was nothing in the universe and then there was a big explosion of light and energy and everything was formed out of that. The top scientific minds agree that this is how the universe was formed. They're still trying to figure out what caused the big bang but not having much luck. It's like someone or something just wanted light and flipped a switch...a real puzzle.
And God said, "Let there be light."

[Last Comic Standing]

All matter was formed during the big bang. See, there was nothing in the universe and then there was a big explosion of light and energy and everything was formed out of that. The top scientific minds agree that this is how the universe was formed. They're still trying to figure out what caused the big bang but not having much luck. It's like someone or something just wanted light and flipped a switch...a real puzzle.


That's the best the so called smart people of this earth can come up with? Hell i rather just listen to a burning bush! :lmao

[mouse]

All matter was formed during the big bang. See, there was nothing in the universe and then there was a big explosion of light and energy and everything was formed out of that. The top scientific minds agree that this is how the universe was formed.

That is all bullshit! It's a known fact that when something explodes all particles must rotate in the same direction. There are many planets out there that rotate in an opposite direction of other planets.





They're still trying to figure out what caused the big bang but not having much luck.

Then why teach it in the schools? Why have it in the books? sounds like theory or religion, if you don't have proof why lie or mislead the students?




It's like someone or something just wanted light and flipped a switch...a real puzzle.

It's only a puzzle to those with stubborn egos who refuse to believe there is a creator.

[LnGrrrR]

Then why teach it in the schools? Why have it in the books? sounds like theory or religion, if you don't have proof why lie or mislead the students?


Gravity is also just technically a theory. Should we stop teaching that as well? lol

[Yonivore]

Gravity is also just technically a theory. Should we stop teaching that as well? lol
Are there competing theories?

[LnGrrrR]

Are there competing theories?

Sure! I just made one up, called the Theory of Everything Falls Down-ed-ness. Let's teach it in schools! Or we could use Aristotle's... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotelian_theory_of_gravity

To be fair, gravity is. AFAIK, a fact. But how gravity occurs is a theory, as no one knows why gravity exists/what causes it.

Proponents of other theories tend to not have facts to back it up. They consist of people doing two things. 1) Pointing to holes in the Big Bang Theory. 2) Looking at those holes and saying, "See, our galaxy must have been designed!"

[mouse]

Gravity is also just technically a theory. Should we stop teaching that as well? lol

saying something is a theory is not the problem, it's when the text book says "450 Billion years ago there was a......"

The science books don't say they think the earth is at least 20 thousand years old, they say it's 250 million years old.

They also teach that you can tell how old a dinosaur bone is by using the fossils found around them. But that Geologic column chart was proved to be wrong many years ago and yet it's still in the text books.


Geologic Column:
Charles Lyell [1797-1875] is credited as the author of the Geologic Column. The Geologic Column is a 10 or 11 layered column that supposedly was formed over millions to billions of years by accumulation of star dust, and the death of animals and plants. Charles Darwin picked up Lyell's ideas and popularized them.

[LnGrrrR]

saying something is a theory is not the problem, it's when the text book says "450 Billion years ago there was a......"

The science books don't say they think the earth is at least 20 thousand years old, they say it's 250 million years old.

They also teach that you can tell how old a dinosaur bone is by using the fossils found around them. But that Geologic column chart was proved to be wrong many years ago and yet it's still in the text books.

Who disproved the Geologic column?

[Yonivore]

Who disproved the Geologic column?

Probably Extra Stout's High School science teacher.

[DIO]

Who disproved the Geologic column?


http://www.metacafe.com/watch/471282/hovind_disproves_the_geologic_column/

[ElNono]

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/471282/hovind_disproves_the_geologic_column/

This same Hovind?

Kent E. Hovind (born January 15, 1953) is an American Young Earth creationist and conspiracy theorist, currently serving time in a federal prison for tax-related crimes. He is famous for creation science seminars that aim to convince listeners to reject modern theories of evolution, geophysics, and cosmology in favor of biblical creation. Hovind's views are criticized by the scientific community, and some fellow young Earth creationist organizations like Answers in Genesis.[3]

Hovind established the Creation Science Evangelism ministry in 1989[4] and, before his incarceration, frequently argued for Young Earth creationism in his talks at private schools and churches, at debates, and on radio and television broadcasts.

Since January 2007 Hovind has been serving a ten-year term in the Federal Correctional Institution, Edgefield in Edgefield, South Carolina, for 58 tax offenses, obstructing federal agents, and related charges.[5]

[baseline bum]

:lmao Young Earth :lmao

[mouse]

Do a little research, before you put your foot in your pie hole.
The government has been on his ass for years. If the government really wanted to they could convict us all for non payment of taxes. Do you report your income tax when your neighbor gives you 500 to help fix his fence?

You must really hate the man to pull out the Tax evasion card. If your going to do a screening of everyone before we can quote them then you may as well shut down the politics forum. Does it matter if Edison had child porn under his mattress? he still invented the light bulb and if you was going to do a debate on who invented the light bulb are you going to say it was not him because he went to prison for sex charges?

