I Believe That There Is No God

[betsy]

If by some chance science proves that God does not exists, that Christianity is baseless, inspite of millenia of accumulated evidence to the contrary - historical records, scriptures, archeological sites, etc., - and you are proven to have guessed right, you will be able to nya-nya-nya me for a very, very short time.

HOWEVER, if not, nya-nya-nya ad infinitum.

Of course at least, you won't hear.

Edited July 14, 2007 by betsy

[KO2]

I don't believe anything that has no basis in observable fact or established in repeatable results.

Again I say, that I feel it is important to constantly seek wisdom, the truth, without expecting answers.

The moment one resorts to believing something fed to them by another, without testing and examining it closely, they have abandond their search.

This puts them in that persons hands for their ethical understanding, This leads to large dangerous flocks of believers, ready for anything from the suicides of Jim Jones to the riots over the Prophet Mohammed's cartoons. You'll find these dangerous crowds trying to impose their belief systems on others at abortion clinics, through school boards, in front of our parliament buildings.

These dangers of the Religious masses have been at the root of most blood letting in the last two millenia.

Yet this information doesn't fit into a believers understanding because they are mindless minions which don't belive these recorded these facts about themselves. If they do then they never question how these parts of their tradition fit with the picture they paint of their god,

[Leafless]

These dangers of the Religious masses have been at the root of most blood letting in the last two millenia.

Like most freer capitalist countries your life and freedoms in Canada are protected by a more civilized people who do follow a faith and do believe in God.

You probably would not even exist if societies were religion free and at the mercy of ruthless barbarians and savages who would never allow any civilized system to develop but are only interested in self personal satisfaction at any cost to themselves and their tribe.

[KO2]

You are always ready to deny the facts and turn this in condemnations of me.

I say that this is the mark of a true believer fraudulent at the core

[ScottSA]

You are always ready to deny the facts and turn this in condemnations of me.

I say that this is the mark of a true believer fraudulent at the core

What "facts" are you talking about? That the "dangers of the Religious masses have been at the root of most blood letting in the last two millenia?" That's silly. WWs I and II alone probably killed more people than had ever been killed in warfare before then, combined. Most of the ideological proxy wars since then have been ideological; usually caused by a profoundly humanist/atheist ideology at that. If you want people to belief the "facts," then stop making them up.

[KO2]

And there was no motivation of the troops on both sides, invoking God?

And there was no religious component to the genocide of 6 million Jews?

And the Crusades didn't take place in the past as well as continuing until today?

And the Inca civilization didn't disappear in the name of God?

Their choice of execution method depended on whether they accepted Christ or not?

And Christians didn't persecute niggers under the authority of white sheets and burning crosses?

And you always come back to wishing to bully the messenger.

Blindness is also a mark of religious believers!

Edited July 14, 2007 by KO2

[ScottSA]

And there was no motivation of the troops on both sides, invoking God?

And there was no religious component to the genocide of 6 million Jews?

And the Crusades didn't take place in the past as well as continuing until today?

And the Inca civilization didn't disappear in the name of God?

Their choice of execution method depended on whether they accepted Christ or not?

And Christians didn't persecute niggers under the authority of white sheets and burning crosses?

And you always come back to wishing to bully the messenger.

Blindness is also a mark of religious believers!

What a maroon you're turning out to be. WW I and II were not religious wars, just to start. No, the crusades are not going on today. That's just silly. You're stacking a few crossburnings in the 50s against the Rwandan genocide and the Killing Fields? That's crazy. The holocaust was a function of racial "Aryanism" vs "Jewishness," not a battle between Christianity and Judaism. I might be "blind" to some point as yet unmade, but you're just being weird.

Edited July 14, 2007 by ScottSA

[KO2]

OK there is no clash going on today between Islam and Christianity.

Ok we don't see any evidence of it here in the posts.

[ScottSA]

OK there is no clash going on today between Islam and Christianity.

Ok we don't see any evidence of it here in the posts.

Please put down the joint and concentrate if you can. I'm taking issue with your silly contention that religion is at the root of all violence. I am not claiming that religion never has anything to do with violence. And in case you haven't noticed, there is indeed no clash going on between Islam and Christianity. The clash is between secularism and Islam. Christianity is at best a shocked bystander, so don't try to drag it into the mix. It didn't do nuttin'.

