Well, Grad, I am angry at the atrocities, be it in the name of any God or not. I'm with you on that. And to be honest, it's painful.
My stand is that I hope one day people will not be easily manipulated, would look at culture, media, magazines, religion, and all with a spirit of their own and make up their own mind. Even create their own thoughts without trying to destroy another person but find pleasure in the diversity, and probably celebrate that each one is capable of imagination, reason, self-examination, and relate with, from, or without with each other.
When I see young teenagers here adopting hip-hop gangster images without even questioning themselves and the idea is to me a great pain. It makes them follow a paradigm of drugs, rape, gun-point intellect, and just plain stupid. I don't see rap or the culture being shown as truth but as entertainment, but when kids get led to this and eventually an adult takes control and form a retarded following that looks and behaves like a cult, leading sheep to certain evils, I burn inside.
Thus, giving just one example there, there's something incomplete with most if not all people. I too am subject to this, and so I try hard and ask and discuss.
I agree with you Grad, and I have a suspicion why things in this discussion at least seems to be mirrored from what others have already said or implied.
To answer the quote there, I would lay a vote on the box that says, "No". Just as much that people would not simply love the piece of music, but must admire the musician. The inventor, rather than simply the useful invention.
You know what's funny about "Purpose Driven Life" (not the book but the idea of just these words)? Personally, and this is just personal mental exercise. Don't these people think it's demeaning to have a purpose? That one must have purpose to have a fulfilling life? Doesn't this idea make utilities of people?
Anyway, that's some points there. Hint, hint.
But then when another group starts bashing at them, because some other group that has their same symbol or clothing or color of skin is doing something terrible, then I've got a problem with that. I believe anyone does, this is why it's wrong to just attack "Religion" in general.
It think it actually somehow gathers moderates from moderate to extremes. God forbid. I don't know why atheist suddenly rallied and marched out against everyone. I saw this and thought, Wow this is counter productive if the aim was to destroy religion. This is establishing religion.
edit: Check this out guys. This shows something about people who "confess" and say, "Lord, lord!"
But then when another group starts bashing at them, because some other group that has their same symbol or clothing or color of skin is doing something terrible, then I've got a problem with that. I believe anyone does, this is why it's wrong to just attack "Religion" in general.
It think it actually somehow gathers moderates from moderate to extremes. God forbid. I don't know why atheist suddenly rallied and marched out against everyone. I saw this and thought, Wow this is counter productive if the aim was to destroy religion. This is establishing religion.
What, why?
Skin colour is something you're born with, and attacking that is wrong
Religion, however, is just a hypothesis about how the world works. You can be convinced into it, and convinced out of it.
Religions can't prove their hypothesis is correct even after thousands of years, so they should just be mocked like every other bad idea.
And that's why the ones that adhere to the truths in their books asks, "Please provide proof that what we accept as truth is actually false".
This is actually a signal, a plea, that asks for more than just ridicule but actually reasonable and humane approach.
When a person believes something, atheists should look into this, and have lived their lives with all the harsh (or otherwise) precepts of their beliefs, bashing them head on with "Stupid" is just not helping. Why? It's obvious. This is my point.
To answer your question therefore is easy, a person's beliefs is not just an "Idea" like you would at least want to consider. It is like their skin color, even more. It's like believing and feeling one is a man, even if one's body speaks otherwise.
Care is called for.
Edit: Check this guy's thoughts about what is happening.
True. I agree with that. It's a play of words actually. What is says is a cognitive response saying, "give us something that will totally remove all our proofs of the existence of God without calling us insane/stupid." From here, if you agree, let's take their so called proof seriously. Let's assume that we ourselves accept that in some way this could lead them to believe what they believe.
You see, calling people stupid or plain silly to rail them off their track is simply just like saying, "If you don't believe in my God you will go to hell." It's just not very productive.
Now, if that's not clear enough, let me put it this way:
A man sees in the desert an oasis, and tells his fellow, "dude, I know there's an oasis up ahead" the other guy says, "well, bro, that's a good story."
Now, assuming the default is unknown that there is or is not really an oasis, given that they both have no idea where they are exactly in the desert or what planet they're on (and let's not go into the details of the oasis, just that an oasis because both of them then will assume defaults on what an oasis is or lack of), and they actually have theories where they are but they generally don't agree.
Now, how would this other guy who doesn't see the oasis convince his friend to not go into the direction of his oasis?
Something non-theists should look into is that theist attribute everything visible to the invisible God. "If you cannot love your brother whom you see, how can you love God whom you do not see?" or something like that. (Taking the bible as an example because this seems to be more popular in our countries where we are)
This means, some theists actually know their God is invisible, and would say, "well, you are an evidence of God."
