Just booked my ticket to go see Richard Dawkins next week.

[Radical Plato]

Your tone is starting to annoy me a little 'Savagely Homo', you should wind your turkey neck in a bit.

[muscleman-2013]

Aside from a few very controversial ancient texts, there is no historical record of Jesus at all. Certainly nothing that speaks to his activism or miracles. The most logical explanation is there was a real-life political agitator who got blended with the myths of Horus, Dionysus, etc, and we ended up with the stories we know today.

Prayer is just a way to bargain with an uncaring universe. If you do the right things and burn enough goats, maybe, just maybe, you will be spared some hardships. Doesn't work.

There are the apostles.  Most of whom were martyred.  Do you think they all had the same collective delusion?

[Radical Plato]

There are the apostles.  Most of whom were martyred.  Do you think they all had the same collective delusion?

Why Not?  Considering billions of modern day humans share a collective delusion even though they are exposed to countless information that exposes their delusions as just that, I can't see why a handful of ancient apostles with limited knowledge and access to alternate information couldn't share in a delusion.

[BigRo]

can you sit in a dark room and enjoy stillness of mind? Or does your militant evangelism give you no peace?

[BigCyp]

How did you accumluate over 10k posts without me ever noticing you? The sheer volume of shit, should have alerted my nosehair at least by now.

[Radical Plato]

How did you accumluate over 10k posts without me ever noticing you? The sheer volume of shit, should have alerted my nosehair at least by now.

You probably lack the intellect to work this out for yourself.  I am sure another getbigger will take it upon themselves to help you solve your dilemma.

[muscleman-2013]

Why Not?  Considering billions of modern day humans share a collective delusion even though they are exposed to countless information that exposes their delusions as just that, I can't see why a handful of ancient apostles with limited knowledge and access to alternate information couldn't share in a delusion.

Oh c'mon bro, you're stretching your imagination real hard there..

[Radical Plato]

Oh c'mon bro, you're stretching your imagination real hard there..

I'm not imagining anything, it is true that billions of people today share a common delusion.  I am right whatever faith you choose.  Let's say the Christians are right then they aren't the ones participating in a mass delusion, well then that means everyone is.  And if the Muslims are right, then billions of non-muslims are also collectively deluded.  If billions of people can share in a mass delusion in an advanced age like ours then it is utterly plausible that 12 apostles could share a collective delusion in the Bronze age.

I am not saying that the apostles were or were not deluded just pointing out if billions of people can share in a delusion then it isn't unreasonable to think that 12 apostles could also suffer from a shared delusion.

[BigRo]

your just as religious with your atheism, troubling you cant see it.

[B_B_C]

How did you accumluate over 10k posts without me ever noticing you? The sheer volume of shit, should have alerted my nosehair at least by now.

its because you nose hairs, having spent so long in  shit, lost their sensitivity

[Radical Plato]

your just as religious with your atheism, troubling you cant see it.

Oh Brother, this old chestnut.  You are getting desperate now.  Personally I don't like the term atheist, although I will use it for arguments sake and to avoid lengthy explanations. I will quote Sam Harris as he articulated this well when he said, " 'atheism' is a term that should not even exist. No one ever needs to identify himself as a "non astrologer" or a "non-alchemist." We do not have words for people who doubt that Elvis is still alive or that aliens have traversed the galaxy only to molest ranchers and their cattle. Atheism is nothing more than the noises reasonable people make in the presence of unjustified religious beliefs.”

And you fail to realize you are also an atheist, I just go one god further than you.  I am sure you don't believe in Zeus, Poseidon or Hera or the myriad of other gods people of other religions other than your own believe in.

[FermiDirac]

How did you accumluate over 10k posts without me ever noticing you? The sheer volume of shit, should have alerted my nosehair at least by now.

He's the artist formerly known as E-kul IIRC.

