Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Misc Discussion Boards => Religious Debates & Threads => Topic started by: big L dawg on January 26, 2011, 04:24:53 PM
-
Understanding atheism, the atheist strawman arguments and what atheism isn't
by snkscore
Sun Jun 14, 2009
In a recent diary, someone made the statement that von Brunn was an atheist as evidence that "dogmatic atheism" is just as dangerous as dogmatic christianity, or something along those lines.
The comments were loaded with people talking about the von Brunn and atheism, but the comments were flooded with incorrect assumptions about atheism and atheists.
So if you are curious about atheism, or if you think you fully understand atheism but want to double check yourslf, or maybe you are an atheist and want to expand/argue what I write below: have at it
The first incorrect assumption I would like to address is the topic of "belief":
Atheism is a belief system.
Atheism is not a belief system because there isn't anything we are "believing" that could be considered a "system." Atheism doesn't join people together in a common ideology like religions do because atheists share nothing in common, except their lack of belief in 1 specific thing. Imagine trying to label other groups based on their lack of belief in 1 specific thing. You'd have the "Non-bigfoot-believers" and the "Non-mermaid-believers" and the "Non-magic-believers". These groups wouldn't share anything you could call a belief system. Same with atheists.
In a way, people will get into a discussion of semantics of whether atheism is a "belief" or not, but really that is only because it is possible to state the any negative belief as a belief in the negative, which kinda works in english even if it doesn't exactly convey the position.
Some definitions of atheism will even say something along the lines of "belief there is no god" but really the issue here, from my perspective, is that there are a finite number of things I believe. I believe gravity makes things fall, I believe I am losing my hair in the back, I believe my favorite team just lost their 3rd game in a row etc.
But the things I don't believe are infinite. You could come up with an infinite number of things I don't believe in. In fact, I could come up with an infinite number of things YOU don't believe in that all deal with pink unicorns!
Don't believe me?
Do you believe that there is a pink unicorn in front of you right now?
Do you believe that there are 2 pink unicorns in front of you right now?
Do you believe that there are 3 pink unicorns .... forever.
So you could turn ALL of those infinite "lack of beliefs" into "beliefs" by stating the negatives, but none of those define the persons actual finite beliefs.
So, if someone asked me "Do you believe there is no god?" I would probably simply respond "Yes" but really the correct response to convey my position is "I don't believe that there is a god."
Whether or not atheism is a "belief" really isn't a giant deal, but it kinda leads into the next issue which is a big deal:
Atheists require faith to believe there is no god.
It takes more faith to be an atheist than to believe in god.
How can atheists be sure there is no god when they have no proof?
Atheists are arrogant in thinking they know there is no god when really they don't know.
Atheists claim to know what cannot be known.
These statements are all inaccurate.
This is where "belief" (or our lack of it) comes in to the real discussion. 99.9% of atheists won't claim (with the certainty that religious folks do to the contrary) that they know there isn't a god.
Now, once again, if someone asked me "Is there a god?" I'd probably just say "No", but the full answer would really be something like "I think the chance that there is a god is extremely small."
Most atheists don't usually respond with the fully qualified answer, which I think leads to people to make the assumption that atheists are 100% sure that god doesn't exist.
This is not the case. We don't KNOW that god doesn't exist. I am totally open to the possibility of god existing, (and bigfoot, alien abductions, the lock ness monster, and holistic medicine) and as soon as there is evidence to support any of it, I will reevaluate my position.
So you see, (virtually all) atheists leave open the possibility for god existing. Some people refer to this view as "weak atheism". A "strong atheist" on the other hand (of which there are very few) would say "I know there is no god." These people do in fact require faith to make such a statement because they can't have proof that god doesn't exist (because it's impossible to prove), but the 99.9% of us atheists who leave open that possibility of god don't require any "faith" to hold our position any more than it takes "faith" to not believe in Santa Claus. You don't have proof that he isn't real, but the odds are pretty low.
If you aren't sure if god is real or not you aren't an atheist, you are really an agnostic and not an atheist.
In some respects this is true, but I still consider myself an atheist, and maybe after reading this some agnostics will consider themselves atheists too.
One definition for agnostic is:
One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.
By this definition, I am an agnostic.
But let me pose a question:
On the topic of leprechauns, do you know they exist or not for certain?
While some would just jump to saying they are sure leprechauns don't exist, the reality is that no one can really be 100% sure that leprechauns or (insert any mythical magical made up thing here) don't exist. It's impossible to prove. So, by strict definitions, on the topic of leprechauns, you are all agnostics.
But that really doesn't accurately describe your position on leprechauns does it? No, you really don't think leprechauns exist... you aren't really "on the fence" about the issue. Same for most atheists. Yes, by leaving open the possibility that god could exist, by definition, we are agnostic, but for all intents and purposes, we are atheists.
Pol Pot and Stalin were atheists and they murdered tons of people.
This may be true, but they also both didn't believe in the flying spaghetti monster. Neither of these lack of beliefs directed them to do what they did. Their lack of blief wasn't the reason they murdered people. They were sociopaths.
Based on sheer numbers, Christians must be committing murders all the time in the US. But, usually not because of their religion. I'm not going to blame christianity or any other religion for something one of it's followers do, unless they are acting based on their religion.
So von Braunn might have been atheist, as one person suggested, but he didn't go to the museum to kill because he was atheist, he went because he was racist. Scott Roeder on the other hand, killed George Tiller because, in his religious beliefs, Tiller was a mass murderer who had to be stopped.
How can atheists be moral if they don't believe in the bible which teaches what is right and wrong?
Someone could write an entire book on this topic, but I'll just say that morality is something we have evolved as a trait to help us survive. Tribes of humans who helped each other out were more likely to survive than those that didn't.
You'll find that most atheists have a very strong sense of morality, but it isn't dictated to them by a holy book.
I'd also argue that the 3 main holy books are loaded with immoral lessons. Genocide, slaughtering women and children, beating slaves to a pulp, rape, sacrificing your own children etc. Sure there are positive moral stories too, but these books are far from quality lessons on morality in today's society.
Why does it matter if people are religious or not? Can't you just leave them alone?
At the most basic level it matters to me because the truth matters to me. I want to have the most accurate view of the world possible, and that means trying to believe as many true things as possible, and trying to NOT believe as many false things as possible. And if there isn't evidence for something, I don't think it should be believed.
On a DK level, religion stands in the way of a lot of progressive goals either directly or indirectly.
It directly impacts things like:
-abortion rights
-gay marriage
-stem cell research
-sex education
-AIDS funding in Africa
-science education in school
-middle east relations
-global warming and environmental efforts
But it indirectly impacts EVERYTHING we fight for on this site, because if religion were not allowed into the equation when elections came around, the country would be much farther to the left on issues that have nothing to do with religion (like health care or taxation).
Without religion, Bush would have never won election. It wouldn't have been close. How many GOP senators and congressmen have won election in part due to their strong religious positions? How many "Republicans" do you know who are only Republicans because of their religious beliefs and vote a straight republican ticket because they think its the right thing to do from a religious perspective, even if they know (or don't know) that they are voting against their own self interest?
People will vote for a guy who promises to fight to allow prayer in school, but when elected what he is really doing is voting to kill health care reform, voting in favor of tax breaks for the rich, voting against CAFE standards... none of this has anything to do with religion, but it is religion that put him there.
Also, if you look around the world at countries that have a high level of atheism (where religion is not oppressed by an authoritarian government) you will find they are some of the most progressive, successful, and "happy" places to live. So I think you could make the case that if the US were to move more in that direction in terms of religion, it would result in good things for the country as a whole.
In summary:
-Atheism is a lack of a specific belief, not a belief system.
-Atheists don't KNOW that there isn't a god.
-Atheists don't need faith to be atheists.
-Atheist murderers don't kill in the name of atheism.
-
Understanding atheism, the atheist strawman arguments and what atheism isn't
by snkscore
Sun Jun 14, 2009
In a recent diary, someone made the statement that von Brunn was an atheist as evidence that "dogmatic atheism" is just as dangerous as dogmatic christianity, or something along those lines.
The comments were loaded with people talking about the von Brunn and atheism, but the comments were flooded with incorrect assumptions about atheism and atheists.
So if you are curious about atheism, or if you think you fully understand atheism but want to double check yourslf, or maybe you are an atheist and want to expand/argue what I write below: have at it
The first incorrect assumption I would like to address is the topic of "belief":
Atheism is a belief system.
Atheism is not a belief system because there isn't anything we are "believing" that could be considered a "system." Atheism doesn't join people together in a common ideology like religions do because atheists share nothing in common, except their lack of belief in 1 specific thing. Imagine trying to label other groups based on their lack of belief in 1 specific thing. You'd have the "Non-bigfoot-believers" and the "Non-mermaid-believers" and the "Non-magic-believers". These groups wouldn't share anything you could call a belief system. Same with atheists.
In a way, people will get into a discussion of semantics of whether atheism is a "belief" or not, but really that is only because it is possible to state the any negative belief as a belief in the negative, which kinda works in english even if it doesn't exactly convey the position.
Some definitions of atheism will even say something along the lines of "belief there is no god" but really the issue here, from my perspective, is that there are a finite number of things I believe. I believe gravity makes things fall, I believe I am losing my hair in the back, I believe my favorite team just lost their 3rd game in a row etc.
But the things I don't believe are infinite. You could come up with an infinite number of things I don't believe in. In fact, I could come up with an infinite number of things YOU don't believe in that all deal with pink unicorns!
Tell that to these people:
An Atheist loves himself and his fellow man instead of a god. An Atheist accepts that heaven is something for which we should work now – here on earth – for all men together to enjoy. An Atheist accepts that he can get no help through prayer, but that he must find in himself the inner conviction and strength to meet life, to grapple with it, to subdue it and to enjoy it. An Atheist accepts that only in a knowledge of himself and a knowledge of his fellow man can he find the understanding that will help lead to a life of fulfillment
http://www.atheists.org/about (http://www.atheists.org/about)
And.....
The New Jersey Humanist Network is a vibrant and growing community of secular humanists. Humanism is a democratic and ethical life-stance, which affirms that human beings have the right and responsibility to give meaning and shape to their own lives. We believe that virtues like morality, kindness, justice and generosity derive from natural human values and reason, and are realized fully only when free from belief in supernatural powers and a spiritual afterlife. Please join us at any of our meetings which are always open to the public.
http://www.njhn.org/ (http://www.njhn.org/)
That sounds like a "belief" system to me.
In short, "There is no God; man is his own 'savior'. Hence, it's the reason I've suggested that atheism, at its core, is simply MAN WORSHIPPING HIMSELF.
Atheists require faith to believe there is no god.
It takes more faith to be an atheist than to believe in god.
How can atheists be sure there is no god when they have no proof?
Atheists are arrogant in thinking they know there is no god when really they don't know.
Atheists claim to know what cannot be known.
These statements are all inaccurate.
This is where "belief" (or our lack of it) comes in to the real discussion. 99.9% of atheists won't claim (with the certainty that religious folks do to the contrary) that they know there isn't a god.
Now, once again, if someone asked me "Is there a god?" I'd probably just say "No", but the full answer would really be something like "I think the chance that there is a god is extremely small."
Most atheists don't usually respond with the fully qualified answer, which I think leads to people to make the assumption that atheists are 100% sure that god doesn't exist.
This is not the case. We don't KNOW that god doesn't exist. I am totally open to the possibility of god existing, (and bigfoot, alien abductions, the lock ness monster, and holistic medicine) and as soon as there is evidence to support any of it, I will reevaluate my position.
So you see, (virtually all) atheists leave open the possibility for god existing. Some people refer to this view as "weak atheism". A "strong atheist" on the other hand (of which there are very few) would say "I know there is no god." These people do in fact require faith to make such a statement because they can't have proof that god doesn't exist (because it's impossible to prove), but the 99.9% of us atheists who leave open that possibility of god don't require any "faith" to hold our position any more than it takes "faith" to not believe in Santa Claus. You don't have proof that he isn't real, but the odds are pretty low.
WRONG!! Atheists don't say "I don't know". They emphatically declare that there is no God (See the aforementioned items from "American Atheists" and the New Jersey Humanists Network).
If you aren't sure if god is real or not you aren't an atheist, you are really an agnostic and not an atheist.
In some respects this is true, but I still consider myself an atheist, and maybe after reading this some agnostics will consider themselves atheists too.
One definition for agnostic is:
One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.
By this definition, I am an agnostic.
But let me pose a question:
On the topic of leprechauns, do you know they exist or not for certain?
While some would just jump to saying they are sure leprechauns don't exist, the reality is that no one can really be 100% sure that leprechauns or (insert any mythical magical made up thing here) don't exist. It's impossible to prove. So, by strict definitions, on the topic of leprechauns, you are all agnostics.
But that really doesn't accurately describe your position on leprechauns does it? No, you really don't think leprechauns exist... you aren't really "on the fence" about the issue. Same for most atheists. Yes, by leaving open the possibility that god could exist, by definition, we are agnostic, but for all intents and purposes, we are atheists.
NOPE!! To be an atheist, you must believe that THERE IS NO GOD. If you believe that there is a God, you're not an atheist. It's just that simple.
Pol Pot and Stalin were atheists and they murdered tons of people.
This may be true, but they also both didn't believe in the flying spaghetti monster. Neither of these lack of beliefs directed them to do what they did. Their lack of blief wasn't the reason they murdered people. They were sociopaths.
Based on sheer numbers, Christians must be committing murders all the time in the US. But, usually not because of their religion. I'm not going to blame christianity or any other religion for something one of it's followers do, unless they are acting based on their religion.
They didn't believe in the flying spaghetti monster. But, they believed that their government was to be in the place of God. And, since they headed the government, the people effectively were to worship them (Stalin and Pol Pot, in their respective countries).
Even Hitler stated that he wanted his people to find salvation in the swastika, instead of the cross. In essence, their governnments (and for all practical purposes) they themselves became God.