But if I don't agree that what is visible is a proof of the invisible creator, then boom, a chasm is born. Right? So that direction is, I think, totally not going to lead anywhere.
[ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
Here's a question thrown:
Is it possible to create in a lab with the proper conditions a single celled organism and allow it to create 3 or more types of other forms and eventually distinct DNA configurations (or forms of life) without using already existing parts from organic things?
A lot of assumptions need to be cleared, I admit, in order to properly simulate this and even make it happen fast enough so we can observe it without having to wait billions of years.
Is it possible to create in a lab with the proper conditions a single celled organism and allow it to create 3 or more types of other forms and eventually distinct DNA configurations (or forms of life) without using already existing parts from organic things?
A lot of assumptions need to be cleared, I admit, in order to properly simulate this and even make it happen fast enough so we can observe it without having to wait billions of years.
Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away.
Psalm 63:3-4
Because your steadfast love is better than life,
my lips will praise you.
So I will bless you as long as I live;
in your name I will lift up my hands.
Ephesians 2:4-7
But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved— and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
It's not like their skin colour. You can change your religion. You can't change your race.
It's not an atheist's job to prove them wrong. If I say I have a magic unicorn, it's my job to prove it.
Not really Ev.... if you say you have a unicorn ... thats your own business.... I honestly dont give a fuck...
Religion isnt so much about what they actually belief...... they are generally as a whole revolve around how to live your life.
You can not tell me that the teaching's of Jesus Christ do not make the world a better place. If if you don't think he was a magic man. His teaching still hold values.
Lock this thread so these people Stop bashing religion this is disappointing that this thread is left open for people to open bash other peoples ideals.
If if you don't think he was a magic man
Yes but why would anyone think Jesus is a `magic man` if they know their history?
Edwin Yamauchi calls "probably the most important reference to Jesus outside the New Testament." Reporting on Emperor Nero's decision to blame the Christians for the fire that had destroyed Rome in A.D. 64, the Roman historian Tacitus wrote:
Nero fastened the guilt . . . on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of . . . Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome. . . .
Another important source of evidence about Jesus and early Christianity can be found in the letters of Pliny the Younger to Emperor Trajan. Pliny was the Roman governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor. In one of his letters, dated around A.D. 112, he asks Trajan's advice about the appropriate way to conduct legal proceedings against those accused of being Christians.
At one point in his letter, Pliny relates some of the information he has learned about these Christians:
They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food but food of an ordinary and innocent kind.
Lucian of Samosata was a second century Greek satirist. In one of his works, he wrote of the early Christians as follows:
The Christians . . . worship a man to this day the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account. . . . [It] was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws
Perhaps the most remarkable reference to Jesus outside the Bible can be found in the writings of Josephus, a first century Jewish historian(Josephus was not a Christian). On two occasions, in his Jewish Antiquities, he mentions Jesus.
About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he . . . wrought surprising feats. . . . He was the Christ. When Pilate . . .condemned him to be crucified, those who had . . . come to love him did not give up their affection for him. On the third day he appeared . . . restored to life. . . . And the tribe of Christians . . . has . . . not disappeared.
There`s many more sources apart from the bible that gives historic evidence for Christ.
No no .... I was saying ... the man existed and that it really doesn't matter if he was really the son of god or not.... his teachings were valuable regardless.
anyways im done with this topic.
All this thread does is give bigots the chance to mock others beliefs. It should really be locked... I didn't think SC2mapster or curse for that matter supported such ignorant attacks on individuals freedoms.
I can only stand to argue with "your stupid because you believe something I don't", so many times.
Haters gonna hate I guess. Its sad that other peoples beliefs is such a bother to you atheists.
I struggle to read Christian apologetics. Often they rely on scientific falsehoods, or outright rejection of the scientific method which just frustrates me to a point where I can't continue.
I would happily read a peer-reviewed analysis of the evidence for creationism. However there aren't any. None by the Institute of Creationist Research. None by the Discovery Institute.
No religion can present repeatable, lab-testable proof of their deity. Fact. I'd be the first to welcome an afterlife but there's just no reason to believe in any of it.
All this thread does is give bigots the chance to mock others beliefs. It should really be locked... I didn't think SC2mapster or curse for that matter supported such ignorant attacks on individuals freedoms.
Indeed, there was a name for the time when religion had its chance to run the world: it was called the dark ages. My means of fighting religion are limited to intellectual discourse, which I have made clear. Yet I seem to recall you physically threatening pretty much every non-believer on this forum. Are there no rules against that here? Either way, you're a dangerous idiot and a prime example of my point.
