Question about atheists

This is a discussion on Question about atheists within the A Brief History of Cprogramming.com forums, part of the Community Boards category; I tell u guys, everytime i reply to one of these, i come back a few hours later and i ...

  1. #61
    RoD
    RoD is offline
    Redundantly Redundant RoD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Missouri
    Posts
    6,331
    I tell u guys, everytime i reply to one of these, i come back a few hours later and i can no longer follow the conversation cuz im too damn stupid to get half of it.

    um...Go Atheism!

  2. #62
    Registered User Scourfish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    397
    "Atheism leaves a man to sense, to philosophy, to natural piety, to laws, to reputation, all which may be guides to an outward moral virtue, though religion were not, but superstition dismounts all these, and erecteth an absolute monarchy in the minds of men."

    "Books must follow sciences, and not sciences books."


    -Sir Francis Bacon(1561- 1626)


    You don't get to choose how you're going to die. Or when. You can only decide how you're going to live. Now.

    -Joan Baez

    Atheism, unlike Christianity, does not pretend to teach morals. Atheism is simply the absence of theism and nothing more.

    -Cliff Walker
    -486SX-20
    -Some random Debian Distro
    -Some version of MS-Dos
    -Day of the Tentacle

  3. #63
    Cat
    Cat is offline
    Registered User
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    1,571
    Originally posted by didaskalos
    But, nothing can stop an atheist from killing his neghbour.
    Theology and morality are not the same thing. Read Plato's Euthyphro, the character Socratres has a lengthly debate which concludes that morality exists apart from religion; religion may seek to illuminate morality, but the actual moral code is a priori knowledge, which exists even if there were no god (and even if there were no beings capable of making moral decisions).

    Of course, many things often claimed to be moral issues might truly be morally neutral -- nobody says we know what the "right" moral code is, but we CAN know it, from logic and reason.

  4. #64
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    1,708
    im just glad that we live in a society that allows you to believe whatever in the hell you want, even if it is unpopular. I can choose to believe that the earth is made of pizza and go around trying to eat the sidewalk just as long as I don't harm anyone else in the process.
    EDIT:
    which you could make an argument that you are harming government/public property (the sidewalk)

  5. #65
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    7
    Too many posts from the last time.. i 'll try to be as fast as possible.

    Frst, many comments have been told about gravity. Of-fcourse the answer to gravity is not God, science gave reasons and we have to follow them, and the man who told about this in the first post made a mistake. Full Stop. So, no more comments about gravity.

    >How old is the world? How long did it take the earth to be created?

    Could you be a little more specific? What do you think that thelogists say and what scientists?

    >Who is "we"?
    We, Orthodox Christians.

    >Free-will contradicts gods omniscience since it means he cant fortell the future - if the future exists free will cannot, if the future does not exist God cannot know it.

    First of all, i am talking about Christianity, and not just any God, in the particular example. Because, unlikekly whith Islam, where Allah determine how humans will think ( i mean, he don't let people think by their own, "he controlls their mind" ( if he existed ) ) - that was just a mere comment to show you that we don't speak about any religion but for Christinity, the God of Christianity lets people think freely.
    In the topic now, no, you are wrong, we have free will. It's us who choose what movements to do, not God. But, as God is prescient, he knows the future; but this doesn't mean that he is the one who controlls our will.

    >then we would all be perfect people
    God made us perfet humans. God made us perfect. It's, we, people who made ourselves vulnerable to death. This is a very big topic, and just a quick note: God doesn't leave us helpless here in earth, but he gives us great help, with many ways.
    Also, as you know ( i hope so.. ), we, Christians, can reach the level of God.

    >if God was all he's meant to be, our nature would not include being total ****s half the time.
    That's what you said in your previous post, and i answered to you that no, its we, people who made the wold as it is today, with our catastrophical choises.

    >It fails to account for problems that have nothing to do with mankind like disease
    Well.. that;s another huge topic, and i 'll try to be as brief as possible. First of all, you should know that before the Fall, there were no diseases, no deaths.
    Now, we to have diseases?. First of all, it's because of our faults and we have diseases and we "suffer".
    Secondly, with these methods ( storms and othe catastrophics ), God challenge our faith. He is testing our faith.
    Story: A priest was praying to God ( do you think that it is easy? .. i don't think so.. ), when a scorpion beat his leg. But he did not let his prayer and see his leg. Although he was in great pain, he went on with his prayer.
    So, all these are something like tests.
    But it could also be signs to make us come closer to him. Yes, that's another reason.

    However, we should not complaign to Got for our sufferings, because He never forgets us and he gives us help, and for a very big reason: Only one human wan sinless, and he suffered so much. Only one human was sinless, and he had so many enemies. Christ. And we, the humans with so many sins, come and complaign? I think that says too much.

