Total posts: 63
Posted in:
Religious people bear the BoP. Provide an argument against this statement.
Created:
-->
@Tradesecret
So if I'm gay and am atheist (so cannot ask God for forgiveness), God will cast me into a pit of fire for eternity for my sin. Is this correct.
Created:
Posted in:
peak 150 wpm on monkeytype. (no punctuation or capital letters)
peak 115 wpm on typeracer
Created:
-->
@Tradesecret
But God does not discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. Or race or color - or religion - or wealth or poverty or gender or age. Or intellectual capacity.
God destroys a good family for no reason.
God made a bet with Satan that Job, a good and blameless man, would remain faithful even if he killed his children and ruined his life. Here we see God indicting himself for the crime, openly confessing that he destroyed a family "for no reason."
"The Lord said to Satan, 'Have you considered my servant Job? There is no one like him on the Earth, a blameless and upright man who fears God and turns away from evil. He still persists in his integrity, although you incited me against him, to destroy him for no reason.' " (Job 2:3 New Revised Standard Bible)
Created:
If I were an Islam, you'd be six feet deep in soil.
If I were a Christian, you'd not enter heaven and burn for eternity.
Created:
Posted in:
Put forth your best arguments against the existence of a God.
Atheism is not a belief, it is a lack of belief. There is no reason to be atheists, it is just a category for those who have a lack of faith. Therefore there is no way to convert one to atheism. In a nutshell, atheism is as follows; You say God is real. I say do you have evidence. I say I don't believe you. When you make this statement, you have assumed that the BoP is on atheists, which is incorrect. Religious folks are the ones proposing an idea, so it is, therefore, their duty to prove beyond reasonable doubt that their idea is true.
I will define God as Maximal Great Being, that is omnipotence(all powerful), omniscience, (all knowing) and omnipresence (all loving).
With this comes the issue of evil. Take the example of the holocaust. God being omniscience was aware of Jews being killed. God being omnipresence has sympathy for Jews, and God being omnipotence has the ability to stop the mass murder. All of the above cannot be the case.
Essentially, my stance is not a belief, it is a lack of belief. So far, there has been no one who has convinced me of the exsistance of God.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
That's not very convincing though, because you've essentially just said "it's wrong because it is".
This is essentially the argument used by anti-gay protestors. In fact, the thinking of "it's wrong because I think it is" is what racists used.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
Now that I think about it, that's actually a fair point. What makes murder wrong? What is actually wrong about killing someone? What's your view. What makes murder and incest wrong.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Lemming
Well, that's not a question about incest then, that's about human morality. You can use the same logic and murder. I personally believe that morality is not real, in the sense that there is no ultimate good or bad. I believe in emotivism, in that expressing your dislike for murder is subjective and simply personal. To say "killing is wrong" is neither true nor false, just like saying "boo killing".
I then believe our laws are founded on the principle of intersubjectivism, in that things are wrong because your community claims it is, however, for personal reasons.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Exactly, as long as there is consent, I don't see an issue to criminalise their actions.
Created:
Posted in:
I’ve beenthinking, what is actually wrong with incest. When you read the word incest,some would presumably have thought “ew, gross”, and I am asking why. If a consentingbrother and sister were deeply in love and wished to do no harm upon anyone,why should they be denied the privilege of marriage? Why should they be labelledas criminals?
Perhaps I am missing something fundamentalhere.
Perhaps I am missing something fundamentalhere.
Created:
Posted in:
Here are some of my views
God isn't real
Religion is harmful
Pro Gambling (let idiots waste their money, not my problem)
Abortion is immoral
Trans men are women
Free market
BLM (blue lives matter)
ALM (all lives matter)
Send illegal immigrants back
Pro Gun rights
So I would be a conservative atheist?
Created:
Posted in:
Why does this matter? It's not like God exists in the first place.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
Wait, so you're a flat earther for real? Come on man.