[KO2]

You always start with a denegrading remark as if my point of view were inferior to your one sided understanding because of something else. Nothing you say is without this denegration at some point.

So its Islam and secularism?

Islam is not a religion?

You are devoid of comprehension and full of belief because for you any pointing at real history, they still have the records of the witches they burned and stolen wealth is still in the coffers of Rome, is coloured by what you are forced to see.

I know you are a self righteous fundamentalist because of the judgemental way you approach my viewpoints, all verifiable with facts.

You probably also believe in creationism and your evidence always boils down to one book.

The last 2000 years nothing has been allowed to be added to it so how would you know of the events that have passed in that time

[IXthAmendment]

I'll wager a dollar he doesn't die an atheist, and if he does he's in for a big surprise.

What, specifically, do you think he'll be surprised by? And what makes you think that?

[ScottSA]

I'll wager a dollar he doesn't die an atheist, and if he does he's in for a big surprise.

What, specifically, do you think he'll be surprised by? And what makes you think that?

I don't think it. I know it. And if you don't know what I'm talking about him being surprised by, this conversation is not for you.

[jbg]

Yes there are scientific explanations for the behaviour of natural phenomena.

But there is no scientific evidence that proves how they got there. Just a few feeble attempts.

Quite true. I think that religion fills a virtually inevitable human need to explain the unexplainable. And where I agree with you is that the orderliness of earth, the apparently unique fact of life here, is not really satisfactorily explainable. There had to have been a "kick start" to get the process rolling in the first place, which I believe is divine (or Devine in Saskatchewan).

As the theory of evolution sputters and grinds to an embarrassing halt under the weight of the lack of evidence that its inventor admitted was essential....I would think that anyone defending our scientific understanding of the universe would be a little embarrassed, to say the least.

These theories, often wrongly, seek to explain the behaviour behavior of nature and the universe. Only the most arrogant and ignorant imagine they can explain their existence. (sorry about the spelling correction but the site appears to be rife with that particular error).

Here we part company. Once the unexplainable "kick start" occurred, I believe that evolution explains almost everything that you'd be looking for.

[betsy]

As the theory of evolution sputters and grinds to an embarrassing halt under the weight of the lack of evidence that its inventor admitted was essential....I would think that anyone defending our scientific understanding of the universe would be a little embarrassed, to say the least.

These theories, often wrongly, seek to explain the behaviour behavior of nature and the universe. Only the most arrogant and ignorant imagine they can explain their existence. (sorry about the spelling correction but the site appears to be rife with that particular error).

Here we part company. Once the unexplainable "kick start" occurred, I believe that evolution explains almost everything that you'd be looking for.

That would be a good topic for another thread. But there is good evidence from the scientific community that the theory of evolution is fatally flawed.

A lot of scientists have abandoned it as a satisfactory theory...mostly by the lack of fossil evidence that was required to substantiate the theory. Even according to Darwin himself.

Darwin stated that without the fossil evidence his theory would crumble. And he was convinced this fossil evidence would be found.

It hasn't been found.

Furthermore the theory of biogenesis has been accepted - that life can only come from life. In a desperate effort to reconcile the theories of evolution and biogenesis, some scientists have even gone so far as to suggest that life began on earth from spores floating in from outer space. Perhaps they've been reading too many 1950's sci-fi novels.

Edited July 15, 2007 by betsy

[jbg]

Furthermore the theory of biogenesis has been accepted - that life can only come from life.

Thus the need for a divine "kickstart", and thus a role for G-d.

[ScottSA]

You probably also believe in creationism and your evidence always boils down to one book.

And your mother probably wears army boots.

[Drea]

Woooooo -- gooooooooood insult Scotty!

You are debating skills are at most that of grade school level.

"you don't agree heathen? well, well... well your momma's ugly! Neener, neener".

LOL

Edited July 15, 2007 by Drea

[cybercoma]

Woooooo -- gooooooooood insult Scotty!

You are debating skills are at most that of grade school level.

"you don't agree heathen? well, well... well your momma's ugly! Neener, neener".

LOL

It's worse than that. His arrogance is insulting to his intelligence. When he doesn't have an answer, he simply resorts to comments like, "you wouldn't understand anyway, " or "you're never going to get it."

