The Athiest Thread

Atheist, Agnostic, Theist


  • Total voters
    49
Status
Not open for further replies.
Either way, it's a blanket statement applying to a group that he isn't a part of. That's okay. All black people like fat women.
I might've rephrased it even worse. Atheists are content with believing in solely in our universe. What else is there? If you believe in heaven or hell you aren't atheist.

Anyway, I'm not even sure what I'm doing speaking for King Ace in the first place.
 
I might've rephrased it even worse. Atheists are content with believing in solely in our universe. What else is there? If you believe in heaven or hell you aren't atheist.

Anyway, I'm not even sure what I'm doing speaking for King Ace in the first place.
LOL! Me neither. I'm just trying to figure out how "I don't believe in God" translates into "I'm content with believing solely in our Universe". The way I see it, we didn't know about a lot of forces in the Universe until we learned how to look. We've also figured out how to use what we already know to create formulas that explain forces we didn't know to look for. The existence of black holes, dark matter and dark energy wasn't discovered by observation. They were first discovered by formulas that mathematically explained how forces we already knew about worked. I can't tell you I'm content in solely believing in something that isn't understood yet. I can tell you I'm content in solely believing in empirical data. But since "M" theory and advanced physics points to a multiverse, and I'm a curious person, it looks like I have a long way before being content. I mean the hadron supercollider is able to reproduce forces we could only theorize about. Including the Higg's boson. Celestial telescopes have been able to look at light released 15 billion years ago. Almost peeking at the beginning of our Universe. So, since I'm an Atheist I should say our pursuit of knowledge should stop? The Universe is and thats good enough...let's all quit exploring now.
 
First of all, thanks for the article you posted previously. I'd say overall all it's just stating common sense. I won't nit-pick it though because it seems to be an honest effort on your part to seek common ground. And there's some common ground.

I feel I should say some things positives about religion. I like the fellowship that occurs in religion when it's about being festive and social. The Catholic Church near me is Croatian. They have awesome parties! It was kind of neat helping a Priest (yes, all black, white collar thingy) carry kegs onto the church grounds. I love it when the Priest rewards me by doing a couple shots of slivovitz with me. They have a live band playing traditional crow music. (I hope crow isn't an epithet for Croatian). I like it when people come together and have a good time. I wish Atheists could gather for fellowship and fun. I wish we could get together and do more positive things for the community as a group. But if we did, we wouldn't get tax exempt status so a lot of our fund raising would go to taxes. I guess we could set up a 501-C3 or something...
The problem is, whenever atheists get together, all they seem to want to do, and this thread is evidence of it, is complain about how much they don't like Christians or mock them for believing "fairy tales" or pretend to be edgy by making all kinds of blasphemous jokes--some of which are funny, but that doesn't really do any good in the world.

One issue is compartmentalization. You have acquired, knowingly or unknowingly, a psychological trick. The trick is that you can drop all the reason that you apply in everything else when it comes to religion. You see Criss Angel and you know he's not performing miracles. You see a plane in the sky and you know it's not flying because of pixie dust. But you read there's a magic entity that created everything including people which he uses in a proxy war against another one of his creations (satan), and somehow all your understanding of logic and reason gets tossed to the wayside. Then, I see a lot of religious folks trying to reverse engineer the logical side of their nature in order for it to better coexist with their faith.
I like to think that my faith is pretty well reasoned TBH. There's nothing wrong necessarily with just believing in Jesus and trusting him for salvation though:

"All sensible people know that if you are tired and hungry a meal will do you good. But the modern theory of nourishment—all about the vitamins and proteins—is a different thing. People ate their dinners and felt better long before the theory of vitamins was ever heard of: and if the theory of vitamins is some day abandoned they will go on eating their dinners just the same..."

"We believe that the death of Christ is just that point in history at which something absolutely unimaginable from outside shows through into our own world. And if we cannot picture even the atoms of which our own world is built, of course we are not going to be able to picture this. Indeed, if we found that we could fully understand it, that very fact would show it was not what it professes to be—the inconceivable, the uncreated, the thing from beyond nature, striking down into nature like lightning. You may ask what good will it be to us if we do not understand it. But that is easily answered. A man can eat his dinner without understanding exactly how food nourishes him. A man can accept what Christ has done without knowing how it works: indeed, he certainly would not know how it works until he has accepted it."

It's not a requirement to know how it works, just that it does. Some people like to dig deeper though I guess.

"Believe or suffer for an eternity". Hey, Ghandi wasn't Christian either so I guess I'll have good company.
As I've said many many times, not all Christians believe that. See my previous post.

"God (as Jesus) died for you sins". No one asked him to for one. Two, he made us as sinners. Not only because of free will, but he created a Universe where free will has damnable consequences. Why was that necessary?
Good question. This is a misconception I've heard a lot of. Look at it this way: God is goodness. I don't mean that he's a good being, or that he does good things all the time, (though that's true too), but he is the embodiment of the notion which we call goodness. The people who will be condemned are those who willfully choose to separate themselves from goodness. There is no other source of goodness anywhere. He is it. Imagine this analogy. Suppose there were a single star in the entire universe with a planet revolving around it. Some people say, "We don't like this star. It's too yellow/hot/whatever," get on a spaceship and leave to live on some barren husk in the outer darkness. Would they then have any right to complain that they couldn't see because it was dark?