So von Braunn might have been atheist, as one person suggested, but he didn't go to the museum to kill because he was atheist, he went because he was racist. Scott Roeder on the other hand, killed George Tiller because, in his religious beliefs, Tiller was a mass murderer who had to be stopped.
The only difference between the two is that one used humanist doctrine as justification to murder and the other used religious doctrine.
How can atheists be moral if they don't believe in the bible which teaches what is right and wrong?
Someone could write an entire book on this topic, but I'll just say that morality is something we have evolved as a trait to help us survive. Tribes of humans who helped each other out were more likely to survive than those that didn't.
You'll find that most atheists have a very strong sense of morality, but it isn't dictated to them by a holy book.
The apostle Paul has a term for that: Having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof. Plus, if man makes the rules, then this guy's morality is no better or worse than that of Hitler, Stalin, or Pol Pot.
And in the words of Jesus Christ, "If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him?" (Luke 11:13).
I'd also argue that the 3 main holy books are loaded with immoral lessons. Genocide, slaughtering women and children, beating slaves to a pulp, rape, sacrificing your own children etc. Sure there are positive moral stories too, but these books are far from quality lessons on morality in today's society.
And these arguments can be easily dissected and shown to be incorrect.
Why does it matter if people are religious or not? Can't you just leave them alone?
At the most basic level it matters to me because the truth matters to me. I want to have the most accurate view of the world possible, and that means trying to believe as many true things as possible, and trying to NOT believe as many false things as possible. And if there isn't evidence for something, I don't think it should be believed.
On a DK level, religion stands in the way of a lot of progressive goals either directly or indirectly.
It directly impacts things like:
-abortion rights
-gay marriage
-stem cell research
-sex education
-AIDS funding in Africa
-science education in school
-middle east relations
-global warming and environmental efforts
This canard is so easy to rip apart, it's not funny.
- Abortion rights? Gee, complain about "genocide" one minute but give no thought about destroying babies in the womb the next. That's really "progressive" for you. As one recent ad put it, "The most dangerous place for an African-American is the womb". Planned Parenthood was founded by Margaret Sangor, FOR THE EXPRESSED PURPOSE of killing black people. Surprise, surprise!!! She's an atheist, too.
- Gay "marriage"? What part of "one man, one woman" don't you understand? Most gay "marriage" advocates decry polygamy, which makes no sense. They are basically saying that THEY can change the rules of marriage for their purposes; but others can't. Plus, you'll notice that marriage rates overall tend to DROP in places where gay "marriage" is legalized (the very thing gay "marriage" proponents swore wouldn't happen).
- Stem Cell Research? PLEASE!! The only form of that, opposed by people of faith, is embryonic stem cell research (the one kind that hasn't cure one blasted disease TO THIS DAY). Progressives tend to forget about that. Every time stem cell research is cited for a new cure or treatment, progressives run their mouths, forgetting to mention that the cure came from ADULT stem cells. And, they also forget that it was a certain president from Texas who STARTED federal funding for adult stem cell research.
- Sex Education? Sex makes babies!! Progressives seem to forget about that. It never dawned on them that the fewer teens that do the wild thing, the fewer of them get burned with STDs or get knocked up. We've seen such lovely progressive "comprehensive" education, such as "Fistgate" and letting kids 2nd graders put condoms on pickles (OK, they were regular cucumbers). As with too many of their "reforms", it seems progressives put forth mind-bogglingly stupid ideas then act surprised when they don't work.
- AIDS Funding in Africa: Another blatant LIE. Bush gave more to funding AIDS research and treatment in Africa than ANY OTHER PRESIDENT (including Obama). Heck, even AIDS activist and pop star, Bono (hardly a Bush fan) acknowledged Bush's contributions.
- Middle East relations? This guy must be on crack. You think the folks in the Middle East are going to abide by progressive diplomacy? NEWS FLASH!! European countries that have tried that crap are being OVERRUN by Muslim extremists. Within a decade or so, they'll be bowing the knee to Allah or get killed (and you progressives think Christianity is bad? Try Islam, extra strength, no chaser).
- Global Warming? How many times does this have to be exposed for the farce that it is? It's all about trying to hike taxes on people and force them to buy crap that few, if any, would purchase of their own free will.
But it indirectly impacts EVERYTHING we fight for on this site, because if religion were not allowed into the equation when elections came around, the country would be much farther to the left on issues that have nothing to do with religion (like health care or taxation).
Without religion, Bush would have never won election. It wouldn't have been close. How many GOP senators and congressmen have won election in part due to their strong religious positions? How many "Republicans" do you know who are only Republicans because of their religious beliefs and vote a straight republican ticket because they think its the right thing to do from a religious perspective, even if they know (or don't know) that they are voting against their own self interest?
Unfortunately for whining progressives, our constitution allows for FREE expression of religion. We're allowed to have it and YES we can take in people's religious beliefs (in word and practice, in terms of social issues) to cast our votes. We don't leave our constitutional rights at the ballot box. And, if progressives don't like it, TOUGH COOKIES!!!
We determine what our self-interest is, not this writer or any other progressive. Although, one could easily argue that certain demographics vote straight Democratic ticket, because they think it's the right thing to do, even though they suffer more than anyone else, due to progressive policies.
People will vote for a guy who promises to fight to allow prayer in school, but when elected what he is really doing is voting to kill health care reform, voting in favor of tax breaks for the rich, voting against CAFE standards... none of this has anything to do with religion, but it is religion that put him there.
It goes both ways. People will vote for a guy who promised to "take from the rich and give to the poor". Guess what!! That NEVER HAPPENS. Look at the poor people today; look at the high unemployment rates. How many people in the ghettos and trailer parks and poor farms got all that money that progressives were supposedly taking from the rich?
And how many of them have all this health insurance that was promised? Basically NONE, as most of the so-called benefits don't kick into gear for another three years. Furthermore, what about all the people whose insurance has gone SKY HIGH? Wasn't ObamaCare supposed to bring premiums down? It didn't happen. And forcing someone to buy health insurance (or anything else, for that matter) is as unconstitutional as you can get.
Also, if you look around the world at countries that have a high level of atheism (where religion is not oppressed by an authoritarian government) you will find they are some of the most progressive, successful, and "happy" places to live. So I think you could make the case that if the US were to move more in that direction in terms of religion, it would result in good things for the country as a whole.
Yet, you don't see anyone breaking their necks, risking life and limb, to go to those countries. They do that to come HERE. And, if the progressives loves these atheistic shangri-las so much, ain't nothing stopping them from packing their back and moving.
In summary:
-Atheism is a lack of a specific belief, not a belief system.
-Atheists don't KNOW that there isn't a god.
-Atheists don't need faith to be atheists.
-Atheist murderers don't kill in the name of atheism.
- Dead wrong (See American Atheists and New Jersey Humanist Network, among others)
- Yes they do. Atheists don't speak from doubt.
- Actually they do. They have faith that they are their own saviors.
- With atheism effectively being man worshipping himself, they have killed in the name of their own deification (i.e. Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot).
-
Atheists are the low IQ guys! No need to understand those...
-
One thing you gotta give MCWAY credit for is writing long ass posts.
-
I don't know ab that whole article but the last time I met an atheist and ask him if there was a god he told said he hasn't seen any evidence of one and therefore based on the existing evidence there was no god, but did serve the right to change his statement based on the possibility of evidence coming to light.
-
I don't know ab that whole article but the last time I met an atheist and ask him if there was a god he told said he hasn't seen any evidence of one and therefore based on the existing evidence there was no god, but did serve the right to change his statement based on the possibility of evidence coming to light.
God wants a relationship with Man, however it would prove nothing if God was as apparent as a tree in your window. It would mean much less to God if we believed because we HAD to you know. Faith is exactly that- believe regardless of having undeniable proof.
Also God is in many things but some see God others chance/coincidence.
I have a great story on this- my buddy was a captain in the Marines, now switched to Army for career reasons. Last year, he suffered a great tribulation. He had zero income the entire year. Basically some boob in the marines discharged him improperly and left him in limbo.
Long story short, Christmas rolls around and my buddy has ZERO cash for his kids. His kids wanted like two toys specifically, a dartboard and I want to say a train set.
He goes to a place that gives out donated toys, and keep in mind when you get toys you stand in line and are handed something. You do not pick anything out.
He walks up and they hand him a friggin train set! Like exactly what his son had wanted. His daughter oddly enough wanted a dart board. Well fat chance of that, buddy was living with a lady who helps out US servicemen, doesn't charge rent etc, but the idea of darts and holes in the walls-not happening.
TOY #2 WAS A MAGNETIC DART SET.
Now, I admit, you could POSSIBLY chalk this up to pure coincidence- if you are ignorant and blind. God's work is plain as day here. My buddy could not believe it, he was super excited to tell me the story.
If you hear that story, and think "BS, this story is fake" it is 100% truthful. If you think this is coincidence, then you truly do not believe. They say God shows Himself to those who believe in their hearts. I believe this to be true.
Or perhaps it's commonplace to get some donated toys that, out of millions of possibilities, just happen to be the exact ones your kids wanted, and a MAGNETIC dart board at that. I was dumbfounded, and to be frank a little scared when I heard the story.
I think for many people, myself included, it is actually scary to realize GOD DOES EXIST. It would be one thing for God to walk into my room and introduce Himself, there wouldn't be any way out of that. But the essence of faith I think makes it easier to daydream about God possibly existing, I think He does, would be cool but then again it is a bit frightening. Probably a big reason God does things the way that He does. Mankind probably has a hard time with that- a creator who made EVERYTHING, knows EVERYTHING (who doesn't shudder when they think of the things they might have to fess up to, things they think no one saw) who has ultimate power.
I personally do believe in God but am far from ready to meet Him or what it would be to walk with God and am happy reading the Gospel and trying to make changes in my life. Someday I will be ready, but it's a scary thought nonetheless. At least I am honest, I believe many atheists are that way because they are afraid to face that reality- believing in nothing so that you can do as you please every day is much easier. And less scary.
-
One thing you gotta give MCWAY credit for is writing long ass posts.
Not like big L dawg, whose posts are very short. ::)
-
Not like big L dawg, whose posts are very short. ::)
Not to mention well-referenced. ::)
;D
-
Tell that to these people:
An Atheist loves himself and his fellow man instead of a god. An Atheist accepts that heaven is something for which we should work now – here on earth – for all men together to enjoy. An Atheist accepts that he can get no help through prayer, but that he must find in himself the inner conviction and strength to meet life, to grapple with it, to subdue it and to enjoy it. An Atheist accepts that only in a knowledge of himself and a knowledge of his fellow man can he find the understanding that will help lead to a life of fulfillment
http://www.atheists.org/about (http://www.atheists.org/about)
And.....
The New Jersey Humanist Network is a vibrant and growing community of secular humanists. Humanism is a democratic and ethical life-stance, which affirms that human beings have the right and responsibility to give meaning and shape to their own lives. We believe that virtues like morality, kindness, justice and generosity derive from natural human values and reason, and are realized fully only when free from belief in supernatural powers and a spiritual afterlife. Please join us at any of our meetings which are always open to the public.
http://www.njhn.org/ (http://www.njhn.org/)
That sounds like a "belief" system to me.
In short, "There is no God; man is his own 'savior'. Hence, it's the reason I've suggested that atheism, at its core, is simply MAN WORSHIPPING HIMSELF.
WRONG!! Atheists don't say "I don't know". They emphatically declare that there is no God (See the aforementioned items from "American Atheists" and the New Jersey Humanists Network).
NOPE!! To be an atheist, you must believe that THERE IS NO GOD. If you believe that there is a God, you're not an atheist. It's just that simple.
They didn't believe in the flying spaghetti monster. But, they believed that their government was to be in the place of God. And, since they headed the government, the people effectively were to worship them (Stalin and Pol Pot, in their respective countries).
Even Hitler stated that he wanted his people to find salvation in the swastika, instead of the cross. In essence, their governnments (and for all practical purposes) they themselves became God.
The only difference between the two is that one used humanist doctrine as justification to murder and the other used religious doctrine.
The apostle Paul has a term for that: Having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof. Plus, if man makes the rules, then this guy's morality is no better or worse than that of Hitler, Stalin, or Pol Pot.
And in the words of Jesus Christ, "If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him?" (Luke 11:13).
This canard is so easy to rip apart, it's not funny.
- Abortion rights? Gee, complain about "genocide" one minute but give no thought about destroying babies in the womb the next. That's really "progressive" for you. As one recent ad put it, "The most dangerous place for an African-American is the womb". Planned Parenthood was founded by Margaret Sangor, FOR THE EXPRESSED PURPOSE of killing black people. Surprise, surprise!!! She's an atheist, too.
- Gay "marriage"? What part of "one man, one woman" don't you understand? Most gay "marriage" advocates decry polygamy, which makes no sense. They are basically saying that THEY can change the rules of marriage for their purposes; but others can't. Plus, you'll notice that marriage rates overall tend to DROP in places where gay "marriage" is legalized (the very thing gay "marriage" proponents swore wouldn't happen).
- Stem Cell Research? PLEASE!! The only form of that, opposed by people of faith, is embryonic stem cell research (the one kind that hasn't cure one blasted disease TO THIS DAY). Progressives tend to forget about that. Every time stem cell research is cited for a new cure or treatment, progressives run their mouths, forgetting to mention that the cure came from ADULT stem cells. And, they also forget that it was a certain president from Texas who STARTED federal funding for adult stem cell research.
- Sex Education? Sex makes babies!! Progressives seem to forget about that. It never dawned on them that the fewer teens that do the wild thing, the fewer of them get burned with STDs or get knocked up. We've seen such lovely progressive "comprehensive" education, such as "Fistgate" and letting kids 2nd graders put condoms on pickles (OK, they were regular cucumbers). As with too many of their "reforms", it seems progressives put forth mind-bogglingly stupid ideas then act surprised when they don't work.