[ScottSA]

Woooooo -- gooooooooood insult Scotty!

You are debating skills are at most that of grade school level.

"you don't agree heathen? well, well... well your momma's ugly! Neener, neener".

LOL

It's worse than that. His arrogance is insulting to his intelligence. When he doesn't have an answer, he simply resorts to comments like, "you wouldn't understand anyway, " or "you're never going to get it."

The reason I say you'll never get it is because you insist on using the standard of rationality as a touchstone against which to measure believe in a diety. But more important than that is the fact that you don't even understand what I mean when I say that.

[cybercoma]

The reason I say you'll never get it is because you insist on using the standard of rationality as a touchstone against which to measure believe in a diety.

So you admit that it's irrational to believe in a deity, therefore it must be irrational to expect everyone else to follow the morality that you derive from supposedly knowing the mind of that deity.

[BornAlbertan]

Why are so many atheistss such hypocrites? I mean, they hate being evangelized to...yet they do the exact same thing. Only they evangelize through ridicule and demoralization.

I watch Bullshit. I enjoy Penn Jillette and think he is a highly intelligent man. But everytime I hear him speak against religion I just have to shake my head and say to myself "let it go man!".

People often blame religion for war. But what about wars that start where there was no religion involved? Do we blame that on atheism?

How about this: LIVE AND LET LIVE.

People who are fucked in the head are gonna do shit whether or not they have a religion. It's only that if they do have religion, they have their justification while devout atheists have theirs.

My parents taught me from a very young age the difference between right and wrong. I didn't need my faith for that. The understanding of my faith came AFTER that and I accepted it on my own terms. My faith is something I have questioned nearly every day of my life and have every time come to understand it better. Does my faith make me a better person? Marginally. It is only from an inner peace am I able to be a better person. But some people might not need to feel that...it is not my place to say one way or another.

Am I a bad person? No.

Am I self-righteous? No.

Do I tell people what to believe? No.

Do I rationalize with people why I believe what I do? No.

So why do atheists take it upon themselves to push their views?

It's hilarious to see the exact thing atheist loathe is the very thing they are...minus God.

Edited July 19, 2007 by BornAlbertan

[capricorn]

I am a non-practicing Roman Catholic but my faith is deep. I believe that the Universe is so outstanding, only a Supreme Being, that is God, could have created it. I also believe we mortals are on Earth as a test, all devised by Him. That is why He gave us free will. There is life beyond. Inherently good humans (I include atheists in this group) and repentant sinners (atheists not included because they don't give credence to sin) will be rewarded and go to a better place. The rest (I include atheists in this group) will be punished. Not complicated in my book. I just hope He keeps good books. You know, with identity theft and all.

[ScottSA]

I am a non-practicing Roman Catholic but my faith is deep. I believe that the Universe is so outstanding, only a Supreme Being, that is God, could have created it. I also believe we mortals are on Earth as a test, all devised by Him. That is why He gave us free will. There is life beyond. Inherently good humans (I include atheists in this group) and repentant sinners (atheists not included because they don't give credence to sin) will be rewarded and go to a better place. The rest (I include atheists in this group) will be punished. Not complicated in my book. I just hope He keeps good books. You know, with identity theft and all.

I believe everything as you, except for the punishment part. I sincerely doubt there is a need for punishment, per se...just a need for further spiritual self-realization. Thomas Merton it was I believe who said he suspected that hell is loneliness; a formulation that works in reverse as well. By loneliness he seems to have meant a lack of fellowship, or isolation. Either way I strongly suspect there is no lake of fire or whatever nasties the medieval mind thunked up to scare the peasants. But I think atheists are in for one hell of a surprise when they die.

[jefferiah]

Cybercoma confronts us with some of the ugliest moments in religious history. But he think he misses out on the fact that there are very many good stories associated with people of religion as well. I cannot argue the fact that there have been many atrocities committed by those who label themselves Christians, but I do argue the assertion that religion gives justification for it.

Cybercoma here is a story for you, I hope it makes you see another side of what religion can inspire.

http://myhero.com/myhero/hero.asp?hero=mkolbe

[Bonam]

It'd be pretty awesome if there was something after death. Wish I had some reason to believe that there is, besides wishful thinking.