For all the Christians on here.

[sandorski]

Only in your Universe with a Unicorn standing on a rainbow 1000 years away (who refers to light-years as years?). You can claim fail but you are just as sorry and pathetic as Nik. You have no respect for anyone other than those who believes in what YOU believe.

I would say you fail ... but then I would be lowering myself to your level. You live behind a keyboard ... I live life with an open mind and believe what I believe ... not what you wish me to.

The mind boggles.

 

[Nik]

It's amazing how confused the confused can be.

 

[DrPizza]

THIS THREAD IS NOW ABOUT PIE!

Bastard! My wife isn't allowing any snack food in the house because she's on a diet. Meals & food in the house are quite limited. As a result, my caloric intake has dropped to about 1500 calories a day. And, it's cold in here; I need the calories to keep warm.

I pity you. If you are correct in your assumption that there is no God then you are doomed. If you are incorrect ... and there is a God then you are worse then doomed for you have heard ... but not taken heed.

Nik, suggest you cease in your rantings as anyone who actually believes will not be convinced by your "logic" ... and those who do not believe are already without any sort of faith.

What gets me about atheists and agnostics (like Nik) is that they just cannot stand that fact that people cannot believe in something that cannot be seen and that they cannot believe in anything unless they are shown proof.

You're begging the question. You're assuming that there is a God who punishes non-believers in order to make the case that people should believe in God. What if there is a God who created us. But, because he created us with the capability of logical thought, he rewards people who think logically & punishes people who don't? "Faith" means believing in something when there is no logical evidence to believe in it. Further, you are incorrect about Nik's "logic" not convincing people to stop and reflect on their own beliefs. More and more people are reflecting on their own beliefs and ultimately discarding their religious beliefs. If you'd like this explained better than I am at the moment in a brief paragraph, google Pascal's Wager and see why his logic is very flawed.

Even more, they feel they need to tell religious people they believe in lies and "fairy tales" which you can find in every religious thread here. Atheism is not based in logic, reason, or any other excuse they come up with for being atheist.

There is no logical reason to believe in a deity. However, there's a logical reason to understand why people are attracted to the idea of a deity. And for those who are hoping to convert people away from religion (and not without zero success either) perhaps it's because they realize that historically, there has been a great cost to society because of religion. That's not to say that religion hasn't done good for us. But, for the simplest of examples, the Dark Ages, the Spanish Inquisition. Need I continue? How many years centuries has progress been set back because of religion?

Also, multiquote doesn't apparently quote back to page one; I was going to address your comment that there isn't morality without religion. If that's the case, then how does there exist tribes without religious traditions, but they have moral values? There are tribes where you could leave something out in plain sight in the middle of the village & no one would even think to take it. Is "thou shalt not steal" a moral value only when you believe in the 10 commandments, and not a moral value for everyone else who chooses not to take things that don't belong to them?

 

[SMOGZINN]

Why do you ask this question? Why do you pester believers? If you're the pure rationalist you portray, if you have no tendency or inkling of faith, then you should consider this activity, and those who believe, unworthy of your time and attention.

This sort of pestering of believers however comes across as an expression of some insecurity and personal question of faith, but that should be done personally.

I can't speak for the original poster, but as a GNU Atheist I can speak as to why I care.
I care because believers write laws.
I care because believers run companies.
I care because believers control the military.
I care because believers control the media.
I care because I have lost jobs when my boss found out I was not Christian.
I care because I have lost friends when they found out I was not Christian.
I care because I have lost lovers when they found out I was not Christian.

I care because believers make decisions that affect me, and do it all too often based on religious beliefs that are not grounded in good logic or rational decision making.

And finally, I care because I believe that this world could be a better place if we stopped fighting over a possible next one.

So, I will ask you, with all my reasons for wanting to know, why do you continue to believe in something that has no reasonable basis for belief even after the lack of reason is pointed out to you?

 

[SparkyJJO]

This thread is full of nonsense

The OP's first pic is true - yet pointless, because I'd like you to show me ONE person, just one (besides Jesus himself), who never, ever sinned. Oh, that's right, nobody

Then for many others here, you have no clue on this either. We don't see it as "what we can get away with in the afterlife" or whatever. Anyone who DOES see it that way needs to get his head and heart checked, because that's totally not the point of it all.