    >It is no longer able to control research because it no longer has the power
    Either if it had the power, either if it did not have it, it doesn't want to, and that's what counts

    > it still screws up scientific education and so in that sense it still damages science: see evolution, age of Earth, etc
    No it doesn't! Off course and we accept that all organisms evolved - after they were created ( science does not say that humans were created from a microorganism - probbably with one ceil ).

    >age of Earth
    Because Govetcheez said something about it, could you tell me what do you think that Christianity says, and what science?

    >... i have addressed this already.
    Answer to this question: Because my English aren't so good, do you mean that you agree?

    >Well i know af ew Christians they don't seem to struggle with life.
    When you mean struggle, you mean fight/try hard to be what Christianity says, right?
    Well, then you lose my point here, and to answer and to your question what i mean with "tue" Christian" - i though it was very obvious, these are not true Christians. They are typically Christians, just because they were baptized Christians. So, a "tue" Christian, is ,simply, the man who does what Christianity wants them to do. I am not going to to tell you now what Christianity tells you to do, go open the Bible and find out.
    Also, you are not the only one who knows some Christians who don't stuggle in life.
    Conclusion: These are not Christians, and we should not rely our arguments on them.

    >Whats are craft thoughts
    Sorry, i sed wrong word.. eeeerr..
    cunning/craft/craftiness/arch/sly/didgy/wiles
    I don't know which one fits better.

    >Then why is it that atheists in general do not go about killing their neighbours?
    That's out of topic.
    It's like saying: then why all the people who are baptized Christians aren't true Chritians? . But i don't say that. Also, Covtcheez said about the laws.
    No, the laws were "recently" voted. i 'll just take the Europians who went to America, and our know the Americans. What did they do to the indigenes ( the habitats )? They destoyed and extinguish them. The human laws, didn't exist that time.
    However, the laws of Christianity, did exist that time and from the beginning of the life.
    So that's the point.
    Also, what can an atheist say, is that,
    since this is all we are gonna live, then let's just start killing all the people i find in my way, steel money, there is no way to worry about it. After all, we are all gonna die. What will i gain if i don't steel the food of the neighbour and be hungy?

    But a man who is believes in God, will "be afraid of" Him and the "Finall Judge", and don'r say this.

    ****************************************

    >What is reason? What is theory? What is energy? What is a question? What is three dimensional space? What is an idea?

    No buddy. Questions are out there and are waiting from us humans to answer them.
    About your questions now, opening a dictionnary will help yuo find out what humans named with these words.

    *****************************************

    "Atheism leaves a man to sense, to philosophy, to natural piety, to laws, to reputation, all which may be guides to an outward moral virtue, though religion were not, but superstition dismounts all these, and erecteth an absolute monarchy in the minds of men."

    Well, those statements irritates me too much.
    Obviously, the man who said this statement, doesn't know what Christianity wants. He probbably thinks that Christianity means to stay in a room , never go out, never read a book, never have fun, not to speak to others, not to search for learning.
    That's extremely wrong, and we should avoid telling these things if we don't know what Christianity says.

    Outward moral virtue? Instead of saying "outwaord" and make tricks - because Christianity contains all moral virtues, he would better tell us what he means.

    Ah yeah!
    I just now remembered what a man said to us: to prove him that there is God ( somethin like this i think ?)
    Well, as i many times said, i can't prove to you that there is God - question: all those ( many many many ) witnesses who saw Christ making miracles and leaved while the Bible was writting, were mad? -, but we can say and prove with the laws of science that the universe has/need a cause and was created by something/someone - which is abviously out of the powers of numans.


    P.S: I think i wanted to discuss some more comments, but i think i forgot them..

  6. #66
    Disagreeably Disagreeable
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    711
    >Seems that Sunlight was the only agnostic besides me... *sigh*<

    I'm agnostic. Had no idea you or Sunlight were. Or, for that matter, Cheez was.

    Fix reason firmly in her seat, and call to her tribunal every fact, every opinion. Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blindfolded fear.

    - Thomas Jefferson

    >I believe in [X], therefore [X] must be true.

    Insert "The existance of God" for religious people.
    Insert "The absence of a higher being" for atheists.

    Neither can prove their point using normal logic, because this is not possible. Both parties belief. Both call it the absolute truth.<

    I agree with this to a certain extent. I mean I know a lot of believers that are very open and don't have the typical arrogance that comes with a large portion of Christians. Same with the atheists. There are a lot of them that don't have that arrogance.

    I think when people try to prove either side, that's when "all hell done break lose." But hey, if you think you can, go ahead; there will be plenty of us in the bleachers spectating for pure amusement.
    Last edited by Hillbillie; 08-08-2003 at 05:43 AM.

  7. #67
    Mayor of Awesometown Govtcheez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    8,825
    > didaskalos

    I swear to whatever omnipotent presence is out there (for now I'll assume it's James Brown) that if you mention Mosaic Law I will do everything in my power to ban your entire island's worth of IPs from this board... AProg.