The only reason you want this thread locked is because you want to prohibit OUR freedom of speech and continue propagating your intellectual slavery. I'm not Korean but maybe you should move to China if you want to be such a god damn communist.
Religion isnt so much about what they actually belief...... they are generally as a whole revolve around how to live your life.
You can not tell me that the teaching's of Jesus Christ do not make the world a better place. If if you don't think he was a magic man. His teaching still hold values.
Jesus also advocates child abuse, beating slaves and murdering those who don't believe as you do. Perfect moral teachings if you're a brutal bronze-age troglodyte. Screw Jesus and screw you.
Religion is directly responsible for millions of deaths: http://teapotatheism.blogspot.com/2008/06/anonymous-wanted-body-count-total-so-he.html
Final tally for theism: 2,229,074,100
Highest possible atheism death toll with Stalin: 95,000,000
Stalin shouldn't even count because his atheism was no more responsible for his actions than his communism or any of his other beliefs were.
Yes, I think the world would be better off if all religion was eradicated. No, I don't plan on scourging heretics anytime soon, that's religion's job. The comfort that it provides people is not worth the atrocities that it brings and the years of scientific progress that it takes away. There is no such thing as moderate religion. Again, even my parents, my parents; friends, and my friends have expressed bigoted, anti-scientific beliefs. Shit, just look at what you people post in this thread. The world would be better off without these beliefs, but I do not blame these people. They are victims of childhood religious indoctrination, and that's another reason why religion is evil.
If you kept your beliefs to yourself, nobody would care.
Hrmmm, count 5 you statements, 0 "Religious people in General Statements". But hey, that's okay, you thought the slavery issues in America were fraught for over 50 years ago, well before you made some edits, all entitled to some mistakes :)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Well, Grad, I am angry at the atrocities, be it in the name of any God or not. I'm with you on that. And to be honest, it's painful.
My stand is that I hope one day people will not be easily manipulated, would look at culture, media, magazines, religion, and all with a spirit of their own and make up their own mind. Even create their own thoughts without trying to destroy another person but find pleasure in the diversity, and probably celebrate that each one is capable of imagination, reason, self-examination, and relate with, from, or without with each other.
When I see young teenagers here adopting hip-hop gangster images without even questioning themselves and the idea is to me a great pain. It makes them follow a paradigm of drugs, rape, gun-point intellect, and just plain stupid. I don't see rap or the culture being shown as truth but as entertainment, but when kids get led to this and eventually an adult takes control and form a retarded following that looks and behaves like a cult, leading sheep to certain evils, I burn inside.
Thus, giving just one example there, there's something incomplete with most if not all people. I too am subject to this, and so I try hard and ask and discuss.
I agree with you Grad, and I have a suspicion why things in this discussion at least seems to be mirrored from what others have already said or implied.
To answer the quote there, I would lay a vote on the box that says, "No". Just as much that people would not simply love the piece of music, but must admire the musician. The inventor, rather than simply the useful invention.
You know what's funny about "Purpose Driven Life" (not the book but the idea of just these words)? Personally, and this is just personal mental exercise. Don't these people think it's demeaning to have a purpose? That one must have purpose to have a fulfilling life? Doesn't this idea make utilities of people?
Anyway, that's some points there. Hint, hint.
But then when another group starts bashing at them, because some other group that has their same symbol or clothing or color of skin is doing something terrible, then I've got a problem with that. I believe anyone does, this is why it's wrong to just attack "Religion" in general.
It think it actually somehow gathers moderates from moderate to extremes. God forbid. I don't know why atheist suddenly rallied and marched out against everyone. I saw this and thought, Wow this is counter productive if the aim was to destroy religion. This is establishing religion.
edit: Check this out guys. This shows something about people who "confess" and say, "Lord, lord!"
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.
What, why?
Skin colour is something you're born with, and attacking that is wrong
Religion, however, is just a hypothesis about how the world works. You can be convinced into it, and convinced out of it.
Religions can't prove their hypothesis is correct even after thousands of years, so they should just be mocked like every other bad idea.
I see your point.
And that's why the ones that adhere to the truths in their books asks, "Please provide proof that what we accept as truth is actually false".
This is actually a signal, a plea, that asks for more than just ridicule but actually reasonable and humane approach.
When a person believes something, atheists should look into this, and have lived their lives with all the harsh (or otherwise) precepts of their beliefs, bashing them head on with "Stupid" is just not helping. Why? It's obvious. This is my point.