Created:
-->
@Theweakeredge
The point is not whether you agree with him or not, it is his debating skills. He always cites his sources off the top of his head when questioned, and uses smart analogy to put the other person's view in perspective. What do you mean he does not debate in a valid way? I think it's stubborn that you say he's not just an iffy debater, but that he is out right bad. It's clear that he is good as he has gotten to the position he is in and it is also clear that he knows what he's talking about as he has literally spent his life defending his POV successfully.
Created:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Who do you believe to be a good debater then.
Created:
-->
@Theweakeredge
Shapiro would rebut that
Created:
-->
@seldiora
Shapiro would get all 10s I reckon. Always well prepared, rebuts everything humorously, intimidates and never looses.
Created:
-->
@Tradesecret
Would you like to challenge me in a debate regarding this topic in the near future? I wish to properly debate and dissect your points. This back and forth can go on forever.
On a quick note, the section where you say the BoP is on me is just simply ridiculous. You are the one proposing this idea, and yet you have literally just shyed away from giving any evidence. Embarrassing. I look forwards to debating and beating you in the near future.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
Christians believe Jesus was born from a virgin mother.
Christians believe he stabbed to death on a cross.
Christians believe he came back to life
Christians believe he then met God, his father.
Christians believe that God is represented in the holy trinity, so Jesus is God.
So I'm not sure what Christians you are talking about.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
So you believe a man who was born from a virgin mother, stabbed to death, buried, came back to life to meet his father who is also himself? Yes or no.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
yes or no it's easy. Do you abide by the ten commandments? Do you believe in the resurrection of Jesus.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
Do you believe in the God from the new and old testament
Created:
-->
@Mopac
@Tradesecret
Sorry for my late reply. I have been very busy.
As the two of you are religious and seem very convicted of it, I will be willing to debate one of you on this matter, as this back and forth can quite literally go on forever. It will have to be at a later date as I am currently participating in a 5 round debate.
To quickly address your two points
Mopap: You have essentially done nothing besides express your disagreement and ignore my points. You have provided no evidence nor any rebuttals.
Tradesecret: You too, have provided no evidence. The only thing you have done is discredit Darwin. Then you turn to morality. The issue with this is that God doesn't solve the morality issue, it simply postpones it. Is murder bad because it is, or is it bad because God says it is? Another issue I see is that you instantly default to God when you do not understand something. I could very easily make a hypothetical god which answers all out current day dilemmas. Though you may believe your God solves the issue of morality, and even if it hypothetically does, you still have the issue of proving God's existence.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
Because I go to an Anglican school and have leant about this.
Now answer my questions instead of avoiding them.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
Answer these
Why do you ignore geological evidence which confirms the world is older than 10 000 years old?
Why do you ignore astromnemers who have observed light from distant starts, confirming the universe is billions of years old?
Why do you ignore Steven Hawkings' discovery (testable) that something did come from nothing?
Why do you ignore Richard Dawkins testable findings that the case for God is weak?
Why do you love a God who is inactive when Jews are being gassed?
Why do you love a God who created bugs which bit into children's eyes, causing them to go blind?
Why do you love a God who doesn't care that children are being raped?
Why do natural disasters occur, killing millions annually?
Created:
-->
@Mopac
The Ultimate Reality is God.
That's your view. No evidence provided.
The fact that there is some form of existence acts as evidence of God,
That's your belief, no evidence provided. Why does it have to be God who created the world? Why cant be be some other God? Why can't it be thor? What makes your god different to the others.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
I too would consider Peterson as more decent than Yiannopoulos, however, that doesn't make the latter bad.
As to your belief that they are mis guided, that would be incorrect. Peterson simply considers the simple solution, as people generally overlook the simple answer and disregard as, quite plainly, too simple.
I would say, as a debater, I have picked up on Petersons' thought process, Shapiros debating tactics and Yiannopoulos' mouth.
Created:
If every bible was burnt - it still would not get rid if the Bible. There are many people all around the world, who have memorised it. Totally.
That's not what I meant. The point is that the Bible is not observable from nature, and that it came from some peasants imagination. Things like gravity, chemistry and physics are all a product of observations and calculations.
As for science, perhaps some of it would be observed. But other stuff, like the origin of the universe, or indeed evolution would soon be discarded because it is not observable.