    > What do you think that thelogists say

    The numbers I've heard usually say that the earth is 6000 years old, as opposed to the several billion science indicates.

    > Because, unlikekly whith Islam, where Allah determine how humans will think ( i mean, he don't let people think by their own, "he controlls their mind" ( if he existed ) )



    > ( do you think that it is easy? .. i don't think so.. ),

    As easy as praying to anything else:
    "Hay God - sup d00d!"

    > Off course and we accept that all organisms evolved - after they were created

    Most creationists don't.

    > science does not say that humans were created from a microorganism - probbably with one ceil

    Really... What does science say, in your addled little mind?

    > Because my English aren't so good, do you mean that you agree?

    No.

    > That's out of topic.

    The hell it is. You say that atheists have nothing to prevent them from killing their neighbors, since they aren't bound by what the Bible says. Clyde and I are saying that it's possible to live by some rules and totally ignore the Bible.

    > Christianity contains all moral virtues



    > were mad?

    Not necessarily - they didn't write the Bible. Some other guy did.

  8. #68
    The Earth is not flat. Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,420
    First of all, i am talking about Christianity, and not just any God, in the particular example. Because, unlikekly whith Islam, where Allah determine how humans will think ( i mean, he don't let people think by their own, "he controlls their mind" ( if he existed ) ) - that was just a mere comment to show you that we don't speak about any religion but for Christinity, the God of Christianity lets people think freely.
    In the topic now, no, you are wrong, we have free will. It's us who choose what movements to do, not God. But, as God is prescient, he knows the future; but this doesn't mean that he is the one who controlls our will.
    1) Muslim's do not believe Allah control's their minds, they too believe in free will.

    2) We cannot have free will, and God know the future, the two are logically impossible.

    If we have free will the future cannot exist, in the block-time sense, ie. you have "time" in which the past, the present, the future is all "there", and we merely have a psychological experience of it passing. If that were the case the future would exist, in a fixed tangible sense, correspondingly we would have no freedom to choose it.

    Thus the only possiblilty of freewill (actually it's impossible anyway, because of physics and neurology etc, but we will ignore those for the time being) is if the future doesn't exist, all that exists is the present, a single point in time. If that is the case we can have free will because the future is not set but God cannot know the future because, it dose not exist, in the same way that God cannot know what colour the box i'm holding is, because i'm not holding a box. The best he can do is see all the different possible futures, without knowing which one will come true.

    God made us perfet humans. God made us perfect. It's, we, people who made ourselves vulnerable to death. This is a very big topic, and just a quick note: God doesn't leave us helpless here in earth, but he gives us great help, with many ways.
    Also, as you know ( i hope so.. ), we, Christians, can reach the level of God.
    If we were perfect, there would not be the copious amount of bloodshed we see all over the world.

    Our nature was given to us, by God, we don't choose it, if you had the choice between a kick in the groin and a million dollars which would you choose? Almost everyone would choose the million dollars, that doesn't mean you don't have choice.

    Correspondingly if God existed, humans would simply not choose to do horrible things to each other. It would not be a part of our nature.

    Of course if you think we formed via the blind forces of evolution then our behaviour makes perfect sense.

    That's what you said in your previous post, and i answered to you that no, its we, people who made the wold as it is today, with our catastrophical choises
    Right, and we make those choices because of our catastrophical nature which God gave us.

    I can imagine a humanity with choice but who don't kill each other, why, if there is a benevolent all powerfull creator is that not the humanity of today?

    Well.. that;s another huge topic, and i 'll try to be as brief as possible. First of all, you should know that before the Fall, there were no diseases, no deaths.
    Now, we to have diseases?. First of all, it's because of our faults and we have diseases and we "suffer".
    Are you saying we are being punished for the actions of our ancestors? Does that sound reasonable to you? Do you think it would be fair to punish you if your parents did something wrong?

    Would an infinitely wise, infinitely just God, so something like that? Of course not.

    Secondly, with these methods ( storms and othe catastrophics ), God challenge our faith. He is testing our faith.
    Which again makes him sick, if you have children will you put them through hardships just to see if they pass? "Tom go and crawl through that glass" "Why daddy? It will hurt please don't make me" "I want to see if you can do it and still love me afterwards, CRAWL!!", yea again an infinitely wise, infinitely benevolent God would do this?

    Plus once again it violates Gods omniscience, if God is capable of knowing the future then he would already know whether you would pass a test or not, correspondingly he is causing harm and pain for no reason at all.

    So, all these are something like tests.
    This whole idea is absurd. What about people who have never heard about Christianity? Amazonian tribes and such, why are they tested? How can they possibly pass the test? Once again God is just causing misery and pain for kicks.