- AIDS Funding in Africa: Another blatant LIE. Bush gave more to funding AIDS research and treatment in Africa than ANY OTHER PRESIDENT (including Obama). Heck, even AIDS activist and pop star, Bono (hardly a Bush fan) acknowledged Bush's contributions.
- Middle East relations? This guy must be on crack. You think the folks in the Middle East are going to abide by progressive diplomacy? NEWS FLASH!! European countries that have tried that crap are being OVERRUN by Muslim extremists. Within a decade or so, they'll be bowing the knee to Allah or get killed (and you progressives think Christianity is bad? Try Islam, extra strength, no chaser).
- Global Warming? How many times does this have to be exposed for the farce that it is? It's all about trying to hike taxes on people and force them to buy crap that few, if any, would purchase of their own free will.
Unfortunately for whining progressives, our constitution allows for FREE expression of religion. We're allowed to have it and YES we can take in people's religious beliefs (in word and practice, in terms of social issues) to cast our votes. We don't leave our constitutional rights at the ballot box. And, if progressives don't like it, TOUGH COOKIES!!!
We determine what our self-interest is, not this writer or any other progressive. Although, one could easily argue that certain demographics vote straight Democratic ticket, because they think it's the right thing to do, even though they suffer more than anyone else, due to progressive policies.
It goes both ways. People will vote for a guy who promised to "take from the rich and give to the poor". Guess what!! That NEVER HAPPENS. Look at the poor people today; look at the high unemployment rates. How many people in the ghettos and trailer parks and poor farms got all that money that progressives were supposedly taking from the rich?
And how many of them have all this health insurance that was promised? Basically NONE, as most of the so-called benefits don't kick into gear for another three years. Furthermore, what about all the people whose insurance has gone SKY HIGH? Wasn't ObamaCare supposed to bring premiums down? It didn't happen. And forcing someone to buy health insurance (or anything else, for that matter) is as unconstitutional as you can get.
Yet, you don't see anyone breaking their necks, risking life and limb, to go to those countries. They do that to come HERE. And, if the progressives loves these atheistic shangri-las so much, ain't nothing stopping them from packing their back and moving.
- Dead wrong (See American Atheists and New Jersey Humanist Network, among others)
- Yes they do. Atheists don't speak from doubt.
- Actually they do. They have faith that they are their own saviors.
- With atheism effectively being man worshipping himself, they have killed in the name of their own deification (i.e. Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot).
Wowwwww I just took the time to read the whole thing (I tend to skim) lot of VERY relevant and accurate information here. Great post.
-
Tell that to these people:
An Atheist loves himself and his fellow man instead of a god. An Atheist accepts that heaven is something for which we should work now – here on earth – for all men together to enjoy. An Atheist accepts that he can get no help through prayer, but that he must find in himself the inner conviction and strength to meet life, to grapple with it, to subdue it and to enjoy it. An Atheist accepts that only in a knowledge of himself and a knowledge of his fellow man can he find the understanding that will help lead to a life of fulfillment
http://www.atheists.org/about (http://www.atheists.org/about)
And.....
The New Jersey Humanist Network is a vibrant and growing community of secular humanists. Humanism is a democratic and ethical life-stance, which affirms that human beings have the right and responsibility to give meaning and shape to their own lives. We believe that virtues like morality, kindness, justice and generosity derive from natural human values and reason, and are realized fully only when free from belief in supernatural powers and a spiritual afterlife. Please join us at any of our meetings which are always open to the public.
http://www.njhn.org/ (http://www.njhn.org/)
That sounds like a "belief" system to me.
In short, "There is no God; man is his own 'savior'. Hence, it's the reason I've suggested that atheism, at its core, is simply MAN WORSHIPPING HIMSELF.
WRONG!! Atheists don't say "I don't know". They emphatically declare that there is no God (See the aforementioned items from "American Atheists" and the New Jersey Humanists Network).
NOPE!! To be an atheist, you must believe that THERE IS NO GOD. If you believe that there is a God, you're not an atheist. It's just that simple.
They didn't believe in the flying spaghetti monster. But, they believed that their government was to be in the place of God. And, since they headed the government, the people effectively were to worship them (Stalin and Pol Pot, in their respective countries).
Even Hitler stated that he wanted his people to find salvation in the swastika, instead of the cross. In essence, their governnments (and for all practical purposes) they themselves became God.
The only difference between the two is that one used humanist doctrine as justification to murder and the other used religious doctrine.
The apostle Paul has a term for that: Having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof. Plus, if man makes the rules, then this guy's morality is no better or worse than that of Hitler, Stalin, or Pol Pot.
And in the words of Jesus Christ, "If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him?" (Luke 11:13).
This canard is so easy to rip apart, it's not funny.
- Abortion rights? Gee, complain about "genocide" one minute but give no thought about destroying babies in the womb the next. That's really "progressive" for you. As one recent ad put it, "The most dangerous place for an African-American is the womb". Planned Parenthood was founded by Margaret Sangor, FOR THE EXPRESSED PURPOSE of killing black people. Surprise, surprise!!! She's an atheist, too.
- Gay "marriage"? What part of "one man, one woman" don't you understand? Most gay "marriage" advocates decry polygamy, which makes no sense. They are basically saying that THEY can change the rules of marriage for their purposes; but others can't. Plus, you'll notice that marriage rates overall tend to DROP in places where gay "marriage" is legalized (the very thing gay "marriage" proponents swore wouldn't happen).
- Stem Cell Research? PLEASE!! The only form of that, opposed by people of faith, is embryonic stem cell research (the one kind that hasn't cure one blasted disease TO THIS DAY). Progressives tend to forget about that. Every time stem cell research is cited for a new cure or treatment, progressives run their mouths, forgetting to mention that the cure came from ADULT stem cells. And, they also forget that it was a certain president from Texas who STARTED federal funding for adult stem cell research.
- Sex Education? Sex makes babies!! Progressives seem to forget about that. It never dawned on them that the fewer teens that do the wild thing, the fewer of them get burned with STDs or get knocked up. We've seen such lovely progressive "comprehensive" education, such as "Fistgate" and letting kids 2nd graders put condoms on pickles (OK, they were regular cucumbers). As with too many of their "reforms", it seems progressives put forth mind-bogglingly stupid ideas then act surprised when they don't work.
- AIDS Funding in Africa: Another blatant LIE. Bush gave more to funding AIDS research and treatment in Africa than ANY OTHER PRESIDENT (including Obama). Heck, even AIDS activist and pop star, Bono (hardly a Bush fan) acknowledged Bush's contributions.
- Middle East relations? This guy must be on crack. You think the folks in the Middle East are going to abide by progressive diplomacy? NEWS FLASH!! European countries that have tried that crap are being OVERRUN by Muslim extremists. Within a decade or so, they'll be bowing the knee to Allah or get killed (and you progressives think Christianity is bad? Try Islam, extra strength, no chaser).
- Global Warming? How many times does this have to be exposed for the farce that it is? It's all about trying to hike taxes on people and force them to buy crap that few, if any, would purchase of their own free will.
Unfortunately for whining progressives, our constitution allows for FREE expression of religion. We're allowed to have it and YES we can take in people's religious beliefs (in word and practice, in terms of social issues) to cast our votes. We don't leave our constitutional rights at the ballot box. And, if progressives don't like it, TOUGH COOKIES!!!
We determine what our self-interest is, not this writer or any other progressive. Although, one could easily argue that certain demographics vote straight Democratic ticket, because they think it's the right thing to do, even though they suffer more than anyone else, due to progressive policies.
It goes both ways. People will vote for a guy who promised to "take from the rich and give to the poor". Guess what!! That NEVER HAPPENS. Look at the poor people today; look at the high unemployment rates. How many people in the ghettos and trailer parks and poor farms got all that money that progressives were supposedly taking from the rich?
And how many of them have all this health insurance that was promised? Basically NONE, as most of the so-called benefits don't kick into gear for another three years. Furthermore, what about all the people whose insurance has gone SKY HIGH? Wasn't ObamaCare supposed to bring premiums down? It didn't happen. And forcing someone to buy health insurance (or anything else, for that matter) is as unconstitutional as you can get.
Yet, you don't see anyone breaking their necks, risking life and limb, to go to those countries. They do that to come HERE. And, if the progressives loves these atheistic shangri-las so much, ain't nothing stopping them from packing their back and moving.
- Dead wrong (See American Atheists and New Jersey Humanist Network, among others)
- Yes they do. Atheists don't speak from doubt.
- Actually they do. They have faith that they are their own saviors.
- With atheism effectively being man worshipping himself, they have killed in the name of their own deification (i.e. Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot).
man, u been talkin to me this whole time?!
-
"Fistgate" and letting kids 2nd graders put condoms on pickles (OK, they were regular cucumbers).
What the hell?
I think for many people, myself included, it is actually scary to realize GOD DOES EXIST.
I think it can be scary to people to conceive of a Holy God who has Holy Standards. None of us is able to meet them on our own and that can frighten and offend people. Thankfully He has made a way for us through faith in Christ.
I have a great story on this- my buddy was a captain in the Marines, now switched to Army for career reasons. Last year, he suffered a great tribulation. He had zero income the entire year. Basically some boob in the marines discharged him improperly and left him in limbo.
Long story short, Christmas rolls around and my buddy has ZERO cash for his kids. His kids wanted like two toys specifically, a dartboard and I want to say a train set.
He goes to a place that gives out donated toys, and keep in mind when you get toys you stand in line and are handed something. You do not pick anything out.
He walks up and they hand him a friggin train set! Like exactly what his son had wanted. His daughter oddly enough wanted a dart board. Well fat chance of that, buddy was living with a lady who helps out US servicemen, doesn't charge rent etc, but the idea of darts and holes in the walls-not happening.
TOY #2 WAS A MAGNETIC DART SET.
Now, I admit, you could POSSIBLY chalk this up to pure coincidence- if you are ignorant and blind. God's work is plain as day here. My buddy could not believe it, he was super excited to tell me the story.
Great story!
-
God wants a relationship with Man, however it would prove nothing if God was as apparent as a tree in your window. It would mean much less to God if we believed because we HAD to you know. Faith is exactly that- believe regardless of having undeniable proof.
Why? Why does a god who wants a relationship with man worry about whether he reveals himself first? Why is it important to a god that we first find "evidence" that he exists before we have that relationship? Makes no sense..
And if God insists on playing hide and seek with us, and not revealing himself, why do Christians expend so much effort trying to prove to us he exists? Isn't that contradictory?
-
God wants a relationship with Man, however it would prove nothing if God was as apparent as a tree in your window. It would mean much less to God if we believed because we HAD to you know. Faith is exactly that- believe regardless of having undeniable proof.
Why? Why does a god who wants a relationship with man worry about whether he reveals himself first? Why is it important to a god that we first find "evidence" that he exists before we have that relationship? Makes no sense..
And if God insists on playing hide and seek with us, and not revealing himself, why do Christians expend so much effort trying to prove to us he exists? Isn't that contradictory?
Who gives a fuck? Apparently, you do. Here allow me to explain what big L dawg so miserably failed to do with his long cut and paste.
Atheists do not believe in the existence of a God, gods, goddesses, etc. Nothing divine. No supreme being. No creator. Nothing.
There. That was simple, was it not? Of course it was.
-
Who gives a fuck? Apparently, you do. Here allow me to explain what big L dawg so miserably failed to do with his long cut and paste.
Atheists do not believe in the existence of a God, gods, goddesses, etc. Nothing divine. No supreme being. No creator. Nothing.
There. That was simple, was it not? Of course it was.
Short and to the point Reeves, but about as far off topic of my post as you can get.
-
God wants a relationship with Man, however it would prove nothing if God was as apparent as a tree in your window. It would mean much less to God if we believed because we HAD to you know. Faith is exactly that- believe regardless of having undeniable proof.
Where is this from? Is this in this thread and I missed it?
-
Short and to the point Reeves, but about as far off topic of my post as you can get.
Within the context of this thread's intent, it is you that was off topic. I of course was not and made my point and it was succinct as possible. As was my point regarding your screen name. If what you seek is verification of the existence of God (and again, your screen name coupled with your words more than implies this as well as an affinity for James Bond films! ;D), then a thread on Atheism is not where you will find it.
Good luck in your search!
-
Who gives a fuck? Apparently, you do. Here allow me to explain what big L dawg so miserably failed to do with his long cut and paste.
Atheists do not believe in the existence of a God, gods, goddesses, etc. Nothing divine. No supreme being. No creator. Nothing.
There. That was simple, was it not? Of course it was.
We know that. And, by default, they believe that man is the most sentient being in existence. Ergo, as stated earlier, atheism is simply man worshipping himself.
-
We know that. And, by default, they believe that man is the most sentient being in existence. Ergo, as stated earlier, atheism is simply man worshipping himself.
I don't believe that man is the most "self aware" being on the planet, neither do I worship myself nor anything or anyone else. If I had faith the size of the proverbial mustard seed, it would only be there because there was verifiable proof of what I believed in. I don't see any verifiable proof of the existence of a divine being. I refuse to be an asshole towards those that have a genuine faith in Jesus, but not for those that are fake Christians and especially so muslims. The latter are worthless piles of shit as is their chosen profit mohammed and false god, allah.
And yes, I spelled it that way on purpose. ;D
-
Ergo, as stated earlier, atheism is simply man worshipping himself.
How disappointing that must be for them :-\
-
I don't believe that man is the most "self aware" being on the planet, neither do I worship myself nor anything or anyone else. If I had faith the size of the proverbial mustard seed, it would only be there because there was verifiable proof of what I believed in. I don't see any verifiable proof of the existence of a divine being. I refuse to be an asshole towards those that have a genuine faith in Jesus, but not for those that are fake Christians and especially so muslims. The latter are worthless piles of shit as is their chosen profit mohammed and false god, allah.
And yes, I spelled it that way on purpose. ;D
If man isn't, then who is? And who's making the rules regarding good vs. evil here?
-
If man isn't, then who is? And who's making the rules regarding good vs. evil here?
