[GameTheory]

(09-23-2013 12:23 AM)Sherman Wrote:  

[...] Also, what is it with the popularity of ridicule ? This seems to be an atheistic ritual similar to the Puritans who would shame the sinners in order to reinforce their beliefs and enhance their feelings of goodness.

born again christians ridicule themselves

[soup]

(09-23-2013 03:41 PM)Sherman Wrote:  

(09-23-2013 12:39 AM)soup Wrote:  

(09-23-2013 12:23 AM)Sherman Wrote:  

The popular form of Atheism today qualifies as religion. I think there is a definite difference between an unbiased inquiry into the truth vs. atheism (which is more like advocacy of a belief). Also, what is it with the popularity of ridicule ? This seems to be an atheistic ritual similar to the Puritans who would shame the sinners in order to reinforce their beliefs and enhance their feelings of goodness.

Definition of Religion: the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, esp. a personal God or gods.


Atheism is not a religion.

No belief in God is not a sufficient definition of Atheism. If you don't believe in a God, but you do believe in reincarnation, then you are not an atheist, in the sense that you believe that reality is something more than material. Many Buddhist don't have a concept of God but believe in rebirth, so it's not correct to call Buddhism atheistic.

Also, not having a belief in something is also a belief. It is common for believers to not realize that they have a belief. If you ask a Christian whether he is religious, he will say no, that he doesn't follow a religion he follows the truth, and the other sects are religions. A true Muslim will say the same. Ditto for the true atheist. They see their beliefs as knowledge and aren't aware that they are believing anything.

Also, as for science, the most verified laws of physics that you can depend on and call truth is Quantum mechanics. But the real quantum mechanics is a set of mathematic equations that describe a certain behavior in the world. Nothing more than that. Physicists don't even commit to any particular Ontology. They just say the truth is in the mathematics. So, physics at its most real says nothing about God. Furthermore, things like string theory and multiverses are mathematical speculation and have no more of a claim to scientific truth than theology, because they can't be verified by experimentation. But some atheists are willing to use multiverses as a rational explanation of their creator God "chance". But, since another universe, by definition is beyond experimentation (if we could reach it, it would be one universe), it follows that a multiverse theory has no greater claim to science then the notion of God.

It's not a question of physics. it is a linguistic problem to have a thing exist and not exist at the same time. Either it exists or it doesn't.

You can't have something exist outside of existence. If it exists, then it is part of existence. God is a joke- the creature that both can and can't make a rock that is too big for him to lift.

It's cognitive dissonance that creates a shimmering lure that religious people fall for generation after generation.

It's like how girls fall for the same thing over and over again.

Religion is the game of the priests and shaman.

It's like that Chinese guy who exercised the demons from the girl's pussy with his dick.

Religious people open their asses for smarter people than them.

[Eirykr]

This thread topic somewhat conflates belief in god with religion. You can very well have a religion without a belief in any gods (Buddhism, Taoism, Shamanism, et al).

Believing in your own personal god is not necessary blue pill, but being religious probably is the epitome of blue pill thinking. Religion is a social engineering tool used by the clever and dominant to manipulate humanity on a massive scale. It has convinced chumps and betas for thousands of years to sacrifice their own lives and happiness for a tenuous hope of a fulfilling life after death.

As for believing in God, that really depends on how you define it. The God of the Philosophers is full of contradictions, the God of the bible even more-so. Could there be an alien or otherworldly intelligence that behaves according to laws we just don't or can't comprehend? Possibly. But what makes it worthy of worship? Why should I care? And more importantly what is the difference between claiming this entity exists and that an invisible, undetectable dragon lives in your garage? Why should I believe in your god as opposed to Thor or the God of Tits and Wine? I'd prefer those two anyway.

[sixsix]

(09-23-2013 02:36 PM)Samseau Wrote:  

(09-23-2013 05:13 AM)sixsix Wrote:  

Theist belief systems include the belief: 'A personal deity exists.'
Atheist belief systems lack that belief. That is it.

Disbelief is a belief. Try again.

The only correct answer is "I don't know," which isn't a belief but the inability to believe.

@Samseau

Why don't you reply to the following?

(09-23-2013 05:23 AM)sixsix Wrote:  

But let's say we just can't say whether or not a god exists (for the sake of argument).

First problem, we also don't know what his demands are. Which texts are his word? What rules should we follow?
How can we discriminate between the actual wisdom of the galactic boss, and texts written by angry sand men?
This seems to be a problem to many people. God doesn't visit here that regularly.
For some strange reason he prefers communicating with us by making statues cry red liquid.

Second problem, he sounds like a mean person I would not respect. But listen to him, or else...
Being red pill, should I go to church out of fear?

Lastly, why would he care, and write prescriptive texts?
He's an almighty king of kings, why is he emotionally affected by what we eat?
Why does he have such strong opinions about what those puny humans do on that puny planet?
Especially when it concerns their naughty parts?

Don't these sound like human concerns, written down to codify community-stabilizing rules in uncertain times?

P.S. Is not believing in unicorns a belief? And not believing in Santa Claus is also a belief?

Do you it's more correct to say you don't know whether or not unicorns and Santa Clause exist?

[Eirykr]

(09-24-2013 11:51 AM)sixsix Wrote:  

He's an almighty king of kings, why is he emotionally affected by what we eat?
Why does he have such strong opinions about what those puny humans do on that puny planet?
Especially when it concerns their naughty parts?

[Sherman]

I'm trying to make out the argument here. Quantity trumps quality. So, if someone enters a desert with thousands of miles of lifeless sand, he couldn't possibly be interested in a small oasis because it is so small and insignificant.

[Architekt]

(09-24-2013 10:29 PM)Sherman Wrote:  

I'm trying to make out the argument here. Quantity trumps quality. So, if someone enters a desert with thousands of miles of lifeless sand, he couldn't possibly be interested in a small oasis because it is so small and insignificant.