I can almost hear the reluctance in you admitting some of science can be observed. You state that evolution cannot be observed? This is embarrassing. Then how did Darwin come up with his theory? Was it his imagination? Did he make it up? No, he observed it in nature. Leading scientists such as Richard Dawkins have run computer programs which simulate this exactly.
Why is that it is the most recognised biological discovery of the century? Biologists and evolutionists have found that Darwin is right. Every living object are in fact related.
One other interesting thing is that there have been people who try the bible and destroy it. The Nazis and the Communists most notable. And if you look back into ancient Israel, many of their own tried to destroy it. But somehow for whatever reason GOD keeps preserving his Word.
Oh yes, of course. It's God. God is so keen to keep his word he's willing to intervene. Is there any evidence of this? No. But no matters, I'll play along.
Assuming God kept the bible in circulation, that would mean he has been active in the last 50 years. It would also mean he is willing to intervene with human activity. You mentioned the Nazi? Good on you. Why is that God didn't do a thing when Jews were being tortured, raped and gassed? Why is is that God allowed WW2 to begin? Why does God send tsunamis which kill millions? You've stubbed your own toe here buddy. You've closed your own escape hatch. The usual response would have been "God doesn't want to intervene with humans" but as you have stated, he is willing to save his own book and goes as far as intervening with humans. Is God so greedy that he is willing to save his book, and not act when Jews by the millions are dying.
Now you would not only have to burn every book - you would have to destroy the internt and every computer and phone.
You clearly do not understand. It's quite embarrassing. The point isn't to say whether this is possible, because it's not. I'm saying hypothetically, if the bible was wiped from human memory, it would be gone forever. I then compare this to science, where if every scientific fact is erased, it would be back in some shape or form.
The one thing poor old Ricky keeps forgetting is that God is real and he will maintain his word indeed as he has over 4000 years. That is an observable fact. I wonder what you will do that?
I feel pity for your ignorance. You really are, to put it plainly, stupid. "God is real". Haha. What part of God is an observable fact? The part where he lets Jews die? The part where he puts Asians in internment camps? The part where he allows children to be raped? Where is the evidence. Trust me, if you gave me any sort of testable evidence, I will examine it, but the only thing you religious chaps can say is "have faith".
Embarrassing.
Created:
Posted in:
Hello all.
Here's a full blown description of myself.
As the profile picture and name suggests, I'm a fan of Juice Wrld. I am 15 and deeply interested by politics and psychology. My interest in politics first sparked when watching the viral Jordan Peterson vs Cathy Newman debate, where Cathy was quite literally stumped. However, my drive for debating is credited to the Ben Shapiro debating Cenk Uygur. Throughout the video, I was thinking, "how can one go onto mainstream media and so misinformed?" Time after time, Cenk was proven to by hypocritical and illogical. How could he not see this? I as a 15 year old clearly understood where he was going wrong, so why was this life long politician struggling to do the same?
Nevertheless, I was inspired and wanted a taste for debating myself. And as any 15 year old would, Instagram's SJW activist pages were the perfect starting point. Armed with my fake account, I began, and it was just like the videos. Point after point, person after person, they all went down like blades of grass. After a while, it was beginning to be to easy. So then came debate.org.
By the time I joined DDO, it was already a barren wasteland. Admittedly, there were still a few left wing stragglers of whom posed little issues to me, but as a whole, there was no challenge. While looking at the DDO forums, I found a mention of Debateart, which brings me here today (a few days ago).
This is my second account, (my first was hacked. Yes very generic) and I have had some people tell me I am quite good at debating. I view myself as a very completive debater who may have been slightly influenced by Milo Yiannopoulos. I'm sure you all understand what that means.
Created:
To all, here is a saying I like to keep in mind.
If you burn every scientific textbook, it will come back in some sort of shape or form in the next 1000 years. This is because the scientific textbook is a collection of observable facts. However, if you burn every single bible in the world, it will never come back. You would think that the big book of life which has human morality etched in it's pages would be a bit durable than this.