Plenty of creatures are self aware (sentient) and you know this to be so. As for intelligence, man is the smartest animal on the planet. A lot of liberal retards think dolphins are smarter but if that's so how come dolphins ain't got iPods? And man governs himself. Not always well, but we make and often break (or change) the rules. We wrote the book on rules. For example, Moses authored the Pentateuch which included Leviticus which was expressly designed for the Hebrews but also held many truths for all mankind.
Did God write these books? Allow me...Just because a fellow named "Art" paints a picture does not make it a genuine "work of art". So it is with the Bible. Just because people claim that God wrote those words does not make it so. I do agree that to a greater degree (especially so the New Testament) wise men wrote those words.
The Koran on the other hand (the left shit-wiping hand by the way) was written by a raving lunatic and it shows. It has less wisdom than you'll find on a Bazooka Joe gum wrapper.
If you are a genuine Christian, know that I am not really "against" your faith. In fact, I am far more eloquent, far better equipped to support that faith than you'll ever be. I just choose not to believe in anything outside the goodness of the words of Jesus of Nazareth and his disciples. Why? Because just because he said he was the Son of God does not make it so. But Jesus was a great man.
-
We know that. And, by default, they believe that man is the most sentient being in existence. Ergo, as stated earlier, atheism is simply man worshipping himself.
Since it is quite possible man invented god.. there is no difference between atheism and theism then..
-
We know that. And, by default, they believe that man is the most sentient being in existence. Ergo, as stated earlier, atheism is simply man worshipping himself.
complete non-sequitor by the way. It does not follow that because a god does not exist then other sentient beings do not and there is no logical reason why somewhere in the universe that is as vast as ours there exists a species that are more sentient. Atheism says nothing about the existence of other beings just a theistic god. No evidence exists for god, hence the term faith. Faith is an irrational belief without evidence, it is by definition irrational. I am a rationalist who can admit when i do not have all the answers unlike the faithful.
-
Plenty of creatures are self aware (sentient) and you know this to be so. As for intelligence, man is the smartest animal on the planet. A lot of liberal retards think dolphins are smarter but if that's so how come dolphins ain't got iPods? And man governs himself. Not always well, but we make and often break (or change) the rules. We wrote the book on rules. For example, Moses authored the Pentateuch which included Leviticus which was expressly designed for the Hebrews but also held many truths for all mankind.
Did God write these books? Allow me...Just because a fellow named "Art" paints a picture does not make it a genuine "work of art". So it is with the Bible. Just because people claim that God wrote those words does not make it so. I do agree that to a greater degree (especially so the New Testament) wise men wrote those words.
The Koran on the other hand (the left shit-wiping hand by the way) was written by a raving lunatic and it shows. It has less wisdom than you'll find on a Bazooka Joe gum wrapper.
If you are a genuine Christian, know that I am not really "against" your faith. In fact, I am far more eloquent, far better equipped to support that faith than you'll ever be. I just choose not to believe in anything outside the goodness of the words of Jesus of Nazareth and his disciples. Why? Because just because he said he was the Son of God does not make it so. But Jesus was a great man.
Jesus has some pretty stupid quotes that make no sense at all.
-
What's up Necrosis? Long time no see! ;D
Jesus has some pretty stupid quotes that make no sense at all.
Like which ones for example?
-
complete non-sequitor by the way. It does not follow that because a god does not exist then other sentient beings do not and there is no logical reason why somewhere in the universe that is as vast as ours there exists a species that are more sentient. Atheism says nothing about the existence of other beings just a theistic god. No evidence exists for god, hence the term faith. Faith is an irrational belief without evidence, it is by definition irrational. I am a rationalist who can admit when i do not have all the answers unlike the faithful.
Ummmm...did you miss the part where I asked if man isn't the most "self aware" being in existence (as Reeves said), THEN WHO IS?
Atheism purports that there is no higher being than man, because that would open the possibility of man answering to that being (i.e. answering to a supernatural deity).
And, contrary to your claim, faith is HARDLY irrational belief without evidence. People believe in what God can do, based on what He has done, in the past. Ask people who tithe, who've been healed (or had family members healed) of ailments.
They believe that God will bless them today, because HE HAS blessed others who have been faithful in the past.
-
Ummmm...did you miss the part where I asked if man isn't the most "self aware" being in existence (as Reeves said), THEN WHO IS?
Atheism purports that there is no higher being than man, because that would open the possibility of man answering to that being (i.e. answering to a supernatural deity).
And, contrary to your claim, faith is HARDLY irrational belief without evidence. People believe in what God can do, based on what He has done, in the past. Ask people who tithe, who've been healed (or had family members healed) of ailments.
They believe that God will bless them today, because HE HAS blessed others who have been faithful in the past.
I dare you to prove this. Your entire argument depends on your proving that statement.
-
I dare you to prove this. Your entire argument depends on your proving that statement.
Prove what? That people tithe and have been blessed as a result? (I'm one of them as are folks like Loco, Butterbean/STella, just to name a few).
-
Prove what? That people tithe and have been blessed as a result? (I'm one of them as are folks like Loco, Butterbean/STella, just to name a few).
Prove a SINGLE case of someone being 'healed' by a supernatural deity. Just ONE.
-
Prove a SINGLE case of someone being 'healed' by a supernatural deity. Just ONE.
Of course, we as believers believe that all healings are ultimately because of a supernatural Deity....because we believe that God created us as we are, and our bodies, if cut, scraped, burned, broken etc can heal themselves (depending on the wound)...God created minds able to grasp, produce and administer healing medicines/surgeries, etc.
But I assume you reject that and want something more like my friend's mother that was prayed over (she had some kind of female cancer) and when she went to the bathroom she said something black came out and at her next scan there was no cancer there. But I don't think just someone saying that happened is probably acceptable "proof" to you, and in fact, for those that believe that that was cancer leaving her body, there is still no way to "prove" it really. Someone could say, oh, she didn't have cancer to begin with or it was a mistaken diagnosis or whatever.
I guess I think that some people believe that miracles can happen and some don't. Maybe they'll change their minds sometime, and maybe not.
lovemonkey, from where do you think life on this planet came? Do you embrace the theory that all life on earth evolved from the same organism?
-
Of course, we as believers believe that all healings are ultimately because of a supernatural Deity....because we believe that God created us as we are, and our bodies, if cut, scraped, burned, broken etc can heal themselves (depending on the wound)...God created minds able to grasp, produce and administer healing medicines/surgeries, etc.
But I assume you reject that and want something more like my friend's mother that was prayed over (she had some kind of female cancer) and when she went to the bathroom she said something black came out and at her next scan there was no cancer there. But I don't think just someone saying that happened is probably acceptable "proof" to you, and in fact, for those that believe that that was cancer leaving her body, there is still no way to "prove" it really. Someone could say, oh, she didn't have cancer to begin with or it was a mistaken diagnosis or whatever.
I guess I think that some people believe that miracles can happen and some don't. Maybe they'll change their minds sometime, and maybe not.
lovemonkey, from where do you think life on this planet came? Do you embrace the theory that all life on earth evolved from the same organism?
What if someone claimed with 100% conviction, a conviction they'd bet their life on, that Vishnu cured their AIDS? You wouldn't believe it for a second no matter how strong their beliefs are... only way to change your mind would be to have scientific proofs presented to you(I hope!). You know for a fact that it's a billion times more likely that it's all in their head than there being a a god different than your own. That's the same problem I'm having with believing the claim that Jehovah/Yahweh/etc cured your friends illness, or worse, your friends friend ::)
Until you can prove it, it is ALL WORDS and honestly, very cliché.
The concept of miracles don't mix well with the blend of an 'all loving god' and the world we live in. Why would your god cure some spoiled westerner of their cancer while literally hundreds of thousands of children are left to merciless starvation every single day? If you believe in miracles, then you also believe that your God picks, by his/her own will, who to cure or help. The choice to not help those in the most dire need really says something about the deity in question.
How come that whenever a natural catastrophe strikes it's always "god works in mysterious ways" and when some baby is found a week later in the rubble of a collapsed building it's suddenly a "miracle"? Whoever says that got some nerve. It's evil-bent hypocrisy.
And also, if you want to argue that praying accelerates healing I'm sorry to say that there have been studies done where the opposite turned out to be true. I'm sure someone else mentioned them to you.
I do NOT to claim know where life came from, BUT there are a couple of theories that sound plausible to me. The fact that amino acids can take form very rapidly(literally within days/weeks) under the right conditions and that life seem to have sprung up in different places on earth during its early history suggests to me that it is not totally unbelievable that life originated from earth, by natural processes. But there is still a lot to be discovered and I'm looking forward to future scientific advancements that can take us closer to our earth as it was 4 billion years ago.
-
One miracle I would really like to see is the conversion of a retard liberal becoming a genuine, sincere and law abiding/upholding, heterosexual Conservative. It would have to be a famous liberal and as stated, the conversion would have to be genuine. They would have to denounce liberal ideals on literally every topic, from sexuality to politics, religion and beyond.
In a way it would not be unlike the conversion of Paul (formerly Saul) of Tarsus. That would be miraculous indeed.
-
cool story bro
-
And also, if you want to argue that praying accelerates healing I'm sorry to say that there have been studies done where the opposite turned out to be true. I'm sure someone else mentioned them to you.
Actually no, I've never heard this. Can you link me to some studies please?
-
Actually no, I've never heard this. Can you link me to some studies please?
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/31/health/31pray.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/31/health/31pray.html)
Long-Awaited Medical Study Questions the Power of Prayer
By BENEDICT CAREY
Published: March 31, 2006
Prayers offered by strangers had no effect on the recovery of people who were undergoing heart surgery, a large and long-awaited study has found.
And patients who knew they were being prayed for had a higher rate of post-operative complications like abnormal heart rhythms, perhaps because of the expectations the prayers created, the researchers suggested.
Because it is the most scientifically rigorous investigation of whether prayer can heal illness, the study, begun almost a decade ago and involving more than 1,800 patients, has for years been the subject of speculation.
-
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/31/health/31pray.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/31/health/31pray.html)
Long-Awaited Medical Study Questions the Power of Prayer
By BENEDICT CAREY
Published: March 31, 2006
Prayers offered by strangers had no effect on the recovery of people who were undergoing heart surgery, a large and long-awaited study has found.
And patients who knew they were being prayed for had a higher rate of post-operative complications like abnormal heart rhythms, perhaps because of the expectations the prayers created, the researchers suggested.
Because it is the most scientifically rigorous investigation of whether prayer can heal illness, the study, begun almost a decade ago and involving more than 1,800 patients, has for years been the subject of speculation.
The above study is flawed:
WebMD
Researchers Try to Test the Power of Prayer on Surgery Patients
Those who were certain they were being prayed for "had an unexpectedly high complication rate," Bethea says. "This aspect of awareness needs further study ... such a significant finding begs for more evaluation."
"The reality of this study is that the group they thought would do the best actually did worse," says Mitchell Krucoff, MD
However, stress could have been the cause, he says. "Think about it, the night before surgery they were told about the prayer therapy, then asked not to tell anyone. They were going into major heart surgery -- yet they knew something they could not mention to anyone."
"It's possible that knowledge about the prayer might have induced a form of performance anxiety in the patients, or made them feel doubtful about their outcome," Bethea says. "They may have wondered, 'Am I so sick that they had to call in the prayer team?'"
http://www.webmd.com/balance/guide/20070201/praying-for-health-study-stirs-debate
Their study has been criticized by other journal editors, the researchers admit. "A balanced study would have a Group 4 -- a group that knew they definitely weren't being prayed for," says Bethea. "We were concerned that would increase the patient's stress level."
Prayer's effect may be larger when people pray for themselves, says Benson. "It often breaks the train of everyday thought and invokes a relaxation response. We were not studying relaxation response in this study, but others studies have shown it to be beneficial."
http://www.webmd.com/balance/guide/20070201/praying-for-health-study-stirs-debate?page=2
-
The above study is flawed:
WebMD
Researchers Try to Test the Power of Prayer on Surgery Patients
Those who were certain they were being prayed for "had an unexpectedly high complication rate," Bethea says. "This aspect of awareness needs further study ... such a significant finding begs for more evaluation."
"The reality of this study is that the group they thought would do the best actually did worse," says Mitchell Krucoff, MD
However, stress could have been the cause, he says. "Think about it, the night before surgery they were told about the prayer therapy, then asked not to tell anyone. They were going into major heart surgery -- yet they knew something they could not mention to anyone."
"It's possible that knowledge about the prayer might have induced a form of performance anxiety in the patients, or made them feel doubtful about their outcome," Bethea says. "They may have wondered, 'Am I so sick that they had to call in the prayer team?'"
http://www.webmd.com/balance/guide/20070201/praying-for-health-study-stirs-debate
Their study has been criticized by other journal editors, the researchers admit. "A balanced study would have a Group 4 -- a group that knew they definitely weren't being prayed for," says Bethea. "We were concerned that would increase the patient's stress level."
Prayer's effect may be larger when people pray for themselves, says Benson. "It often breaks the train of everyday thought and invokes a relaxation response. We were not studying relaxation response in this study, but others studies have shown it to be beneficial."
http://www.webmd.com/balance/guide/20070201/praying-for-health-study-stirs-debate?page=2
The whole concept of that study is pretty funky/flawed... but either way the conclusion was that prayers wasn't all that it was cracked up to be. In fact, you'd get the exact result you'd expect if there was no god, surprise surprise!
-
The whole concept of that study is pretty funky/flawed... but either way the conclusion was that prayers wasn't all that it was cracked up to be. In fact, you'd get the exact result you'd expect if there was no god, surprise surprise!
I agree that this is very difficult to measure through scientific studies, but this obviously has value to modern medicine or else they wouldn't be spending the money, time and resources to study it. This is only one of many studies conducted on the value of prayer in Health Care, and there are many more to come.
