Learning Thread - *Atheism*

[Always Sore]

I'm not discounting the idea that a "God" may of made this universe(or in your analogy put us in the ocean). However I AM discounting the ARGUMENTS put forth that claim to prove such a thing happened.

True. Ideas in science change through time. However they only change through proof. I hold out on any possibility. I never dismiss anything. However I also never believe anything unless there's proof.


Anecdotes aren't evidence. If you tell me of a "miracle" that happened to you(Has been done several times by other christians) then you'd have to prove it happened through facts,Not "accounts". In science "because he says so" isn't proof of anything. Unless you can prove such things occured then they're useless to me.

I choose not to believe fantastical accounts from people who claim they are miracles. I choose not to believe UNTIL they provide evidence.
People lie.
People get confused.
People fool other people.
People fool themselves.


You're missing the entire point of my former posts.

I NEVER conclude "There is no evidence for a god so there is no God." That would be a logical fallacy called "Argument from ignorance".

Fence sitting is the best option when the facts aren't known. You can't make the conclusion there is a God since there is no proof of that. Nor can you make the conclusion there isn't a God since there is no proof for that either.

I doubt there is a "God" but I don't say there isn't one 100%. I simply don't believe there is. Lack of belief and belief against are two different things.

1ST and i hate i am even taking the time to write for i do not care for you as a person and do not care or feel the need to try to convince you of a position since you made a choice based on findings you feel are correct so to so is also a waste of time.

that being said i really think either i am not being clear enough or you do not understand my ocean analogy is not that "god" created the ocean but that it exisists as does the boat the possiablity of a god in the creation process due to lack of proof does not.hope that helps.

the problem i have with your ideas stims from your belief that you know something due to vast book reading and schooling but you discount religion as if the same "man" who write the science book could be the same as writes the bible so with the belief that all men are faliable then anything you learned could be wrong and if you left with only things you proved yourself as fact you yourself are a man and thus can be wrong.

there is a game called telephone where something is started at one end and in the end it becomes something different, my point is just beacuse you think it and can point to a book or paragraph that supports you conclusion it does not make it right by definiation. people use both the science and the bible to there own ends.

proof is in the eye of the beholder. in the universe there are stars that cannot be scean but the light from these can, by right if it cannot be seen or touuched or felt they do no exist in the theory of atheistic "proof" of a god. i can point to a child and say to you thats a work of god though you can point to science and say thats the work of a union between a man and a women are you right? by your definition yes but is there a chance i can be right? yes and for me there is proof as the same as you it just depends on what you feel in your heart.

for me to walk in a world with or without a belief in something is wrong. i think if you choose not to feel some way about a "god" than great if you feel there is one great but to dismiss one side due to lack of proof i find to be poor, and that is the center of my problem either shit or dont but do not sit on the pot and tell me i can't shit.

[Johnny Apollo]

1ST and i hate i am even taking the time to write for i do not care for you as a person and do not care or feel the need to try to convince you of a position since you made a choice based on findings you feel are correct so to so is also a waste of time.

You don't care for me as a person? And I thought Christians were supposed to be kind and understanding...

that being said i really think either i am not being clear enough or you do not understand my ocean analogy is not that "god" created the ocean but that it exisists as does the boat the possiablity of a god in the creation process due to lack of proof does not.hope that helps.

You're being perfectly clear and your argument makes no sense.

"The ocean and the boat exist but the possibility of a god in the creation process due to lack of proof does not"? That sentence makes no sense.

the problem i have with your ideas stims from your belief that you know something due to vast book reading and schooling but you discount religion as if the same "man" who write the science book could be the same as writes the bible so with the belief that all men are faliable then anything you learned could be wrong and if you left with only things you proved yourself as fact you yourself are a man and thus can be wrong.

1.You're compairing modern science books to ancient religous books? Is that a joke? You can't possibly be serious.

2.I don't simply believe everything I read. If there is no evidence for it then I simply don't believe it.

there is a game called telephone where something is started at one end and in the end it becomes something different, my point is just beacuse you think it and can point to a book or paragraph that supports you conclusion it does not make it right by definiation. people use both the science and the bible to there own ends.

You don't know anything about science obviously. Go back to highschool.

First of all...Telephone? I don't see how that compairson even fits here. That only works when you're communicated by word of mouth not text.

Second of all...Science works with EVIDENCE. FACTS,EXPERIMENTS. You can't accuratly use science in support of anything because it only supports what is proven. That's it. Your lack of understanding of science is astounding.

proof is in the eye of the beholder. in the universe there are stars that cannot be scean but the light from these can, by right if it cannot be seen or touuched or felt they do no exist in the theory of atheistic "proof" of a god.

You haven't been reading my posts have you? I never claimed just because I can't see it,it doesn't exist. I never said that. I said the contrary to that.

I see no point in wasting MY time with you when you can't even read or speak proper english.


