Atheism

reply to post by iterationzero

You hit the nail on the head, I am making a positive claim, that there is a God and if you believe you can have eternal life.

A positive claim for which you have yet to provide evidence.

You are making a negative claim, basically calling people stupid for believing the universe was created by God.

Can you point out where I did so? Here’s a hint: you can’t. Since you’ve taken it upon yourself to actively lie about both my position and what I have or haven’t said, our civil discourse on this subject is at an end.

How foolish it is for material-minded man to allow such vulnerable theories as those of a mechanistic universe to deprive him of the vast spiritual resources of the personal experience of true religion. Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah…

Here’s the TL;DR version of what you just said:

God created the Earth, and then birthed and raised himself in West Philadelphia. He spent most of the days after those first seven chilling out, maxing, relaxing all cool… shooting some b-ball outside of the school. There were these other divine entities who were up to no good and they started making trouble in his neighborhood. God got into one little fight and his mom got scared and said, “You’re moving with your auntie and uncle in Bel-Air!”

That pretty much covers Genesis through Exodus.

Can you prove this didn’t happen?

Next time, show a little integrity and be honest about other people’s positions and words.

reply to post by awake_and_aware


Right....... Perhaps you should reread your assertions?

Originally posted by UB2120
Science lives by the mathematics of the mind; music expresses the tempo of the emotions. Religion is the spiritual rhythm of the soul in time-space harmony with the higher and eternal melody measurements of Infinity. Religious experience is something in human life which is truly supermathematical.

Excuse me, but....WHAT?

I know that this neo-guru screed is supposed to sound deep but it's a bunch of stuff you've made up accompanied by words you made up that don't correlate with the way we know the universe works. In a response acknowledging that you need to provide proof of your claims you've now made even more claims that require even more evidence and/or proof. Souls? Supermathematics? Eternal melody measurements of infinity? Seriously?

reply to post by UB2120


I'm sorry, people don't have to disprove your assertions, you have to prove them. Sure, they have to address your presented evidence, but they don't have to disprove your redunkulous assertions.

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by UB2120
Science lives by the mathematics of the mind; music expresses the tempo of the emotions. Religion is the spiritual rhythm of the soul in time-space harmony with the higher and eternal melody measurements of Infinity. Religious experience is something in human life which is truly supermathematical.

Excuse me, but....WHAT?

I know that this neo-guru screed is supposed to sound deep but it's a bunch of stuff you've made up accompanied by words you made up that don't correlate with the way we know the universe works. In a response acknowledging that you need to provide proof of your claims you've now made even more claims that require even more evidence and/or proof. Souls? Supermathematics? Eternal melody measurements of infinity? Seriously?

Just as corrective criticism.....

I am not religious at all, don't believe in a god.....etc...

but...

attempting to debunk a religious claim by making statements such as "What??? Are you serious? That's silly...etc" do nothing.

They make you appear as if you do not know how to support your supposed theory.

What I do, whenever I enter into religious debate, is support with logic and fact. I use history and science. not only does it help support my claim, but it does not turn off my opponent.

Very important when debating sensitive topics such as god or religion.

Originally posted by ButterCookie

Just as corrective criticism.....

I am not religious at all, don't believe in a god.....etc...

but...

attempting to debunk a religious claim by making statements such as "What??? Are you serious? That's silly...etc" do nothing.

They make you appear as if you do not know how to support your supposed theory.

Firstly, I repeatedly - multiple times - asked politely for the poster to support his assertions. So did other people here.

Secondly, I have not proposed any "supposed theory" that I must support.

But, at some point, expressing some frustration at nonsensical babble posted as a response to our polite inquiry and rightfully calling B.S. on it does not, in my opinion, "do nothing" as you suggest. Thank you, though. I will attempt to be more polite in the future, though I do have a saturation point for accepting someone's frogwash.

Originally posted by yourmaker
i'm just popping into this thread with a friendly reminder that there is no god and that this is your one life to live.

continue.

There is no God? Then what happened on September 11th? Why were all the cathedrals built? Why was Newton inspired to capture the "laws of God"?

An objective existence of God doesn't even matter... what matters is the reality of both the greatness and atrocities that are inspired by the notion of God or Gods....

Without a belief in God, Newton would have had no inspiration... for that was his sole inspiration... I'm not arguing for or against anything here other than the reductionist view that the objective world is somehow separate from the passions of the subjective realm.

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
There is no God? Then what happened on September 11th? Why were all the cathedrals built? Why was Newton inspired to capture the "laws of God"?

Why do people write about unicorns in there are none? (Side note: the bible mentions unicorns at least 7 times).

An objective existence of God doesn't even matter... what matters is the reality of both the greatness and atrocities that are inspired by the notion of God or Gods....

Whether god exists definitely matters since those actions you've mentioned are done in the name of those alleged gods.

Without a belief in God, Newton would have had no inspiration... for that was his sole inspiration... I'm not arguing for or against anything here other than the reductionist view that the objective world is somehow separate from the passions of the subjective realm.