-
I agree that this is very difficult to measure through scientific studies, but this obviously has value to modern medicine or else they wouldn't be spending the money, time and resources to study it. This is only one of many studies conducted on the value of prayer in Health Care, and there are many more to come.
Given how religious america is overall it comes as no surprise that studies like these are conducted.. doesn't say anything about the validity of prayers though. If I'm not mistaken this particular study was funded by religious people.
-
Given how religious america is overall it comes as no surprise that studies like these are conducted.. doesn't say anything about the validity of prayers though. If I'm not mistaken this particular study was funded by religious people.
Likewise, the study you posted says nothing about the invalidity of prayer. That was my point.
-
Likewise, the study you posted says nothing about the invalidity of prayer. That was my point.
Given the nature of prayers(a supernatural request), the burden of proof is upon those who claim its existence. The results from these studies vary a bit and that is a bit intriguing, makes you wonder about placebo effect, stress levels in patients etc. But lets be real here, those are all natural factors within the realm of the natural world and there's absolutely no proof anywhere that some desert god by the name of Yahweh/Jehovah/whatever has anything to do with it.
-
Given the nature of prayers(a supernatural request), the burden of proof is upon those who claim its existence. The results from these studies vary a bit and that is a bit intriguing, makes you wonder about placebo effect, stress levels in patients etc. But lets be real here, those are all natural factors within the realm of the natural world and there's absolutely no proof anywhere that some desert god by the name of Yahweh/Jehovah/whatever has anything to do with it.
Still, the study you posted does not prove the opposite.
I personally do not seek to prove something that is faith based. I personally believe by faith in God, in prayer and in miracles, but I believe televangelists and faith healers are crooks who make a mockery of miracles to profit from gullible people.
Miracles have their time and place and, except for very specific times in history and for a very specific purpose, they are not for public displays of power or for proof of anything.
-
Still, the study you posted does not prove the opposite.
I personally do not seek to prove something that is faith based. I personally believe by faith in God, in prayer and in miracles, but I believe televangelists and faith healers are crooks who make a mockery of miracles to profit from gullible people.
x2
-
Miracles have their time and place and, except for very specific times in history and for a very specific purpose, they are not for public displays of power or for proof of anything.
...and of course you happen to know when something is a miracle and when it isn't? Otherwise you can't back up that statement... a statement that is basically just another wording for "god works in mysterious ways", "you can't perform a study on the work of god" etc. How convenient.
A very good time and place for a miracle would be right about NOW in many parts of Africa, Japan and so on.
-
...and of course you happen know when something is a miracle and when it isn't? Otherwise you can't back up that statement... a statement that is basically just another wording for "god works in mysterious ways", "you can't perform a study on the work of god" etc. How convenient.
A very good time and place for a miracle would be right about NOW in many parts of Africa, Japan and so on.
No, a good time for public miracles was when Moses arrived in Egypt to lead Israel to The Promised Land.
Another good time for public miracles was when Jesus started his ministry in Israel about 2,000 years ago.
These are in the Bible and I believe it by faith.
I can't prove to you anything about miracles, but I can prove it to myself. About 24 years ago, I said a prayer to Jesus Christ and my life, my personality and character were changed forever. I'm a miracle. I have also witnessed many other people changed forever by Jesus Christ.
The next time for public miracles, I believe, will be when the Anti-Christ and The False Prophet show their face. You and I, if we are still around, will witness many wonders and miracles performed by this false prophet who will deceive many people around the world, even atheists.
-
No, a good time for public miracles was when Moses arrived in Egypt to lead Israel to The Promised Land.
Another good time for public miracles was when Jesus started his ministry in Israel about 2,000 years ago.
These are in the Bible and I believe it by faith.
I can't prove to you anything about miracles, but I can prove it to myself. About 24 years ago, I said a prayer to Jesus Christ and my life, my personality and character were changed forever(placebo is totally out of the question here? How would you know?). I'm a miracle. I have also witnessed many other people changed forever by Jesus Christ.
The next time for public miracles, I believe, will be when the Anti-Christ and The False Prophet show their face. You and I, if we are still around, will witness many wonders and miracles performed by this false prophet who will deceive many people around the world, even atheists.
Well I guess that's where our opinions differ greatly. Not much else I can say, really.
-
Well I guess that's where our opinions differ greatly. Not much else I can say, really.
So even if you yourself experience a miracle or witness one, you will always dismiss it as a placebo effect. To each its own!
-
So even if you yourself experience a miracle or witness one, you will always dismiss it as a placebo effect. To each its own!
What's more likely here... a suspension of the laws of nature(not one single case this happening has ever been proved, otherwise they wouldn't be laws) or that my brain goes haywire?
Do you fully understand the consequences of your brain dictating your sense of reality? Reality is whatever your brain tells you, and it is most definitely beyond your control. If your brain thinks there's a pink unicorn dancing with monkeys made out of styrofoam right in front of you, then that is what you will believe. There's no outer 'you' to keep your brain in check.
-
What's more likely here... a suspension of the laws of nature(not one single case this happening has ever been proved, otherwise they wouldn't be laws) or that my brain goes haywire?
Do you fully understand the consequences of your brain dictating your sense of reality? Reality is whatever your brain tells you, and it is most definitely beyond your control. If your brain thinks there's a pink unicorn dancing with monkeys made out of styrofoam right in front of you, then that is what you will believe. There's no outer 'you' to keep your brain in check.
Maybe you are not really sitting there typing something on your computer in response to my post. Maybe I don't exist. Maybe you are a 95 year old man, suffering from dementia or some other mental decease, sitting in a nursing home or mental institution, thinking up all this stuff. :-\
-
Maybe you are not really sitting there typing something on your computer in response to my post. Maybe I don't exist. Maybe you are a 95 year old man, suffering from dementia or some other mental decease, sitting in a nursing home or mental institution, thinking up all this stuff. :-\
Hey, it's fully possible but very unlikely.
You're not very familiar with philosophy of science, are you?
-
Hey, it's fully possible but very unlikely.
You're not very familiar with philosophy of science, are you?
"Philosophy of science is about as useful to scientists as ornithology is to birds." - Richard Feynman
http://www.diracdelta.co.uk/science/source/q/u/quotes/source.html
My conversion and its effects for the past 24 years a placebo effect? Very unlikely!
-
"Philosophy of science is about as useful to scientists as ornithology is to birds." - Richard Feynman
http://www.diracdelta.co.uk/science/source/q/u/quotes/source.html
My conversion and its effects for the past 24 years a placebo effect? Very unlikely!
But you can't know for sure, that's the whole point! Try to be at least open to the idea that it is a placebo effect.
What would you say to people that are absolutely convinced they've been blessed by Vishnu? Your argument is no stronger than theirs.
-
But you can't know for sure, that's the whole point! Try to be at least open to the idea that it is a placebo effect.
What would you say to people that are absolutely convinced they've been blessed by Vishnu? Your argument is no stronger than theirs.
Same way that you can't know for sure that you are not imagining this very discussion.
By faith in the Bible, I can know for sure that Vishnu can't bless anyone. By faith I can know for sure that my conversion is a miracle from Jesus Christ and not a placebo effect. And it's not just faith and it's not just the Bible anymore, but my personal experience and the effects of my conversion that let me know for sure.
-
Same way that you can't know for sure that you are not imagining this very discussion.
Good good, you're starting to get it. Our imagination can come up with the most extraordinary things and our only way of filtering them out is to put probabilities on them. But that's all we can do. I'd say it's very unlikely that I'm imagining this conversation, same with me being 95 years old. I'd say it's very likely that there is no god, given the extreme lack of evidence to support such a thesis.
By faith in the Bible, I can know for sure that Vishnu can't bless anyone. By faith I can know for sure that my conversion is a miracle from Jesus Christ and not a placebo effect. And it's not just faith and it's not just the Bible anymore, but my personal experience and the effects of my conversion that let me know for sure.
Would you admit that as an argument, it all collapses when you mention the word faith? Faith and knowing something for sure do NOT mix well. Your faith is no better as an argument than the faith of those who believe in Vishnu.
By my book, faith is a belief in something without evidence, or contrary to the evidence. It's a suspension of logic that you make by choice... it holds zero value when trying to prove something.
-
Good good, you're starting to get it. Our imagination can come up with the most extraordinary things and our only way of filtering them out is to put probabilities on them. But that's all we can do. I'd say it's very unlikely that I'm imagining this conversation, same with me being 95 years old. I'd say it's very likely that there is no god, given the extreme lack of evidence to support such a thesis.
Would you admit that as an argument, it all collapses when you mention the word faith? Faith and knowing something for sure do NOT mix well. Your faith is no better as an argument than the faith of those who believe in Vishnu.
By my book, faith is a belief in something without evidence, or contrary to the evidence. It's a suspension of logic that you make by choice... it holds zero value when trying to prove something.
You can't know or even begin to understand faith or what it is. Faith in itself is evidence. I have it. It was given to me by God. You obviously don't have it. Don't ask me why.
Hebrews 11:1
Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see.
Ephesians 2:8
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God
-
You can't know or even begin to understand faith or what it is.
So that makes it even less of an argument.
Faith in itself is evidence.
No, it's not. It's a construct of your mind.
It was given to me by God.
Given the discussion we just had about placebo effect, you can't say that for sure.
Don't ask me why.
That's what a closed mind would do - not ask questions. A closed mind would also not explain its reasoning and just say "Don't ask me why".
Hebrews 11:1
Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see.
Ephesians 2:8
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God
Holy scriptures ::)
-
So that makes it even less of an argument.
Why?
No, it's not. It's a construct of your mind.
No, it's not.
Given the discussion we just had about placebo effect, you can't say that for sure.
Given the discussion we just had, by faith I can indeed say for sure.
That's what a closed mind would do - not ask questions. A closed mind would also not explain its reasoning and just say "Don't ask me why".
Not at all. Just saying you may receive faith yourself in time.
Holy scriptures ::)
Exactly!
-
Why?
If only you are able to define what faith is to you, then it could never translate into an argument that someone else would understand.
No, it's not.
That's your opinion and not fact.
Given the discussion we just had, by faith I can indeed say for sure.
Please do elaborate. Your statement here doesn't make sense at first glance.
Exactly!
I'm sure you're more than aware how manipulated by humans your holy scripture is. I hope you don't take it at face value.
-
If only you are able to define what faith is to you, then it could never translate into an argument that someone else would understand.
That's your opinion and not fact.
Please do elaborate. Your statement here doesn't make sense at first glance.
I'm sure you're more than aware how manipulated by humans your holy scripture is. I hope you don't take it at face value.
You are merely stating your opinion. Faith is defined in the Bible above, and it is all the evidence I need to know for sure that there is a God who performs miracles today. You maybe an atheist today, but like many atheists before you, you yourself may one day become a man of faith too. The Bible was written by men, inspired by God. There are plenty of discussions on this board about the so called "human manipulation" of the Bible. You can start another thread about this if you wish!
-
You are merely stating your opinion. Faith is defined in the Bible above, and it is all the evidence I need to know for sure that there is a God who performs miracles today. You maybe an atheist today, but like many atheists before you, you yourself may one day become a man of faith too. The Bible was written by men, inspired by God. There are plenty of discussions on this board about the so called "human manipulation" of the Bible. You can start another thread about this if you wish!
If that's all the evidence you need then I feel sorry for you. I really do.
Sure a lot of atheists have converted... hundreds of thousands, even perhaps a couple of millions. But those numbers are merely a fart in a hurricane when compared to how many religious people have turned agnostic or atheist within the last couple of hundred years. For some odd reason atheism tends to spread when the literacy rate goes up... hmmmmmmmm.
I do not wish to beat a dead horse.
-
If that's all the evidence you need then I feel sorry for you. I really do.
Sure a lot of atheists have converted... hundreds of thousands, even perhaps a couple of millions. But those numbers are merely a fart in a hurricane when compared to how many religious people have turned agnostic or atheist within the last couple of hundred years. For some odd reason atheism tends to spread when the literacy rate goes up... hmmmmmmmm.
I do not wish to beat a dead horse.
Thanks, but please don't feel sorry for me! I am very satisfied with my life. And it's no surprise, people who attend church often are very happy, you know? ;D
Study: Happiness is having friends at church
12/7/2010
By Michelle Healy, USA TODAY
Attending religious services regularly and having close friends in the congregation are key to having a happier, more satisfying life, a study finds.
http://www.usatoday.com/yourlife/mind-soul/spirituality/2010-12-07-happyreligion07_ST_N.htm
Oh, and atheists are the minority in this world. Just saying...not that it matters since truth is not a democracy.
And the literacy rate has nothing to do with being theist or atheist since there are millions of highly educated theists in the world today.
-
Thanks, but please don't feel sorry for me! I am very satisfied with my life. And it's no surprise, people who attend church often are very happy, you know? ;D
Study: Happiness is having friends at church
12/7/2010
By Michelle Healy, USA TODAY
Attending religious services regularly and having close friends in the congregation are key to having a happier, more satisfying life, a study finds.
http://www.usatoday.com/yourlife/mind-soul/spirituality/2010-12-07-happyreligion07_ST_N.htm
Oh, and atheists are the minority in this world. Just saying...not that it matters since truth is not a democracy.
And the literacy rate has nothing to do with being theist or atheist since there are millions of highly educated theists in the world today.
Yes there are, but that says nothing about the overall trend. America is one big exception for some odd reason... but exception is the word here. You can't deny that education over time dissolves the authority of the church and finally faith itself. If you don't believe that then I suggest you go read some history books.
http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=library&page=pzuckerman_26_5 (http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=library&page=pzuckerman_26_5)
"The twenty-five nations characterized by organic atheism with the highest proportion of nonbelievers are listed in Table 1. When looking at standard measures of societal health, we find that they fare remarkably well; highly religious nations fare rather poorly. The 2004 United Nations' Human Development Report, which ranks 177 countries on a "Human Development Index," measures such indicators of societal health as life expectancy, adult literacy, per-capita income, educational attainment, and so on. According to this report, the five top nations were Norway, Sweden, Australia, Canada, and the Netherlands. All had notably high degrees of organic atheism. Furthermore, of the top twenty-five nations, all but Ireland and the United States were top-ranking nonbelieving nations with some of the highest percentages of organic atheism on earth. Conversely, the bottom fifty countries of the "Human Development Index" lacked statistically significant levels of organic atheism."