You make no sense by stating "there are stars which can't be seen but the light from them can" WTF does that even mean? Do you even know what you're saying here? The object can't be seen but the light from it can? HAHA.

i can point to a child and say to you thats a work of god though you can point to science and say thats the work of a union between a man and a women are you right? by your definition yes but is there a chance i can be right? yes and for me there is proof as the same as you it just depends on what you feel in your heart.

If you use a "Child" as evidence of a God you have to PROVE that's evidence of a God.

I can prove it's evidence of man and woman having sex. Can you prove it's evidence of a God? No.

Not even compairable.

for me to walk in a world with or without a belief in something is wrong. i think if you choose not to feel some way about a "god" than great if you feel there is one great but to dismiss one side due to lack of proof i find to be poor, and that is the center of my problem either shit or dont but do not sit on the pot and tell me i can't shit.

You obviously didn't read my posts. More proof you're a waste of my time.

I said multiple times I never "dismiss" the existence of a God due to lack of proof.

I am a "Weak Atheist". I do not deny the existence of a God. I simply lack belief. I neither claim there is or there is not a God. I have no proof one way or the other so I lack a belief one way or the other.

 


Last post i'll address from you in this thread. You don't read my posts to begin with so it's a waste of my time.

[Always Sore]

glad johnny we are on the same page. i do not waste my time reading your posts due to the fact that i find you both a bore and a idiot and a judgemental assclown. if you look at my first post i was putting my 2 cents on a topic i tend to avoid wasting time with you and only respond to you since you felt it nessecary to make a comment.2nd at no point in anything i write do i call my self a christian but you make the assumption (without proof) that because i am defending the side of "god" ergo it makes me a christian or because i have had a experence you assume it make me a dye hard cross waving christian.

so let me break it down for you i am not the type that comes here to get into a pissing contest with people who i define thru there actions as assclowns because unlike you in my real life if we were in the same room and you ran your mouth like you do here the pressure you would feel on your throat would be my hand choking the life out of you and you could let me know when at the moment of exit if you see god.

you sent a stupid pm about debate i asked nicely for you to buzz off, if you continue to feel the need to take your little shots at me i may feel the need to "play" back with you.

do not respond or try to disect anything i write or make stupid comments if you don't like it or don't agree with it ignore it as i will attempt to do with you.

before you give me your "oh attack the person since you can't prove your argument" theory save it.just because you don't understand something does not make it wrong and to dismissed it just means we have not communicated correctly, i hope to not have to speak with you again.

[24KT]

Helen Keller was once asked if there was anything worse than not having sight.
She responded "Yes, there are worse things than not having sight, ...having sight, ...but no vision"

[Dos Equis]

Did you know Helen Keller was a communist?  I was shocked.  Recently read it in "Lies My Teacher Told Me."  Interesting book.  Obvious liberal bias by the author, but still a good read.

[micky55024]

First of all...Telephone? I don't see how that compairson even fits here. That only works when you're communicated by word of mouth not text.


You make no sense by stating "there are stars which can't be seen but the light from them can" WTF does that even mean? Do you even know what you're saying here? The object can't be seen but the light from it can? HAHA.

I think the telephone reference was to the idea that a conversation that takes place between two people can be altered if say the story is told to one person and then that person calls another person and so on and so on.  Ten people down the line the story will most likely have been altered from the original.  Text is text and much less likely to be altered but still a possibility when translated from one language to another.  The bible is most likely a representation of these stories, which may have been altered over time due to being passed by word of mouth, and in the end the truth may be different from what is reresented int he bible.

As for the light reference...  When you look at an object you are not seeing that object.  You are simply seeing the light that was reflected off that object unless the object is emitting it's own light energy.  A red shirt is only red because red is the only color in the spectrum that is not absorbed by the shirt and that specific lightwave is reflected back to your eye.  With that said...the light from a star is a result of the energy that is being released.  Every star emits a different color due to it's unique combination of gases and other compounds that are the source of that energy.  No 2 stars are the same color.  The human eye is unable to detect the difference in colors of most stars.  So technically AS is right because you really are not seeing the object but he is wrong in saying that the object cannot be touched because it can, we're just not close enough to do so.

[alexxx]

Johnny how did we come to exist? there was a bang from where and how>? Scientists are unreliable. They always change their data and get their "facts" wrong because they are only human. This is a battle you cannot win Johnny. God is and was and will be.

Johnny what happens to people after death? Do we just seize to think? How can this be possible? Here we are a source of spiritual never ending energy and the next thing you know somebody dies. Does this energy sease to exist. Please answer my questions if you can't I take it you can't prove anything about religion.

[Dos Equis]

Johnny is gone "forever."  You might want to direct your question to his alter ego "Mark."   

[alexxx]

Johnny is gone "forever."  You might want to direct your question to his alter ego "Mark."   

I feel happier all of a sudden.