    And why is it, that God tests religious and non-religious people alike? If he already knows someone doesn't believe in him what exactly is he testing? Or perhaps that's punishment, perhaps God punishes people who use the faculty to reason he supposedly gave them, by making their lives crap.

    But it could also be signs to make us come closer to him. Yes, that's another reason.
    Do you think alzheimers makes people closer to God?

    However, we should not complaign to Got for our sufferings, because He never forgets us and he gives us help,
    When exactly does God give us help?

    Its amazing, if something good happens it gets attributed to God, if something bad happens it gets attributed to man.

    Someone falls off a cliff, its mankind being stupid, a doctor saves his life via a 12 hour long operation, that must God...... right.

    Either if it had the power, either if it did not have it, it doesn't want to, and that's what counts
    It doesn't want to!? Of course it wants to! How much research into evolutionary biology do you think would get done if the orthodox church could control science, how much neurological research that explains away the soul?

    Precisely none.

    No it doesn't! Off course and we accept that all organisms evolved - after they were created ( science does not say that humans were created from a microorganism - probbably with one ceil ).
    Science DOES say that all life evolved from a common ancestor, a lot less complex than a modern single celled organism.

    ecause Govetcheez said something about it, could you tell me what do you think that Christianity says, and what science?
    Following a literal interpretation of the bible the world is about 6 thousand years old, from scientific investigation the world is about 4.5 billions years old. Slight discrepancy there no?

    When you mean struggle, you mean fight/try hard to be what Christianity says, right?
    What you don't seem to grasp is that different people think have different ideas over what Christianity says is right.

    My Christian lab parter who helps organise all the Christian union events, and is reasonable serious about his "faith", doesn't struggle with ethics any more than I do.

    Well, then you lose my point here, and to answer and to your question what i mean with "tue" Christian" - i though it was very obvious, these are not true Christians.
    Different people have different ideas over what a "true" Christian is, and of course everyone is convinced that their version of the "true" Christian is infact the right one.

    They are typically Christians, just because they were baptized Christians. So, a "tue" Christian, is ,simply, the man who does what Christianity wants them to do.
    And how do they decide what Christianity wants them to do? Literal interpretation of the bible? So true Christians advocate punishing children and grandchildren of criminals, like it says in the bible?

    Because interpretation of the meaning behaind the bible varies there is no such thing as a "true" Christian.

    I am not going to to tell you now what Christianity tells you to do, go open the Bible and find out.
    The question is how to interpret the bible.

    Sorry, i sed wrong word.. eeeerr..
    cunning/craft/craftiness/arch/sly/didgy/wiles
    I don't know which one fits better.
    Can you give me an example?

    That's out of topic.
    No its not, if you say Christianity is the thing that stops Christians doing bad things, then you have to account for what is stopping atheists doing them, otherwise you have no way of telling whether something entirely unrelated to Christianity is infact making Christians behave morally.

    The human laws, didn't exist that time.
    Human laws have always existed, they merely had a different form.

    [/quote]
    However, the laws of Christianity, did exist that time and from the beginning of the life.
    [/quote]

    Christian laws presumeably were handed down to mankind via Moses, how do you explain the existance of great civilisations who followed moral codes that had nothing to do with Christianity? Like the ancient Egyptians, or the Romans, or the ancient Greeks?

    Also, what can an atheist say, is that,
    since this is all we are gonna live, then let's just start killing all the people i find in my way, steel money, there is no way to worry about it. After all, we are all gonna die. What will i gain if i don't steel the food of the neighbour and be hungy?
    But that doesn't happen does it? Atheists are no less ethical than theists, and the reason is because, fundamentally, ethics has nothing to do with religion.

    Ethics are social rules that must exist for a society to exist, they have evolved to keep societies together, because societies benefit the individuals involved.

    Social animals have social rules, we have the most complex social interaction correspondingly we have the most complex set of social rules.
    Last edited by Clyde; 08-08-2003 at 07:47 AM.

  9. #69
    Hamster without a wheel iain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    1,385
    At the end of the day most of us on the cboard are screwed, think about it.

    If there is a god, which one is it? Ignoring the 'one god' idea - how can there be one if every religion has such a differieng theology on how he/she/it behaves.

    All religious people who dont belive in the right god are screwed, and so are the atheists.

    If there is no god, then all the religious have lived their life in vein following the ideals and teachings of something that never existed.
    Monday - what a way to spend a seventh of your life

  10. #70
    the hat of redundancy hat nvoigt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Hannover, Germany
    Posts
    3,139
    >1) There is no such thing as proof.

    I didn't imply there is. Actually, that's my point.

    >You cannot claim that I believe in X, and I don't believe in X,
    >are equally valid when neither has any evidence to back them up.

    Well, I do. You want me to believe in something, you better provide
    proof or proof-of-concept ( i.e. examples ).