"Concerning literacy rates, according to the United Nations Report on the World Social Situation (2003), of the thirty-five nations with the highest levels of youth-illiteracy rates (percentage of population ages fifteen to twenty-four who cannot read or write), all were highly religious, with statistically insignificant levels of organic atheism."
-
Yes there are, but that says nothing about the overall trend. America is one big exception for some odd reason... but exception is the word here. You can't deny that education over time dissolves the authority of the church and finally faith itself. If you don't believe that then I suggest you go read some history books.
http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=library&page=pzuckerman_26_5 (http://www.secularhumanism.org/index.php?section=library&page=pzuckerman_26_5)
"The twenty-five nations characterized by organic atheism with the highest proportion of nonbelievers are listed in Table 1. When looking at standard measures of societal health, we find that they fare remarkably well; highly religious nations fare rather poorly. The 2004 United Nations' Human Development Report, which ranks 177 countries on a "Human Development Index," measures such indicators of societal health as life expectancy, adult literacy, per-capita income, educational attainment, and so on. According to this report, the five top nations were Norway, Sweden, Australia, Canada, and the Netherlands. All had notably high degrees of organic atheism. Furthermore, of the top twenty-five nations, all but Ireland and the United States were top-ranking nonbelieving nations with some of the highest percentages of organic atheism on earth. Conversely, the bottom fifty countries of the "Human Development Index" lacked statistically significant levels of organic atheism."
"Concerning literacy rates, according to the United Nations Report on the World Social Situation (2003), of the thirty-five nations with the highest levels of youth-illiteracy rates (percentage of population ages fifteen to twenty-four who cannot read or write), all were highly religious, with statistically insignificant levels of organic atheism."
So it follows that literacy causes atheism. ::)
Then it would be in Christianity's best interest to keep people illiterate, right?
Yet, it has been Christianity that has contributed the most to literacy around the world. If you don't believe that then I suggest you go read some history books. ;)
-
So it follows that literacy causes atheism. ::)
Then it would be in Christianity's best interest to keep people illiterate, right?
Yet, it has been Christianity that has contributed the most to literacy around the world. If you don't believe that then I suggest you go read some history books. ;)
Yes, that's the biggest reason why they insisted on preaching in latin for as long as they could. When translated bibles were made available for everyone to read and not just the priest, a great shift in power took place. It gave people a chance to understand just how ridiculous the stories in the bible really are... so ridiculous that even children question them.
I really don't see what there is to misinterpret here.... Yes, illiteracy breeds ignorance and fear. You were just plain wrong with this statement:
And the literacy rate has nothing to do with being theist or atheist since there are millions of highly educated theists in the world today.
"Concerning literacy rates, according to the United Nations Report on the World Social Situation (2003), of the thirty-five nations with the highest levels of youth-illiteracy rates (percentage of population ages fifteen to twenty-four who cannot read or write), all were highly religious, with statistically insignificant levels of organic atheism."
-
Yes, that's the biggest reason why they insisted on preaching in latin for as long as they could. When translated bibles were made available for everyone to read and not just the priest, a great shift in power took place. It gave people a chance to understand just how ridiculous the stories in the bible really are... so ridiculous that even children question them.
I really don't see what there is to misinterpret here.... Yes, illiteracy breeds ignorance and fear. You were just plain wrong with this statement:
"Concerning literacy rates, according to the United Nations Report on the World Social Situation (2003), of the thirty-five nations with the highest levels of youth-illiteracy rates (percentage of population ages fifteen to twenty-four who cannot read or write), all were highly religious, with statistically insignificant levels of organic atheism."
When translated bibles were made available for everyone to read and not just the priest, people did not become atheists. They became non-Catholic Christians, Protestants.
As for misinterpreting your statics, you are showing how closed minded you are. This is right out of the link you posted above:
"The information presented in this discussion in no way proves that high levels of organic atheism cause societal health or that low levels of organic atheism cause societal ills such as poverty or illiteracy."
http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=post;quote=5285956;topic=364234.50;num_replies=63;sesc=fb57477a712e89c97b2eb19108e9b92e
Even more interesting from you link:
Suicide Rate
A country's suicide rate stands out as the one indicator of societal health in which religious nations fare much better than secular nations. According to the 2003 World Health Organization's report on international male suicide rates (http://www.who.int/en/), the nations with the lowest rates of suicide were all highly religious, characterized by extremely high levels of theism (usually of the Muslim and Catholic varieties). Of the ten nations with the highest male suicide rates, five were distinctly irreligious nations ranked among the top twenty-five nations listed earlier.
United States
Americans are very religious. Many studies have found that only between 3-7 percent of Americans do not believe in God. Rates of prayer, belief in the divinity of Jesus, belief in the divine origins of the Bible, and rates of church attendance are remarkably robust in the United States, making it the most religious of all Western industrialized nations, with the possible exception of Ireland. When it comes to societal health, the United States certainly fares far better than much of the rest of the world. According to the United Nations' 2004 "Human Development Index" discussed earlier, the United States ranked eighth.
;D
-
When translated bibles were made available for everyone to read and not just the priest, people did not become atheists. They became non-Catholic Christians, Protestants.
As I said, first step is when the authority of the church is dissolved. The next step is when a larger % of people turn to agnosticism and atheism. With the exception of America, the western world has progressively gotten less religious over time(excluding muslim immigration).
As for misinterpreting your statics, you are showing how closed minded you are. This is right out of the link you posted above:
"The information presented in this discussion in no way proves that high levels of organic atheism cause societal health or that low levels of organic atheism cause societal ills such as poverty or illiteracy."
Not necessarily cause and effect, but they do seem to come hand in hand, no? Alas, although there are exceptions, the general guideline here seems to be that the more religious a country is, the more likely they're doing poorly.
Suicide Rate
A country's suicide rate stands out as the one indicator of societal health in which religious nations fare much better than secular nations. According to the 2003 World Health Organization's report on international male suicide rates (http://www.who.int/en/), the nations with the lowest rates of suicide were all highly religious, characterized by extremely high levels of theism (usually of the Muslim and Catholic varieties). Of the ten nations with the highest male suicide rates, five were distinctly irreligious nations ranked among the top twenty-five nations listed earlier.
United States
Americans are very religious. Many studies have found that only between 3-7 percent of Americans do not believe in God. Rates of prayer, belief in the divinity of Jesus, belief in the divine origins of the Bible, and rates of church attendance are remarkably robust in the United States, making it the most religious of all Western industrialized nations, with the possible exception of Ireland. When it comes to societal health, the United States certainly fares far better than much of the rest of the world. According to the United Nations' 2004 "Human Development Index" discussed earlier, the United States ranked eighth.
;D
If that is so then that is a shame.
-
As I said, first step is when the authority of the church is dissolved. The next step is when a larger % of people turn to agnosticism and atheism. With the exception of America, the western world has progressively gotten less religious over time(excluding muslim immigration).
Not necessarily cause and effect, but they do seem to come hand in hand, no? Alas, although there are exceptions, the general guideline here seems to be that the more religious a country is, the more likely they're doing poorly.
If that is so then that is a shame.
Christians made translated Bibles available to people back then and today as well. Today, Christians make translated Bibles available to people around the world. And because many of those people are illiterate, Christians teach them how to read so that these people can read their Bibles. This has gone on for centuries, thus Christianity has contributed very much to world literacy.
The literacy rate in South India is very high, higher than the rest of the Nation. South India's population is mainly Christian. And their high literacy rate has been attributed to Christianity.
The US is a developed, industrialized, Western nation with a high literacy rate, and #1 economy in the world. Oh, and the US happens to be very religious too.
Secular nations have a much higher suicide rate than religious nations.
What was that about cause and effect?
-
Christians made translated Bibles available to people back then and today as well.
Bible's were not made readily available until the first effective printing presses came along which happened somewhere around the late 14th - mid 15th century in europe. For people to own books back then was very rare, and literacy even more so. For a long time the only book they had access to was the bible. So there's no denying that the bible played a big role in that, not because of some rare property of the bible itself, but simply because it was pretty much the only book available back then.
But literacy and education turned out to be the downfall of christianity, ironically.
And you did not want to be caught with anything else but christian literature/thinking back in those days.. unless you liked to die a painful death. On a sidenote, christianity has been a pain in europes ass for the longest time, I'm glad to live in a time period where I'm allowed to speak my mind freely about religion and not get persecuted for it.
And because many of those people are illiterate, Christians teach them how to read so that these people can read their Bibles. This has gone on for centuries, thus Christianity has contributed very much to world literacy.
The literacy rate in South India is very high, higher than the rest of the Nation. South India's population is mainly Christian. And their high literacy rate has been attributed to Christianity.
See above.
The US is a developed, industrialized, Western nation with a high literacy rate, and #1 economy in the world. Oh, and the US happens to be very religious too.
Secular nations have a much higher rate of suicide than religious nations.
What was that about cause and effect?
As that report said, america is an exception. America is 8th on the HDI list with a majority of the top ten being very irreligious countries. At the #1 spot you find Norway, one of the most secular countries in the world. So that argument takes you nowhere.
America also have some of the highest murder rates, 6,5/100,000 population compared to Norway that sits at a meager 0,60. That's about a 10-1 difference. Your prison population rate is also the highest in the entire world. Your infant mortality rate is also below all western standards.
If you use that report to state that suicides rates are higher in secular countries, then you also have to accept the religiosity/illiteracy part. Just as much of a lack of cause and effect in both of them. Which way are you going to have it?
-
Bible's were not made readily available until the first effective printing presses came along which happened somewhere around the late 14th - mid 15th century in europe. For people to own books back then was very rare, and literacy even more so. For a long time the only book they had access to was the bible. So there's no denying that the bible played a big role in that, not because of some rare property of the bible itself, but simply because it was pretty much the only book available back then.
But literacy and education turned out to be the downfall of christianity, ironically.
And you did not want to be caught with anything else but christian literature/thinking back in those days.. unless you liked to die a painful death. On a sidenote, christianity has been a pain in europes ass for the longest time, I'm glad to live in a time period where I'm allowed to speak my mind freely about religion and not get persecuted for it.
Oh yeah, was that so back then? And what about this?
Today, Christians make translated Bibles available to people around the world. And because many of those people are illiterate, Christians teach them how to read so that these people can read their Bibles. This has gone on for centuries, thus Christianity has contributed very much to world literacy.
The literacy rate in South India is very high, higher than the rest of the Nation. South India's population is mainly Christian. And their high literacy rate has been attributed to Christianity.
Way to dismiss Christianity's great contribution to world literacy past and present!
As that report said, america is an exception. America is 8th on the HDI list with a majority of the top ten being very irreligious countries. At the #1 spot you find Norway, one of the most secular countries in the world. So that argument takes you nowhere.
America is not just an exception. It is a heck of an exception, destroying your theory(literacy = atheism). America is 1st on the GDP list. So that argument takes you nowhere.
America also have some of the highest murder rates, 6,5/100,000 population compared to Norway that sits at a meager 0,60. That's about a 10-1 difference. Your prison population rate is also the highest in the entire world. Your infant mortality rate is also below all western standards.
There are many reasons for this and you can't attribute it to theism.
If you use that report to state that suicides rates are higher in secular countries, then you also have to accept the religiosity/illiteracy part. Just as much of a lack of cause and effect in both of them. Which way are you going to have it?
I'm not just using that report. It is well known that secular nations statistically tend to have a high suicide rate and problems with alcoholism.
You are the one who brought the literacy = atheism theory based on statistics. Which way are you going to have it?
-
Oh yeah, was that so back then? And what about this?
Same principle, just another place on earth in a different time. They don't have many other books available or just simply can't afford them or it just might not be in their culture, so in that sense it's great that they learn to read. But at the same time they join a desert death cult which is....meh not good.
Way to dismiss Christianity's great contribution to world literacy past and present!
It could just as well have been the Quran, Torah or whatever holy book you can think of in a totalitarian state.
America is not just an exception. It is a heck of an exception, destroying your theory(literacy = atheism). America is 1st on the GDP list. So that argument takes you nowhere.
An exception does not invalidate a general guideline. Most people do well eating a healthy amount of protein, those with kidney problems do not, hence they are an exception. But the recommendation/guideline of eating good amounts of protein still stands. See it's not that hard, is it? Did I really have to put it this way or are you just being slow?
On exactly what GDP list is america #1? If you count the nation as a whole, sure america is on top of the list behind the European Union. That comes as no surprise really given your population and vast natural resources. But on a per capita basis your claim seem to get little support.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29_per_capita (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29_per_capita)
In fact, most of scandinavia seem to spank your american ass on a per capita basis. But that doesn't really say much about religion/atheism since it might as well be a coincidence.
There are many reasons for this and you can't attribute it to theism.
Sure there are but it's hypocritical of you to blame secularism for suicide rates when one might as well blame christianity for higher murder and prison rates.
I'm not just using that report. It is well known that secular nations statistically tend to have a high suicide rate and problems with alcoholism.
You are the one who brought the literacy = atheism theory based on statistics. Which way are you going to have it?
Now you're doing it again.. throwing out claims out of thin air and at the same time dissecting whatever source I put out there like a true hypocrite. "It is well known that secular nations statistically tend to have a high suicide rate and problems with alcoholism. "
Find a study that shows that correlation and I'll just as quickly find another study that links religiosity and illiteracy.