Think about it. Where do science textbooks come from? Nature. Where does the bible come from? Obviously, since it will never come back if burnt, it is not in observable nature. It comes from imagination.
This example was first made by Ricky Gervais.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
Ok, I'll reword it. There is nothing scientific about a God of which no evidence can confirm.
Created:
-->
@Mopac
There's nothing scientific about invisible floating sky man.
Created:
-->
@EtrnlVw
Refer to above.
Created:
An embarrassingly poor response strung together by ignorance,self-importance and denial. Upon being confronted with my facts, I am notconfronted for being wrong, EtrnlVw simply says I assumed.
Upon being confronted with the true characteristics of God,I am again, not confronted for being wrong, but simply side swept with the waveof a hand. (like how God waved his hand and caused a flood to kill every livingorganism because he felt like it.)
but athiesm uses scienceyou mean interprest science
This is where EtrnlVw’s intelligence is truly reflected. Theonly chaps who interpret things are you religious folks and your book. Sciencecannot be interpreted. Science is science. You cannot bend the facts. Eitheryou are with science or you are not.
When confronted with facts regarding geology and archaeology,my opponent simply says “but you assumed this”. Damn right I did. I am usingwhat you religious folks say. I don’t need to personalise a set of question foryou.
You know EtrnlVw’s a terrible debater when they have to usethe “you assumed” card 3 times in the space of 3 paragraphs. Remember! When facedwith facts, just ignore, deny and side sweep.
Now, it's funny how you mock religious thinkers because they gain insights from "books" and follow other religious thinkers yet here you are pandering to works of atheists and gullibly following them like a lost little sheep lol.
You've made a fatal error. You are assuming that I think like you. You are assuming that I have faith in books. Haha, sorry, I'm not like you. I don't blindly believe. Do you know why I believe Dawkins? Because he uses logic, facts, statistics and science. I do not blindly follow Dawkins. I do not blindly follow Darwins. They have provided testable facts and observations which I, after a thorough examination, have accepted. I do not blindly believe Dawkins. If one day he stated the earth was flat, I would hear him out, see if he has any valid facts and then accept or reject his theory. On the other hand, if God commanded you to kill, you would do just that. (Before you say that's an assumption, you get your morality from the book, so whatever it says you will do. Just like a lost little sheep lol.)
You say you do not claim God does not exist, or at least don't know. If you do not know for a fact your whole foundation could be false if God does exist. Therefore you have no reason to claim you stand for truth wherever it may be. You have accepted atheism, not knowing whether of not God exists, then you make the claim you stand for truth. Now that is a contradiction.
Returning to my point about the garden fairies (Swifty dismissed), I do not need to give evidence as to why something doesn't exist. If I claimed there were garden fairies in my flower bed which couldn't be observed or detected in anyways, how would you disapprove me? What if I then said that these fairies were the creator of the universe? What if I told you to bend your back and pray to these fairies? Yes technically, I do not know that these fairies do not exist, but the lack of evidence gives me a good cause not to believe.
It's not a battle between science and theism, it's an argument between theism and materialism/atheism.
Credit where due, this is a good point. However, between theism and atheism, atheism is the more accurate standpoint. Here is atheism in a nutshell. You say God is real. I say where's the proof. You say you don't have any. I say I don't believe you. The difference between theism and atheism is that theists add their own interpretations and atheists don't. When an atheist sees archaeologist proving man did not walk with dinosaurs, they see it as is. When theists see it, they add the on the bit about the flood to use science, yes, but with their own untestable modifications.
When questioned about the evil bible verse, EtrnlVw responded with what seems to be an attempt to be funny. No proper answer no sir, just a deflection of blame. I will once again quote it here for all to see.
Judges 19:23-24
23 The owner of the house went outside and said to them, “No, my friends, don’t be so vile. Since this man is my guest, don’t do this outrageous thing.
24 Look, here is my virgin daughter, and his concubine. I will bring them out to you now, and you can use them and do to them whatever you wish. But as for this man, don’t do such an outrageous thing.”