    I don't believe in Santa Claus, because after my parents told me,
    there was no source backing the story up. No source, no belief.

    Imagine I'm sitting at McDonalds with a friend. My friend does not believe in China.
    All I have is a man-made book (map) and if I'm lucky, an eyewitness. The same evidence I have for God's existance. So what does that mean ? Maybe I have a bad point of reference ( McDonalds doesn't help proving China's existance ). Maybe China exists. Maybe not. I simply don't have the means to finally decide. Both is possible from my point of reference.

    My point is, you cannot prove your theory as religous people cannot prove theirs.
    Both is belief. I'm sorry to say, but most Atheists are insulting religious people
    because of their belief system and call them dumb. I have not yet seen a christian
    to call a non-believer dumb. I don't like people imposing their view of the world on others without backing it up with proof. And as proof does not exist, cannot exist, neither religion should do this. As Atheism has the same base as every other religion ( no backup but strong beliefs ) I would call atheism a religious movement, too.

    "If we followed your reasoning we would conclude that the man who believes in floating invisible kangaroos is as likely to be correct as the man who doesn't"

    Well, I would call him irrational. Doesn't mean he must be wrong though. Unlikely, not impossible.

    China exists ( for you and me, assuming we have never been there ) because all people around us told us so. If all those people were religious, would that mean God exists ? And why would God's existance depend on people's thoughts ?


    ( Clyde, we have discussed this on countless religion threads before, I don't think we will come to terms in this one )
    hth
    -nv

    She was so Blonde, she spent 20 minutes looking at the orange juice can because it said "Concentrate."

    When in doubt, read the FAQ.
    Then ask a smart question.

  11. #71
    It's full of stars adrianxw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    4,831
    >>> I have not yet seen a christian to call a non-believer dumb.

    I was suprised to see you say that. After all, we've been through a huge number of these debates and the believers have frequently levelled all manner of insult at the non-believers, or believers of another religion. AProg, for example, did it all the time with his repeated rabid anti-islamic propaganda.
    Wave upon wave of demented avengers march cheerfully out of obscurity unto the dream.

  12. #72
    The Earth is not flat. Clyde's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    1,420
    Well, I do. You want me to believe in something, you better provide proof or proof-of-concept ( i.e. examples ).
    But since proof doesn not exist, that presumeably renders all beliefs equal in your eyes.

    Are you suggesting therefore that the view that the Earth is flat, is as likely to be correct as the view that the Earth is spherical?

    Neither can be definitively proved, since definitive proof is impossible.

    I don't believe in Santa Claus, because after my parents told me,
    there was no source backing the story up. No source, no belief.
    No source translates into no evidence?

    Imagine I'm sitting at McDonalds with a friend. My friend does not believe in China.
    All I have is a man-made book (map) and if I'm lucky, an eyewitness. The same evidence I have for God's existance. So what does that mean ? Maybe I have a bad point of reference ( McDonalds doesn't help proving China's existance ). Maybe China exists. Maybe not. I simply don't have the means to finally decide. Both is possible from my point of reference.
    This is exactly where your logic goes wrong.

    You have something you know is true - the existance of China - and you have a scenario where for a given person there is no evidence to suggest it exists.

    The China example is not particularly good because there is no satisfactory way of explaining the evidence pointing to China other than its existance whereas there is a satisfactory way of explaining belief in God other than his existance - anthropology.

    You are imagining a scenario which you already know to be true and working backwards!

    Consider, from your friends perspective and to improve the example lets imagine there truly is no evidence whatsoever for China, none at all. Imagine it was a few thousand years ago, before the West had any contact with China.

    China still existed but there was no evidence available to support it.

    What then is reasable to believe?

    Consider the number of possible countries there are -a spectacularly huge number, varying in size position, culture, genetics, etc.

    What is the chance of correctly guessing the right one?

    So then is it reasonable for a person who lived back then to believe that there is a country at x latitude and y longditude, who have z culture, and w history, and ........ etc etc.

    Of course its not!

    It would be akin to believeing someone was going to win the lottery every day of their life, and then their children would win it every day, and their grand children....

    The fact that they "might" have got it right is irrelevent, I "might" win the lottery for the rest of my life, and my children "might" and my great grandchildren "might", whether it actually happens or not it doesn't matter, its insane to believe it will.

    Its the same as my invisible kangaroo or indeed Santa Claus, he might exist, but it is not equally as reasonable to believe in him as to disbelieve in him.

    Think of it in terms of probability, if you say "I don't believe, in invisible kangaroos" then the chance of being right is so guargantuan, that its insane not believe it" Likewise the probability of it being right is so small as to make belief in it crazy.

    You apply the same reasoning every moment of your life, why for example are you not terrified that you might about to be killed by a materialising elephant?

    Surely if you are agnostic towards God for the reasoning you provide you are also agnostic towards everything that has neither evidence for it not evidence against it, materialising elephants included.