And those of you just stirring up crap, well, that's to be expected from you guys anyway

And the "no logical reason to believe in a deity" well where did everything come from? Is it REALLY logical to say it all happened by random happenings? Stop and think about it - not just pass over it like always, but actually give it some serious thought. Random chance can't create order, chance isn't a force anyway. There has to be a cause for every effect. The world and universe today, with all its intricate complexities and balances, cannot have just happened by "chance" - there is no way. I know I know, you try and say there is, but it is logically, and physically, impossible, on many different levels...

But I can't change your minds, you suppress the truth because, if you acknowledge it, then you know you're accountable to someone else, and naturally don't like that. Although, just sticking your fingers in your ears, closing your eyes, going "lalalala" to it all doesn't change the fact. Ignoring it won't make it go away

There, I've said my piece, I'm done

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

"Faith" means believing in something when there is no logical evidence to believe in it.

That's a cynical view that provides little room for rational discussion.

 

[TheVrolok]

"Faith" means believing in something when there is no logical evidence to believe in it.

... no it doesn't. Or do you mean in its narrow definition in regard to religion/deities?

 

[DrPizza]

That's a cynical view that provides little room for rational discussion.

Oh look! The troll who refuses to answer questions or participate in any debate (because people are rude) is back.

 

[child of wonder]

Jesus loves me because the Bible tells me so.

 

[DrPizza]

... no it doesn't. Or do you mean in its narrow definition in regard to religion/deities?

Hmmm... I've completely forgotten what this thread is about. Geee, I can't really remember what the context was in which I defined faith. Let's see... 150 posts and replies about religion/deities? You've got me...

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

Oh look! The troll who refuses to answer questions or participate in any debate (because people are rude) is back.

I don't feel any particular obligation to continue a discussion with someone who's behavior is boorish, rude, and obnoxious. Should I?

Why do you feel the need to demean those who have faith?

How do you feel that leads to any enlightened discussion?

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

Hmmm... I've completely forgotten what this thread is about. Geee, I can't really remember what the context was in which I defined faith. Let's see... 150 posts and replies about religion/deities? You've got me...

Post 178.

 

[TheVrolok]

Hmmm... I've completely forgotten what this thread is about. Geee, I can't really remember what the context was in which I defined faith. Let's see... 150 posts and replies about religion/deities? You've got me...

You were just being pedantic then?

 

[Madwand1]

I care because believers make decisions that affect me, and do it all too often based on religious beliefs that are not grounded in good logic or rational decision making.

And finally, I care because I believe that this world could be a better place if we stopped fighting over a possible next one.

So, I will ask you, with all my reasons for wanting to know, why do you continue to believe in something that has no reasonable basis for belief even after the lack of reason is pointed out to you?

I believe in intellectual freedom; that I am free to believe what I want, as you are free to believe what you want.

It seems that you have a political bend to your expressed reasons for opposition to, as you say, Christianity. To the extent that Christianity is expressed as a political force, it is reasonable to me that there would be opposition. But if you have a political or legal problem, then be politically or legally active. There are also legal remedies for employment problems infringing on personal beliefs, and if inadequate, then there are political and legal processes for change. Again, if organized Christianity is expressing itself as a political or legal force, then I think it's entirely fair to organize against that as that. And especially where religious organizations are using their taxation benefits for political gain, I think there are grounds for objection.

 

[PhineasJWhoopee]

I believe in intellectual freedom; that I am free to believe what I want, as you are free to believe what you want.

It seems that you have a political bend to your expressed reasons for opposition to, as you say, Christianity. To the extent that Christianity is expressed as a political force, it is reasonable to me that there would be opposition. But if you have a political or legal problem, then be politically or legally active. There are also legal remedies for employment problems infringing on personal beliefs, and if inadequate, then there are political and legal processes for change. Again, if organized Christianity is expressing itself as a political or legal force, then I think it's entirely fair to organize against that as that. And especially where religious organizations are using their taxation benefits for political gain, I think there are grounds for objection.

What was the original point, that there should be a religious litmus test for voting rights?

 

[DrPizza]

Post 178.

I'm not going to count, but wild guess, at least 28 posts weren't about religion/deities. One of the posts was about pie.

 

[SMOGZINN]

I believe in intellectual freedom; that I am free to believe what I want, as you are free to believe what you want.

It seems that you have a political bend to your expressed reasons for opposition to, as you say, Christianity. To the extent that Christianity is expressed as a political force, it is reasonable to me that there would be opposition. But if you have a political or legal problem, then be politically or legally active. There are also legal remedies for employment problems infringing on personal beliefs, and if inadequate, then there are political and legal processes for change. Again, if organized Christianity is expressing itself as a political or legal force, then I think it's entirely fair to organize against that as that. And especially where religious organizations are using their taxation benefits for political gain, I think there are grounds for objection.