That's a bold statement that I'm not sure is accurate. Newton likely would have been just as eager to understand the world whether god-belief was part of the equation or not.

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by UB2120
You hit the nail on the head, I am making a positive claim, that there is a God and if you believe you can have eternal life. You are making a negative claim, basically calling people stupid for believing the universe was created by God.

So even after you understand you're being asked for some evidence it appears you didn't pony any up. Your reasoning and assertions does not constitute evidence.

Read my post right above yours, its long, but has a more detailed answer.

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
There is no God? Then what happened on September 11th? Why were all the cathedrals built? Why was Newton inspired to capture the "laws of God"?

Why do people write about unicorns in there are none? (Side note: the bible mentions unicorns at least 7 times).

An objective existence of God doesn't even matter... what matters is the reality of both the greatness and atrocities that are inspired by the notion of God or Gods....

Whether god exists definitely matters since those actions you've mentioned are done in the name of those alleged gods.

It matters not... the fact that I am inspired to greatness by a story or ideal doesn't have anything to do with the objective reality of that story or ideal... the only thing that matters is the movement it inspires in me...

Without a belief in God, Newton would have had no inspiration... for that was his sole inspiration... I'm not arguing for or against anything here other than the reductionist view that the objective world is somehow separate from the passions of the subjective realm.

That's a bold statement that I'm not sure is accurate. Newton likely would have been just as eager to understand the world whether god-belief was part of the equation or not.

Go read up on Newton and you will discover that the only thing he felt more passionately about than physics was deciphering bible prophecy and the reason he was so devoted to the Principia Mathematica was because he felt he was translating Gods intentions.... he was in modern day parlance... a religious fanatic...

In fact... read the introduction to the PM it's all right there...

reply to post by traditionaldrummer


And if he had two X chromosones he'd have been a she. Surely YOU BOTH see how utterly silly it is to use what you think he would do if as any sort of argument.

reply to post by Watcher-In-The-Shadows


I never asserted anything. I won't assert that there is a God, i won't asser that there isn't.

The Theist or the Deist are positions that say this "GOD" does exist, i want to know where they are getting their information from besides the void of faith.

When you've stated what i have asserted, add some more of those emoticons; They definetly enhance your arguments.

Originally posted by Watcher-In-The-Shadows
reply to post by traditionaldrummer

 

And if he had two X chromosones he'd have been a she. Surely YOU BOTH see how utterly silly it is to use what you think he would do if as any sort of argument.

I agree. Neither of us can accurately speak for Newton on this. But for the idea that basically Newton couldn't have happened without god is too bold a statement to go unchallenged.

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by UB2120
Science lives by the mathematics of the mind; music expresses the tempo of the emotions. Religion is the spiritual rhythm of the soul in time-space harmony with the higher and eternal melody measurements of Infinity. Religious experience is something in human life which is truly supermathematical.

Excuse me, but....WHAT?

I know that this neo-guru screed is supposed to sound deep but it's a bunch of stuff you've made up accompanied by words you made up that don't correlate with the way we know the universe works. In a response acknowledging that you need to provide proof of your claims you've now made even more claims that require even more evidence and/or proof. Souls? Supermathematics? Eternal melody measurements of infinity? Seriously?

Ok, I will make it a little easier for you. What about what we call life? Life can only spring from pre-existant life. So where did life originate if not God?

Originally posted by HunkaHunka
It matters not... the fact that I am inspired to greatness by a story or ideal doesn't have anything to do with the objective reality of that story or ideal... the only thing that matters is the movement it inspires in me...

It doesn't matter only if you don't care whether the things that inspire you are true. But it does matter, particularly when atrocities are done in the names of these gods. Determining whether there is or isn't a deity could eliminate this harmful phenomenon to the benefit of our species. It very much matters.

Go read up on Newton and you will discover that the only thing he felt more passionately about than physics was deciphering bible prophecy and the reason he was so devoted to the Principia Mathematica was because he felt he was translating Gods intentions.... he was in modern day parlance... a religious fanatic...

In fact... read the introduction to the PM it's all right there...

Indeed, Newton was kooky about a lot of things. But claiming that he couldn't have achieved similar things without fanaticism is just too speculative.

Originally posted by UB2120
Ok, I will make it a little easier for you. What about what we call life? Life can only spring from pre-existant life. So where did life originate if not God?

There's no empirical rule that states that life can only spring from pre-existent life. In fact, the theory of abiogenesis negates that idea, though at this point it's not fully understood.

But again you're resorting to yet another argument from ignorance. "We don't know how "X" happened, therefore my idea of "Y" must be correct". That's not the way we discern the truth about anything.

If you claim life originates from God because life only comes from pre-existent life you have several problems. Firstly, that god must also be alive and by your assertion his life would have to have been provided by something else alive. Welcome to infinite regress. That aside, you also have to produce the life-giving deity, then document the mechanism by which the first living organism was sparked.

reply to post by traditionaldrummer


So, instead of calling the argument what it was. You instead chose to respond in kind. Fascinating.....