    But you're not, people who are, really are insane. The reason you selectively apply this reasoning to God and not to materialising elephants is because its a socially acceptable idea to believe in God, and not in materialising elephants.

    Actually i've thought of a better way of putting it: For every scenario like the China one, where something exists but lacks evidence there are a bazillion scenarios where something doesn't exist but lacks evidence.

    The reason being is simple: The universe has a finite number of variables out of an infinite number of possible variables.

    Damnit i'm not being coherent, there must be a better way of phrasing this, but unfortuneately at the moment, i can't find it. I'll see if i can find a better description.

    My point is, you cannot prove your theory as religous people cannot prove theirs.
    Both is belief. I'm sorry to say, but most Atheists are insulting religious people
    because of their belief system and call them dumb.
    But you see it IS dumb! Believeing in something that lacks any evidence is crazy, whether it be invisible kangaroos, materialising elephants, God, or even China a few thousand years prior to any knowledge about it.

    When constructing a picture of reality the only way of not living in a fantasy world is to go on postive evidence not lack of negative evidence.

    There is evidence for a keyboard in front me, hence i believe there is, there is evidence for a heliocentric solar system, so i believe there is, there is no evidence for invisible kangaroos or talking lamps, or God or an infinite number of other possibly phenomena.

    As Atheism has the same base as every other religion ( no backup but strong beliefs ) I would call atheism a religious movement, too
    Atheism is merely logic, not believeing in God is not different to not believeing in invisible kangaroos.

    Do you consider non-belief in invisible kangaroos a religion as well?

    Well, I would call him irrational. Doesn't mean he must be wrong though. Unlikely, not impossible.
    Indeed not impossible, but possibility doesn't matter, only probability because thats all we ever have to go on.

    China exists ( for you and me, assuming we have never been there ) because all people around us told us so. If all those people were religious, would that mean God exists ? And why would God's existance depend on people's thoughts ?
    Yes but you see as i indicated to earlier there is no other feasable explanation for all the people who say China exists, and the books that show pictures of it etc. Hence that constitutes evidence for its existence. Because there IS another explanation for religion, and religious beliefs, the fact that religion and religious beliefs exist does NOT constitute evidence for God.

    Whether God exists or not we would expect religion to exist. If china didnt exist we wouldn't expect millions of people to claim it did, and for there to be pictures, and tv. and etc. etc. That is why I modified your example to refer to a point in tim before any evidence of China existed.

    Clyde, we have discussed this on countless religion threads before, I don't think we will come to terms in this one )
    No! I can't believe that nvoigt because you're smart, genuinely intelligent and evidently not overly indocrinated, you are influenced by social view points which is skewing the way you're thinking about this topic but i genuinely think you could come around if i or someone else could explain with more clarity why your reasoning is flawed. Unfortuneately my mind is not what it was, damnit, and I wield the English language with all the finesse of a sledgehammer.

    I'm going to try and find a passage that illustrates my point better than my incoherent ramblings.
    Last edited by Clyde; 08-08-2003 at 08:42 AM.

  13. #73
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    552
    >My point is, you cannot prove your theory as religous people cannot prove theirs. Both is belief.

    >As Atheism has the same base as every other religion ( no backup but strong beliefs ) I would call atheism a religious movement, too


    That is wrong. Firstly, atheism in general doesnt claim anything, therefore an atheist doesnt have anything to prove. Atheism is simply lacking a belief in god(s). So by what I understood from reading your post is that you too are atheist. Of course there are some atheists that say they believe that god doesnt or cannot exist, which of course would require evidence for their claim, but in general atheists make no claim about anything.

    When you are born, you would say that you lack a belief in anything, including god. That is the general position of atheism, lack of belief. Just as the newborn isnt required to prove their belief (because there is no belief to prove), an atheist, or in general anyone who doesnt believe in something, isnt required to prove anything.
    Last edited by *ClownPimp*; 08-08-2003 at 11:57 AM.
    C Code. C Code Run. Run Code Run... Please!

    "Love is like a blackhole, you fall into it... then you get ripped apart"

  14. #74
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    7
    Before answering to anything, Clyde i want you to answer what i asked you. - ( i think that when we say address we mean that we agree )
    Here it is:
    >... i have addressed this already.
    Answer to this question: Because my English aren't so good, do you mean that you agree?
    ****
    >did it all the time with his repeated rabid anti-islamic propaganda
    Well, someone's oppinions about a religion are not propaganda. Now i am arguing ( with the good meaning ) with an atheist; but i don't say that this atheist is making propaganda against Christianity. It's merely different oppinions.