I wonder how many people have been to jail or prison that today have good jobs and work for the government? hell even the famous judge Mathis who has a TV show was in jail. why not do a search on people who are doing good things today that went to prison or jail. start with Gandhi and end up with Bill Gates.
http://listverse.com/literature/10-literary-geniuses-who-went-to-jail/


But I am happy you went there it shows you have nothing in your ammo pouch to prove your point but to try and find a cheesy ChumpDumper tactic to side step the issues.

Good work!

A person with your intelligence deserves to believe in the Geologic Column :tu

[baseline bum]

Young earth has about as much credibility as your planes were holograms and the WTC was brought down by explosives hypothesis.

[SnakeBoy]

the WTC was brought down by explosives hypothesis.

We could know if that hypothesis was true or not if the government would just tell us if all the dust from the WTC was spinning in the same direction.

[Blake]

Hey, I'm not the one that doesn't know the difference between a thesaurus and a dictionary...an antonym and a definition.

it's really besides the point, but it's just another example of someone spouting off what they think are facts before they actually do just 10 seconds of internet research.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/

just click on "thesaurus"

[Blake]

I'm fine with religions. It's mainly the religious I can't stand.

from a practical matter, I'm fine with neither.

Who is more right.....Catholics, Baptists, Methodists, or Presbyterians?


We certainly didn't make it, and our attempts to redesign it inspire humility, when they do not horrify.

ugh. big words hurt brain.

If we certainly didn't make the Bible, then who made the Koran?


You're not a pharisee. That's much to your credit, IMO.

uh, ok.


I could be wrong, but I doubt the the honest seeker will be denied in the end.

I guess we'll find out when we die. Too bad I can't find out before that happens.


Tend to agree, but I do believe that you can fake it 'til you make it. How else do very young people acquire religion?

through mom and pop, but I fail to see how this is as a response to the original

[Blake]

That's the best the so called smart people of this earth can come up with? Hell i rather just listen to a burning bush! :lmao

you listen to burning bushes?

it sound more like you've been inhaling a little of your own burning bush

[Extra Stout]

Extra Stout owns me so thoroughly that I whine about it in multiple threads.

[Extra Stout]

People who believe in young-earth creation and think the flood created all geological phenomena tend to suck at finding oil.

[Winehole23]

from a practical matter, I'm fine with neither.

Who is more right.....Catholics, Baptists, Methodists, or Presbyterians?Up to you. Each claims his own without my recommendation. I have no advice for anybody else about religion. Nor do I have my own private rankings of the major sects.

You judge by the fruits. A particular religion is good for a person if it turns out well for that person. Or more precisely, if the person turns out well.


ugh. big words hurt brain.

If we certainly didn't make the Bible, then who made the Koran?The clause immediately before my reply to you referred to intelligent design and the created world. I was referring to that, not the Bible. I apologize for the unclear pronoun.



through mom and pop, but I fail to see how this is as a response to the originalLnnGrrrR suggested that belief is not deliberate but automatic. I suggested a case where people come to it gradually. A fairly clear counterpoint, isn't it?

[The Reckoning]

Catholics ftw.

we can drink as much as we want :toast. we even drink during Mass.

[Yonivore]

My ass hurts from being buttfucked, on every topic, in everty thread, by everyone in the forum. But, that's okay, I think I'm gay now.
Wow! That was easy.

[Extra Stout]

Wow! That was easy.
Between your newfound conspiracy theory fetish, your near-total scientific and cultural illiteracy, your biblical fundamentalism combined with lack of any recognizably Christian moral conduct, your total dependence upon pundits and blogs to form your half-baked opinions to the point of your plagarizing them, and your reflexive, childish obsession with teh gay...

you should run to be the Republican candidate for President in 2012. Really. You epitomize what the party stands for today.

[Yonivore]

Between your newfound conspiracy theory fetish, your near-total scientific and cultural illiteracy, your biblical fundamentalism combined with lack of any recognizably Christian moral conduct, your total dependence upon pundits and blogs to form your half-baked opinions to the point of your plagarizing them, and your reflexive, childish obsession with teh gay...

you should run to be the Republican candidate for President in 2012. Really. You epitomize what the party stands for today.
C'mon, say what you really feel. Don't hold back.

[clambake]

Between your newfound conspiracy theory fetish, your near-total scientific and cultural illiteracy, your biblical fundamentalism combined with lack of any recognizably Christian moral conduct, your total dependence upon pundits and blogs to form your half-baked opinions to the point of your plagarizing them, and your reflexive, childish obsession with teh gay...

you should run to be the Republican candidate for President in 2012. Really. You epitomize what the party stands for today.

considering he's already on the ledge, do you think this is appropriate?

[Yonivore]

considering he's already on the ledge, do you think this is appropriate?

