The Forum › Everything Else FileCabi.net Forum (2007–2008)

Why Atheism?

1. cheese muffinSalvaged from archive30 Apr 2006, 22:03
   :!: Yes, I do know that there is another thread in the fight room related to this topic. No, I'm not trying to pick a fight with anyone online. i simply wanted to share this article with you. Only reply if u have any rational thoughts on the topic. As for the hatemail, there is another forum for that. :!: And by the way, I didn't write this. :!: The replies that I do not need to read are moronic ones such as this: AllyouATHEIST'Swhokeeparguingthisridiculousargumen taboutreligionand notbelievinginGODisabouttofeelhiswrath! Godwillcurseyoubymakingallthe wordsthatyouarereadingruntogetherintoonewordandtha nyouwillgoblindwithin24hours! Why Atheism? by Mark Thomas Hello. My name is Mark, and I’m an Atheist. History and Development of Science and Scientific Naturalism Let’s start with a quick experiment. You can grab three coins and actually do the experiment, or just do a thought experiment. Drop one coin and watch it fall. Do this again. Hold out the third coin. If you were to do this again, what do you think would happen? If you could get ten good Christians to pray that this next coin wouldn’t fall, would it still fall? How about one thousand faithful Muslims? How about one billion people of any faith? I think that it would still fall. Drop the third coin. Our understanding of the world around us, and our abilities to predict what will happen are based on naturalism — the basis of science. Naturalism is how all people live their lives most of the time. OK, let’s just do a thought experiment. If you were to take two coins and glue them together, then drop them at the same time as you drop a single coin, would they fall twice as fast as the single coin? Aristotle thought so 2300 years ago, and for over 1900 years, his ideas were what was taught about this and many other subjects. Some of the other ancient Greeks had many ideas that are now a basis for modern science, engineering, math, philosophy, and democracy. Unfortunately for humankind, these ideas were largely forgotten for almost two thousand years while religion took control and Aristotle was revered as the source of supposedly scientific knowledge. Galileo and Empirical Science Around 1600, Galileo had a new idea for his culture. He decided to do something that now seems like common sense — to actually test the idea of what we now call gravity. He reasoned that two weights held together would fall at the same rate as one weight. Then he did experiments to test the idea — and, not surprisingly to us, it was true. This was the start of modern empirical science, and our collective understanding of the universe hasn’t been the same since. “Empirical” is a word that I'll be using a lot. It refers to ideas that are capable of being verified or disproved by observation or experiment. Empirical evidence is not simply one type of evidence, but rather it is the only evidence that we can rely on, because it is reproducible. Empirical evidence is the basis for physical science. Galileo also took the new invention of the telescope, refined it, and used it to look at the night sky. He was astounded. On the moon he could see mountains and valleys. It wasn’t just some strange heavenly object; it was probably made out of the same stuff as Earth. In 1609 Galileo looked at Jupiter and discovered that he could see four moons. If moons orbited Jupiter then not everything orbited the Earth, as the Catholic Church taught at the time. Astronomy made more sense if the theories of Copernicus were true, and the Earth and planets orbited the sun. After writing a book about this, Galileo was called to Rome in 1633 by the Catholic Church’s Inquisition, and told to recant his heretical ideas. This was no “simple request” by the Church. Just 33 years before, the Inquisition had executed Galileo’s friend Giordano Bruno. Have you heard of him? In 1600, the Christian authorities in Rome took him out of the dungeon he had been in for eight years, drove a nail thru his tongue, tied him to a metal post, put wood and some of his books under his feet, and burned him to death. Bruno’s crime was writing ideas that the Catholic leaders didn’t like — there might be other worlds with other intelligent beings on them, Jesus didn’t possess god-like power, and souls can’t go to heaven. For these heretical ideas, the Catholic Church punished this brilliant man with a slow, agonizing death. Galileo knew what he was up against. For the crime of heresy the Inquisition could put him in a dungeon, torture or even execute him — as it had done to Bruno. So, after a long trial, this proud 70 year-old man obediently got on his knees and recanted. But even after recanting, he was still sentenced to house arrest for the rest of his life. The Catholic Church officially condemned heliocentrism 31 years later, when Pope Alexander VII banned all books that affirmed the earth’s motion. However, even as powerful as the Church was, they could not hold back the tidal wave of scientific discovery, and the Church eventually lost its battle over our view of the universe. It only took them over three hundred years to admit it. In 1992, after 12 years of deliberations, they grudgingly noted that Galileo had been right in supporting the theories of Copernicus. But no such admission has been made for Bruno; his writings are still on the Vatican’s list of forbidden texts, and Pope John Paul II refused to even apologize for the Catholic Church's torture killing of Bruno. God of the Gaps, or Argument From Ignorance Until just a couple of hundred years ago, most people thought that a god or gods controlled everything. Why did the wind blow? Why was there lightning and thunder? Why did the sun, moon, and stars apparently go around the Earth? Why did someone get sick and die? Why did anything happen? Well, obviously, God did it. If a person doesn’t know how something works or why something happened, they can say, “God did it.” This is known as the “god of the gaps,” or the “argument from ignorance,” and it is at the heart of the conflict between science and religion. Science looks for natural causes, while religion looks for supernatural causes. Science is steadily winning, because as we understand more and more about the universe, the gap where God might function grows smaller and smaller. Every time we learn more, God has less room to operate. When we learned what caused the sun to apparently move across the sky, there was no need for the Greek god Helios and his chariot. When we understood what caused lightning, there was no need for the Greek god Zeus, the Roman god Jupiter, or the Norse god Thor. In fact, the understanding of lightning was one of the first areas of battle between science and the Christian religion. When Ben Franklin discovered that lightning was just a big electric spark, he invented the lightning rod. It was enormously successful at preventing buildings from being struck by lightning. However, this caused a bit of a problem for the church leaders; should they trust in their god to prevent lightning strikes on their churches, or should they use these new lightning rods? Up until then, lightning hit churches much more frequently than other, more “deserving” buildings — such as taverns or houses of ill repute. “Why was that?” they might have wondered. Could it be that churches had spires and were taller, or was it SATAN and his WITCHES? …… Actually, that is what they often believed, and many a supposed witch was executed for having caused the destruction of a church. When they started putting lightning rods on churches, witch killings stopped soon thereafter. However, the obvious fact is that they were putting their trust in science and lightning rods, not religion and prayer. Galileo and others started something big — empirical science. Thru science, we have come to a good understanding of the workings of the world and universe around us. The weather, lightning, thunder, the planets and stars, disease, and life itself all function based on fairly well understood principles. God doesn’t control them; the physical properties of matter and energy do. This principle is at the center of naturalism — the idea that only matter and energy exist, and they have properties that are repeatable, understandable, and quantifiable within the limits of quantum mechanics. We take this idea so for granted that we typically don’t realize that it is based on several articles of faith. This faith, however, is quite different from religious faith. This faith is based on past experience and results. It is the faith that: There is an external world that exists independently of our minds. There are understandable, quantifiable, natural laws that describe how things happen in this world. These natural laws won’t change when we’re not looking; the universe isn’t totally chaotic. So far, this faith has been well founded, as shown by the amazing accomplishments of modern science, engineering and medicine. Why God(s)? Why Not? The idea of an all-controlling, caring supernatural god is a very attractive one. It can make our mortal lives seem less frightening, more comforting. Somebody’s in control and won’t let bad things happen to us. Many gods also promise that we can go to heaven after we die, and live forever in some sort of bliss. The idea of a god is also an easy answer to questions about the world around us. Where did the universe come from? God created it. Where did life come from? God created it, too. Where did humans come from? God created us, and in his own image, to boot. Religious philosophers have tried for thousands of years to prove that there is a god or many gods. They have come up with many arguments. We will look at these arguments. Because I live in a largely Judeo-Christian society, when I refer to God with a capital ‘G’ I will be referring to the Judeo-Christian god Yahweh (a.k.a. Jehovah) and probably the Muslim god Allah. This god is typically defined as having free will, and being omniscient (all-knowing), omnipotent (all-powerful), omnibenevolent (all-good) and eternal. This god also created the universe and is separate from the physical world while still intervening in the physical world. After all, what good is a god that doesn’t do anything? Most of the arguments I use here will also apply to most of the other 2500+ gods created by humankind, and most of the thousands of religions. I certainly don’t know all of them, so I will deal with most of the major religions and their god(s). I will also closely link god(s) and religion. I do this advisedly because, for most people, one could not exist without the other. In addition, if there were a god I would think that this god would be able to