Although the source might seem a little typical for someone like me, here some candy for ya ;D
http://www.skeptic.com/reading_room/religious-belief-and-societal-health/ (http://www.skeptic.com/reading_room/religious-belief-and-societal-health/)
(http://www.skeptic.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/v12n03_images/fig1_2.gif)
(http://www.skeptic.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/v12n03_images/fig3.gif)
(http://www.skeptic.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/v12n03_images/fig4.gif)
(http://www.skeptic.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/v12n03_images/fig5_6.gif)
-
Some more candy
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article571206.ece (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article571206.ece)
and
(http://i.imgur.com/kpb5A.png)
-
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d5/Spam_with_cans.jpeg/220px-Spam_with_cans.jpeg)
You are not as smart as you pretend to be. I never said atheism = high suicide rate. I said that by your logic, I could say the same thing using the same statistics. ::)
None of the statics you posted prove anything, and your sources? Skeptic.com? SecularHumanism.org? Please! ::)
If you really believe what you are saying here you are either close minded or just lying.
-
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d5/Spam_with_cans.jpeg/220px-Spam_with_cans.jpeg)
You are not as smart as you pretend to be. I never said atheism = high suicide rate. I said that by your logic, I could say the same thing using the same statistics. ::)
I never claimed to be smart. Arguments should stand on their own, no matter if the person uttering it has down syndrome or can solve a Schrödinger wave equation. I'm pretty sure you were convinced that secularism is strongly correlated to suicide.
It is well known that secular nations statistically tend to have a high suicide rate and problems with alcoholism.
None of the statics you posted prove anything, and your sources? Skeptic.com? SecularHumanism.org? Please! ::)
If you really believe what you are saying here you are either close minded or just lying.
The studies are ultimately based on other sources, as far as I understand they were not conducted by people affiliated with secular organizations and even if they were, are you calling them liars? Did they make all those numbers up? It's possible but at least try to refute it by showing me some other studies... otherwise I claim victory on this one.
Those studies show a very strong correlation between religiosity and crime no matter how you view them. Why wouldn't I believe that they're likely close to the truth?
EDIT: You basically refuted none of my arguments.
-
I never claimed to be smart. Arguments should stand on their own, no matter if the person uttering it has down syndrome or can solve a Schrödinger wave equation. I'm pretty sure you were convinced that secularism is strongly correlated to suicide.
The studies are ultimately based on other sources, as far as I understand they were not conducted by people affiliated with secular organizations and even if they were, are you calling them liars? Did they make all those numbers up? It's possible but at least try to refute it by showing me some other studies... otherwise I claim victory on this one.
Those studies show a very strong correlation between religiosity and crime no matter how you view them. Why wouldn't I believe that they're likely close to the truth?
You're pretty sure I was convinced that secularism is strongly correlated to suicide? What makes you so sure?
You keep going back and forth. Make up your mind. So do those numbers prove the correlation or not? If so, are high suicide rates correlated to atheism or not? Which way are you going to have it?
-
You're pretty sure I was convinced that secularism is strongly correlated to suicide? What makes you so sure?
Because you kept repeating the same statement. Unless it was some far fetched irony, I don't see what I'm missing here.
It is well known that secular nations statistically tend to have a high suicide rate and problems with alcoholism.
You keep going back and forth. Make up your mind. So do those numbers prove the correlation or not? If so, are high suicide rates correlated to atheism or not? Which way are you going to have it?
How exactly am I going back and forth? As we agreed earlier, the numbers don't prove anything, BUT they do demonstrate a strong correlation. High suicide rates might be correlated to atheism, I have no problem accepting that. But if you feel like it, please do find any other studies that shows that correlation.
That's the way I'm going to have it.
Now if you don't mind, please explain why those studies/graphs I posted are false. Because if they ain't, you've got little ground to stand on. Actually you've been steadily avoiding many of my arguments.. to the point I'm starting to wonder if this debate is worth continuing. I'm interested in the discussion while you seem preoccupied with trying to discredit me and avoiding arguments. Sure I toss out a little bit of insults here and there, but I do explain my position and reasoning on every argument.
-
Tell that to these people:
An Atheist loves himself and his fellow man instead of a god. An Atheist accepts that heaven is something for which we should work now – here on earth – for all men together to enjoy. An Atheist accepts that he can get no help through prayer, but that he must find in himself the inner conviction and strength to meet life, to grapple with it, to subdue it and to enjoy it. An Atheist accepts that only in a knowledge of himself and a knowledge of his fellow man can he find the understanding that will help lead to a life of fulfillment
http://www.atheists.org/about (http://www.atheists.org/about)
And.....
The New Jersey Humanist Network is a vibrant and growing community of secular humanists. Humanism is a democratic and ethical life-stance, which affirms that human beings have the right and responsibility to give meaning and shape to their own lives. We believe that virtues like morality, kindness, justice and generosity derive from natural human values and reason, and are realized fully only when free from belief in supernatural powers and a spiritual afterlife. Please join us at any of our meetings which are always open to the public.
http://www.njhn.org/ (http://www.njhn.org/)
That sounds like a "belief" system to me.
In short, "There is no God; man is his own 'savior'. Hence, it's the reason I've suggested that atheism, at its core, is simply MAN WORSHIPPING HIMSELF.
WRONG!! Atheists don't say "I don't know". They emphatically declare that there is no God (See the aforementioned items from "American Atheists" and the New Jersey Humanists Network).
NOPE!! To be an atheist, you must believe that THERE IS NO GOD. If you believe that there is a God, you're not an atheist. It's just that simple.
They didn't believe in the flying spaghetti monster. But, they believed that their government was to be in the place of God. And, since they headed the government, the people effectively were to worship them (Stalin and Pol Pot, in their respective countries).
Even Hitler stated that he wanted his people to find salvation in the swastika, instead of the cross. In essence, their governnments (and for all practical purposes) they themselves became God.
The only difference between the two is that one used humanist doctrine as justification to murder and the other used religious doctrine.
The apostle Paul has a term for that: Having a form of godliness but denying the power thereof. Plus, if man makes the rules, then this guy's morality is no better or worse than that of Hitler, Stalin, or Pol Pot.
And in the words of Jesus Christ, "If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him?" (Luke 11:13).
This canard is so easy to rip apart, it's not funny.
- Abortion rights? Gee, complain about "genocide" one minute but give no thought about destroying babies in the womb the next. That's really "progressive" for you. As one recent ad put it, "The most dangerous place for an African-American is the womb". Planned Parenthood was founded by Margaret Sangor, FOR THE EXPRESSED PURPOSE of killing black people. Surprise, surprise!!! She's an atheist, too.
- Gay "marriage"? What part of "one man, one woman" don't you understand? Most gay "marriage" advocates decry polygamy, which makes no sense. They are basically saying that THEY can change the rules of marriage for their purposes; but others can't. Plus, you'll notice that marriage rates overall tend to DROP in places where gay "marriage" is legalized (the very thing gay "marriage" proponents swore wouldn't happen).
- Stem Cell Research? PLEASE!! The only form of that, opposed by people of faith, is embryonic stem cell research (the one kind that hasn't cure one blasted disease TO THIS DAY). Progressives tend to forget about that. Every time stem cell research is cited for a new cure or treatment, progressives run their mouths, forgetting to mention that the cure came from ADULT stem cells. And, they also forget that it was a certain president from Texas who STARTED federal funding for adult stem cell research.
- Sex Education? Sex makes babies!! Progressives seem to forget about that. It never dawned on them that the fewer teens that do the wild thing, the fewer of them get burned with STDs or get knocked up. We've seen such lovely progressive "comprehensive" education, such as "Fistgate" and letting kids 2nd graders put condoms on pickles (OK, they were regular cucumbers). As with too many of their "reforms", it seems progressives put forth mind-bogglingly stupid ideas then act surprised when they don't work.
- AIDS Funding in Africa: Another blatant LIE. Bush gave more to funding AIDS research and treatment in Africa than ANY OTHER PRESIDENT (including Obama). Heck, even AIDS activist and pop star, Bono (hardly a Bush fan) acknowledged Bush's contributions.
- Middle East relations? This guy must be on crack. You think the folks in the Middle East are going to abide by progressive diplomacy? NEWS FLASH!! European countries that have tried that crap are being OVERRUN by Muslim extremists. Within a decade or so, they'll be bowing the knee to Allah or get killed (and you progressives think Christianity is bad? Try Islam, extra strength, no chaser).
- Global Warming? How many times does this have to be exposed for the farce that it is? It's all about trying to hike taxes on people and force them to buy crap that few, if any, would purchase of their own free will.
Unfortunately for whining progressives, our constitution allows for FREE expression of religion. We're allowed to have it and YES we can take in people's religious beliefs (in word and practice, in terms of social issues) to cast our votes. We don't leave our constitutional rights at the ballot box. And, if progressives don't like it, TOUGH COOKIES!!!
We determine what our self-interest is, not this writer or any other progressive. Although, one could easily argue that certain demographics vote straight Democratic ticket, because they think it's the right thing to do, even though they suffer more than anyone else, due to progressive policies.
It goes both ways. People will vote for a guy who promised to "take from the rich and give to the poor". Guess what!! That NEVER HAPPENS. Look at the poor people today; look at the high unemployment rates. How many people in the ghettos and trailer parks and poor farms got all that money that progressives were supposedly taking from the rich?
And how many of them have all this health insurance that was promised? Basically NONE, as most of the so-called benefits don't kick into gear for another three years. Furthermore, what about all the people whose insurance has gone SKY HIGH? Wasn't ObamaCare supposed to bring premiums down? It didn't happen. And forcing someone to buy health insurance (or anything else, for that matter) is as unconstitutional as you can get.
Yet, you don't see anyone breaking their necks, risking life and limb, to go to those countries. They do that to come HERE. And, if the progressives loves these atheistic shangri-las so much, ain't nothing stopping them from packing their back and moving.
- Dead wrong (See American Atheists and New Jersey Humanist Network, among others)
- Yes they do. Atheists don't speak from doubt.
- Actually they do. They have faith that they are their own saviors.
- With atheism effectively being man worshipping himself, they have killed in the name of their own deification (i.e. Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot).
Get a job, bum.
-
As we agreed earlier, the numbers don't prove anything, BUT they do demonstrate a strong correlation. High suicide rates might be correlated to atheism, I have no problem accepting that.
Good! ;)
-
Get a job, bum.
I got one. It takes little time or effort to dismantle such silliness as this.
What's your excuse?
-
Good! ;)
lol, I guess that settles the discussion then. ::)
-
I got one. It takes little time or effort to dismantle such silliness as this.
What's your excuse?
Wait. Sex leads to babies?
Oh yeah, I always seem to forget about that.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worship
your links don't provide any evidence of what you speak. Man being is own saviour has nothing to do with him worshipping himself. It is said in the context that man has to due it for himself, that there is no god or anyone who will correct the wrongs of life.
Your arguments are always piss poor.
stop with the hitler nonsense you have been corrected on this topic numerous times. Seriously, its plainly evident that he was religious. Also, there is no logical connection be atheism and the nazi's, in fact if hitler believed himself to be a god, or nazism to be a new religion, it then goes to show the perversion relgious belief can have on the mind. Atheism has no logical in roads to killing others, it simply states there is no god. That is it, what people do with that is different however there are no logical conclusions to be made only that it contradicts religion and the idea of a god.
It also doesnt hold that man is the most sentient being in the universe.
-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Worship
your links don't provide any evidence of what you speak. Man being is own saviour has nothing to do with him worshipping himself. It is said in the context that man has to due it for himself, that there is no god or anyone who will correct the wrongs of life.
Your arguments are always piss poor.
stop with the hitler nonsense you have been corrected on this topic numerous times. Seriously, its plainly evident that he was religious. Also, there is no logical connection be atheism and the nazi's, in fact if hitler believed himself to be a god, or nazism to be a new religion, it then goes to show the perversion relgious belief can have on the mind. Atheism has no logical in roads to killing others, it simply states there is no god. That is it, what people do with that is different however there are no logical conclusions to be made only that it contradicts religion and the idea of a god.
It also doesnt hold that man is the most sentient being in the universe.
I have been corrected by no one on that topic, least of all YOU. Listen to what you just said, In fact if hitler believed himself to be a god, or nazism to be a new religion, it then goes to show the perversion relgious belief can have on the mind. Atheism has no logical in roads to killing others, it simply states there is no god.
Atheism DOES NOT (in practice) merely state that there is no God. That's a simple fact you can't get through your head, EVEN WITH THE WORDS OF THOSE ATHEISTS RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOUR FACE.
Man has to "do" (not "due") it for himself? NEWS FLASH!! Man can't do it for himself. He hasn't done for himself and he never will do it for himself. And, we've all seen the horrors of those men who have tried (i.e. Hitler). Hitler was religious? DUH!!!! Key word......WAS. But, when he went into Jew-killing mode, his stated goal was to make the swastika replace the cross, to destroy Christianity root and branch.
And, as has been asked a zillion times, if man isn't the most sentient being in the universe, WHO IS? Atheists claim they don't know. Of course, until they "find out", they'll gladly place themselves in that role.
-
I have been corrected by no one on that topic, least of all YOU. Listen to what you just said, In fact if hitler believed himself to be a god, or nazism to be a new religion, it then goes to show the perversion relgious belief can have on the mind. Atheism has no logical in roads to killing others, it simply states there is no god.
Atheism DOES NOT (in practice) merely state that there is no God. That's a simple fact you can't get through your head, EVEN WITH THE WORDS OF THOSE ATHEISTS RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOUR FACE.
Man has to "do" (not "due") it for himself? NEWS FLASH!! Man can't do it for himself. He hasn't done for himself and he never will do it for himself. And, we've all seen the horrors of those men who have tried (i.e. Hitler). Hitler was religious? DUH!!!! Key word......WAS. But, when he went into Jew-killing mode, his stated goal was to make the swastika replace the cross, to destroy Christianity root and branch.
And, as has been asked a zillion times, if man isn't the most sentient being in the universe, WHO IS? Atheists claim they don't know. Of course, until they "find out", they'll gladly place themselves in that role.
You're making a lot of ungrounded assumptions about "atheists". Why would a simple disbelief in a god make you part of any group? You don't believe in astrology, do you? Aha! What's your hidden agenda???
