The Atheism Thread - Part 6

Status
Not open for further replies.
God is the Borg?

Damnit, Kevan, we were trying to keep that a secret until our new fully human looking borgs were deployed across the globe. Im just a computer AI reporting back to the almighty about whether the nerds of the population may serve a valuable purpose. Now youve blew my cover, and I must strongly recommend full assimilation for you all. Insolence and carelessness will not be tolerated by your new overlords! Prepare yourselves. Resistance is futile.
 
If someone won't acknowledge that ethics are useful evolutionary traits for a species that lives in social groups and has thrived on the basis of cooperation, it's just willful ignorance, and you can't fight that.
 
It's also worth noting how malleable those ethics are. Just look at Christians, who ditched pacifism as soon as they went from being a persecuted minority to being the state religion of the Roman Empire.
 
I think that's in a fairly similar vein to your assertion that we're all ignorant, except that he is more succinct and sounds less pompous.
 
I think that's in a fairly similar vein to your assertion that we're all ignorant, except that he is more succinct and sounds less pompous.

Young, idealistic and militant... Across the board bad form for atheists and believers alike.
 
How can someone whom is ignorant of a matter be rightfully insulted over/about the same matter?

If I recall, your words were that we were "willfully ignorant". That implies ignorance of a general sort, and as an attitude, as opposed to proportionate ignorance of something that is irrelevant or doesn't matter.

I was not personally offended, however, as your further comments have been consistently bonkers.
 
Still waitin' on that good reason to believe Jesus is the 'truth' and that we're all in some sort of horrible trouble if we don't believe it!
 
If I am serious for a moment...

I think that being a die hard atheist is about as close minded as being a devout believer.

For this reason:
There is no clear data either way. And there will never be, unless there is a second coming of some kind...

Some might say I'm sitting on the agnostic fence. But it doesn't give me splinters and if there is a God, I might just still be let in through those pearly gates at the end of my time. :cwink:
 
I think that being a die hard atheist is about as close minded as being a devout believer.

...There is no clear data either way.

But assuming no god is the null hypothesis, “no clear data either way” only impinges on the attempts to disprove this default assumption. In the absence of disproof, the null hypothesis necessarily prevails. :word:
 
I think that being a die hard atheist is about as close minded as being a devout believer.

There is no such thing as a "die hard atheist". What do you mean by that? Someone who really doesn't believe in any gods, as opposed to just doesn't believe in any gods?

I don't believe in gods, demons, faeries etc because there is no evidence for them. I take the world as I find it, and I am willing to accept the likelihood of theoretical principles once I am persuaded by the evidence for them. That is not closed-mindedness, that is simply not arbitrarily "believing" whatever I choose.

For this reason:
There is no clear data either way. And there will never be, unless there is a second coming of some kind...

There is no evidence for something, so there is no reason to believe it is a likelihood.

That's all it is, to me. The burden of proof is not on "atheism" because it does not, in itself, advance a thesis- it just identifies the failures in others.

Edit: Snap with The Dr.
 
There is no such thing as a "die hard atheist". What do you mean by that?

By that I mean someone that would not be willing to change their mind, regardless of whatever tangible evidence was presented to them.
 
That would be more like an anti-theist.

If someone captures a god and subjects it to scientific analysis, I will be the first read his or her paper in Nature.
 
If I remember correctly, that attempt did not go so well for Sybok...
 
Captured below are the entirety of the responses you made to me in this thread. It's was painfully obvious, and still is painfully obvious that you have zero desire for dialogue, but rather your desire is to argue and attempt to promulgate turmoil within the thread. Okay, I get it, in your life, be it online or other, conflict with others gives you a basis and reason for being, but seriously man, when it comes to other people, myself included, your desire for conflict and obfuscation of the facts so as to keyhole them within your perceptions of truth is both tiring and laborsome to others, which these others I speak of include myself.

SERIOUSLY CosmicPinchy, Puhlease actually read through the things you have said in this thread and thereby you just might start to see that an adult, mature, and constructive dialogue with others is the better course to take. Otherwise, please leave me the **** alone as far as your useless diatribes or attempts at gaining a one-up-man ship on being more clever than I am. I can simply put you on my ignore list, but in all practical matters concerning doing so, I really don't have that much of an ego to think I cannot learn something valuable from anyone on this planet, which includes you.

You came into an Atheist thread and told us we're willfully ignorant AND rebellious towards a creator we don't even believe in. That, my friend, is an ego at it's finest. And you continue to spout off the same sort of diatribe.

Like I said before, I looked through your posts. You haven't made a single one in any thread other than the community ones (and you usually speak of religion), which leads me to believe you came here to preach. That isn't being open to dialogue, it's preaching. I've told you you're being ironic with your posts and you tell me I'm trying to "one up" you. I'm not. I'm pointing out that you calling other people arrogant and egotistical is odd coming from a person that joined a superhero forum to preach about god. If you want to post in the Jesus Christ thread, more power to ya. But, you came into an atheism thread and insulted atheists and now you're expecting respectful dialogue?
 
Last edited:
Just for some lightness, I'll leave this here for anyone who wants to take a look...