    >The numbers I've heard usually say that the earth is 6000 years old

    >Following a literal interpretation of the bible the world is about 6 thousand years old,

    1) Bible doesn't says something like this ( for Clyde ).
    2) theologists of Christianity doesn't say this. Only conciderating the fact that the history ( prehistory ) of Greece starts at 9000-7000 BC ( before 0 ) and that the theologists agree with that - and most people in Greece are baptized Christians - means that we don't say that the world is only 6000 years. If we said this, Greece would exist before the creation of the universe! Simply, we don't. We agree with science. I think i was very clear here. Agreing with science which says that Greece's history starts at 9000-7000 BC ( no doubt here ), means that we don't say that the wolrd is only 6000 years old. Instead, of course and we agree that the universe is several billions years old.

    >As easy as praying to anything else
    No. Since you never praid you can't say that it is that easy.

    >Not necessarily - they didn't write the Bible. Some other guy did.
    and? All those who lived the miracles of Jesus agrees with what the Bible said. ( many of them were alive while the Bible as written )

    >1) Muslim's do not believe Allah control's their minds, they too believe in free will.
    First of all, the reason for talking about Allah was to show you that now, we are speaking only about Christianity, not about other religions - because many say that their God controlls the mind of the people.
    Anyway, what you said is wrong.
    And that was a problems that the theologists of Islam were trying to explain, and try to give an answer for many years. The problem that, since Allah controlls the will/behaviour of people, why at the "Final Judge" he will judge all the people as responsible for their own acts?. That's true.

    >We cannot have free will, and God know the future, the two are logically impossible.
    No. It's clear: Everybody can do whatever he wants, not whatever the God wants. And what we will choose some day between many other choices, is the future, which in fact doesn't exist at all - at least for now.
    ex. Next morning, you'll have to choose something between many other choises. When this time comes, you will think and make your choise. That's all. But God, knows from today what you will choose, but he is not the one who chooses that.

    >If we were perfect, there would not be the copious amount of bloodshed we see all over the world.

    >Correspondingly if God existed, humans would simply not choose to do horrible things to each other. It would not be a part of our nature

    1) Our nature include free will
    2) Can't you see what i said to you previously? When God made us, we were perfect. He gave us the pontential - logic - to choose between many things. However, many people use this power for bad purposes.
    As you know, Satan, was at first an angel as all the others. But he wanted to become a God , and He didn't want to have others above him. And that's why he left from the God.
    So, every body can do whatever he wants. Even an( and many others) angle left from the God.
    This say too much about the free will that we have from God., and that it's not God's fault that so many people do bad things( since he gave us free will ).

    >Right, and we make those choices because of our catastrophical nature which God gave us.
    What is this sentence trying to do now? Can't you read what i have posted?
    God let us think freely and choose whatever you want. God did not give us catastrophical nature, many of us make catastrophical choises.

    >Are you saying we are being punished for the actions of our ancestors? Does that sound reasonable to you? Do you think it would be fair to punish you if your parents did something wrong?

    First of all it's not a real panishement. It would be a reall punishement, if after the deth our soul wouldn't leave any more, or, if after the death everybody of us went to hell.
    But things aren't like this. We can also "leave in the Paradise", as Adam and Eve used to. We can also become Saints, which, of course, is not God, but it is something like a God. There is a term in my language, but i don't know how do you say it in English.

    Humans learned the evil, an they did that sin. They had all the conforts, and they did not do what God told them. So, they showd that, they didn't deserve all these things God made for them.
    *--->*Also, God asked them the reason for eating that "fruit". So they had the chance to apology. But instead of apologing, one said that it was the womans fault and the other it was the snake's fault. They did not regret for their act.

    >Which again makes him sick, if you have children will you put them through hardships just to see if they pass?
    It's like the english phrase:
    A friend in need is a friend indeed
    Or, in my coumrty, exept from something like this, we also have:
    The good captain(of a ship) appears in the storm.
    These two phrases give the answer.

    Also, you should know that God never let us helpless, and gives us strength to overcome all of our problems.
    Do you know how many tamptations face all those priests who decide to go to a desert for example, although they are alone? However, they get so much strength from the God, that they are the happiests persons in the world.
    So, yes, this tests might be very difficult ( basicaly now i am talking about temptations), but we have great help.

    Also, you asked if altzhaimer brings people closer to God.
    I 'll make this a little more generall, and ask you this:
    Which kind of person do you think, will come closer to God, more easiy; a man with all the conforts, many money, three houses, five cars, and at launch a table with all the kinds of food?, OR a poor man who has very little money, his house was recently destoied by an eartquake, and doesn't know if he 'll find anything to eat today?
    Yes, i know these are extrime examples, but the say my point.

    Saint Claus, is Saint Basilios. Saint Basilios was very rich, but he gave all his money to the poor, and he did not keep anything for himself. And that's why the tradition wants him to bring presents to children.
    So, although Basilios had no money or anything, he was so happy, as the poor might get in the above example.