25 But the men would not listen to him. So the man took his concubine (wife, women who lives with a male) and sent her outside to them, and they raped her and abused her throughout the night, and at dawn they let her go.
26 At daybreak the woman went back to the house where her master was staying, fell down at the door and lay there until daylight.
27 When her master got up in the morning and opened the door of the house and stepped out to continue on his way, there lay his concubine, fallen in the doorway of the house, with her hands on the threshold.
28 He said to her, “Get up; let’s go.” But there was no answer (dead). Then the man put her on his donkey and set out for home.
This comes from your book of goodness and truth.
You can ask me a question without being rude and insulting.
Listen here big man, I'll talk to you however I want, chump. You can either answer the questions in hopes of humiliating me or you can slither away as you have done and admit to defeat. Here are the questions, answer them if you are capable.
Why do you ignore millions of years worth of evolutionary science which states all that every living thing has commen ancestor. (Contradictory to the bible which states that God created humans instantly)
Why do you ignore geological evidence which confirms the world is older than 10 000 years old?
Why do you ignore astromnemers who have observed light from distant starts, confirming the universe is billions of years old?
Why do you ignore Steven Hawkings' discovery (testable) that something did come from nothing?
Why do you ignore Richard Dawkins testable findings that the case for God is weak?
Why do you love a God who is inactive when Jews are being gassed?
Why do you love a God who created bugs which bit into children's eyes, causing them to go blind?
Why do you love a God who doesn't care that children are being raped?
Why do natural disasters occur, killing millions annually?
Created:
Posted in:
Created:
Created:
-->
@Stephen
As I stated before, expect nothing less than ad hoc manoeuvres or straight up lies.
Created:
-->
@EtrnlVw
To start with, my position is well thought out, carefully weighed and un-biased. I use the whole picture of what is available (religion as a whole, as well as what we know through science) to make the best conclusions. But thanks for asking.
Oh yes of course. Yes yes, except for when you ignore archaeologists fossil discoveries which disapprove of the history of animals displayed by the bible. And of course you shut your eyes and cover your eyes when confronted with scientific papers stating the earth is older than ten thousand years old. What about lights detected from millions of years away? Of course, they don't count. Darwinism? Arguably one of the most important discoveries in the history of human evolution?
Just ignore that as well to protect your little slave encouraging, jealous and proud of it; petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak who is a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.
Science is not atheism, never was. It is a neutral study, did your boy Dawkins tell you that in his book lol? Theism and science are perfectly compatible. We can get to that, but you're going to have to start asking questions instead of making assumptions. Thanks.
Science is not atheism, but atheism uses science. Theism and science are perfectly compatible!? Hahaha, unless you count it when you back bending folks use ad hoc after ad hoc to defend your precious delusion. Fossil's show that man did not walk with dinosaurs? No problem, just say that dinosaurs were slow and stupid. What's that? That's not enough? Sure thing, we'll just say that God clicked his fingers and killed every single organism. Ad hoc after ad hoc after ad hoc. It is quite the circus show.
Have I told you anything yet?
Besides a bunch of BS? Nope. Is this a good way of escaping a question? Yup.
You haven't shown anything at all yet, you're just patting yourself on the back, have made immature assumptions. Nothing new here, this is how you guys tout yourselves, whatever makes you feel special I suppose but let me know at any point if you're interested in a mature conversation with zero assumptions about my character.
This is not a debate so I did not provide any sources, but very well, if you want to humiliate yourself...
https://www.debateart.com/debates/2393-is-religion-harmful (curtasy to a DART debate)
I'm not going to link anything else here as I can already predict what you will do. Ignore, deflect and lie.
Scientists are not on your side, you've placed them on your side.
Except for Richard Dawkins. Except for Charles Darwins. Except for Christopher Hitchens. Except for Sam Harris. Except for Stephen Hawking. Except for Michel Houellebecq. Except for Peter Singer.
Evolution and the processes of our universe are intelligently produced and accomplished. Processes are associated with intelligence, intelligence with agency therefore the processes that take place within the universe are compatible with a Creator, creation is a process. Inanimate forces cannot generate processes and know how something should unfold to work, that requires thought and mind.