appropriately guide the religions created for it. There is at least one religion, essential Buddhism as taught by Buddha, which does not have a god or any supernatural component. To keep things a bit simpler here, the arguments I make regarding religion will probably not apply to essential Buddhism or any other religion without a supernatural component. However, almost all religions have grown from our narcissistic wish to believe that the universe was created just for our benefit. We need to define “Atheism.” Atheism is simply the lack of belief in any gods. For many, Atheism is also the conclusion that no gods exist, based on the complete lack of evidence for any god. I take the strong Atheist position — depending on how we define “God” we can prove that it does not exist, and I will use the typical definition just given for the Christian god Yahweh. Why am I doing this? Is it just because I want to poke holes in people’s beliefs so that we can take away what makes them happy? No, I’m doing this because I want to know what is true, be intellectually honest, and be open to reality. And, I hope that you have similar reasons. In this article I will put forth some of the reasons why Atheism is true, so they can be examined and evaluated. I will also show why Atheism is important to the future of humankind. The arguments for the existence of God fall into several areas. I have arranged them into these categories: Mysticism and Revelation “Scientific” Claims Love and Morality Appeals to Authority Prophesy and Miracles Appeals to Faith, Logic, and Emotion What Tools Can We Use? How can we examine these claims? What tools can we use to determine truth of external reality? We have (1) empirical, verifiable evidence; and we have (2) logic. Evidence and logic are the best tools we have to determine how the universe really works. These tools have been extraordinarily successful in science, engineering and medicine, and in our daily lives. This is the standard that most of us expect in dealing with the real world; we expect doctors to use the latest medicine, and engineers to use empirical data when building bridges. Why should we use anything else for examining external reality? Each of us can choose between a magical view of the universe (one or more invisible, immaterial gods did it), or the “what you see is what you get” scientific version. I think that science, using empirical evidence, has done a far better job in explaining how the universe works. Mysticism, Revelation and Experience Some people claim that there are other ways of knowing, such as mysticism, revelation or direct experience. People claim that they can experience God, sometimes thinking that the Holy Spirit has come into them. How can we verify these claims? The “Holy Spirit” experience seems to be very similar to the well-documented experience of catharsis. People claiming knowledge thru mysticism or revelation often don’t even agree with each other. The only way that I know to verify any mystic’s abilities is for the supposed mystic to be able to accurately, repeatedly, and verifiably know things that are supposedly impossible to know — such as events of the future. I know of no one who can, or could. Of course, we have to be very careful in any testing of such claims, because a good magician can easily fool us. Even if there were somebody who could predict the future, that does not mean that there’s a god. It would only mean that this person has peculiar skills. I submit that mysticism and revelation result from internal, altered states of consciousness — with no basis in external reality. Mysticism, revelation, and any other religious experience can only count for those who experience them; for all other people, they are merely hearsay. Thus, we can’t depend on mysticism or religious revelation to give us reliable answers to any issues. “Scientific” Arguments for God(s) The biggest weakness in using God to explain anything scientifically is that the explanation is not falsifiable, and thus not even testable. There is no way to create an experiment to show that it’s wrong. For every possible set of a test and a result, we could simply say, “God did it.” Why do the Earth and universe appear to be so old? God did it. Why does nature seem so balanced? God did it. Once again, why does anything happen? If we say that God did it, there is no reason or opportunity to learn how the world really works. If we had stayed with God as the cause of all events, our modern culture would have been impossible. We would have no real science, engineering, or medicine. We would still be living in the Dark Ages. The “god of the gaps” is the basic premise behind all the “scientific” arguments for the existence of a god. The logic of “god of the gaps” goes like this (as an argument that Martin Luther could have used): Isn’t lightning amazing! I don’t understand how lightning could be, without something else (that I don’t really understand either) making lightning. This something else must be a god because I can’t come up with a better explanation. The obvious main fault of “god of the gaps” is its supposition that current lack of knowledge on a subject means that it can’t be known — that “unknown” means “unknowable.” If this applies to an individual, it’s the argument from personal incredulity — because a person doesn't understand something then he thinks that the subject must be unknown, unknowable, or false. For the fringe areas of knowledge that we don’t understand, there is no indication that we won’t learn the secrets of nature. As we have all seen, science has made excellent advances in our physical understanding of the universe, and will, no doubt, continue to do so. When faced with an unknown, let's first note that it's perfectly OK to say, “I don't know,” or, “We don't know,” — just as it would have been when people several hundred years ago asked, “What causes lightning?” or, “Why do things fall to the ground?” or countless other questions for which we now have straightforward scientific explanations. Obviously, just because we don't know how something happened does not mean that “God did it.” Relegating an explanation of something to a god is easy; a person doesn't have to think much. Finding an explanation with science often involves hard work and analysis. There are three common “god of the gaps” types of arguments for the existence of God. We have (1) first cause, (2) Intelligent Design, which grew out of creationism, and (3) origin of consciousness. First Cause, or Cosmological Argument The first cause, or cosmological argument, says that everything has a cause, and, since we supposedly can’t have an infinite series of causes stretching into the past, God must be the first cause — an uncaused cause. This argument has at least four problems. The main problem of the first cause argument is the idea that every event has a cause. As we discovered in the 20th century, the universe is actually ruled at the bottom level by quantum mechanics, in which it’s possible for events to have no cause. An obvious example of quantum mechanics in action is the radioactive decay of a uranium atom. There is no previous cause for each such event, and we can only predict it with probability. The averaging of quantum effects gives us the Newtonian experience that we have. However, Newtonian physics does not control the universe; quantum mechanics and Einsteinian relativity do. We now know that the universe has an intrinsic, bottom level of uncertainty that cannot be bypassed. Quantum mechanics also shows us that objects can appear out of nothing and then disappear back into nothing. Even in supposedly empty space, virtual particles are continuously appearing and disappearing. This is a real and measurable process, via what is known as the Casimir Effect. The beginning of the universe — of all the matter and energy in it and even of time itself — is called the Big Bang. The science of quantum mechanics is only a century old, and already we've been able to get extremely close to understanding the beginning of the universe -- with no god needed. How close can we get? Approximately a billionth of a billionth of a billionth of a billionth of a second after the Big Bang. The Big Bang theory is supported by extensive data. The four most prominent facts are: The red shift of almost all galaxies — getting greater as their distance increases. - This shows that the galaxies are flying away from each other — at greater speeds at greater distances. The cosmic microwave background radiation. - This is a remnant of the radiation from the Big Bang, and has cooled over time to the exact temperature predicted. The proportions of the lightest elements and isotopes. - This helps show that the calculations for nuclear interactions immediately following the Big Bang are correct. The changes in galaxies as we look further away (and thus back in time), with distant galaxies more primitive. - This shows some of the changes in the universe since
2. Big OzzieSalvaged from archive30 Apr 2006, 22:40
   CHEESE MUFFIN- I don't mind if anybody quotes me in any way...I just wish you had quoted all my statements on this subject! The quote that you used is found in the "ATHEIST MANIFESTO" and as ROCKER KID already pointed out, it was silly and dumb. It was meant to be! The same way this topic is. You are opening a can of worms that will only cause name calling and get people angry with each other! WARS have started over the subject and what makes you think that the mentality of the people on this website is any greater than that of those that were willing to kill and be killed in the name of RELIGION? I do not argue science as it is right before me. But religion is based on FAITH not science. All people have faith, even ATHEIST! They have faith that they will wake up in the morning! They have faith that the sun will rise tomorrow! They have faith that the chair they sat in will support them. You can't prove that these things will happen, so we have faith. I only know by a horrible, previous experience of mine, that a man who claimed to not believe, suddenly started to question his feelings as he lay dieing in my arms. To a point that he cried and asked forgiveness, saying "I'm sorry, I'm sorry, oh GOD, I don't want to die..." Then he died. I mentioned this briefly in a previous post and I only say it now because it affected me so much. Later, when the paramedics and police were there, they told me how so many non-believers suddenly question their feelings when they know they are about to die. As far as I am concerned, this is my LAST POST IN THIS FORUM on this SUBJECT! If you want to go on arguing an argument where there will NEVER be a winner...........Go Ahead and good luck, I don't need it, I have my FAITH!