    >When exactly does God give us help?
    quick note: An example which says to much; a man in the Twince , in 11th of September, praid to God to help him get out of the building, and he managed to leave the builting - without even understanding how he achieved it.

    >Its amazing, if something good happens it gets attributed to God, if something bad happens it gets attributed to man.

    No. If someone decides to kill himself, he has doen a catastrophic choise, with his free will. That shows lack of faith. If he had faith, he wouldn't kill him self. That's all. What you said above, is 2 different topics.

    Also, i am not going to tell more than the following about if church would controll the science. I am not going to say about an "if".
    Personally, as a Christian, i tell you that our faith encourages research. It doesn't contoll it and our faith doesn't say anywhere that researches should stop. Full Stop.

    The same thing appeals about the "true" Christian. We both know who a "true' Christian is, and also our theologists and all priests say what i've told you.
    That's also a sign that we don't say, "ah ,all people who are baptized Christians will "go to Paradis" ". We are talking about the reall Christians i mentioned.

    Also, you said about interpretation of the Bible. Go buy a bible, and i don't think that you 'll find a very nig problem about the interpritation.


    Now to the other huge topic:

    >Science DOES say that all life evolved from a common ancestor, a lot less complex than a modern single celled organism.

    No buddy. There is no scientific proof that life did ( or ever could ) evolved into existence from non-living matter. Only DNA is known to produce DNA.
    A living thing was never produced from anything other than another living thing.
    So, that living micro-organism with the one cail you said about ( even if human came from this ), definetely needs a creator.

    I am very clear here, and so i can claim - as theologists say- that Christianity doesn't come in conrtast with science.

    >No its not, if you say Christianity is the thing that stops Christians doing bad things, then you have to account for what is stopping atheists doing them, otherwise you have no way of telling whether something entirely unrelated to Christianity is infact making Christians behave morally.

    yeah, i know that many many atheists don't do bad things. We all have feelings and know some basic rules of ethic. But what i was talking about is after life.

    What i said is that:
    if you are an atheists: either if you do bad things, either if you do good things, the result is the same - death.
    if you are a Christian: either if you do bad things, either good, the result isn't he same: there is hell and paradise.

    So, for an atheist, what's the big deal in doing bad things? ( that was my point - the deal )

    But for a Christian, this is a very big deal. - that's also the answer to what Goctcheez said.

    >Human laws have always existed, they merely had a different form.
    What???????? Come on now...
    *At least, the laws that stop Govtcheez from killing his neighbour, did not always exist.

    > how do you explain the existance of great civilisations who followed moral codes that had nothing to do with Christianity? Like the ancient Egyptians, or the Romans, or the ancient Greeks?

    As i told you, i was talking about after life. And i agree with you at this time.
    After all, God made as with logic, and we are able to determine the good and the bad.

    >But that doesn't happen does it?
    I said that He could just do this, because he isn't afraid of hell

    >Atheists are no less ethical than theists
    Sure.

    >ethics has nothing to do with religion
    Well... it's the way everybody sees this. Yeah, ethic by its own doesn't have anything to do with religion, but Christianity has the best/perfect ethic. ( this is not selfish )

    Also i think you said something about the Amazons? or for the people who leave in the jungles of Africa.
    Well, these people have logic and can understand that killing their friend is bad thing.

    i now see some more comments:
    >If he already knows someone doesn't believe in him what exactly is he testing?
    Well, in this case, he might bring him these signs to make him believe.
    Also, the Holy Spirit, with one or another way, gives many many choices to people to hear about Christianity. That's also what the church does.

  15. #75
    Mayor of Awesometown Govtcheez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    8,825
    > theologists of Christianity doesn't say this.

    Yes they do.

    > Since you never praid you can't say that it is that easy.

    Oh, thanks for reminding me. I forgot WHAT I MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE DONE.

    > All those who lived the miracles of Jesus agrees with what the Bible said.

    Um... I see. And you spoke with these people? What do you bse that statement on?

    > Anyway, what you said is wrong.

    Again, thanks for clearing that up.

    ATTENTION PEOPLE OF CPROG - THE FOLLOWING IS AN APROG/DICKINTHEHOLE/MONEY?/ETC STYLE REBUTTAL OF EVERYTHING. I REFUSE TO BACK THIS UP WITH ANY SORT OF FACTS. I AM CORRECT BECAUSE I AM.

    "You are wrong"

Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. Alice....
    By Lurker in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 06-20-2005, 02:51 PM
  2. Debugging question
    By o_0 in forum C Programming
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 10-10-2004, 05:51 PM
  3. Question about pointers #2
    By maxhavoc in forum C++ Programming
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 06-21-2004, 12:52 PM
  4. Question...
    By TechWins in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 07-28-2003, 09:47 PM
  5. Question, question!
    By oskilian in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-24-2001, 12:47 AM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21