Clearly you are not well acquainted with science to say that essentially say something can come from nothing. Your thinking is very limited. You act like nature cares about you. Yes creation is a process, but it isn't the process which created the universe. Your whole theory hypocritical and contradictory. When scientists say the universe came from nothing, you say that isn't possible. When atheist asks who created God, you say "don't worry about man, God is different". It is quite embarrassing that you use the logic that you deny to support you theory.
you've decided for whatever reason you are the arbiter of truth and I'm here to correct that.
I am not the arbiter of truth. I do not emit truth. I am simply attracted to truth and therefore stand by truth where ever it may be.
I've always been drawn to truth, that's why I engage in all of this.
Cap.
When you decide you want to know about my beliefs, how they were formed or what I feel just ask.
Personally, I'm not one who's interested in fiction, but no matters. Tell me why you believe in your delusions despite all the evidence I have listed. Tell me why you ignore archaeologists, astronomers, geologists, biologists and politicians who string it all together.
You talk big about me making assumptions, but really, am I wrong? You believe in a man who was born of a virgin mother, stabbed to death, buried and then bought back to life by his father who is also himself. Sounds like a joke.
No need to peddle atheist books here, I'm well informed.
Cap.
you're not the superior thinker here, you've assumed yourself to be.
I am. I am the superior thinker. That is exactly what I am. You know why? Because I don't ignore millions of years worth of evolutionary science. Because I am not blind to facts. Because I believe scientific papers which have been examined endlessly. Because I believe astronomers with their billion dollar telescopes. Because I believe things which can and have been testified. While you believe in a musty old book written by peasants. Here are some versus for you to mutter in your morning pray.
Judges 19:23-24
23 The owner of the house went outside and said to them, “No, my friends, don’t be so vile. Since this man is my guest, don’t do this outrageous thing.
24 Look, here is my virgin daughter, and his concubine. I will bring them out to you now, and you can use them and do to them whatever you wish. But as for this man, don’t do such an outrageous thing.”
25 But the men would not listen to him. So the man took his concubine (wife, women who lives with a male) and sent her outside to them, and they raped her and abused her throughout the night, and at dawn they let her go.
26 At daybreak the woman went back to the house where her master was staying, fell down at the door and lay there until daylight.
27 When her master got up in the morning and opened the door of the house and stepped out to continue on his way, there lay his concubine, fallen in the doorway of the house, with her hands on the threshold.
28 He said to her, “Get up; let’s go.” But there was no answer (dead). Then the man put her on his donkey and set out for home.
I particularly likes this one as God comes in and saves the poor girl from what would be an unimaginably horrific experience. I love how God loves this girl. I love how God taught these men a lesson. I love how God protected this girl at a time of darkness.
Please, just please. Stop. Stop this. Put the bible down.
Created:
Sorry, old chap, my list of qualities are not supposed to prove anything except the fact that most of the atheists I know are like that.
Anecdotal Fallacy. Facts
I love the studies that people such as yourself produce and reproduce. But they are biased studies - and easily shown to be so.
https://www.livescience.com/59361-why-are-atheists-generally-more-intelligent.htmlatheists/https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religiosity_and_intelligence#:~:text=Using%20data%20from%20a%20U.S.,national%20IQs%20in%20137%20countries.
I have to say, I physically laughed when I read that. I laughed. Religion is ALL about blind obedience. Religion is ALL about blind faith. It is quite literally a battle of who can ignore the most facts in the name of pure belief.Again - I am glad you can laugh. But the fact is - churches are voluntary organisations.
Please tell me you are joking. Yes, churches are technically voluntary, but what choice are you giving a small child who you've instilled upon them that praying to the wrong God will end with the burning in eternity? You have robbed the child of any freedom when you shoved the bible in their face and forced them to bend their knees. If one chose, they could choose to instil any quality into a little child. Given the right conditions, you could almost certainly mould a killed out of a child with constant violence and abuse.
We don't have to ignore facts. We embrace them.