To answer your question therefore is easy, a person's beliefs is not just an "Idea" like you would at least want to consider. It is like their skin color, even more. It's like believing and feeling one is a man, even if one's body speaks otherwise.
Care is called for.
Edit: Check this guy's thoughts about what is happening.
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.
It's not like their skin colour. You can change your religion. You can't change your race.
It's not an atheist's job to prove them wrong. If I say I have a magic unicorn, it's my job to prove it.
True. I agree with that. It's a play of words actually. What is says is a cognitive response saying, "give us something that will totally remove all our proofs of the existence of God without calling us insane/stupid." From here, if you agree, let's take their so called proof seriously. Let's assume that we ourselves accept that in some way this could lead them to believe what they believe.
You see, calling people stupid or plain silly to rail them off their track is simply just like saying, "If you don't believe in my God you will go to hell." It's just not very productive.
Now, if that's not clear enough, let me put it this way:
A man sees in the desert an oasis, and tells his fellow, "dude, I know there's an oasis up ahead" the other guy says, "well, bro, that's a good story."
Now, assuming the default is unknown that there is or is not really an oasis, given that they both have no idea where they are exactly in the desert or what planet they're on (and let's not go into the details of the oasis, just that an oasis because both of them then will assume defaults on what an oasis is or lack of), and they actually have theories where they are but they generally don't agree.
Now, how would this other guy who doesn't see the oasis convince his friend to not go into the direction of his oasis?
Something non-theists should look into is that theist attribute everything visible to the invisible God. "If you cannot love your brother whom you see, how can you love God whom you do not see?" or something like that. (Taking the bible as an example because this seems to be more popular in our countries where we are)
This means, some theists actually know their God is invisible, and would say, "well, you are an evidence of God."
But if I don't agree that what is visible is a proof of the invisible creator, then boom, a chasm is born. Right? So that direction is, I think, totally not going to lead anywhere. [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
Here's a question thrown:
Is it possible to create in a lab with the proper conditions a single celled organism and allow it to create 3 or more types of other forms and eventually distinct DNA configurations (or forms of life) without using already existing parts from organic things?
A lot of assumptions need to be cleared, I admit, in order to properly simulate this and even make it happen fast enough so we can observe it without having to wait billions of years.
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis
This is where you're leading.
Religion, no matter how hard may struggle to survive, will end. Its extinction has already begun, it is inevitable.
That is all.
Ignorance 101. Also, not possible.
I can recommend you a book, Since I assume you`re not a closed book in your "belief". Maybe you could see things better from our point of view?
http://www.amazon.com/There-God-Notorious-Atheist-Changed/dp/0061335304
Christianity can.
1 Corinthians 13:7-8
Love bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
Love never ends. As for prophecies, they will pass away; as for tongues, they will cease; as for knowledge, it will pass away.
Psalm 63:3-4
Because your steadfast love is better than life, my lips will praise you. So I will bless you as long as I live; in your name I will lift up my hands.
Ephesians 2:4-7
But God, being rich in mercy, because of the great love with which he loved us, even when we were dead in our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ—by grace you have been saved— and raised us up with him and seated us with him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the coming ages he might show the immeasurable riches of his grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus.
Whatever you do, wholeheartedly, moment by heartfelt moment, becomes a tool for the expression of your very soul.
Not really Ev.... if you say you have a unicorn ... thats your own business.... I honestly dont give a fuck...
Religion isnt so much about what they actually belief...... they are generally as a whole revolve around how to live your life.
You can not tell me that the teaching's of Jesus Christ do not make the world a better place. If if you don't think he was a magic man. His teaching still hold values.
Lock this thread so these people Stop bashing religion this is disappointing that this thread is left open for people to open bash other peoples ideals.
@SouLCarveRR: Go
If if you don't think he was a magic man
Yes but why would anyone think Jesus is a `magic man` if they know their history?
Edwin Yamauchi calls "probably the most important reference to Jesus outside the New Testament." Reporting on Emperor Nero's decision to blame the Christians for the fire that had destroyed Rome in A.D. 64, the Roman historian Tacitus wrote:
Nero fastened the guilt . . . on a class hated for their abominations, called Christians by the populace. Christus, from whom the name had its origin, suffered the extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of . . . Pontius Pilatus, and a most mischievous superstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out not only in Judaea, the first source of the evil, but even in Rome. . . .
Another important source of evidence about Jesus and early Christianity can be found in the letters of Pliny the Younger to Emperor Trajan. Pliny was the Roman governor of Bithynia in Asia Minor. In one of his letters, dated around A.D. 112, he asks Trajan's advice about the appropriate way to conduct legal proceedings against those accused of being Christians.