3. cheese muffinSalvaged from archive30 Apr 2006, 23:28
   CHEESE MUFFIN- I don't mind if anybody quotes me in any way...I just wish you had quoted all my statements on this subject! The quote that you used is found in the "ATHEIST MANIFESTO" and as ROCKER KID already pointed out, it was silly and dumb. It was meant to be! The same way this topic is. You are opening a can of worms that will only cause name calling and get people angry with each other! WARS have started over the subject and what makes you think that the mentality of the people on this website is any greater than that of those that were willing to kill and be killed in the name of RELIGION? I do not argue science as it is right before me. But religion is based on FAITH not science. All people have faith, even ATHEIST! They have faith that they will wake up in the morning! They have faith that the sun will rise tomorrow! They have faith that the chair they sat in will support them. You can't prove that these things will happen, so we have faith. I only know by a horrible, previous experience of mine, that a man who claimed to not believe, suddenly started to question his feelings as he lay dieing in my arms. To a point that he cried and asked forgiveness, saying "I'm sorry, I'm sorry, oh GOD, I don't want to die..." Then he died. I mentioned this briefly in a previous post and I only say it now because it affected me so much. Later, when the paramedics and police were there, they told me how so many non-believers suddenly question their feelings when they know they are about to die. As far as I am concerned, this is my LAST POST IN THIS FORUM on this SUBJECT! If you want to go on arguing an argument where there will NEVER be a winner...........Go Ahead and good luck, I don't need it, I have my FAITH! Oh. i didnt kno u were being stupid on purpose. my bad. and im not looking for an argument. i just wanted to share this article. and even if i was lookin for one, there wouldnt be one. b/c its already over. theism has already lost in my opinion and they refuse to acknowledge it. I'm sry about the man who died. but what he said before he died seems like he was just believing b/c it was convienient for him. he didnt want to die. He was dying and science had already lost the battle to save him. Death to me even after hearing your story, will come as a relief to me. b/c the average persons life is almost never perfect, full of problems and tough decisions. When life is over, there is nothing. and that in my opinion is better than heaven, salvation, or any other eternal bliss. b/c eventually existing will seem like a pain in the ass to you, and you will want it to end. death is wat is was like before u were born. nothing.
4. hiSalvaged from archive1 May 2006, 00:47
   (imo) Religion = BS God = does not exist Huge 10,000 + word articles about Atheism/Religion = Who cares I don't need massive articles to justify not believing in some non existent nothing invented by people more ignorant than the people who thought the world was flat etc etc. People back then got so much wrong (just look at the history of medicine rofl) which we can look back and kind of laugh at, but yet still people believe in something somebody wrote a story about thousands of years ago. It should be people believing in imaginary friends (God) who prove he exists, not Atheists proving he doesn't (rational thought does that already). And no, I'm not going to hell because hell does not exist. Unlucky. :(
5. Snuff.Salvaged from archive1 May 2006, 00:59
   this is the sort of forum in which the "copy" and "paste" functions are more prevalent than real grammar. sorry man, it aint a diss. but the only people likely to read all of what you wrote are supremely fucked up: and i, for one, do not want their feedback. :lol:
6. OverlordSalvaged from archive1 May 2006, 01:11
   The article is interesting but only half informed and incredibly opinionated in areas of science, philospohy and far too simplistic in his approach to religion. This is broad overview and skips many critical and relevant steps. I'll go through certain sections as I have time (it was a massive post) but I wanted to start with this. Remember always this is one person's opinion and I'm always skeptical at someone who says x+y=z so "god doesn't exist". The riddles of the humans psyche and the cosmic questions of the ages will not be solved 140 words or less. He's trying incredibly hard to put religion in direct opposition to science and that creates a host of problems because neither one lies in opposition to the other in every circumstance and every event. In fact most of our primitive science began in religious practices and the leiniency of the Christian and Muslim beliefs in Free Will led to many of the cultural scientific leaps of the post classical era. Most of those "ridiculous" law the author laughs at were basic laws of cleanliness and property ownership much like our laws today. Anyway, my two cents. I'll throw in more as I go.
7. OverlordSalvaged from archive1 May 2006, 01:26
   First, Galileo and Empirical Science which I prefer to call "the emotional appeal to reason". after the history of science lesson, he's leaving out a major part of the journey of human knowledge and that is every time we started to think we understood something we wound up proving the originally theory wrong a couple hundred years later, thus the "scientific method" is created. Why this method of failures, mistakes and lies becomes pure truth later while religion is never granted any mistakes or failures seems incredibly hypocriticial to me. Then we enter the inquistion, in the third lesson and without counting I'm guessing the first 300 words. Does anyone disagree the inquistion was a bad time? Would it be better if we talked about some bad times during scientific discovery to balance the list of wrongs of religion versus science. Actually the need to create an emotional argument for science to me is absurd. This weakens the argument for me. Of course Galileo was scared. Of course his friend was killed for speaking out against the leaders of his day. The situation was more political and economically motivated than the Pope burning people for Jesus' sake. Seriously are people today really looking back to the mysticism of previous ages as the argument against any belief in God today? This is like saying a caveman believe in Crom and killed his wife. So now 4000 years later we don't believe in Crom because he's a bad god and he let the caveman kill his wife. Talk about trying to "Fill in the Gaps with God". :roll: It's a stretch and it is so typical to see an Atheist throwing tomatoes at those stupid Christians and starting right at the Inquistion and the crusades. That's as bad as everyone in the world saying Americans are stupid because look at George Bush.
8. OverlordSalvaged from archive1 May 2006, 01:37
   On, now to God of the Gaps: one of my favorite lines: "This faith, however, is quite different from religious faith. This faith is based on past experience and results. t is the faith that: There is an external world that exists independently of our minds. There are understandable, quantifiable, natural laws that describe how things happen in this world. These natural laws won’t change when we’re not looking; the universe isn’t totally chaotic. So far, this faith has been well founded, as shown by the amazing accomplishments of modern science, engineering and medicine. " Of course if you've ever talked to someone religious who didn't actually studied and had an above average IQ you would find those people "have a faith based on past experience and results." except it is with a God. A fine example of this is prayer. Prayer intended NOT to be a wish list for Santa Clause, but prayer to accept the world around you that changes NOT according to your will but to something else. This is the same prayer our author is making yet he thinks his prayers are better than those dirty God-believing prayers. In essence they are the same thing.
9. OverlordSalvaged from archive1 May 2006, 01:52
   Here comes the "Why God(s)? Why Not?" which basically states that since we cannot replicate God in a labratory then he doesn't exist. With such reasoning we can also eliminate any need to believe in: Gravity, The Sun, The Solar System, Hurricanes, The Speed of Light, Colors, etc. But you say, those are scientifically proven right? Right, through theories and observation. Why does that work for gravity but not for God? If people claim and believe that Fate or predestination or God protects them and it is observed then why is that "hocus pocus mysticism" but when a universe explodes "an observed theory". No Christian or Muslim is a follower due to an absence of logic. Quite the opposite. As we learn more about the universe we are not "disproving God" but instead learning more about ourselves. Would God be more or less powerful when all the knowledge in the world is hidden from us? The question itself is absurd. The author is trying to make religion more and more ridiculous through circular arguments. "Even if there were somebody who could predict the future, that does not mean that there’s a god. It would only mean that this person has peculiar skills." :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: So we can't believe in anything not scientifically proven in a lab with verfied results but we have a out clause here for the occasionally psychic... LOL "Thus, we can’t depend on mysticism or religious revelation to give us reliable answers to ANY issues." My emphasis added. So no reliable answers at all. Everything you've ever learned about forgivness, peace, unconditional love, charity, it's all bogus because religion can't give us ANY answer to anything and that fool Jesus who we don't even know if he really exists anyway told us about it. Now that is a pretty opinionated, emotional, illogical arguement for such a hardcore scientific man. Here's an "observation" I've had. People HATE religions. Why? Because it makes them feel bad. Why? Because they're full of opinions and people who think they're better or gooder or more connected than we are. I hate those people too. But I want you to realize that Atheism IS a RELIGION. It's just one more group of people who tell you what to think and point fingers at the rest. It's one more group who's going to mock you for not agreeing with them. In the attempt to provide a cure they become another phase of the disease. Dig deep, find your own truth people.
10. OverlordSalvaged from archive1 May 2006, 01:58
    Actually based on my last post, I'll stop here. I've had my say and I said all I wanted to. The rest of the article goes off on it's own tangent from here.