[Man of Steel]

Oh Brother, this old chestnut.  You are getting desperate now.  Personally I don't like the term atheist, although I will use it for arguments sake and to avoid lengthy explanations. I will quote Sam Harris as he articulated this well when he said, " 'atheism' is a term that should not even exist. No one ever needs to identify himself as a "non astrologer" or a "non-alchemist." We do not have words for people who doubt that Elvis is still alive or that aliens have traversed the galaxy only to molest ranchers and their cattle. Atheism is nothing more than the noises reasonable people make in the presence of unjustified religious beliefs.”

Put 20 atheists in a room and you'll get about 5-6 different definitions of atheism.   Same with theists.

I don't care how, what, why an atheist defines or doesn't define their position......I know exactly what/who a person without God is.

What I enjoy about Sam's comment is how he begins by stating that the term "atheism" need not exist as the identity of "atheists" need not be defined by words and then concludes with redefining the term "atheism" with different words.

That said, just enjoy Dawkins' lecture/discussion LOL.  

[SF1900]

Put 20 atheists in a room and you'll get about 5-6 different definitions of atheism.   Same with theists.

I don't care how, what, why an atheist defines or doesn't define their position......I know exactly what/who a person without God is.

What I enjoy about Sam's comment is how he begins by stating that the term "atheism" need not exist as the identity of "atheists" need not be defined by words and then concludes with redefining the term "atheism" with different words.

That said, just enjoy Dawkins' lecture/discussion LOL.  

And please, tell me what or who a person is without God in their life? Unless you know the internal world of every atheist, this ought to be interesting.

Cue the statement, "All atheists are depressed, lonely, lost, misguided, without god." 

[BigCyp]

its because you nose hairs, having spent so long in  shit, lost their sensitivity

Still the worst posts in getbig history then  .

[BigCyp]

He's the artist formerly known as E-kul IIRC.

Ahahahahahahahahahahahha a 'E-Kul' oh brother, didn't know I was dealing with that bitter little beta oh brother, I wouldn't have bothered.

[Man of Steel]

And please, tell me what or who a person is without God in their life? Unless you know the internal world of every atheist, this ought to be interesting.

Not a problem.....just a person that chooses to have no belief in God....simple as that.  Reasons why vary from person to person.  You'll most likely give me a different spin....fine.  It'll still come back to what I just wrote.

I agree with Sam, don't need the term "atheist" or "atheism".  I just found it funny that he still redefined it.

[B_B_C]

Still the worst posts in getbig history then  .

better than being shit nosed like you claim to be

[Howard]

Well it isn't unusual to dislike someone who exposes the beliefs you have cherished for a lifetime to be nothing more than falsehoods and indoctrination.  Better to remain in denial and ignorance than to face the fact you have been a deluded idiot your whole life.

You mean to tell me that Snoopy will never have the Christmas Beagle come visit his doghouse.

[rocket]

Most atheists are completely unaware of the fact the term "atheist" pertains to a rejection of all deities existing.  A most unscientific mentality and not actually the term they think they are subscribing to.

Some blithering idiots obvious cross their own faith barrier and do maintain there is no god but most people (and I do mean the critical thinkers) merely do not believe in the ones that have been perpetuated on earth without any proof, but maintain they *could* exist aka agnosticism.

Anybody who claims that "there is no god" instead of "they doubt there is a god by virtue of lack of proof" is in their own special way a religious person.

Debating religion is a desperately fruitless process of attempting to reinforce your own beliefs by criticising others.  

I will say this, though - anybody who believes that without god, life isn't magnificent and the universe we reside in is not "magical" enough is wrong and I'm glad to say that having discovered astrophysics and owned telescopes and whatnot, I no longer have any fucks to give about there not being a magical skygod in my life.

Also, Richard Dawkins is a poor ambassador for critical thinking in the context of interaction with those who have faith.  He bleeds a very clear and identifiable frustration for people who have faith and it doesn't matter how unintelligent people are, they can all read when someone thinks they are a fucking moron.