Yes, except for the big bang. And geological evidence that the world is older than 10 00 years. And the fact that lights are detected from stars millions of years away, showing the universe is older than the bible record. You know, just ignore that stuff and perform some ad hoc manoeuvres and your religion should be safe.
I took several years to learn the ancient languages so that I could read it myself. I learned all about the ancient cultures so that I could understand as best I could how they lived back in those times so that I could best understand what the authors are saying. I trained with people from all different religions and non-religions in order to make sure that I could best understand these cultures and languages. I am not convinced that you look at facts and question them. I too value logic and science and reasoning.
What you have done is equivalent to analysing the Harry Potter series in a foreign language. The very fact that you swiped Dakwkins aside with a wave of your hand's dhows that you are not open to facts. Dawkins book contains facts which are followed by logic which are easily understood. He uses testable evidence, recognised studies and logic, all three of which the bible lacks. Where is the evidence in the bible? Where are the testable studies?
Christians as a rule don't believe that their eternal bliss is dependent upon them being good - so bending their back is a straw man argument. Are we happy we have a purpose? Of course. So what. Is it what makes us happy? No. Are we happy we are not little organisms on a spinning ball? Absolutely. But again - this is not what makes us happy. Our identity is not found in our happiness. Our joy is not found in being happy. Do we like that God cares for us? Of course - why would we not be ok with that?
Contradiction after contradiction. You state that you are happy with a purpose. You state that you are happy you are not a little organism on a spinning ball. And then you state that you are happy God cares about you. But this is exactly what I was saying. We ARE a little organism on a spinning on a ball. The only difference is that you cannot face it and wrap yourself in cotton while I face it head-on. But then after this you state that these things don't make you happy. So what does make you happy?
And I understand. Who doesn't want to be loved? Who doesn't want purpose? Who doesn't want to be recognised? But I personally do want to be happy because of a fictional character. I personally do not want to make up someone to love me. Because that is sad. Imagine needing to make up an imaginary person, and then feel satisfied that you are loved by your own false creation. Sounds a bit like doublethink from 1984.
But you don't understand. And that is the issue. these things are not what makes us happy. I don't want to be happy just to please you. I dont want to be happy just to believe whatever you tell me is true - or to believe whatever I read in a book (science text book). I don't make anyone up to love me. I don't know anyone who does that. Gee I don't even believe that people from other religions - who believe in false gods - make their gods up to believe them. What a silly thing to say.
I too am happy that I have freedom of thought.How exactly are you more free than an atheist? I could very easily make the case that atheist are freer than religious people.
Because unlike you - I can actually think without the restraints of living in a box. I can think outside the box and not be restricted by what my non-faith tells me I can believe in. I can tap into the mind of the Almighty God of the Universe - which you simply just shut your mind from. I am free from sin - which you are not. In fact - you deny even the concept of sin - which is even more telling. You walk around like you are free - and yet you know you are trapped.
I don't wish to engage in that line of thinking. I don't find it very helpful and typically leads to ill feeling on both sides.
A wise a move.
The fact is God is not superman.
No he's not. He's G O D. He can kill every living organism on the planet without a trace with the flick of a hand. He can send a wave strong enough to kill anything and everything. He can certainly save little children are being raped. He could certainly save the Jews from being gassed.
He does not fly into a world to save people like that.
What happened to being Omnipotence, Omniscience, and Omnipresence? What happened to loving everyone like his children?The only reason that God didn't save the Jews from being gassed with they children is either a) he couldn't or b) he didn't care. Tell me, which one is it.
I found his comments quite sad really. He engages in straw man arguments - he set up a picture of God - which the bible does not even portray and then set about decimating that one.
He really doesn't though. Everything he gets is from the bible. Where exactly does he start making things up?
Jesus was not a human sacrifice in the sense of human sacrifices as we understand them
Do I even need to address this?
I think the bigger problem however for atheists is the issue of good. Why are people good? And also why do people die?