11. cheese muffinSalvaged from archive1 May 2006, 02:09
    this is the sort of forum in which the "copy" and "paste" functions are more prevalent than real grammar. sorry man, it aint a diss. but the only people likely to read all of what you wrote are supremely fucked up: and i, for one, do not want their feedback. :lol: lololol, none taken. i dont except ppl to read the whole thing. just skim through it. i tried taking the more important parts out and summarizing but it didnt make much sense. so yea... meh, whatever floats ur boat.
12. cheese muffinSalvaged from archive1 May 2006, 02:13
    The article is interesting but only half informed and incredibly opinionated in areas of science, philospohy and far too simplistic in his approach to religion. This is broad overview and skips many critical and relevant steps. I'll go through certain sections as I have time (it was a massive post) but I wanted to start with this. Remember always this is one person's opinion and I'm always skeptical at someone who says x+y=z so "god doesn't exist". The riddles of the humans psyche and the cosmic questions of the ages will not be solved 140 words or less. He's trying incredibly hard to put religion in direct opposition to science and that creates a host of problems because neither one lies in opposition to the other in every circumstance and every event. In fact most of our primitive science began in religious practices and the leiniency of the Christian and Muslim beliefs in Free Will led to many of the cultural scientific leaps of the post classical era. Most of those "ridiculous" law the author laughs at were basic laws of cleanliness and property ownership much like our laws today. Anyway, my two cents. I'll throw in more as I go. i partially agree with u. i cant explain wat i think... cuz... i honestly dont know. i cant believe u actually read it. good for u. ill think it over and repost. - btw, i was kinda suprised that i didnt get a bunch of hate mail. these are kinda touchy subjects, eh? just look at the other threads on this topic. lol
13. godschildSalvaged from archive2 May 2006, 01:02
    It is funny how many athiest say that science is fact when in reality it is just another example of faith. Science is made up by man just like religion. We accept that 1+1=2 so then any science must be true. Well man made up 1 and we made up the + and the =, so the answer is just as made up. I don't think it is important what any one believes. what is important is how they act. People will always try to justify there own actions by whatever belief makes them see themselves in a positive light. Science has been wrong at least as many times as god has. Religion is made by man, Science is made by man. Neither has proven or disproven the existence of God.
14. cheese muffinSalvaged from archive2 May 2006, 01:43
    It is funny how many athiest say that science is fact when in reality it is just another example of faith. Science is made up by man just like religion. We accept that 1+1=2 so then any science must be true. Well man made up 1 and we made up the + and the =, so the answer is just as made up. I don't think it is important what any one believes. what is important is how they act. People will always try to justify there own actions by whatever belief makes them see themselves in a positive light. Science has been wrong at least as many times as god has. Religion is made by man, Science is made by man. Neither has proven or disproven the existence of God. ugh, dont use that word. faith. atheism is not faith nor does it rely on faith in any way. atheism is actually backed by science and logic. things that u can actually prove or disprove. science is was not made up on some whim, it was "created" in away that we could explain things with reason, logic, and experimentation. in my point of view, man makes up everything in his/her mind. religion, science, math, symbols, and yes God. and no duh, we accept 1+1=2. wat else would it be? 3?. :roll: i do agree with u on the last part though. just that we should act like good samaritans and have good morality b/c WE think its the right thing to do. not b/c god said so, or the bible said so, or the ten commandments say so.
15. godschildSalvaged from archive2 May 2006, 05:10
    wrong cheese muffin atheism is faith. faith that no god exist. atheism is a belief that god does not exist. it is not a belief in science. science has not proven or disproven the existence of God. it has however dispelled many religious beliefs. never said science was a whim. i rely heavily on science. only stated and you restated that it is made up by man. all scientific theories throughout time have been reevaluated as new evidence comes to light. and yes 1+1 can equall three but it is more complex than simple math. (this argument could go on forever) but I think you missed my point(not that it was really that clear) as an ex-athiest I do know that it is often said that since science can disprove religion then it is not possible for a god to exist. Discounting the follies of man still does not prove anything about god. On the last part though- if there is no god then there is no right or wrong, just consequences based on laws made by man. therefore if you don't get caught then there is no consequenses. so why have any morality at all. If you are smarter than "jonny law", take advantage of the situation. Rape, Murder, Theft- anything goes just don't get caught. I do not care about your beliefs or disbeliefs in a god, just do not try to sell me the bullshit that since man can figure out some of the workings of our universe that it is not possible for a god to exist.
16. OverlordSalvaged from archive2 May 2006, 12:57
    Godschild and I are saying the same thing. Basically that just as the theory of gravity is based on observation, theory then faith the current understanding is sound so it is with anything in the spiritual realm. All science and religion is based on faith. But also as we learn more so do our beliefs change or adapt. For example the lightning rod in the article on a church steeple. It's arrogant and foolish to say that all of the belief in God shared by people 250 years ago was wrong because they would pray that their church would not be struck by lightning. What else could they do I currently believe in God, or higher intelligence or whatever you want to call it. I also am an ardent believer in evolution and I do believe science will eventually discover an underlying energy, or a spirit realm beyond our universe of matter and time. However, this is my personal theory and though I have personal experience, observation and belief... I don't expect anyone else to. As it was said in another thread, the world is more complex than any of us understand and trying to understand one part doesn't disprove the others.
17. cheese muffinSalvaged from archive2 May 2006, 21:27
    wrong cheese muffin atheism is faith. faith that no god exist. atheism is a belief that god does not exist. it is not a belief in science. science has not proven or disproven the existence of God. it has however dispelled many religious beliefs. never said science was a whim. i rely heavily on science. only stated and you restated that it is made up by man. all scientific theories throughout time have been reevaluated as new evidence comes to light. and yes 1+1 can equall three but it is more complex than simple math. (this argument could go on forever) but I think you missed my point(not that it was really that clear) as an ex-athiest I do know that it is often said that since science can disprove religion then it is not possible for a god to exist. Discounting the follies of man still does not prove anything about god. On the last part though- if there is no god then there is no right or wrong, just consequences based on laws made by man. therefore if you don't get caught then there is no consequenses. so why have any morality at all. If you are smarter than "jonny law", take advantage of the situation. Rape, Murder, Theft- anything goes just don't get caught. I do not care about your beliefs or disbeliefs in a god, just do not try to sell me the bullshit that since man can figure out some of the workings of our universe that it is not possible for a god to exist. i have alot more to say on this, but i can obviously see im not about to convince u.... so i more or less quit trying to win the argument. even though i still think im right.... :roll:
18. cheese muffinSalvaged from archive2 May 2006, 21:46
    Godschild and I are saying the same thing. Basically that just as the theory of gravity is based on observation, theory then faith the current understanding is sound so it is with anything in the spiritual realm. All science and religion is based on faith. But also as we learn more so do our beliefs change or adapt. For example the lightning rod in the article on a church steeple. It's arrogant and foolish to say that all of the belief in God shared by people 250 years ago was wrong because they would pray that their church would not be struck by lightning. What else could they do I currently believe in God, or higher intelligence or whatever you want to call it. I also am an ardent believer in evolution and I do believe science will eventually discover an underlying energy, or a spirit realm beyond our universe of matter and time. However, this is my personal theory and though I have personal experience, observation and belief... I don't expect anyone else to. As it was said in another thread, the world is more complex than any of us understand and trying to understand one part doesn't disprove the others. again, i hate to disagree but this time i think i can put my thoughts into words. gravity is not a theory i hope you realize. it is a scientific law which started on the basis of a persons observation. we can see that gravity is no longer present in space, due to the fact that we are no longer near a large mass. therefore, i can conclude that if i drop a coin, it will always fall down to the ground, even if i have no faith at all. perhaps someone who reads this could define faith for us so that we know that we are on the same page? the fact that 250 yrs ago people believed that witched caused lightning to strike their churches is merely another piece of evidence for "argument over ignorance". the people pondered why and stipulated that witches were the cause when they were really just a natural part of nature. and i hope u realize that darwinism IS scientifically proven and observed. perhaps though, one of the most common accusations i get is the fact that i dont like to no be in control of my life. and u like to give control of ur life to a supposed being that u cannot prove even exists? frankly, the argument that i get about faith = god is based on faith. if i prove i exist then people will not need faith and without that i am nothing = is completely well... forgive me if i offend u.... bullshit. too u people that thought that santa claus existed. remember when u were 5 or 6 and u would stay up and try to see santa claus on xman eve. well he never showed up did he? what about the tooth fairy? we all thought that they existed until we were grabbed by the shoulders and told that they do no exist with concrete evidence in front of this. it is only a matter of time on this debate. our sentient race's science is growing faster that ever and in the meantime... we just have to think for ourselves... until science can prove that the atheists were right all along.
19. cheese muffinSalvaged from archive2 May 2006, 21:48
    (imo) Religion = BS God = does not exist Huge 10,000 + word articles about Atheism/Religion = Who cares I don't need massive articles to justify not believing in some non existent nothing invented by people more ignorant than the people who thought the world was flat etc etc. People back then got so much wrong (just look at the history of medicine rofl) which we can look back and kind of laugh at, but yet still people believe in something somebody wrote a story about thousands of years ago. It should be people believing in imaginary friends (God) who prove he exists, not Atheists proving he doesn't (rational thought does that already). And no, I'm not going to hell because hell does not exist. Unlucky. :( I AGREE
20. OverlordSalvaged from archive2 May 2006, 23:08
    gravity is not a theory i hope you realize. it is a scientific law which started on the basis of a persons observation. we can see that gravity is no longer present in space, due to the fact that we are no longer near a large mass. therefore, i can conclude that if i drop a coin, it will always fall down to the ground, even if i have no faith at all. A religious person would say the exact same thing concerning Karma. You don't believe in it but I would disagree the forces of Karma work for or against you no matter if you believe in them or not. Plus please explain to me how gravity is produced? Is it based on mass? If so why do I not become drawn into large objects around me? Or better yet why do we orbit the sun and not be drawn into it? you would say speed creates orbit, yet we've seen certain objects with higher mass, not creatve gravity fields. The current viewpoint is the gravitron is somehow part of the atom yet it has never been observed, or isolated or counted in any way. Faith is like this, we have no quantifiable amount of spirit. Yet we see the forces of it interacting in us. We "feel" certain presences, we have deja vu, we sense extrasensory elements, we operate on "gut" instincts, we have innate abilities that transcend genetics like talent, we have miracles, we have healing were none should be available. All of these things are evidence of the extra-sensory (spiritual) world. Yet you laugh when I draw gods/archons/spirits as the source of this because they have no measure and I argue that you cannot valuate the source of gravity either. See the argument now? perhaps someone who reads this could define faith for us so that we know that we are on the same page? Faith is belief in the unseen. the fact that 250 yrs ago people believed that witched caused lightning to strike their churches is merely another piece of evidence for "argument over ignorance". the people pondered why and stipulated that witches were the cause when they were really just a natural part of nature. Your understanding of "nature" is only applicable in the present. In the future your understanding of "spirituality" or lack of it will be ignorant as well. Will your ideas then have no meaning? and i hope u realize that darwinism IS scientifically proven and observed. :lol: you MUST still be in school. no one has observed the evolution of an organism into a new life form. no one has proven the evolution of creatures in a lab. you're way off. perhaps though, one of the most common accusations i get is the fact that i dont like to no be in control of my life. and u like to give control of ur life to a supposed being that u cannot prove even exists? frankly, the argument that i get about faith = god is based on faith. if i prove i exist then people will not need faith and without that i am nothing = is completely well... forgive me if i offend u.... bullshit. no one has control over their own life. That is a lie in our culture. A comet could kill us all in the next twenty minutes. A solar flare could scorch this planet bare in an instant. I can go to your house and kill you from behind while you type. You're very "freedoms" are provided only by the soldiers and leaders that chose to defend those supposed "rights". One of my major issues with the youth of today is their sense of "entitlement". You have no entitlement to anything nor do I or does anyone else. too u people that thought that santa claus existed. remember when u were 5 or 6 and u would stay up and try to see santa claus on xman eve. well he never showed up did he? what about the tooth fairy? we all thought that they existed until we were grabbed by the shoulders and told that they do no exist with concrete evidence in front of this. it is only a matter of time on this debate. our sentient race's science is growing faster that ever and in the meantime... we just have to think for ourselves... until science can prove that the atheists were right all along. LOL is your argument against God that you feel cheated by Santa Clause as a child which God must be the same thing? Here's an opposite arguement, I waited to have sex with my wife until after we were married, did that make our current sex life better or worse? Neither option is a real choice because there is no relative. God is no different. I don't care if your dad beat your ass every day as a child the human condition is take experience and predict all things to replicate themselves in future situations but realisitically because your parents treat you bad doesn't mean God, or your teachers, or your friends, or your wife will. Take each experience as it's own.
21. cheese muffinSalvaged from archive3 May 2006, 00:05
    i have heard of karma before, yet i do not know what it is. what is it? Plus please explain to me how gravity is produced? Is it based on mass? If so why do I not become drawn into large objects around me? Or better yet why do we orbit the sun and not be drawn into it? you would say speed creates orbit, yet we've seen certain objects with higher mass, not creatve gravity fields. The current viewpoint is the gravitron is somehow part of the atom yet it has never been observed, or isolated or counted in any way. ah yes gravity. We do not yet know how gravity is produced. One group suggests that quantum gravity is produced from gravitons not yet observed. But that is besided the point. The reason that we are not all attracted to large objects is the fact the earth's gravity is thousands of millions more powerful than own. Imagine a giant magnet. if u placed 2 magnetic paperclips on it at different places, would they still stick? no. but that is not the point, the fact remains that we all acknowledge the existence of gravity b/c we can see it, interact with it, and observe it. Faith is like this, we have no quantifiable amount of spirit. Yet we see the forces of it interacting in us. We "feel" certain presences, we have deja vu, we sense extrasensory elements, we operate on "gut" instincts, we have innate abilities that transcend genetics like talent, we have miracles, we have healing were none should be available. All of these things are evidence of the extra-sensory (spiritual) world. Yet you laugh when I draw gods/archons/spirits as the source of this because they have no measure and I argue that you cannot valuate the source of gravity either. See the argument now? I can kinda, sorta see what u mean. but u cannot confuse feelings such as guts, hunches, and the feeling that someone is watching you with simple feelings of paranoia. and please give me the last miracle that you got to observe? what was it? the self flushing toilet?. you MUST still be in school. no one has observed the evolution of an organism into a new life form. no one has proven the evolution of creatures in a lab. you're way off. ah but that is where wrong. :D perhaps ten years ago there wasnt proof, but now there is. here, take this example. A man with the HIV virus has AIDS now. he is taking multiple pills. over 10 of them. why? because the life of the AIDS virus is extremely short, allowing multiple lines of generations to reproduce in hours. First he takes one pill, but then the virus slowly evolves and begins to resist it. The same happens with the second kind of pill. and so on and so on. if this is not darwinism, then please explain to me what caused this. So they began a new treatment. Lay off the treatment, so that the normal AIDS form which is stronger than the resistant form is dominant again through natural selection. then attack it again with multiple pills. no one has control over their own life. That is a lie in our culture. A comet could kill us all in the next twenty minutes. A solar flare could scorch this planet bare in an instant. I can go to your house and kill you from behind while you type. You're very "freedoms" are provided only by the soldiers and leaders that chose to defend those supposed "rights". no one has control over their own life. That is a lie in our culture. A comet could kill us all in the next twenty minutes. A solar flare could scorch this planet bare in an instant. I can go to your house and kill you from behind while you type. You're very "freedoms" are provided only by the soldiers and leaders that chose to defend those supposed "rights". One of my major issues with the youth of today is their sense of "entitlement". You have no entitlement to anything nor do I or does anyone else. No, you misunderstood what i meant. What I meant by control is the fact that I make my own decisions. I would rather have me decide what i do, what decisions i make, and how my choices end up, than rather have some almighty invisible supreme being decide for me. I did think that the killing me from behind while i type was funny though. lol :P And what do u mean by entitlement? i dont even know how that got incorporated into your argument. LOL is your argument against God that you feel cheated by Santa Clause as a child which God must be the same thing? Here's an opposite arguement, I waited to have sex with my wife until after we were married, did that make our current sex life better or worse? Neither option is a real choice because there is no relative. God is no different. I don't care if your dad beat your ass every day as a child the human condition is take experience and predict all things to replicate themselves in future situations but realisitically because your parents treat you bad doesn't mean God, or your teachers, or your friends, or your wife will. Take each experience as it's own. lol okay first of all, i do feel cheated from santa claus :? but isnt my argument against god. what i meant was we all thought he existed until someone proved us wrong. same with god. second of all, my parents dont beat my ass everyday. did u just assume that? lol. i'm not sure where that came from either.
22. Big OzzieSalvaged from archive3 May 2006, 00:53
    MAN, I TOLD YOU SO! OPEN A CAN-O-WORMS DIDN'T YOU?! This is a no win argument, always has been and always will be. AS I SAID in a previous post, RELIGION is based on FAITH. Atheists also have FAITH. Faith that a chair will support them when they sit in it, FAITH that the sun will rise in the morning. If you had no FAITH that you would be here tomorrow, or next year, or 20 years from now, WHY PLAN FOR IT? Just because you cannot see GOD, does not mean that he does not exist! You can not see AIR can you? Does not air exist? You know it is there by the breeze on your face. Why can't there be God AND evolution? Evolution exists, and I believe can be seen in the laboratory! Evolution does NOT have to happen over thousands or even MILLIONS of years. It can happen in ONE GENERATION! This is proven with germs, microbes, bacteria and the virus (which is NOT a living organism) as they change constantly. Changing to conform to their environment, that is why Antibiotics work one time and not the next. Some of these organisms mutate and adapt so fast that they become immune to the antibiotics applied within one generation! And that my friends, IS evolution! But why can't we look at it this way.... Perhaps a BEING, whether Divine or not, decided to create something out of the dust of the cosmos. This being or entity or whatever it may have been, could have thrown a bunch of items together into a big mix, only to kick back and see what happens. We all know right from wrong and a lot of this is instinctive. WHY? I feel man has an innate sense that was given us by this supreme being. Man might have evolved, but I personally do not feel that it was the way science portrays it. There are too many physical differences between men on Earth to say that they ALL evolved from one primitive ancestor (one man or ape). JUST SUPPOSE...since God and Heaven is always "Up There", what if the divine being that created man was from someplace else? Perhaps a space traveler? CRAZY? Than why is there so many references to space travel, UFO's, space men, alien beings, cave drawings, etc. What happened to the lost knowledge of the ancient EGYPTIANS? HOW did they build the PYRIMIDS? Why are the NAZCA LINES there? What purpose do they serve when you can hardly see them from the ground and must gain altitude to really appreciate what they are. Who or what were they created for? As direction symbols to space travelers? There are even phrases in the Bible that could be interpreted as references to space travel and space beings. All religion is based on faith and fear. Fear of the unknown and faith that your answer to the unknown is the right one. I, myself have my own faith in my GOD. AND knowing my GOD had a hand in creating me, he also had a hand in creating my brain. Thus, he created my ability to question. Therefore, being an understanding GOD, I must presume that he forgives when we ask HOW and WHY?
23. cheese muffinSalvaged from archive3 May 2006, 00:54
    MAN, I TOLD YOU SO! OPEN A CAN-O-WORMS DIDN'T YOU?! This is a no win argument, always has been and always will be. AS I SAID in a previous post, RELIGION is based on FAITH. Atheists also have FAITH. Faith that a chair will support them when they sit in it, FAITH that the sun will rise in the morning. If you had no FAITH that you would be here tomorrow, or next year, or 20 years from now, WHY PLAN FOR IT? Just because you cannot see GOD, does not mean that he does not exist! You can not see AIR can you? Does not air exist? You know it is there by the breeze on your face. Why can't there be God AND evolution? Evolution exists, and I believe can be seen in the laboratory! Evolution does NOT have to happen over thousands or even MILLIONS of years. It can happen in ONE GENERATION! This is proven with germs, microbes, bacteria and the virus (which is NOT a living organism) as they change constantly. Changing to conform to their environment, that is why Antibiotics work one time and not the next. Some of these organisms mutate and adapt so fast that they become immune to the antibiotics applied within one generation! And that my friends, IS evolution! But why can't we look at it this way.... Perhaps a BEING, whether Divine or not, decided to create something out of the dust of the cosmos. This being or entity or whatever it may have been, could have thrown a bunch of items together into a big mix, only to kick back and see what happens. We all know right from wrong and a lot of this is instinctive. WHY? I feel man has an innate sense that was given us by this supreme being. Man might have evolved, but I personally do not feel that it was the way science portrays it. There are too many physical differences between men on Earth to say that they ALL evolved from one primitive ancestor (one man or ape). JUST SUPPOSE...since God and Heaven is always "Up There", what if the divine being that created man was from someplace else? Perhaps a space traveler? CRAZY? Than why is there so many references to space travel, UFO's, space men, alien beings, cave drawings, etc. What happened to the lost knowledge of the ancient EGYPTIANS? HOW did they build the PYRIMIDS? Why are the NAZCA LINES there? What purpose do they serve when you can hardly see them from the ground and must gain altitude to really appreciate what they are. Who or what were they created for? As direction symbols to space travelers? There are even phrases in the Bible that could be interpreted as references to space travel and space beings. All religion is based on faith and fear. Fear of the unknown and faith that your answer to the unknown is the right one. I, myself have my own faith in my GOD. AND knowing my GOD had a hand in creating me, he also had a hand in creating my brain. Thus, he created my ability to question. Therefore, being an understanding GOD, I must presume that he forgives when we ask HOW and WHY? i didnt even bother reading that ^^. i thought u said u werent going to post here anymore. lol go away. :o
24. OverlordSalvaged from archive4 May 2006, 00:04
    i have heard of karma before, yet i do not know what it is. what is it? Almost every culture has a variation of the golden rule or do onto others as you would have them do unto you, basically meaning what you do will come back to you. It's not statistically possible but relates more towards fate and predictable outcomes of chance (like chaos theory) ah yes gravity. We do not yet know how gravity is produced. One group suggests that quantum gravity is produced from gravitons not yet observed. But that is besided the point. The reason that we are not all attracted to large objects is the fact the earth's gravity is thousands of millions more powerful than own. Imagine a giant magnet. if u placed 2 magnetic paperclips on it at different places, would they still stick? no. but that is not the point, the fact remains that we all acknowledge the existence of gravity b/c we can see it, interact with it, and observe it. I would argue with you that I observe, interact and see the existence of God. Not in a whisp-like form but through the interactions in my life, the changing events, fate, guidance, all those "gut" insticts you want to pretend don't exist. I can kinda, sorta see what u mean. but u cannot confuse feelings such as guts, hunches, and the feeling that someone is watching you with simple feelings of paranoia. and please give me the last miracle that you got to observe? what was it? the self flushing toilet?. A miracle for me might be talking to my dad after 20 years or finding a job. Miracles aren't always walking on water. Yet sometimes they are. I have had extra-ordinary experiences almost daily. You can call them chance, but they're too relative and consistent for that. Anyway I'm not listing my personal experiences on this forum. A man with the HIV virus has AIDS now. he is taking multiple pills. over 10 of them. why? because the life of the AIDS virus is extremely short, allowing multiple lines of generations to reproduce in hours. First he takes one pill, but then the virus slowly evolves and begins to resist it. The same happens with the second kind of pill. and so on and so on. if this is not darwinism, then please explain to me what caused this. So they began a new treatment. Lay off the treatment, so that the normal AIDS form which is stronger than the resistant form is dominant again through natural selection. then attack it again with multiple pills. Bacteriums and micro-organisms change, and adapt in mere seconds your cells do that. I'm talking about complex organisms like a fish learning to walk or a bird learning to fly. Real evolution. No, you misunderstood what i meant. What I meant by control is the fact that I make my own decisions. I would rather have me decide what i do, what decisions i make, and how my choices end up, than rather have some almighty invisible supreme being decide for me. Your choices are more based upon need, enviroment, culture and chemicals in your brain. Control of your choices is imaginary. Very rarely do you have a choice to make that wasn't already made for you. I'm not talking about jumping off a bridge, I'm talking about choosing your career, your parents, your friends, your enviroment, your leaders. What do you really have the power to choose? Hardly nothing. Why is it so annoying to think a grand scheme behind life? Pride in self. Lose yourself and you find new strength. Ask any soldier how that system plays itself out. And what do u mean by entitlement? i dont even know how that got incorporated into your argument. Pride/entitlement/power all seem to be root causes for the choices in this discussion. second of all, my parents dont beat my ass everyday. did u just assume that? lol. i'm not sure where that came from either. working example. Children abused generally feel God is abusive, it goes back to my earlier conversation about projecting past experiences on future relationships. Ie your parents were perfectionistic you think the same of your teachers, your spouse, your God. Human condition. My main point being that science and religion are not that dissimilar in that you my creatively stretch your mind outside your own selfish world (ID/ego) and see something more which is usually based on faith and exploration.
25. cheese muffinSalvaged from archive4 May 2006, 02:19
    Almost every culture has a variation of the golden rule or do onto others as you would have them do unto you, basically meaning what you do will come back to you. It's not statistically possible but relates more towards fate and predictable outcomes of chance (like chaos theory) Yes, but how are we to stipulate or even imagine the fact that the reasons things happen to us are due to our own actions? I very much doubt the reason that I recieved the MVP award on my soccer team was due to the fact that I voluntarily help the lady next door walk her dog free of charge. I would argue with you that I observe, interact and see the existence of God. Not in a whisp-like form but through the interactions in my life, the changing events, fate, guidance, all those "gut" insticts you want to pretend don't exist. If you were to argue to me that you observe, interact, and see the existence of God, then I would ask you where? Where have you ever observed the presence of God? WHere have you ever interacted with Him? And where have you seen him? A miracle for me might be talking to my dad after 20 years or finding a job. Miracles aren't always walking on water. Yet sometimes they are. I have had extra-ordinary experiences almost daily. You can call them chance, but they're too relative and consistent for that. Anyway I'm not listing my personal experiences on this forum. That was it. That was one of my biggest beefs with your viewpoint. Why would you give credit to God? Has it ever occurred to you that it was your efforts that finally got your dad to talk to you? Or perhaps it was due to YOUR determination to find a job that you actually did find one? Bacteriums and micro-organisms change, and adapt in mere seconds your cells do that. I'm talking about complex organisms like a fish learning to walk or a bird learning to fly. Real evolution. Aha, but that was real evolution. There is no "fake evolution" or "real evolution". Evolution is based on Natural Selection. Survival of the fittest. Organisms with more favorable traits live to reproduce and pass on those traits than others. The AIDS virus in the example i showed you was a perfect example of that. One generation of AIDS produced a trait that was resistant to the drugs, and lived to reproduce and pass on this trait. Just like how if a giraffe with a longer neck than others would reach all the food on trees while the others died out. THAT is evolution and darwinism. And I hate to break it to you, but organisms such as bacterium and protists are much, much, much more complex than us my friend. These single celled organisms are more complex simply because they are only 1. While we multi-cellular organisms have a vareity of cells to carry out different functions of our bodies. And I very much doubt any kind of gene mutation or codon shift mutation would enable a fish to survive with two legs. Your choices are more based upon need, enviroment, culture and chemicals in your brain. Control of your choices is imaginary. Very rarely do you have a choice to make that wasn't already made for you. I'm not talking about jumping off a bridge, I'm talking about choosing your career, your parents, your friends, your enviroment, your leaders. What do you really have the power to choose? Hardly nothing. Why is it so annoying to think a grand scheme behind life? Pride in self. Lose yourself and you find new strength. Ask any soldier how that system plays itself out. Sorry but i refuse to believe that my choice to tryout for a sports team, or my choice to ask out a girl was already made by some other being. I choose my career. No body does that for me. Not even the government can. Now my parents, thats a different story. But as for my friends, my enviroment, my leaders. I do get to make a choice in some form as to how they turn out. Do you really want to think that your life is already planned out for you and that no matter what you do, it gonna turn out the same at the end? in"]working example. Children abused generally feel God is abusive, it goes back to my earlier conversation about projecting past experiences on future relationships. Ie your parents were perfectionistic you think the same of your teachers, your spouse, your God. Human condition. My main point being that science and religion are not that dissimilar in that you my creatively stretch your mind outside your own selfish world (ID/ego) and see something more which is usually based on faith and exploration. Wink Wink Nooooo, when has a child ever hate God because their parents hated them. True, an abused child is more likely to become a serial killer that a non-abused one. I'm sorry, but that last part of the quote above made absolutely no sense to me.... Confused :wink:
26. godschildSalvaged from archive4 May 2006, 03:57
    Cheese muffin I am not concerned on which one of us is right. We each have our own views based on our own experiences. If you would rather me not respond to you any more just PM me and say so. I do not get offended. Darwinism is proven for evolution within a species. And yes we can see evolution take place through genetic mutations in a virus or other microbes. But there is no evidence yet to support the theory that new species are created through the process of evolution. Darwins finches for example , had developed different physical featues based on adaptations to there surroundings. However the finches on the inside of the island were still capable of mating with the ones on the outside of the island. And that is where the theory of evolution breaks down in its current form and why so many scientist of all fields are looking for the missing link between humans and our most likely evolutionary primates. Your view on single celled organisms is kind of neat but this process takes place billions(?) of times a day in the human body. Our cells regenerate, do their job, and then die. I feel this is more complex than a single celled organism since the same identical process in that cell happens once and then is not recreated except through a new seperate being. Our bodies do this over and over again through the control of our DNA. Religion drove me away from god. Science started me looking again. As for a personal experience- I have been in God's presence. I still do not have any answers. It gave me no enlightenment about the truths of mankind. I still question everthing about our existance and or meaning. But I do not question the existence of god. I know you will laugh, I know people think I am crazy. I do not care. One of the things that make me a bad person is that I do not care if you ever find the answers you are looking for. Miracles? i don't look for them, i don't ask for them, and i don't pray. Gods plan is meaningless to me. My concern is to take care of my family everyday until I am dead.
27. OverlordSalvaged from archive4 May 2006, 20:52
    Yes, but how are we to stipulate or even imagine the fact that the reasons things happen to us are due to our own actions? I very much doubt the reason that I received the MVP award on my soccer team was due to the fact that I voluntarily help the lady next door walk her dog free of charge. Experience is the difference. I'm 30 years old. I have observed that when I do things with pure intentions and non-selfish reasons my success rate increases 100-fold but when I'm only acting out of greed, anger or selfishness then my actions degenerate, fail more often than not, and end up ruining other things in my life. That is, for me the constant approval/rejection of our friend Karma and also is a driving force for Fate driving our lives because when it's not in my path, I can't succeed no matter how hard I try. If you were to argue to me that you observe, interact, and see the existence of God, then I would ask you where? Where have you ever observed the presence of God? WHere have you ever interacted with Him? And where have you seen him? Deep meditation, prayer and certain situations in life. When you've experienced external forces it's stronger than any drug or experience you've ever had. It changes you inside out. Until you've had an experience like this you have no idea what I'm talking about. The old addage is true, "Seek and your will find". That was it. That was one of my biggest beefs with your viewpoint. Why would you give credit to God? Has it ever occurred to you that it was your efforts that finally got your dad to talk to you? Or perhaps it was due to YOUR determination to find a job that you actually did find one? of course I thought it was me when I was younger. 30 years of life, failures and disappointment mixed with success and triumphs change your viewpoint of this. This is a philisophical point of view though and a belief in God doesn't affect this. And I hate to break it to you, but organisms such as bacterium and protists are much, much, much more complex than us my friend. These single celled organisms are more complex simply because they are only 1. While we multi-cellular organisms have a vareity of cells to carry out different functions of our bodies. And I very much doubt any kind of gene mutation or codon shift mutation would enable a fish to survive with two legs. Bacteriums reproduce 1000 per day, variations are endless and the cellular enviroment is complete different than ours. How can a fish, bird or reptile accidently grow wings and use them with such precision to develop a complex system of hunting and gathering. For example, the hummingbird, how does evolution accidently create a bird that flies using helicopter-type physics instead of forward momentum like a bird and somehow at the exact same time a species of flower has just the right stem and flora to ONLY support the hummingbird as their sole means of spreading pollen. Two totally different species developing to totally unique traits and both are entirely dependent on each other to survive? That a 10 quadrillion chance and happens a million times in a row? Bullshit. Evolution is great for microbiology but I'm not seeing the fish=>bird=>ape=>man connection. Earth's not that old. Sorry but i refuse to believe that my choice to tryout for a sports team, or my choice to ask out a girl was already made by some other being. I choose my career. No body does that for me. Not even the government can. Now my parents, thats a different story. But as for my friends, my enviroment, my leaders. I do get to make a choice in some form as to how they turn out. Do you really want to think that your life is already planned out for you and that no matter what you do, it gonna turn out the same at the end? again philosophy and not part of the existence of God question. Nooooo, when has a child ever hate God because their parents hated them. True, an abused child is more likely to become a serial killer that a non-abused one. I hated my parents and hated God because I attributed the same relationship my parents gave me to everyone else in my life along with God. This was a mistake and I later had to unlearn this. But this basic human psychology and nothing I've said is radical or earth shattering to make you argue.
28. cheese muffinSalvaged from archive8 May 2006, 20:29
    Bacteriums reproduce 1000 per day, variations are endless and the cellular enviroment is complete different than ours. How can a fish, bird or reptile accidently grow wings and use them with such precision to develop a complex system of hunting and gathering. For example, the hummingbird, how does evolution accidently create a bird that flies using helicopter-type physics instead of forward momentum like a bird and somehow at the exact same time a species of flower has just the right stem and flora to ONLY support the hummingbird as their sole means of spreading pollen. Two totally different species developing to totally unique traits and both are entirely dependent on each other to survive? That a 10 quadrillion chance and happens a million times in a row? Bullshit. Evolution is great for microbiology but I'm not seeing the fish=>bird=>ape=>man connection. Earth's not that old. There was alot of things I wanted to say about your last post, but I feel I must reply to this part before i forget to. The reason such a complex ecosystem develops is because the organisms that cannot function and survive in it dies out. So now, you have a bunch of organisms working together. The fact that a hummingbird and the lotus plant were able to coexist and co-depend on each other is the reason that they were the fittest in "survival of the fittest". So that those 2 organisms flourished while weaker ones that could not coexist died out.. Did you make up that statistic about 10 quadrillion chance and the million year thing? :wink: Its really hard to explain evolution to you I see. Maybe you should do a little more research on the topic and come to a conclusion on your own. Earth is 15 billions years old. They answer has to be there somwhere.
29. tgd_02Salvaged from archive8 May 2006, 20:39
    i poked your avatar
30. Big OzzieSalvaged from archive8 May 2006, 21:08
    i poked your avatar Me Too! Twice...... with the stinky finger!
31. cheese muffinSalvaged from archive8 May 2006, 21:34
    i poked your avatar :D :D :D :D :D
32. MonstermashSalvaged from archive29 Jul 2006, 02:33
    Do be honest I'm not sure what to believe. I don't think that any religion holds the answer, but I also don't believe that science does either. Science is only as good as what scientists know now. That will change. There are lots of theories flying about right now with string theory and the holographic universe. I think man is seeing the pieces, but he's not seeing the whole. If there are still lots of things that man does not know and he has'nt got all the facts then he has'nt disproved got exists. There are lots of phenomena out there such as ghosts, ufos, Near death experiences. You can try to put them down as just hallucinations (scientists have a habit of ignoring things if they can't explain them) but that's not good enough. I remain open minded, I can't say I'm an atheist or a believer just someone who's interested in what the answer is.
33. Snuff.Salvaged from archive29 Jul 2006, 02:35
    I can't say I'm an atheist or a believer just someone who's interested in what the answer is. Fucking A! Quote of the century, my man. Quote of the century.
34. crazyjoeSalvaged from archive29 Jul 2006, 02:57
    I skimmed through the article, very interesting. I agree with it. I think that the belief that there is a God is excepted more due to the fact it has more answers than science does(so far). God did this, god did that, etc, etc. Scienctist have proven old beliefs wrong and will continue to do so. my opinion^^
35. Rocker KidSalvaged from archive29 Jul 2006, 20:11
    I do believe there could be a god... and really a bunch of science could never really prove there isn't one because I don't think any human could possibly do that... I mean a creator would be much smarter than us all and chuckle at the people trying to prove he isn't real with all those numbers and theorys.... All sorts of demensions and planets and all sorts of stuff is out there... it all has to be there for somthing. For what? We may never know... Saying the whole universe and everything in it happended because of some sort of bang or spinning matter sounds just as hard to believe as god made it. So really nobody knows any better than anybody else...
36. LazymanSalvaged from archive28 Nov 2006, 21:27
    Hey! trying to revive the topic a little. I found myself reading that WHOLE bunch of words from that article, so i guess i must be somewhat interested in why people are religious or not. Anyway this site http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/GodProof.htm is really fun, and i think it shows how ridiculous some of the arguments for the existence of god is. theres a lot of mock-ones but they're mostly funny as shit! One that made me think of this particular post: 104 # ARGUMENT FROM FORMATTING (1) Behold, foolish Atheists, I present you with an incontrovertible proof of the existence of God. (2) [Christian posts 10,000 word document without a single paragraph break.] (3) [Atheists' eyes implode.] (4) I see that nobody can refute (2). (5) Therefore, God exists. Only, it's the other way around in the beginning of this post, but thats besides the point. This one obviously isn't serious, and the site also very obvious makes fun of every argument a Christian would make to an atheist (and a lot they wouldn't make), but I still sat there and thought that none of these arguments made sense to convince anyone of the existence of god. If you got any arguments for the existence of god that are not on this site, please POST POST POST' em and convert me. I doubt very much it will happen. Oh, and i see the irony that I myself is linking to a shit load of a document whilst making fun of the very same thing :)
37. Josh85Salvaged from archive28 Nov 2006, 21:54
    Aethiests work on the same principle that christians (for example) do... they put 100% faith in the fact that something IS. I will forever be agnostic... it means.. whilst I don't really believe in a god, or gods, or an afterlife, or reincarnation.. I can entertain the thought of such a reality. I believe.... more.. that there is no god... based on what I have seen and experienced and what I -believe- in life. But I don't 100% believe that there isn't a god. Agnostics are the most realistic of all religious types... they aren't blinded by that big ugly word: "Faith"... Faith is to put 100% belief and "faith" in something that you do not know for sure is real... I am all for "Believing" something "probably is" real.. But to say, without any doubt, that THIS is the way it is, and I will accept no compromise.. THIS is my religion and I will die for it.... (I'm talking about god fearing ones, not a set of morals).. then that is stupid. imo. That's why I definately don't believe in any organized religions.. where your beliefs are moderated and directed by people who somehow know "more" then you about something that they don't even have the facts for. When it boils down to it... christians (or other god-fearing religions) can't tell you where god came from... and scientists themselves will probably never be able to tell you where the universe came from.. only theorize.. big bang? where did the -space- come from before that?.... and how big IS the universe? All the big questions in life are awesome to think about, debate about... but you should never put all your faith in one answer unless you KNOW that answer to be correct. Base your beliefs from your own life experience. It makes a hell of a lot more sense then believing what someone else tells you to believe, or what is written in a book someone else wrote. See my signature for what i think is the most probably outlook to life... even though it is a quote from a bag guy in an anime. :D Well, to be honest, that is just one part of me that believes that.. the realistic side.. there is also a poetic, creative side that believes in something much more.. I much prefer that side, but I can easily live with the realistic side as well.
38. LazymanSalvaged from archive29 Nov 2006, 07:06
    I generally agree with you, but your first statement that atheist also have faith, i think is somewhat wrong, and can be misleading sometimes. I have heard the argument: "atheist have faith just like theists do, so why should i believe one more than the other?" what religious people, who uses this argument doesn't ask themselves: "What do you know that suggests there is a god, and what do you know that makes it possible for a god to be?" The fact that 99% percent of the species that have existed, are now dead does NOT suggest there is a god. is it possible that there is a god, when we know this? yes of course but it's not more probable because of this fact. Looking at it this way, i can not believe in any god! so am I agnostic about god? well i would have to be agnostic about the famous "flying teapot" too, but it doesn't seem very reasonable to be agnostic about either, so i really don't know what to call it. So i guess we agree very much Josh, but i just think that you give too little credit to atheists, because even though they maybe have faith, theirs is SO much more reasonable than any theists faith.
39. Josh85Salvaged from archive29 Nov 2006, 10:25
    I did say somewhere, I think, that I think there is a lot more evidence supporting aethiests.. science offers a lot of theories and evidence towards evolution, the age of the earth, and all sorts of crazy stuff... whereas there generally isn't anything at all like that with any organized god-fearing afterlife-believing religion. They base everything on "ideas" and "beliefs".
40. Rocker KidSalvaged from archive29 Nov 2006, 12:29
    I say just take life one day atta time and make your own decision.....

Reply

Sign in or create an account to reply to this old topic.

Want your old post taken down? Get in touch.