[SF1900]

Not a problem.....just a person that chooses to have no belief in God....simple as that.  Reasons why vary from person to person.  You'll most likely give me a different spin....fine.  It'll still come back to what I just wrote.

I agree with Sam, don't need the term "atheist" or "atheism".  I just found it funny that he still redefined it.

Well, I cannot say for a 100% fact that a God does not exist because anyone could be wrong. I say with a 99.9% certainty that a God does not exist based on the available evidence. But I am always willing to change my mind if the evidence presents itself. Dawkins said the same thing. You can't be fully certain a God does not exist. Anyone can be wrong. So, what does that make me? An atheist with a slight twinge of agnosticism? Who really cares.

How you or anyone else wants to define my stance is their prerogative. I do not put much time into thinking about how to define atheism lol. There are much better things to do than that.

[BigRo]

Most atheists are completely unaware of the fact the term "atheist" pertains to a rejection of all deities existing.  A most unscientific mentality and not actually the term they think they are subscribing to.

Some blithering idiots obvious cross their own faith barrier and do maintain there is no god but most people (and I do mean the critical thinkers) merely do not believe in the ones that have been perpetuated on earth without any proof, but maintain they *could* exist aka agnosticism.

Anybody who claims that "there is no god" instead of "they doubt there is a god by virtue of lack of proof" is in their own special way a religious person.

Debating religion is a desperately fruitless process of attempting to reinforce your own beliefs by criticising others.  

I will say this, though - anybody who believes that without god, life isn't magnificent and the universe we reside in is not "magical" enough is wrong and I'm glad to say that having discovered astrophysics and owned telescopes and whatnot, I no longer have any fucks to give about there not being a magical skygod in my life.

Also, Richard Dawkins is a poor ambassador for critical thinking in the context of interaction with those who have faith.  He bleeds a very clear and identifiable frustration for people who have faith and it doesn't matter how unintelligent people are, they can all read when someone thinks they are a fucking moron.

good post, especially like the bolded part.

[rocket]

Well, I cannot say for a 100% fact that a God does not exist because anyone could be wrong. I say with a 99.9% certainty that a God does not exist based on the available evidence. But I am always willing to change my mind if the evidence presents itself. Dawkins said the same thing. You can't be fully certain a God does not exist. Anyone can be wrong. So, what does that make me? An atheist with a slight twinge of agnosticism? Who really cares.

How you or anyone else wants to define my stance is their prerogative. I do not put much time into thinking about how to define atheism lol. There are much better things to do than that.

It makes you not an atheist.  That's not an atheist.

End of story.

Not an atheist with a dash of agnosticism.  It is agnosticism.  They only differ by how you define your certainty and I was truly surprised when I discovered that, that anybody bothers to define themselves as an atheist.

[Radical Plato]

Put 20 atheists in a room and you'll get about 5-6 different definitions of atheism.   Same with theists.

I don't care how, what, why an atheist defines or doesn't define their position......I know exactly what/who a person without God is.

What I enjoy about Sam's comment is how he begins by stating that the term "atheism" need not exist as the identity of "atheists" need not be defined by words and then concludes with redefining the term "atheism" with different words.

That said, just enjoy Dawkins' lecture/discussion LOL.  

Sam uses the word atheism for simplicity sake.  It is done so that he doesn't have to continually expand it by saying "What others mean when they refer to the word atheism".  It is ridiculous to think that one can avoid the word atheism while explaining why the word is unnecessary.

To fully understand his point it would be necessary to hear his complete view on the matter, rather than just a quote taken out of context.

[BigCyp]

I am a 'born again Christian'. I try to live according to the bible, I attend church regularly and am a 'guest speaker' oh brother at several churches.

Still, I would not say 100% that God exists, or that I 'know' God exists.

If I claimed that, my faith, which is the only thing that justifies me in God's eyes, would be void.

I have faith He exists. I don't 'know'.

Hows them apples?