I'd be pretty interested in an oasis, no matter how small, if I were stuck in a large expanse of desert....

[sixsix]

(09-24-2013 10:29 PM)Sherman Wrote:  

I'm trying to make out the argument here. Quantity trumps quality. So, if someone enters a desert with thousands of miles of lifeless sand, he couldn't possibly be interested in a small oasis because it is so small and insignificant.

Yes, the oasis would be desired by us, humans, because we have human desires and drives: like thirst in the desert.

But why would god have human-like desires? Like insecurities, jealousy, food preferences ("don't eat oysters and pork!")?

Like someone else said, do we care about the ant colonies?

[El_Superbeasto]

(09-24-2013 11:51 AM)sixsix Wrote:  

P.S. Is not believing in unicorns a belief? And not believing in Santa Claus is also a belief?

Do you it's more correct to say you don't know whether or not unicorns and Santa Clause exist?

It's not possible to "know" anything other than past events that you have directly observed. Everything else is belief. Is the sun going to come up tomorrow? Either you believe it will or you believe it won't. Based on your previous observations, you would be justified in very strongly believing that it will; but you still don't know. All you know for sure is that the sun has come up every previous day of your life.

Saying "I don't know" is still a belief. It means that you believe that all possibilities are equally likely.

[Cattle Rustler]

This thread is still going on?

Has anyone gotten a meltdown and been banned/warned?

If not, I bet someone will eventually.

[sixsix]

(09-25-2013 12:53 AM)Cattle Rustler Wrote:  

This thread is still going on?

Has anyone gotten a meltdown and been banned/warned?

If not, I bet someone will eventually.

Yes, I beat everyone to it: 60% warning level and a 7-day ban.

P.S. I'm out of the discussion, would be cool if you could still reply Samseau.

[Sherman]

(09-25-2013 12:16 AM)sixsix Wrote:  

(09-24-2013 10:29 PM)Sherman Wrote:  

I'm trying to make out the argument here. Quantity trumps quality. So, if someone enters a desert with thousands of miles of lifeless sand, he couldn't possibly be interested in a small oasis because it is so small and insignificant.

Yes, the oasis would be desired by us, humans, because we have human desires and drives: like thirst in the desert.

But why would god have human-like desires? Like insecurities, jealousy, food preferences ("don't eat oysters and pork!")?

Like someone else said, do we care about the ant colonies?

Because the texts were written by humans who have written something they experienced but can only relate it in terms of every day human experience. It's the person who wrote it who has desires and he is making crude analogies to describe what he experienced. It would be like someone in 500 BC seeing an airplane and saying he saw a large bird with wings that don't flap. It may not be accurate but it is the best he can do.

[soup]

It seems that all the religious people have bailed on this thread.

[Cattle Rustler]

(09-25-2013 11:16 AM)sixsix Wrote:  

(09-25-2013 12:53 AM)Cattle Rustler Wrote:  

This thread is still going on?

Has anyone gotten a meltdown and been banned/warned?

If not, I bet someone will eventually.

Yes, I beat everyone to it: 60% warning level and a 7-day ban.

P.S. I'm out of the discussion, would be cool if you could still reply Samseau.

LOL, that's the reason I bailed on the thread early on.

You can't discuss this type of stuff with people who already have their minds made up.

[GameTheory]

Kudos to the "Millennials" generation: 33% of them have no religion

http://www.alternet.org/belief/one-third...ge-country

[soup]

[soup]

[GameTheory]

[Teedub]

^

It's not even comparable. Evolution can be PROVEN with mountains upon mountains of fossils, carbon dating, and observable evidence on isolated islands. Even within our lifetime, with certain species.

Creationism is based on zero evidence.

I said I wouldn't comment in this thread again, but I thought I'd just throw that in there.

[Ridge Black]

(09-25-2013 12:09 PM)soup Wrote:  

It seems that all the religious people have bailed on this thread.

The premise of the OP was deeply flawed. Moreover, this is a board about fucking and gaming females by the bucket, you can't expect a whole lot of religious fever in such a place.

Bad idea executed in the worst possible place.

[soup]

More evidence against intelligent design: 2 year old boy in China "gives birth" to dead parasitic fetus

"A 2-year-old in China is reported to have "given birth" to the undeveloped fetus of his twin.

Xiao Feng, of Huaxi, was taken to the hospital after his parents noticed he had a bloated stomach and was having trouble breathing, News.com.au reported Monday.

Doctors found that Feng was carrying an undeveloped fetus inside his abdominal cavity, and removed it through emergency surgery.."

[GameTheory]

^^^ good that the Dr.'s saved that little dude

[Sherman]

Why don't these guys ever give up?


[attachment=14800]

[Teutatis]

(09-25-2013 12:53 AM)Cattle Rustler Wrote:  

This thread is still going on?

Has anyone gotten a meltdown and been banned/warned?

If not, I bet someone will eventually.

Indeed. I read the first 10 pages or so and thought things would just simmer down, apparently not.

Honestly I don't think either side will ever convert the other, believing in god or being atheist is something that comes from within, you won't make someone change their mind with arguments.

Anyway, just another godless atheistic infidel here.

[Teutatis]

(10-04-2013 08:25 PM)Sherman Wrote:  

Why don't these guys ever give up?

While I understand what you're trying to say, and I totally acknowledge that you sometimes find some people on the internet that are oh so determined to show the whole world how atheistic they are, and how much more atheist they are than everyone else, and they certainly can be annoying as hell, that picture is nowhere close to what happens in reality. You can't even start to compare the influence and power of religion and its propaganda machine (all religion, not just in the west) with a few young punks on youtube being obnoxious.