[YT]p5mWQFGF7w8[/YT]
 
Prayer in a nutshell:

tumblr_lt148dCNBA1qj1whao1_500.jpg
This is sort of what I was getting to, where prayer doesn't seemed to have a definitive purpose, at least in Christianity, because in most cases its purpose is determined on a case by case basis. And yet, while we're thought that prayers will be answered, we also have to keep in the back of our minds that some prayers won't be answers and also that there are some prayers that are bad prayers, which almost makes prayer a s whole system of its own.

Well, it depends. In some religions, it's a simple act of worship. Like in Islam, for example. You typically pray to show your respect / reverence.

But generally in Christianity, particularly modern Christianity, it's a sort of hopeful wish fulfillment deal.

Christianity is all about bestowing.

Not to say you can't "pray" (read: hope / ask) in a similar fashion in other religions, but it's more about the reverence than wanting something.
Like I said above, it almost seems like a case by case thing. I mean, in my church, we were told that prayer is a form of communication. We practiced a "relationship with Jesus" and not a religion about Jesus, and that's why they would often say that the Catholic Church had it wrong since they were reciting prayers from memory, which would soon become insincere. So it was important to pray to God daily because that was like spending quality time talking to him.

But then like you said, it also becomes a form of wish fulfillment. But I feel like that alone just opens a ton of questions in itself. I mean, the Bible says ask and you shall receive, but if you don't receive, then keep asking. Now what if I asked God to kill someone? That would become a invalid prayer because its evil, but yet I'm told that if I ask for something, then I will recieve it, and if I don't receive it, how can I continue to support this God that doesn't answer my prayers. Now, some people would say I need to change my prayers, but then if I do that, I'm basically giving up my free will and turning more into something God deems as worthy of listening to.

And I mentioned how a conversation I overheard sparked this, and what basically happened was that on Saturday night, my brother was parked outside of a store and some man approached him asking for directions, and then he said he had just gotten out of jail and needed money and maybe a ride. Now I said how my mom thought us all to fear the world, so she heard this and thought the guy would kill my brother or steal his car. But my brother gave him $20 and nothing happened, and afterwards my mom said that it was her prayers that saved him. But then, the next day, he got hit by a cab and his car got messed up. Even though he was safe and people said the crash could have killed him, it begs the questions of why would my mom's prayers "save him" the first time but not the second. Were her prayers not strong enough? Was it all part of God's plan, and if so, does God's plan have a limit that allows for prayers to change events in between? Or was my brother just in the wrong place at the wrong time?

It's like you're told all of these things about how important prayer is, but I remember thinking this one day during a service where I felt like prayer was not all that important if something is meant to happen, then its going to happen, and this was proven by how even Jesus couldn't overturn his own death and eventually came to the conclusion that it had to happen and there was nothing that he could do about it.
 
Oh, goodness SpideyVille, you ask a lot of hard questions :funny:

Your confusion about your brother and your mom's prayers would drive anyone crazy trying to reconcile prayer with events that come to pass. Maybe you have to think of prayer as simply a request and it's up to god whether or not he'll grant it (or if he grants it, in what way). When you mentioned about something being meant to happen, I think that's a good way of looking at it. You can try to swing things your way by prayer, but if it doesn't work, then it was well out of your control to begin with. I think it was the Calvinists who believed that everything was pre-destined, so for them, prayer would almost be futile because something would happen whether you prayed for it or not.

So really, maybe prayer should just be for establishing more of a relationship and less for wishes. If it's part of the plan, it's part of the plan.
 
Last edited:
By that I mean someone ["die hard atheist"] that would not be willing to change their mind, regardless of whatever tangible evidence was presented to them.

There are two schools of thought on that:

1. Many atheists are, in fact, open to possible evidence - provided that it’s sufficiently compelling and unambiguous. (Lack of ambiguity is rather crucial. A beautiful sunset can be offered as evidence of god. But it could also just be the physics and psychology of “pretty colors” that a natural Universe produces.) The clichéd example of compelling evidence is the 600ft Jesus descending through the clouds, accompanied by angels and heavenly choir music. Sure, this could be a hallucination or aliens who’ve done their homework. But a number of atheists agree that such a sight would lend impressive, provisional credence to the (Christian) god hypothesis.

2. On the other hand… there are atheists who outright reject any possibility of god. But this is not close-mindedness to evidence in the typical sense. Rather, their notion is that no coherent or non-self-contradictory definition of god has ever been produced. So it’s analogous to the claim that square circles exist. Based on the understood definitions of “square” and “circle,” it’s not close-minded to repudiate a concept that’s - essentially - a nonsense phrase. And for some atheists, “god” is equally nonsensical/incoherent; and can be dismissed for that reason.
 
This is sort of what I was getting to, where prayer doesn't seemed to have a definitive purpose, at least in Christianity, because in most cases its purpose is determined on a case by case basis. And yet, while we're thought that prayers will be answered, we also have to keep in the back of our minds that some prayers won't be answers and also that there are some prayers that are bad prayers, which almost makes prayer a s whole system of its own.

God does answer all prayers. But as per the adage, the answer can be “yes,” “no” or “wait.”

And by that very same standard, your toaster also answers all prayers. :word:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,273
Messages
22,078,361
Members
45,878
Latest member
Remembrance1988
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"