At one point in his letter, Pliny relates some of the information he has learned about these Christians:
They were in the habit of meeting on a certain fixed day before it was light, when they sang in alternate verses a hymn to Christ, as to a god, and bound themselves by a solemn oath, not to any wicked deeds, but never to commit any fraud, theft or adultery, never to falsify their word, nor deny a trust when they should be called upon to deliver it up; after which it was their custom to separate, and then reassemble to partake of food but food of an ordinary and innocent kind.
Lucian of Samosata was a second century Greek satirist. In one of his works, he wrote of the early Christians as follows:
The Christians . . . worship a man to this day the distinguished personage who introduced their novel rites, and was crucified on that account. . . . [It] was impressed on them by their original lawgiver that they are all brothers, from the moment that they are converted, and deny the gods of Greece, and worship the crucified sage, and live after his laws
Perhaps the most remarkable reference to Jesus outside the Bible can be found in the writings of Josephus, a first century Jewish historian(Josephus was not a Christian). On two occasions, in his Jewish Antiquities, he mentions Jesus.
About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man. For he . . . wrought surprising feats. . . . He was the Christ. When Pilate . . .condemned him to be crucified, those who had . . . come to love him did not give up their affection for him. On the third day he appeared . . . restored to life. . . . And the tribe of Christians . . . has . . . not disappeared.
There`s many more sources apart from the bible that gives historic evidence for Christ.
@EternalWraith: Go
No no .... I was saying ... the man existed and that it really doesn't matter if he was really the son of god or not.... his teachings were valuable regardless.
anyways im done with this topic.
All this thread does is give bigots the chance to mock others beliefs. It should really be locked... I didn't think SC2mapster or curse for that matter supported such ignorant attacks on individuals freedoms.
I can only stand to argue with "your stupid because you believe something I don't", so many times.
Haters gonna hate I guess. Its sad that other peoples beliefs is such a bother to you atheists.
No process discovered in the universe thus far requires a god. Any god. Any process. Not one.
What you're doing is just filling in a gap in human knowledge with your god.
I struggle to read Christian apologetics. Often they rely on scientific falsehoods, or outright rejection of the scientific method which just frustrates me to a point where I can't continue.
I would happily read a peer-reviewed analysis of the evidence for creationism. However there aren't any. None by the Institute of Creationist Research. None by the Discovery Institute.
No religion can present repeatable, lab-testable proof of their deity. Fact. I'd be the first to welcome an afterlife but there's just no reason to believe in any of it.
Indeed, there was a name for the time when religion had its chance to run the world: it was called the dark ages. My means of fighting religion are limited to intellectual discourse, which I have made clear. Yet I seem to recall you physically threatening pretty much every non-believer on this forum. Are there no rules against that here? Either way, you're a dangerous idiot and a prime example of my point.
The only reason you want this thread locked is because you want to prohibit OUR freedom of speech and continue propagating your intellectual slavery. I'm not Korean but maybe you should move to China if you want to be such a god damn communist.
Jesus also advocates child abuse, beating slaves and murdering those who don't believe as you do. Perfect moral teachings if you're a brutal bronze-age troglodyte. Screw Jesus and screw you.
Religion is directly responsible for millions of deaths: http://teapotatheism.blogspot.com/2008/06/anonymous-wanted-body-count-total-so-he.html
Final tally for theism: 2,229,074,100
Highest possible atheism death toll with Stalin: 95,000,000
Stalin shouldn't even count because his atheism was no more responsible for his actions than his communism or any of his other beliefs were.
Yes, I think the world would be better off if all religion was eradicated. No, I don't plan on scourging heretics anytime soon, that's religion's job. The comfort that it provides people is not worth the atrocities that it brings and the years of scientific progress that it takes away. There is no such thing as moderate religion. Again, even my parents, my parents; friends, and my friends have expressed bigoted, anti-scientific beliefs. Shit, just look at what you people post in this thread. The world would be better off without these beliefs, but I do not blame these people. They are victims of childhood religious indoctrination, and that's another reason why religion is evil.
Now if you'd just hold your god in the same light.
If you kept your beliefs to yourself, nobody would care.
I pretty much do keep them to myself.......
You generalize too much kid.
You realise that this thread isn't about you, right?
@Eiviyn: Go
Do you realize that Eiviyn, he is talking directly back to you, after you talked directly to him :)
I was talking about religious people overall. I thought that was obvious.
Hrmmm, count 5 you statements, 0 "Religious people in General Statements". But hey, that's okay, you thought the slavery issues in America were fraught for over 50 years ago, well before you made some edits, all entitled to some mistakes :)