You seem to think God is some kind of policeman, sitting there with his radar gun looking for someone to chase down and give a ticket to. In reality he's our father, calling us to come over and live in the home he's made for us. Some people refuse and would rather sit in the outer darkness than enjoy his companionship. They have no right then to complain that they don't find anything good apart from the source of all goodness.

"Religion is truth". If it's so true why does it have to reinterpret itself when it ceases to align culturally with the society it's trying to prosper from? Basically, Religion is steadfast in it's views until those views start to cost the church warm bodies.
I personally am very much against some of the new realignings, but I don't want to get into that.

Anyone here ever read "The Apocrypha"? Kind of interesting that a book "inspired" by God had so many hidden/rejected texts.
I've read some of it. And I wouldn't expect you to catch this yourself, any more than I could be counted on to detect the subtle differences between types of wine, as I don't drink wine really, but there's something about those books that's "off." They don't seem to fit like the rest of the Bible, and I'm not one bit surprised that they were excluded as being not inspired by God.
 
The problem is, whenever atheists get together, all they seem to want to do, and this thread is evidence of it, is complain about how much they don't like Christians or mock them for believing "fairy tales" or pretend to be edgy by making all kinds of blasphemous jokes--some of which are funny, but that doesn't really do any good in the world.

I'm sorry we vent our frustrations but Christianity in general is the focus. Not you as a person. We Atheists are a minority. Christians don't have a good track record with minorities. Remember that slavery was religiously justified for the majority of mankind's history. Don't take it personal. But a lifetime of being accused of being evil, baby-eating, Godless, cancers on society takes it toll man. Don't take all this personally please. I appreciate the conversation.

I like to think that my faith is pretty well reasoned TBH.

Well, would you please find me a religious person who thinks their religion is unreasonable and send them in? (j/k)

It's not a requirement to know how it works, just that it does. Some people like to dig deeper though I guess.

Sorry for being a shallow Atheist?

As I've said many many times, not all Christians believe that. See my previous post.

I don't think all Christians believe all the same things. Quite the opposite. I figure in one Church you can find variations from pew to pew. So, religion is relative to the individual.

Good question. This is a misconception I've heard a lot of. Look at it this way: God is goodness. I don't mean that he's a good being, or that he does good things all the time, (though that's true too), but he is the embodiment of the notion which we call goodness. The people who will be condemned are those who willfully choose to separate themselves from goodness. There is no other source of goodness anywhere. He is it. Imagine this analogy. Suppose there were a single star in the entire universe with a planet revolving around it. Some people say, "We don't like this star. It's too yellow/hot/whatever," get on a spaceship and leave to live on some barren husk in the outer darkness. Would they then have any right to complain that they couldn't see because it was dark?

I see, so those who don't believe in something they see no evidence of are like people not liking their neighborhood which they see everyday. So, they should all move to New Jersey.

You seem to think God is some kind of policeman, sitting there with his radar gun looking for someone to chase down and give a ticket to. In reality he's our father, calling us to come over and let him love us like a father loves his children. Some people refuse and would rather sit in the outer darkness than enjoy his companionship. They have no right then to complain that they don't find anything good apart from the source of all goodness.

Actually, I see God as the object of our continual dancing around a fire chanting incantations at the moon.

I personally am very much against some of the new realignings, but I don't want to get into that.

Well, since I used slavery as an example I could understand why not.

I've read some of it. And I wouldn't expect you to catch this yourself, any more than I could be counted on to detect the subtle differences between types of wine, as I don't drink wine really, but there's something about those books that's "off." They don't read like the rest of the Bible, and I'm not one bit surprised that they were excluded as being not inspired by God.

The point was that what's in the Bible was decided in closed-door meetings by an imperialistic minded cabal.

Either way. I've been a missionary. I helped "save" people. All the long feeling guilty because I felt like a snake oil salesman. The mission groups I was part of and the one's I met were really no better or worse than anyone else. But they were convinced they were special. And they were convinced that what ever wrong they committed would be forgiven and they would still reap rewards from just simply believing. We helped people. Though it wasn't altruistic. The Church always wants something in return. We went to poor neighborhoods and fed people. Then, basically told them that if they wanted more they'd have to come to our Church. I've never felt so evil.
 
I like to think that my faith is pretty well reasoned TBH.
IT’S NOT. REASONABLE FAITH SHOULD REQUIRE MORE THAN TRUSTING INDIRECT ACCOUNTS OF JESUS’ LIFE. WHY IS IT THAT NONE OF THE GOSPELS WRITTEN BY THE APOSTLES CONTAIN THEIR FIRST-HAND EXPERIENCE OF JESUS’ RESSURRECTION OR ASCENSION? WHY EVEN TRUST THESE STORIES WHEN THEY WERE ONLY WRITTEN 50+ YEARS AFTER THE SUPPOSED EVENTS? WHY TRUST THEM WHEN THEY WERE REVISED NUMEROUS TIMES? HOW IS THIS AT ALL REASONABLE FAITH?


YOU’RE A LIAR. IF YOU BELIEVE IN JESUS, YOU MIGHT AS WELL BELIEVE EVERYTHING YOU HEAR. THIS “DEBATE” ENDED A LONG TIME AGO. YOU HAVE NO ARGUMENT.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top