Yes, I have a political bend to my reasons for opposition to religion.

But the problem is much larger then can be handled by a simple protest or successful lawsuit. The problem is that people think that the things I am opposing are the right things to do, and that their truth is the one and only Truth, and doing almost anything in it's name is good and correct. Therefore they continue to battle against us, even when our arguments on why our stand is a just one is strong, and in many cases simply ignore the laws we have managed to pass, often with the blessing of the powers that are suppose to uphold those laws. They manage to vote in laws that are unquestionably unconstitutional, and cost us lots of valuable time and effort trying to get it removed again. We are vastly outnumbered, and disliked. We only win because we are right.

The fact is being an atheist in this society is dangerous. It is not something someone chooses to do lightly. We can lose our jobs, our children, and our houses because Christian often believe in the myth that atheists are automatically bad people.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

The point is that many atheists thing they are obligated to prove God doesn't exist, despite it being impossible.

I'm always adamant that a proof of God's non-existence is generally impossible, although certain rigorous formulations of a god-concept can be shown to lead to absurdity.

Atheism is not based in logic, reason, or any other excuse they come up with for being atheist.

Atheism is about not believing something for which insufficient evidence exists. That is quite reasonable.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

This thread is full of nonsense

The OP's first pic is true - yet pointless, because I'd like you to show me ONE person, just one (besides Jesus himself), who never, ever sinned. Oh, that's right, nobody

Until it is demonstrated that a God exists who determines what "sin" is, it cannot be said with certainty that anyone has sinned.

And the "no logical reason to believe in a deity" well where did everything come from?

Please demonstrate that it "came from" some origin in the first place.

Is it REALLY logical to say it all happened by random happenings?

That proposition contains no internal contradiction, so it is logically possible.

Stop and think about it - not just pass over it like always, but actually give it some serious thought. Random chance can't create order, chance isn't a force anyway.

Order does arise spontaneously in nature. Benard convection cells.

There has to be a cause for every effect.

But not everything is necessarily an effect.

The world and universe today, with all its intricate complexities and balances, cannot have just happened by "chance" - there is no way.

Bare assertion, and an argument from incredulity.

I know I know, you try and say there is, but it is logically, and physically, impossible, on many different levels...

Simply false. A random universe violates no laws of logic nor any physical limitation.

But I can't change your minds, you suppress the truth because, if you acknowledge it, then you know you're accountable to someone else, and naturally don't like that.

Your mind-reading abilities are worse than your fact-apprehending abilities.

Although, just sticking your fingers in your ears, closing your eyes, going "lalalala" to it all doesn't change the fact. Ignoring it won't make it go away

Make what go away? You haven't demonstrated that there is anything there that could "go away".

There, I've said my piece, I'm done

Run away.

 

[Madwand1]

The fact is being an atheist in this society is dangerous. It is not something someone chooses to do lightly. We can lose our jobs, our children, and our houses because Christian often believe in the myth that atheists are automatically bad people.

I think pretty much everyone is an atheist to some degree, and that as Christianity has a particularly strong emphasis on belief and condemnation of disbelief, that that own disbelief consequently takes a twisted form in the opposition to expressed disbelief in others.

But though opposition is natural, I also think that humanity is not going to have a single monotonic solution or understanding, so no solution will be the mere exclusion of the other, but rather the inclusion of the other in an identified greater commonality (such as I suggest in the comment about common atheism, and such as I implied in my opening remarks here for Nik).

 

[zerocool84]

I guess it makes sense to follow Christianity if you're intolerant.

 

[erikistired]

I don't think I'm better than believers.

Why can they talk about their belief in nothing in public, but I'm not allowed to talk about my lack of belief in that same something publicly?

because you're being an asshole about it. just like the folks who are religious extremists are being an asshole about their side. insulting people because they believe something you don't, which you can't disprove, is never going to open anyone's eyes.

 

[HeavyD]

It has been my experience that people need to come to these conclusions on their own. Most believers will never challenge their faith because it is an integral part of their lives. My faith was shaken long before I quit being a JW. The idea that good people will be murdered by a God simply because they don't share one specific faith never set well with me.

 

[Nik]

because you're being an asshole about it. just like the folks who are religious extremists are being an asshole about their side. insulting people because they believe something you don't, which you can't disprove, is never going to open anyone's eyes.

cop out.

 

[erikistired]

cop out.

not really, but either way neither side is going to listen, so i guess it doesn't matter in the end. also, not a very good movie. kevin smith has done better.