I almost believe you believe that.

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by UB2120
Ok, I will make it a little easier for you. What about what we call life? Life can only spring from pre-existant life. So where did life originate if not God?

There's no empirical rule that states that life can only spring from pre-existent life. In fact, the theory of abiogenesis negates that idea, though at this point it's not fully understood.

But again you're resorting to yet another argument from ignorance. "We don't know how "X" happened, therefore my idea of "Y" must be correct". That's not the way we discern the truth about anything.

If you claim life originates from God because life only comes from pre-existent life you have several problems. Firstly, that god must also be alive and by your assertion his life would have to have been provided by something else alive. Welcome to infinite regress. That aside, you also have to produce the life-giving deity, then document the mechanism by which the first living organism was sparked.

Yet again you resort to personal attacks. Nice. You also cherry pick. You only seem to comment on the stuff you try to ridicule.

God is the only self existant being in the entire universe. Just because it is beyond your comprehension doesn't mean its not true. There is a maximum to finite comprehension and God is way beyond that. I am not trying to make you believe in God, just pointing out some things to show that the universe was designed and is being administered by intelligent beings. We shall all find out the answer one day.

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by ButterCookie

Just as corrective criticism.....

I am not religious at all, don't believe in a god.....etc...

but...

attempting to debunk a religious claim by making statements such as "What??? Are you serious? That's silly...etc" do nothing.

They make you appear as if you do not know how to support your supposed theory.

Firstly, I repeatedly - multiple times - asked politely for the poster to support his assertions. So did other people here.

Secondly, I have not proposed any "supposed theory" that I must support.

But, at some point, expressing some frustration at nonsensical babble posted as a response to our polite inquiry and rightfully calling B.S. on it does not, in my opinion, "do nothing" as you suggest. Thank you, though. I will attempt to be more polite in the future, though I do have a saturation point for accepting someone's frogwash.

That's cool.

If you haven't mentioned your supposed theory, then mentioning it would help make your assertions that what everyone else is saying is false, instead of just saying its false.

For example, instead of telling someone that their idea that mankind simply evolved over time is wrong, I explain how our genetic makeup doesn't fit that theory.....

instead of saying that their idea of us being alone is silly, I explain the vastness of the universe and how our Milky Way galaxy isn't even the most advanced galaxy....

instead of saying their idea of 'God' is stupid, I explain science and astronomy, ow nature works without influence, and how the idea that a being is looking out for their best interest isn't consistent.

So far, the bulk of your comments repeatedly bash and ridicule any idea, whether religious, or Ancient Alien theory.

I ask, out of curiosity, your take on mankind's origin and influence on biblical text....

If logical, then we have a productive debate.

reply to post by awake_and_aware


I'm also of the mind that it doesn't really matter if there are Gods or a God etc.

Especially because those terms are used almost ubiquitously as a term for "authority" and in such a way that many presume there is some sort of ultimate authority in the world.... they don't get that the "sense of authority" comes from within themselves and is wholly subjective (i.e. malleable, like most subjective experiences).

Now most atheists I know find this sort of malleable reality to be distrustful and they seek to expunge it... I find it amazing though, because once you realize how you can mold and form your subjective reality, which in turn has a true impact on your life through your decisions, actions etc... once this realization occurs, and is put into practice... you realize that you are the God of your world because you are ultimately the only authority over your mind.

Now some will still be frightened and want to base it all on "Objective Truths", but those cover hardly anything to do with things like "happiness"... and is tantamount to attempting to seek happiness through things... the very thing which sciences like psychiatry have come to understand is the beginnings of neurosis... which unchecked can lead to psychosis and other psychosomatic disorders.

And this is why the atheist is like a religious fanatic, because even in the face of this understanding... they still attempt to seek happiness solely by basing all beliefs solely on elements of the objective realm.

But what can that say about how likely someone you desire is to accept a proposition from you and if that matters enough to stop you from asking them anyway? What does that say about how you can find happiness in the midst of chaos? These are the reasons why a common tribal state of mind have deities in their narratives, no matter their level of technology. Because there are always things that they can't solve through objective means but can through others... That is the beginnings of shamanism... but the objectivist wants to dismiss those as utterly meaningless when for millenniums it's how we have tried to work out our happiness within existential crises through these means...

And indeed there are great reasons to chastise large organized religions as much as there is to chastise small family narratives.... but the problem is not that humans are trying to work out these issues through the languages of ideals and personal codes of life... the problem is that they have in many instances been turned into tools of self-loathing, the measurement and judgement of others and the general imprisonment of the zest for life... leading to all sorts of atrocities... There is a lot of misanthropic ideals going on in religions today... Just has happened several times in the history of humanity... this misanthropism is the issue... not the quest to work one's life out through the process of personal ideals and beliefs.