Yeah! Trying to push me over the edge, ES? Sadist. (Not that there's anything wrong with that. Whatever cracks your whip, as they say.)

[Yonivore]

Hey, maybe you two should get a room...or, start a thread!

Ooops! Too late:

The Yonivore sucks topic... (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=111635)

Maybe you could go there and vent or something.

[clambake]

are you gonna be ok?

[Yonivore]

are you gonna be ok?
Absolutely! Thanks for asking...I'm touched.

[clambake]

I'm touched.

no shit.

[Ignignokt]

This is really not the forum to be talking about GOD if you really want intelligent answers, after all half the posters in here actually think fuel from a plane brought down three steel framed buildings all in one day.

I could tell you all how this Earth really came about, but to be honest I don't think your little brains could handle it.

lemme guess, the Elohim race of aliens created us..

[mouse]

:lmao Young Earth :lmao


Where did i post i thought the earth was 800 years old? Where did i post that Dr.Hovind was 100% right, or that I believe in all his beliefs?

Where did i post that scientist are bad and 100% wrong?

show me the post where i said I was 100% sure about religion,politics,or any other topic! I only post what I think makes sense to me and or is that to much for your very short attention span mind as you have a hard time trying to debate a real topic,and chooses to surf porn?
then you need to not waste anymore of my time. I don't want to hear about how Ben Franklyn had pictures of naked men under his bed when he was 50 years old, What does that have to do with what he invented? Either it works or it doesn't.

the Dr. Hovid vato can be pean-chea homo who at one time went to jail for a beer run back in 1985, if he proves fossils and Atheist have something in common I want to see for myself.

And after doing so? i may post a video or two to prove you might be wrong, But for you to give up because you couldn't find something on Google that would make you sound smart, and maybe win a smack off with mouse?

That shit won't fly dawg, You better come back with some evidence if your going to prove to me man came from a monkey, or that the earth is a million years old.

prove GOD (aka Ala if your Muslim) is a lie..............................

[baseline bum]

Where did i post i thought the earth was 800 years old? Where did i post that Dr.Hovind was 100% right, or that I believe in all his beliefs?

Where did i post that scientist are bad and 100% wrong?

show me the post where i said I was 100% sure about religion,politics,or any other topic! I only post what I think makes sense to me and or is that to much for your very short attention span mind as you have a hard time trying to debate a real topic,and chooses to surf porn?
then you need to not waste anymore of my time. I don't want to hear about how Ben Franklyn had pictures of naked men under his bed when he was 50 years old, What does that have to do with what he invented? Either it works or it doesn't.

the Dr. Hovid vato can be homo who at one time went to jail for a beer run back in 1985, if he proves fossils and Atheist have something in common I want to see for myself.

And after doing so? i may post a video or two to prove you might be wrong, But for you to give up because you couldn't find something on Google that would make you sound smart, and maybe win a smack off with mouse?

That shit won't fly dawg, You better come back with some evidence if your going to prove to me man came from a monkey, or that the earth is a million years old.

prove GOD (aka Ala if your Muslim) is a lie..............................

You equate NASA's research to finding a pack of Sweet and Low or a bag of coffee, so what's the point? I don't argue with every homeless schizophrenic who yells at me when I walk by him neither.

[Blake]

prove GOD (aka Ala if your Muslim) is a lie..............................

sheez.

Believe what you want, just don't tell me to prove something doesn't exist that we can't physically see.

[8ft.tall.tejano]

wow, this one got really off topic...
i don't care what you pray to, i just think that unless a church provides some sort of community service, then they shouldn't be tax exempt...

[Blake]

wow, this one got really off topic...
i don't care what you pray to, i just think that unless a church provides some sort of community service, then they shouldn't be tax exempt...

:lol

way to get it back on topic with a church tax exemption opinion. No way would that hijack this thread for another 3-4 pages....

although I'm curious.....what do you define as community service and what church do you know of that doesn't do some kind of work in the community?

[8ft.tall.tejano]

yeah but i hi-jacked into something that i would find interesting....but nice call out...
homeless shelter, childcare, senior care, food bank, and the like would be at the top of my list...

there are plenty of older churches in this city (hell its prob nationwide) that just take up lot space on weekdays and on sundays have their little services and thats it...i think thats bullshit...how can they just sit and collect tithes and keep them tax free if they aren't doing something to help the community? so if they didn't eventually the prop taxes would take them out, so we could put something of use on the lot...

[mouse]

You equate NASA's research to finding a pack of Sweet and Low or a bag of coffee, so what's the point?


I never said I was against research, I said if you and your NASA buddies want another 80 Billion dollars you better find more than just a sugar crystal on Mars.

Next time you go by a local hospital go tell a 12 year old girl in the Cancer unit don't worry about dying in six months NASA found a sweet tart on Jupiter.



I don't argue with every homeless schizophrenic who yells at me when I walk by him neither.

But you listen, and that is all that matters.