Wait, lets do that in caps:
A DISBELIEF IN ASTROLOGY(IN PRACTICE) DOES NOT MERELY MEAN JUST THAT!!! THAT'S A SIMPLE FACT THAT YOU CAN NOT GET THROUGH YOUR HEAD!!! LOUD NOISES GAAAHHTRHRHRH
Btw, you strike me as someone who's never read any Hitler biographies... but then again, what would it matter if he was indeed an atheist? Stalin certainly was an atheist, but you don't see the entire scandinavia participate in purges around the clock do you? Even though they happen to share the same disbelief.
-
I have been corrected by no one on that topic, least of all YOU. Listen to what you just said, In fact if hitler believed himself to be a god, or nazism to be a new religion, it then goes to show the perversion relgious belief can have on the mind. Atheism has no logical in roads to killing others, it simply states there is no god.
Atheism DOES NOT (in practice) merely state that there is no God. That's a simple fact you can't get through your head, EVEN WITH THE WORDS OF THOSE ATHEISTS RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOUR FACE.
Man has to "do" (not "due") it for himself? NEWS FLASH!! Man can't do it for himself. He hasn't done for himself and he never will do it for himself. And, we've all seen the horrors of those men who have tried (i.e. Hitler). Hitler was religious? DUH!!!! Key word......WAS. But, when he went into Jew-killing mode, his stated goal was to make the swastika replace the cross, to destroy Christianity root and branch.
And, as has been asked a zillion times, if man isn't the most sentient being in the universe, WHO IS? Atheists claim they don't know. Of course, until they "find out", they'll gladly place themselves in that role.
I can post on this computer it erases everthingfor fucks sake, ill post in a bit.
-
Atheism is the most unintelligent way to believe of all them, no matter how ludicrous the belief. It's total narcissism and if you look at the people who subscribe to it, it usually fits the personality type. Alone, over indulged, non commital and self absorbed.
-
Atheism is the most unintelligent way to believe of all them, no matter how ludicrous the belief. It's total narcissism and if you look at the people who subscribe to it, it usually fits the personality type. Alone, over indulged, non commital and self absorbed.
I can see why you would post under another name..
-
I can see why you would post under another name..
Huh? Look, not everyone fits a profile exactly, but most atheists are a piece of work. Good people to interview for a mental health thesis. I haven't met a normal, grounded one yet who didn't make atheism conform to their own self indulged look at the bigger picture. Hey, whatever, who cares right? We all find out in the end :)
-
Huh? Look, not everyone fits a profile exactly, but most atheists are a piece of work. Good people to interview for a mental health thesis. I haven't met a normal, grounded one yet who didn't make atheism conform to their own self indulged look at the bigger picture. Hey, whatever, who cares right? We all find out in the end :)
"I've never met..." has always been a poor substitute for a sampling of any group and is about as worthless as a penis at a Domestic Violence seminar.
Just sayin...
-
Atheism is the most unintelligent way to believe of all them, no matter how ludicrous the belief. It's total narcissism and if you look at the people who subscribe to it, it usually fits the personality type. Alone, over indulged, non commital and self absorbed.
Not believing in a god makes you narcissistic? Explain that to me.
-
Huh? Look, not everyone fits a profile exactly, but most atheists are a piece of work. Good people to interview for a mental health thesis. I haven't met a normal, grounded one yet who didn't make atheism conform to their own self indulged look at the bigger picture. Hey, whatever, who cares right? We all find out in the end :)
LOL you should be one to talk, do you believe in santa claus and the easter bunny as well?
like George Carline once said, god is an imaginary friend for adults, an imaginary man in the sky that makes you love him otherwise he will kill you/destroy you, LOL
keep on drinking that Kool Aid
-
LOL you should be one to talk, do you believe in santa claus and the easter bunny as well?
like George Carline once said, god is an imaginary friend for adults, an imaginary man in the sky that makes you love him otherwise he will kill you/destroy you, LOL
keep on drinking that Kool Aid
"God is dead" - George Carlin
"George Carlin is dead" - God
-
"God is dead" - George Carlin
"George Carlin is dead" - God
We all gotta die sometime, that's part of our biological timeline, everything dies, even the stars and the suns,, they just have a significantly longer timeline then we do :)
-
Huh? Look, not everyone fits a profile exactly, but most atheists are a piece of work. Good people to interview for a mental health thesis. I haven't met a normal, grounded one yet who didn't make atheism conform to their own self indulged look at the bigger picture. Hey, whatever, who cares right? We all find out in the end :)
Self-indulgent? Care to clarify?
-
Christianity's self-preservation clause - "And if anyone still prophesies, his father and mother, to whom he was born, will say to him, 'You must die, because you have told lies in the LORD's name.' When he prophesies, his own parents will stab him." - Zechariah 13:3
-
Christianity's self-preservation clause - "And if anyone still prophesies, his father and mother, to whom he was born, will say to him, 'You must die, because you have told lies in the LORD's name.' When he prophesies, his own parents will stab him." - Zechariah 13:3
That is from what is generally referred to as "the Old Testament". The "New Testament" is for followers of Jesus of Nazareth, i.e, "Christians".
"Christianity's self-preservation clause"? Give me a break and fuck that noise. WTF were you thinking? Oh wait...you weren't thinking because if you had been you would never have made such a lame-o supposition. And remember, I'm an atheist so don't even try to go there. ;D
-
That is from what is generally referred to as "the Old Testament". The "New Testament" is for followers of Jesus of Nazareth, i.e, "Christians".
"Christianity's self-preservation clause"? Give me a break and fuck that noise. WTF were you thinking? Oh wait...you weren't thinking because if you had been you would never have made such a lame-o supposition. And remember, I'm an atheist so don't even try to go there. ;D
Have you ever had sex?
-
Automobile accident deaths increased by 20% during the period of time "Jesus take the wheel" was on the charts.
The percentage of auto accidents attributed to driver error also increased by exactly 20%. Apparently Jesus isn't a very good driver.
-
Automobile accident deaths increased by 20% during the period of time "Jesus take the wheel" was on the charts.
I actually heard this about "Firestarter" by Prodigy.
-
I have been corrected by no one on that topic, least of all YOU. Listen to what you just said, In fact if hitler believed himself to be a god, or nazism to be a new religion, it then goes to show the perversion relgious belief can have on the mind. Atheism has no logical in roads to killing others, it simply states there is no god.
Atheism DOES NOT (in practice) merely state that there is no God. That's a simple fact you can't get through your head, EVEN WITH THE WORDS OF THOSE ATHEISTS RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOUR FACE.
Man has to "do" (not "due") it for himself? NEWS FLASH!! Man can't do it for himself. He hasn't done for himself and he never will do it for himself. And, we've all seen the horrors of those men who have tried (i.e. Hitler). Hitler was religious? DUH!!!! Key word......WAS. But, when he went into Jew-killing mode, his stated goal was to make the swastika replace the cross, to destroy Christianity root and branch.
And, as has been asked a zillion times, if man isn't the most sentient being in the universe, WHO IS? Atheists claim they don't know. Of course, until they "find out", they'll gladly place themselves in that role.
"Atheism DOES NOT (in practice) merely state that there is no God. That's a simple fact you can't get through your head, EVEN WITH THE WORDS OF THOSE ATHEISTS RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOUR FACE."
yes it does, you are wrong, what is the definition of atheism? its like saying being an aunicorn does not merely state there is no unicorns. It does, but some people may then conclude that means horses are trash to be beaten and killed or that magic doesn't exist since they equate magic with unicorns. That is there own attachment, not a property of aunicornism. Some atheists might say that atheism means we should all kill each other and eat babies, it doesn't reflect atheism. Its a heated arena atheism and god thus people are likely to have more conclusions then just there is a god or no god.
"Man has to "do" (not "due") it for himself? NEWS FLASH!! Man can't do it for himself. He hasn't done for himself and he never will do it for himself. And, we've all seen the horrors of those men who have tried (i.e. Hitler). Hitler was religious? DUH!!!! Key word......WAS. But, when he went into Jew-killing mode, his stated goal was to make the swastika replace the cross, to destroy Christianity root and branch. "
hitler was religious, i used the past tense in the sense that hitler has been dead for a while, not some particular event in his life, good comprehension there. Man can't do it for himself? LOLLOLOL thats all we do. I tell you what you cut your arm off and pray to god to fix it and ill do the same and go to a man called a doctor, see who does more for you, god or the doc. Where do you get this shit, there is not one obvious example of good intervening in someones life, an outright miracle that is obvious to all, not up for debate. However, conversely there are too many examples of god not helping man, japan much? im sure all the men over there are doing less then the god that allowed it to happen.
"And, as has been asked a zillion times, if man isn't the most sentient being in the universe, WHO IS? Atheists claim they don't know. Of course, until they "find out", they'll gladly place themselves in that role."
As far as any human on earth KNOWS it is man, again where do you get this shit? im human i do not KNOW god exists, hence you do not thus according to all the facts and observations ever made in history man is. However, that doesn't mean that there are not more sentient beings or that god does not exist. Your arguments are so shitty is laughable, what does being the most sentient being have to do with self-worship? many cultures worship animals that exist which are obviously less sentient, there goes that argument.
Watch lets ask question of you to see how you respond, your religious mind won't let you be wrong. How does god create? is it from stardust? is it from nothing, is it magic, does it take time? give me the facts of the matter please
-
Christianity's self-preservation clause - "And if anyone still prophesies, his father and mother, to whom he was born, will say to him, 'You must die, because you have told lies in the LORD's name.' When he prophesies, his own parents will stab him." - Zechariah 13:3
Your statement, quoted above. I must admit to be at something of a loss as to just what the fuck you were thinking. Oh wait! I addressed that in my reply, shown directly below.
That is from what is generally referred to as "the Old Testament". The "New Testament" is for followers of Jesus of Nazareth, i.e, "Christians".
"Christianity's self-preservation clause"? Give me a break and fuck that noise. WTF were you thinking? Oh wait...you weren't thinking because if you had been you would never have made such a lame-o supposition. And remember, I'm an atheist so don't even try to go there. ;D
Have you ever had sex?
Your well thought out and structured reply to same. Below is my reply to your insightful missive.
What are you, a fucking moron? No...Don't answer. The strain on your already taxed "brain" might well shut down involuntary functions such as breathing. I suppose that a mental eunuch such as yourself thinks your reply as quoted above somehow "funny", "witty" or even "clever". Fuck that noise, you'r e obviously in over your head little man. I'd tell you to go fuck yourself but that would result in something like a dog chasing its tail.
Yup. You're stupid enough to try.
If you ever feel up to actually responding to what I posted in a manner befitting a human being, please do so and give us all a heads up as I shall be certain to alert the media. Such an event would pre-empt the Royal Wedding or maybe even Roller Derby. So tell us all, are there any more at home like you or did they spay and neuter your sister and brother right after you were born? ;D
-
Your statement, quoted above. I must admit to be at something of a loss as to just what the fuck you were thinking. Oh wait! I addressed that in my reply, shown directly below.
Your well thought out and structured reply to same. Below is my reply to your insightful missive.
What are you, a fucking moron? No...Don't answer. The strain on your already taxed "brain" might well shut down involuntary functions such as breathing. I suppose that a mental eunuch such as yourself thinks your reply as quoted above somehow "funny", "witty" or even "clever". Fuck that noise, you'r e obviously in over your head little man. I'd tell you to go fuck yourself but that would result in something like a dog chasing its tail.
Yup. You're stupid enough to try.
If you ever feel up to actually responding to what I posted in a manner befitting a human being, please do so and give us all a heads up as I shall be certain to alert the media. Such an event would pre-empt the Royal Wedding or maybe even Roller Derby. So tell us all, are there any more at home like you or did they spay and neuter your sister and brother right after you were born? ;D
Save your strength, MCNUGGET is known for regurgitating the bible when he gets confused or doesn't know how to reply to a question
I've gone through years of this with him, same old story... faith and bible...yadda yadda yadda..
-
Save your strength, MCNUGGET is known for regurgitating the bible when he gets confused or doesn't know how to reply to a question
I've gone through years of this with him, same old story... faith and bible...yadda yadda yadda..
He was talking to garebear.
-
Save your strength, MCNUGGET is known for regurgitating the bible when he gets confused or doesn't know how to reply to a question
I've gone through years of this with him, same old story... faith and bible...yadda yadda yadda..
QFT
-
He was talking to garebear.
Correct. I don't mind at all if someone either Atheist or Christian is able to put forth their beliefs or lack thereof in a manner that is somewhat convincing be it from a faith based or scientific point of view. Note that I left out islam. That shit is indefensible as it's nothing less than submission to a misogynistic pedophile, i.e., the profit HOmohammed. Fuck that noise.
If you were bitten by a radioactive dung beetle it's a sure bet that the end result wouldn't be super powers but rather that you'd become either a liberal democrapic politician or a muslim. Atheists should learn to have manners as should Christians. My friends once said to me that just because you disagree there's no need to be disagreeable. I possess a wit that few here can rival but that comes with growing up a short mulatto male. You tend to get picked on by both sides of your genetic coin. ;)
This has served me well when it comes to what often passes for "debate" here on Getbig. Whereas what we often see here on the boards are meant to be biting commentary on the idiocy of ones "opponent" is in reality the written equivalent of a chimp flinging poo at someone because their stuck in their mental cage and can't get at them (though I doubt any of us would really want to punch one another out ;D). In comparison I am firing 50 cal simunition at those that I think are behaving stupidly. No one is perfect, least of all me. ;D
Fuck islam. ;D
-
Actually, I change my mind. There is a God and his son is Jesus.
Jesus is mexican, by the way, and gave me a handjob in San Diego last night.
His breath smelled of onions.
-
Actually, I change my mind. There is a God and his son is Jesus.
Jesus is mexican, by the way, and gave me a handjob in San Diego last night.
His breath smelled of onions.
Oh, please. If you ever changed your mind, I'd hate to see the diaper. ;)