Why are people good? Religion does not help solve this issue. Is murder bad because it is or is it bad because God says it is? If it is a) then God is simply making an observation and telling us humans, and if it's b) then the question of good becomes even more confusing, as Ancient Greeks were fairly moral beings (in the sense that they believed murder was bad) and were not commanded by God
I am truly confused as to how people can really still believe in God despite mountain loads of contradictory evidence.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Theweakeredge
A kangaroo is a completely different species,
A man is a completly different sex to women.
and as of now, it is impossible to perform that surgery.
So the only thing stopping me from being a kangaroo is technology?
Whereas intersex people exist, proving that male and female are NOT the only standards sex is applied too,
You cannot use the minority to justify the majority. This is like saying "you shouldn't teach children that people have arms because some people are amputees". In fact, using your logic, there is NO way to define a male, female or even a human being as there are no constant characteristics that every single human being has. So I ask, how do you define a human being?
we can use surgery to change the body from male to female, and as Kbub530 pointed out above, men who show all of the physical features of a male can have xx chromosomes, does that make him a woman?
Created:
-->
@RoderickSpode
I didn't actually state that you look down on the religious, I stated that you feel superior. Is that wrong?
No.
And what are religious people like that you're so happy you're not like?
Deluded.
RD does not mention Muslims (or at least does not use them as a case against religious folks) in his book. He uses facts and simple logic. The fact that you believe it is warped shows that you are clearly no very comfortable with accepting that you might be wrong.
Created:
-->
@Tradesecret
I have pity for you. I have great pity for you.
You start off by listing a bunch of random qualities that are supposed to prove atheist as some sort of degenerate. Which is embarrassing because atheist are statistically smarter. Oops.
Religion does not blind the masses per se. Nor does it require blind obedience.
I have to say, I physically laughed when I read that. I laughed. Religion is ALL about blind obedience. Religion is ALL about blind faith. It is quite literally a battle of who can ignore the most facts in the name of pure belief.
most of the atheists I know simply drink it up without thinking.
You really are a comedian. Either that or you are actually looking at a mirror. This is YOU. YOU are the one who blindly believes in an old musty book. YOU are the one you has blind faith. You say that I drink up facts without thinking? You are terribly wrong. I am not like you. I actually look at facts. I actually question things. I actually think. I actually value science and reasoning.
Well there we go again. More fake reporting. Christians do not obtain their happiness from a book.
Perhaps you misunderstood me. Here is what I know. Christians, whether conscious or not, are happy that they will live in eternal bliss, so long they bend their backs. They are happy that their good deeds are noticed. They are happy that they have a purpose. They are happy that they are not a little organism on a spinning ball in the middle of nowhere. They are happy that there is a superior being who cares and loves them.
And I understand. Who doesn't want to be loved? Who doesn't want purpose? Who doesn't want to be recognised? But I personally do want to be happy because of a fictional character. I personally do not want to make up someone to love me. Because that is sad. Imagine needing to make up an imaginary person, and then feel satisfied that you are loved by your own false creation. Sounds a bit like doublethink from 1984.
I too am happy that I have freedom of thought.
How exactly are you more free than an atheist? I could very easily make the case that atheist are freer than religious people.
If you wish to respond, please give me a short summary on why you believe God is real, despite millions of years worth of evolutionary science, and leading biologists, geologists, historians, politicians and evolutionists say otherwise.
I have attached a video where Sam Harris deconstruct Christianity in 10 minutes. Please take the time to watch it.
Created:
-->
@RoderickSpode
You seem to feel superior to religious folk, right? And I think your reference to the authors of the bible being peasants is just a general pejorative. I don't think you actually think they were all occupational, or status oriented peasants. I think (or I hope) that you understand they represent various walks of life.
I do not look down on religious people the same way I do not look down on poor people, but I am damn happy that I am not like them.
Have you ever read the God Delusion? Please read it. It is honestly a good book which goes through all the aspects on religion.
Created:
-->
@RoderickSpode
How is believing that I am an insignificant organism on a spinning ball in an empty void easy? Religion is what is easy. Believe you can pray to redeem yourself is easy. Believing you will have eternal bliss is easy. Believing that all your good deeds are approved and noted by god. But religion is also untrue. It is the lazy way out.
Created: