A Few Reasons to be Atheist
In this day and age I fail to see how anyone can be religious at all. I recently heard a quote that was so perfect.
I think it’s kind of interesting to note that people learn about God around the same time they learn about Santa clause. Most kids find it hard to give up on the pleasant notion of Santa, yet they manage to do it. Why are you as adults believing in things that you should have given up as children? After all, there is as much evidence in the existence of God as there is in Santa, and you managed to get rid of him.
And it’s so true. Children are brainwashed to believe in god from a young age, and their religion’s ridiculous ways. There is a large majority of people in America that don’t believe in evolution, and that’s just pathetic. Everyone is entitled to their own view, but believing in something without evidence is just silly. Do Christians even read their bible? I’d bet atheists know more about their religion than they do. The bible tells its followers to murder people who don’t believe in god. How disgusting and violent is that? How can you follow something that wrong? Sure that’s the old testament, and many will say that’s not supposed to be followed. However who decides that you can pick and choose what aspects you follow? I’ve compiled some of Youtube’s best atheist videos explaining how religion is wrong and immoral, and repulsive.
This is my favorite one. It basically describes how christianity is a repulsive religion. If you find a christian that has read the bible they might say “Only the old testament contains violent acts such as stoning.” Well, that’s wrong. It’s both of them. Video length 10:34
This one proves how god’s plan is impossible. Ever hear a christian say “it was meant to be” or “god wanted it to happen”. Well he didn’t, and here’s why that is a load of nonsense. Video length 4:58
Think you can get in to heaven? Well you’re mistaking. The steps to get into heaven in the bible are impossible. Every step has an equal contradiction. You’re forced to sell everything you own, but than later in the bible you’re supposed to give everything away. This makes no sense..sigh I’m doomed and going to hell. Video length 8:36
You don’t need to watch this one, it’s quite repetitive. Basically he prays for three different things to happen and measures the amount of time it really happens. (None) He then wishes it will happen with a lucky horse shoe in hand, and counts the number of times it happens. (None) Point is that prayer is as stupid as a lucky horse shoe. Video length 10:23
Jesus says in the bible that he will appear to you if you pray. Author of the video prays, but sees no jesus. Why? Jesus is not real. Video length 4:32
The Root of All Evil Part I - An excellent video with so many valid points. He talks with religious leaders and tries to have civil conversations. They in return fear the truth and get rather violent. Richard Dawkins is a very smart and educated atheist. Video length 47:21
The Root of All Evil Part II - This video is better than the second one in my opinion. It focuses on the brain washing of children. In his words “faith is a virus that infects generation after generation”. Really a great and true way of thinking about it. They’re teaching the earth is only thousands of years old. That is insane, and what’s sad is most people believe it! Video length 47:58
If you bother to leave a comment, please don’t say "OMG UR AN IDIOT1!! LAWL". Please state why I’m an idiot, and have the facts to back it up. Tell me why I’m incorrect to assume that there is no god. Thanks.
I have mixed feelings on this matter. I am not an atheist, but I am not a christian either. I am an agnostic (I don’t believe in anything). I don’t think the notion of god is very plausible, but I can not be certain.
I think that many religious people believe in whatever it is because humans like to rationalise, or give meaning to things… even if there is not meaning. I think that many Christians are Christian because:
a) they grow up one
b) they are scared of death and other things an Christianity supplies a nice idea of life after death.
However, this does not mean I ridicule Christians, because society is about choice and freedom. I do, however, think that active religious action that is violent, or violates human rights is wrong.
The bible, especially the old testament, does contain a lot of dated statements, and that it is contradictory.
How for instance can you kill someone that works on the sabbath if one commandment forbids you to kill?
However, the author of these videos takes the statements exceptionally literal, such as the story told by Jesus about cutting of the things that make you sin. That was clearly an image to tell us to get rid of our desires or parts of our personality that make us sin, not to tell us to literaly cut of limbs and gouge out eyes. You should always remember the audience :-)
I’m just being nitpicky about this, but you didn’t state much (anything?) to support a stance of Atheism.
I guess it kind of depends how you look at it. Theism, philosophically, is proof there is a god. Athiesm, philosophically, is proof there is no god. Most people do not really have proof, and very few people ever come up with defensible positions either way. Most people really just believe there is a god or just deny that there is a god, with no real proof.
I’ve found that many people who call themselves atheists are really more akin to agnostics who tend to say, “not sure there is a god, not sure there isn’t a god.”
The challenge…
I challenge you all! Find the verse in the bible that says “all infidels must die”… ooo wait, thats the Koran. Ok, so the verse that says it’s ok to kill in the new testament. Post it here for everyone, oh, and post the 5 verses before and 5 verses after. The catch is that by posting the other 10 verses you will not be able to take your verse out of context. I like the N.I.V. bible, but you could even use King James, or whatever you like. Go ahead, all you guys out there willing to put time into it.
Oh, and to be a Christian you don’t need to follow old testament laws. God did not send Jesus to die for all of us so that we could follow more rules. Just understand and accept that Jesus (Gods son) Died for our sins. You don’t need to follow those rules anymore. Just read the New Testament. Go ahead, it doesn’t take long. And remember, feel free to post findings (without alteration) with 5 verses before and 5 after. I’m sure the IT community will be quick to correct you if you alter it.
The fact of the matter is if Christianity was made up completely of the Jewish community, any post like this would demand some sort of lawsuit be attached to the writer.
As for the Santa = God comparison -I myself believe in God through “Faith - believe in God without much proof”. Apparently not much thought went in to that one (people hear about Jesus in many stages of life, not just childhoot). But just for the sake of conversation. Tell me, did Santa create the Electron? No? Who did? Someone had to. Someone had to create the Neutron, Proton, Leptons… the list goes on. Who made it all? Ohhh, it was Evolution you say! That’s it… That’s the answer. The sun has been decreasing in size by about 2 feet a year… and millions of years ago would have consumed our moon. “But scientists said…” you say. Al Gore said he invented the Internet, so we should ask his opinion on the matter. Na, I have better things to do then ask good ol’ Al Theology.
Yes the Old testament is old. And yes the Jewish community still embraces it. Christians do not to the same degree, it does still contain valuable information though. Feel free to read the old testament in your spare time as well. I suggest that before rants are displayed that thought, research and tact be applied in some manner before attacking an entire community in such a fashion.
I did get a good chuckle out of that santa thing. It’s too bad the creators of this rant will dismiss the post as nonsense and find some discrediting information on my post or categorily deny most of whats said without research. It’s because it’s lack of research that led them to post in the first place.
Thanks.
Rant on!
The problem is that the points have you have raised (or those who made the videos) are only a small number that are obviously skewed in the mind of those who don’t believe in God. For me, as a Christian, I am able to see the fallacy in those points. Like the previous poster said, much of the Bible is not meant to be taken literally, but have meaning.
Remember that much of the Bible was written by various people. They each took the teaching of God/Jesus and wrote his or her interpretation of it. One disciple may have thought that selling goods how to fulfill God’s will of not being overly concerned with earthly goods. Another may have interpreted that as giving the goods to others. Another may have believed not to have any goods in the first place. Yet ultimately, the underlying commandment is to help your neighbour and not covet things that others have.
As I stated earlier, every point raised was taken much too literally. The Bible is not just doing everything WORD for WORD or you will go to hell, but the things that God wishes for us to do, and the love He has for us. Faith is something very important, if you pray and don’t believe or if you expect nothing to come out of it, nothing will. Santa was a fictional character made up by someone at some point of time, not with a history. Should you be comparing Jesus with the tooth fairy? Obviously not.
There could be an equal article about WHY there is a God, with prophecies in the Bible that are true, people’s personal experiences (especially with near-death experiences), sightings and miracles, and believe me, prayers DO come true if you believe or if God wills it. If you do not mean a prayer, it will not come true, and not every prayer has to be granted to mean God exists.
At the end of the day, there are alot of things that may be misinterpreted about the Bible/God. If you have knowledge, however, those misinterpretations can be explained. Keep an open mind, God bless,
Jonathan
“If you do not mean a prayer, it will not come true, and not every prayer has to be granted to mean God exists.”
Ok, show me where it says that.
“Tell me, did Santa create the Electron? No? Who did? Someone had to. Someone had to create the Neutron, Proton, Leptons… the list goes on. Who made it all? Ohhh, it was Evolution you say! That’s it… ”
K…so it was a man in the sky with a wand. Mystery solved. You see, making random shit up to explain things you can’t explain is an asinine thing to do. Science allows for new ideas and for change, when new things are discovered. Religion has no room for change, and it will die soon enough. Nobody will believe such idiotic things such as the earth is flat or the earth is only thousands of years old forever. Eventually people will wake up, think for themselves, and stop being brain washed. Oh well until then have fun practising a religion that promotes AIDs and other STDs.
The bible is the biggest scam out..
“If you do not mean a prayer, it will not come true, and not every prayer has to be granted to mean God exists.â€
It says that at several points throughout the Bible, that if you don’t have faith, you’re prayers will not be answered. Jesus himself said that. If you would like specific references I can find them. If I prayed for someone to be hurt, should they be?
“K…so it was a man in the sky with a wand. Mystery solved. You see, making random shit up to explain things you can’t explain is an asinine thing to do.”
So the big bang theory wasn’t make random shit up? How is the big bang theory more plausible that waving a wand in the sky? Or the other countless theories. They were all just made by normal scientists. Just because we are are capable of thought does not mean we know everything there is or are correct. Just a few centuries ago people thought the world was flat and the centre of the universe as you said, why should ideas now be any different? Waking up to what, another ‘possible’ idea. What may happen in centuries in the future when the big bang theory is disproved, and the ‘wake up’ to some new theory?
“Oh well until then have fun practising a religion that promotes AIDs and other STDs. ”
Its funny how you ask for thoughts on why people believe you are wrong, yet you address none of the other rebuttals I have stated. Your response is full of sarcasm, and it looks more like youre the one with the closed mind.
“Oh well until then have fun practising a religion that promotes AIDs and other STDs. ”
Where does it say this, I’m confused, are you talking about cable tv/movies or the bible here? And you say “Religion”, which one? The one that follows the old testament, tells you to kill infidels? Becareful of your answer here ;). You want proof where you must have faith.
“Science allows for…”
Science… mans law… it’s all the same, it all comes from the same place and ultimately has mans agenda behind it. We can make anything up we want to occomodate mans needs/wants. What you seem to want is solid proof that God exist… barring whats in front of you (solid matter, gas’s, etc). Somehow someone gave you the idea that if you half heartedly pray and video tape it, God will appear before you. My friend, not even Al Gore will appear before you if you ask him nicely (btw Al does not equal God for those of you looking to take things out of context again).
“K…so it was a man in the sky with a wand. Mystery solved. You see, making random shit up to explain things you can’t explain is an asinine thing to do. ”
It’s not random, no wand… as stated in previous posts, your answers are in the bible, check it out. If you have a question, ask it… we’ll be happy to answer. The fact of the matter is that the ground you walk on was created at some point (not by scientists). If you want an answer, scientists can’t give it to you, I keep saying that it’s called faith. I don’t know how he did it, but God did. I don’t know why… maybe because God loves us. If you are looking for answers (Not a Christians), then i’m sure someone somewhere can make up enough stuff that sounds believable. Like David Koresh, he convinced plenty of people that his answers were the right ones. The Branch Davidians didn’t turn out so well though.
“Nobody will believe such idiotic things such as the earth is flat…”
The only reason people believed that is because:
1. Scientists said so
2. They were not open minded enough to seek the truth themselves. Are you?
You are right. I’m sure you are no idiot, and the same can be said for most others. Thats why God gave us the ability to choose to believe in him or not.
“You are right. I’m sure you are no idiot, and the same can be said for most others. Thats why God gave us the ability to choose to believe in him or not.”
Good point, God gave us free will because he loves us, and that is one the biggest things to understand about the world today.
Rub3x, like he said, you are obviously not an idiot, but consider the points and keep an open mind. I know you don’t believe and thats fine, but everything stated by you in the article seems to have been jumped on by you as a resounding NO to believing in God without any objectivness. For me as a Christian, I have answers to all of them. So at least consider or have a reason for why what I have said is incorrect. I would just like you to believe, thats all.
There is a fundamental problem in all this.
Are we discussing the possible existence of “something” that set things in motion, etc, etc, or the christian god?
Because as far as the first is concerned, we should all be agnostics. We don’t know and probably can’t.
BUT! As far as the second is concerned, the evidence points to a huge label “FALSE”.
Please decide in your minds what are you arguing about. The most common mistake christians do is trying to defend the christian god and failing that (yeah, pure good god that kills thousands of babies of hunger,disease,whatever every day), they fall back to defending theism in general (”yes, then who made all this?”). Well I don’t care *who* made all this, if it was someone, but I do know and can argue that it couldn’t have been the mucho, racist, war-monger fuckup you couldn’t even build a boat right and had noah to do it for him! The cristian god is a contradiction whether you like it or not. *A* god is not an obvious contradiction but the cristian god is extremely contradictory on just so many levels…. Please, read your stupid bible and get on with it!
And by the way, those who believe in the bible literally, well, they do have a point. It is the word of god, and that’s about it. They may be mistaken but they play fair! For all of you who say that it needs interpretation, who does the interpretation? On what grounds do you decide what needs interpreting and what not? If the bible is not authoritative on what *authority* do you interpret it? None. You just do as you like…. This get-out-of-jail-free card lets you get away with everything: when you don’t like something, yes, obviously it was allegoric!
Jesus condemning that poor fig-tree because it dared have no figs for him to eat, even when it was not the season for figs? Eternal damnation I say! (You are now probably stressing the small amount of brain cells christianity has left you, in order to come up with an answer of the type “god is all love, yadi-yada, yaba-daba-doo…” - keep it to yourselves: we’ve heard it before, and it is *not* convincing: if it were, everybody would have no option but believing it (for example: earth revolves around the sun)).
No go pray for the mercy of your god that sends us and our loved ones disease, misery and death and remember: even 9/11 was god’s will (wasn’t it? can you spot the contradiction here? of course you can’t - you have very few brain cells left… And you do need to breath, keep your heart pumping blood - your cells are being worked 110%, don’t stress them by thinking!). 9/11 was his plan, to test you and your faith. In fact, the extremists flying that jets on w.t.c. were *part* of god’s plan! He used them -poor people-, in order to test you! Those guys were innocent! I say reward them! Build a monument to them! They gave their lives for the fulfillment of god’s great, sick, twisted and sadistic plan!
Bah, you’re not even worth the trouble. Go play with your dolls or something and let us, the scientists, work our asses off, in order to help save lives! Even small children that your god would have drowned, starved to death, killed, raped, murdered….. You just kneel and pray. It’s the one thing you can do well, apparently… Pity it doesn’t do squat. But hey, everyone is welcome in our society — even christians!
(By the time you read this your god has “looked the other way” and allowed 3 or 4 girls to be raped in usa. Praise the lord! Praise jesus!)
Haha well said. The last part was funny as hell. Btw it’s geared mostly towards the christian god, as theirs is the most asinine. However all gods are clearly false and any logical person sees this.
Well, yes, christianity in one form or the other does have the lead in number of brainwashed people in the west and since I saw many bible/jesus references here, I wrote accordingly….
Not that islam or [insert_your_favorite_mind-control_cult_here] is better!!
Gentle reminder:
Since my first post, about 40 girls have been raped. Praise the lord. Thank you jesus!
(Don’t even get me started on babies dying in africa from disease/starvation/war/whatever)
Yes any logical person can easily disprove God without a shadow of a doubt, nothing to worry about there. Us humans know excatly how everything in the universe works, where it came from, and what is going to happen to it. We know that we are the ultimate being in this universe and there couldn’t possibly be anything greater than us. If there was they would certainlly notify us immediatlly becasue we say so. Our plan of things is always right.
Yeah Right. Come on people, deflate your ego and realize that you may not be the smartest and most powerful being alive.
@Jeff:
Tired of hearing this… I really don’t need to know EVERYTHING in order to disprove things. That’s what logic is about.
And by the way, there isn’t anything, no matter how greater or wow-er than me, that is circular and square in the same respect. We have definitions for both of them and, what can we do, they are contradictory. You can’t have both. Whether you like it or not, that’s just the way of things.
Of course, it’s your choice to act like a braindead and say that “yeah, methinks my god haveth both circle and square”. Ok, we will pat you on the head and say, “sure he does, sure he does, whatever you say” but don’t ever expect us to value your opinion….
As for the ego thing, we atheists have it in very fewer amounts than you theists…. No, we are not “God’s great creation”, just chemical reactions… And whatsmore, we are nothing compared to the universe…. No God created all this for us! We’re just a simple by-product. How’s that for our huge ego? As the great Carl Sagan used to say:
“Modern science has been a voyage into the unknown, with a lesson in humility waiting at every stop. Many passengers would rather have stayed home.”
Guess who still prefer to stay home.
Ok, so some person is going to be murdered by a guy in their home, so that person, a christian, prays and prays for himself not to die, but gets killed anyway. I would think they whole heartedly and truthfully meant that prayer (cause they were going to die), yet it didn’t come true. Why, oh I guess because god had his death planned out. So if your prayers go against gods plan, then it doesnt come true. Contradiction ya…
Heh I love that video. Christianity is an utter joke. The best part is their only deffence is:
1.) We take it out of context
2.) That is only the old test. (Not true)
3.) Atheists don’t understand because we don’t have faith. You have to have faith to understand.
They’re brain washed closed minded idiots. My favorite part is when they call atheists closed minded. I grew up christian (sadly) until about 8th grade. From there I made the decisiont hat this was utter bullshit. I’ve seen both sides, have you guys? No.
Last post:
“I’ve seen both sides, have you guys? No.”
As a matter of fact, yes. I was atheist for at least 22 years…so if you have a pipe???
Wow! You grew up Christian until about the 8th grade??? By that time, I’m quite certain that you had all things nicely “wrapped up” (at least knowledge, wisdom and spirituality).
My question…for the atheists.
If you don’t believe in the Divine and in eternal punishment for sins and if you are correct, then no big deal as there is no hell or other eternal punishment/judgment.
If you don’t believe and you are wrong??? This means your odds are 50-50.
If a theist believes and is correct, then he/she will receive his/her rightful inheritance.
If a theist believes and is wrong, then no big deal as he/she had a well-lived life and does not have to worry about eternal damnation.
The theist can win in one way and not lose in the other so I’ll take my chances within the theist’s camp…
Cheers.
You’re a fucking idiot. By your ABYSMAL logic you should believe that there is a purple monster on mars, just because he might put you in hell after you die. You should also believe in all greek gods, hindu gods, muslim profits/gods, and every other fucking religion. Get a brain you ignoramus.
Nice to know you didn’t subscribe to comments, because you rather just dump your load of shit on my comments section and nothing more.
“You’re a fucking idiot.”
Wow! That’s a truly “enlightened” attitude. BTW, what an amazing argument to be used to describe your logic, eh??
“…and every other fucking religion. Get a brain you ignoramus.”
You must really be the conversationalist…Is it Rub3x or “rube”.
“…your load of shit…”
What “pearls of wisdom” can possibly come from the likes of you? It seems as if you do a severe injustice to atheists everywhere. Do you have the ability for mutually beneficial discourse or no? Do you wish to know how to effectively “debate” someone? You see, no matter how illogical or “ABYSMAL” someone’s logic may seem to you, you should respond with your arguments to back up your logic. However, I do see where it might be “beyond you”. Oh, why not? One last “pearl”.
“My favorite part is when they call atheists closed minded.”
I don’t call “atheists” closed-minded. In fact, I don’t even call you closed-minded. However, “devoid of any constructive thought” comes to mind as a phrase to describe you…
Cheers
And the best of ALLLLLLLL…
“If you bother to leave a comment, please don’t say “OMG UR AN IDIOT1!! LAWL”. Please state why I’m an idiot, and have the facts to back it up. Tell me why I’m incorrect to assume that there is no god. Thanks.”
It is so nice to see how I touched such a nerve as to be able to evoke a quite emotional response that goes against precisely what you “preached”. Back it up, please…
Saying I should believe in a purple monster on mars is hardly “backing up” with facts, eh? Besides, it is not purple, it is chartreuse. That’s what makes it a “monster”.
Cheers
Is there any proof of god? All the proof I need.
“Is there any proof of god? All the proof I need.”
Good one. Which shows exactly the point people are making. Your “proof” might be all right for you, but it is the same sort of “proof” a sealed-up weirdo in a asylum has for his being Napoleon Bonaparte. He is 100% convinced, all his inner being says so, he is not joking! But his proof can’t stand one bit of scrutiny. But what are you going to do? He is messed in the head. How could you convince him otherwise? (Or, rather, how could I convince *you* otherwise? Think about it! What would it take for you to admit you are wrong? What would need to happen? Yes, I thought so. Nothing. Just the same as the poor fellow who thinks he’s Napoleon. The only difference is that you’re on the outside).
By your standard, I could from now on go round saying I know there is a being so all-mighty and all-powerful, even more so than *your* pathetic god (it even bitch-slaps your god daily). I could move on to build a whole belief system, genesis system, value system, the complete works around that being. But that wouldn’t make it true… Oh? And why not? I know it’s true because I have all the proof I need. It pretty much told me so! And you wouldn’t call me delusional, would you? Well, not any more that you are (you *do* see things “normal” people have a hard time seeing, don’t you? god, jesus, saints, miracles…)! Of course there a millions of you out there believing in your god but up until now only one of me, so I’m the one who’s delusional. Ok, well just you wait. In 100 years we’ll be a recognized religion and then we’ll no longer be delusional. And your god better watch out: he’s going to be bitch-slapped every single day by our superior god! Long live the Ultimate bitch-slapper!
…Learn how to think, people. Please. There are no “subjective” proofs. Either a proof is right, or it is wrong. If a proof is right, it is accepted by all. If a proof is wrong, it is accepted by some feeble ones and called “faith issue”. Wake up.
(On second thought, better kneel down to your god and pray for forgiveness, all the more stupid people for me to exploit… Please, forget everything I said. You’re more exploitable as you are! What an idiot I’ve been, trying to wake you up! Who’s going to get fucked up the ass so I’m having the great time of my -single and cherished- life? Well, as for you, don’t worry about me getting the better of you - just endure it and you’ll be rewarded on the next life. Mwahahahah! Good one!)
Geez…
Proof is different from evidence…Proof is not dependent upon whether a said argument is “right” or “wrong”–it is merely necessary to be persuasive and compelling. Just one of the many definitions is that proof is anything that can make a person believe that a something is true or false. That means there is such a thing as “subjective proof” and it is used all the time.
You cannot possibly presume to be waking people up when you are not fully awakened yourself. You are wholly unprepared to descend back into the “darkness” of the cave and play the role of pedagogue for you are still blinded by what you perceive to be the “light” of your own logic.
Cheers
As I read through these discussions I see a common theme among the athiest community that is posting here. I’d like to list them to make sure I, and everyone else here, gets a better idea of the quality discussion.
Please correct me if i’m wrong.
Athiests believe “All Gods are false”, and believers in Gods must be verbally abused because of their inferior thought process, instead of helped to understand the atheistic ways. Ok, now that I have acknowleged 50% of the athiest comments on here, maybe we can cut to the chase and stop with the name calling and inellectuall gradings applied to non-athiests.
While I don’t anticipate that any posts provided on either side will sway any posters from one side to the other, I do feel it is neccessary continuing the conversation, as it seems some posters don’t understand a non-athiests reasoning.
I see it time and time again, that non-athiests are not as smart as others for believing in something that cannot be proved. This is a pride issue. Becuase a non-athiest may or may not get to heaven becuase of their beliefs, a non-athiest MUST depend on his belief that God is false to avoid any consequences after death. That being said, the athiests here make comments about intelligence and i would like to point out a few things.
1. Please tell me that you athiests didn’t fall for the comment at the end of those videos “any normal intelligent person believes…”. This again falls into the category of pride. We all like to think we are smarter than most others, and this fits that belief. Ergo, the video’s MUST be true. For cryin out loud, did you believe Al Gore when he said he invented the internet?????
2. Because non-athiests believe in something that can’t be proven, it means they must be idiots. Well, my friendly athiests, you are in the same boat as non-athiests on that one. I’ll explain…
I see here Bill is a “Scientist”. I’m sure we have many more, and I encourage them to respond. If God is not real and non-athiests are wrong for believing in him. I await any poster to show me proof that he is not. Not circumstantial or theoretical evidence mind you… I need hard evidence that scientists depend on. For example, if God is not the all powerful being that created everything, please provide the evidence for the person who did. I mean, you have the dead body of the person that created all, millions of years ago right? Anything? Clothing he wore? Anything at all, physical evidence… thats all we wait for. It’s easy to prove to yourself something isn’t the way it is without seeking proof, likewise, it is easy to prove to yourself something is the way it really is without proof. Athiests BELIEVE (or have faith) that God does not exist, even without supporting evidence… and for that Bill says, lock those crazy people up with the other 75% of the world that believes in a God. I believe Jesus died for my sins, and I’m sure I will be negatively commented for that, that’s my business. If you have serious questions as to why, ask. Don’t just bash everyone out there for not believing what you do, until you have a good understanding of their life.
I thought 18 was funny…
1.) We take it out of context
2.) That is only the old test. (Not true)
3.) Atheists don’t understand because we don’t have faith. You have to have faith to understand.
How does he know we take things out of context? Cause thats what a lot of athiests do… for example bill said, and I quote “I know there is a being so all-mighty and all-powerful…” “… What an idiot I’ve been”. Bill now believes in God from our conversation. In fact Bill does not, but becuase I took your statement, chopped prarts of your statement off and left evidence to the contrary some people may have believed it unless research was done to prove me wrong. That is a very common tactic… don’t worry, most Christians have come accross this more than once in their lives. As for the old testament, you ask questions about the bible, you get answeres accordingly, if you want to generalize about all Gods, you must refer to ALL texts from ALL religions, not just Chrisianity. Athiest Scientists should know this by know. As for number 3, the scientific community up until recently believed ulcers were caused by stress… science has recently shown it’s bacteria that causes this, but i’m sure the average american will still defend the “stress” cause until i give them supporting evidence to the contrary.
3. Finally, God is not real because bad things happen? God does not exist or is contradictory because he allowed bad things to happen?
Interesting argument, but ther is scripture to back this up, though i can’t be sure for all cultures that believe in God. If nothing bad ever happened, no one would be posting here. In fact your computer would not exist. A long time ago, man would not have needed to advance civilizations, and science would have no place in culture. After all, inventions comes from necessity… if we don’t need anything because nothing bad happens then we wouldn’t need to invent. Not only that, but i would happen to guess that no one would even bother questioning the reality of God. I doubt it would even enter anyones mind. In fact I believe it is because bad things happen that people find God. People seek answers because they hit hard times. People who don’t hit hard times don’t look for answeres. Why try to fix something that isn’t broke? That argument that bad things happens is really a joke. Hardly even close to representing something that could be construde as proof of his existance. How could someone be so full of pride as to try to explain the reasoning of a being that created nebula’s that we will never get close enough to study in our lifetime. You say we are brainwashed for believing something so asinine… well athiests do to.
Asinine:
adj.
Utterly stupid or silly: asinine behavior.
Of, relating to, or resembling an ass.
Asenine - You believe the sky is blue. Completely disreguarding the black sky behind it that changes the color of the atmosphere below it thus changing the color we see when we look through the atmosphere.
The Christian religion is no more asinine than the “Athiestic Belief System” or “Religion” as some might interperet it. We both believe in something that cannot be proven by science… big deal. Why am I less of a person for my beliefs? Why single out Christians? Because it’s one of the biggest belief systems (Religion as some people may call it, however incorrectly)around?
Summary of the above post…
1) Result of 1-1
2) School children conveyance spelled backward
3) Rationalized mental attitude
Nothing of importance (much like the last post)
LOL
gnxp.com/M...-thumb.jpg
queensu.ca...ntries.pdf
Religious people are poor and stupid. (With exception of the U.S) the poorer your country is, th e more religious you are. The more religious you are the lower your IQ.
That has more to do with political structure and cultural mores than it does religion but it is still worth noting if only to promote democracy.
A Christian, please understand that atheists (or, anybody else, for that matter) don’t *have* to provide *evidence* for the non-existence of something.
Can you provide evidence that a 1mm-diameter teapot does not exist in orbit around Jupiter?
Can you provide evidence for the non-existence of Unicorns?
Can you provide evidence for the non-existence of Santa-Claus?
Can you provide evidence that a pink dinosaur obsessed with bringing bad luck to anyone who utters the words “THE PINK DINOSAUR IN AFRICA DOESN’T EΧΙST” out loud, does not exist in Africa?
You can’t. But you are an intelligent being. You say to yourself: Is there any *evidence* that the teapot exists? No. Well, it doesn’t. Is there any *evidence* that Unicorns exist? No. Well, they don’t. What about Santa-Claus? No. Same thing. He doesn’t exist. (In spite of some children ACTUALLY believing that he exists - what happens is we adults convince them he exists and they follow suit - up until we tell them “yes, we were lying!”). What about the pink dinosaur? I, for, one am not afraid to say that “THE PINK DINOSAUR IN AFRICA DOESN’T EXIST” out loud. How about you? I hope you are not afraid, too. But why? Because there is not a single shred of evidence that supports the statement that “the pink dinosaur exists”.
You see, there is something called the burden of proof. Please try to understand this issue. The one who says “This exists” *HAS* to provide evidence. NOT the one who says: “No, this doesn’t exist”. He could, but it is extremely different!!! Theists are OBLIGATED to provide evidence, exactly as someone who says that the pink dinosaur exists. Non-theists (i.e. atheists), just as non-pink-dinosaur-ians have to provide none.
If you say that that the validity of the positions of atheists and theists is the same, you must aknowledge that the validity of you position that “there is no pink dinosaur” is of the same validity as someone’s who says that there is. Totally ridiculous. There is no pink dinosaur.
Please, please, “pretty please with sugar on top (TM)”, try to understand this. Thank you.
P.S.
Try to examine side by side santa-claus with jesus. The big difference is that as a child you probably were told, “ok there is no santa claus”….. Think about it.
Bill wrote…
P.S.
Try to examine side by side santa-claus with jesus. The big difference is that as a child you probably were told, “ok there is no santa clausâ€â€¦.. Think about it.
Just to clarify…Does that mean that you don’t believe that Yeshua existed or that you just don’t believe He was the Son of God? The reason that I ask is that many non-believers do not doubt that Yeshua the man existed.
Examining (side-by-side) Santa Claus with Yeshua as presented in the Gospels is quite easily done. Also, the Gospels do have to be considered as source material for they were not always part of the Bible (that came later). It would be like ignoring Josephus as source material–for even Josephus described some “far out” and “miraculous” and “supernatural” events. Why not apply the same literary analysis to the Gospels? Therefore, there is plenty of historical information and Yeshua displays quite human and natural characteristics as well as the supernatural.
Having said all of that…I do agree that one cannot prove a negative. What I disagree with is that the burden of proof lies with those who state the existence of something. The burden of proof lies with the one who is the original claimant in an argument just as in a court of law. In other words, if I am wandering about the internet and see someone say “God does not exist” and I respond with “Sure He does”, then it is still the burden of the original claimant to prove his case. At no time in the justice system do we make the defendant liable for proving his/her innocence??? No, the prosecutor (in your case the skeptic) is liable to prove his/her case. Else, why state it at all?
Oh, I almost forgot…
While not much is known about Saint Nicholas and much more is legend, nobody that I know seriously doubts that this namesake of Santa Claus did indeed exist as an historical person in about the 4th century A.D. so if I compare that to Yeshua then I am forced to conclude that at the very least, Yeshua existed as a man even if He became a “legendâ€. So really, your comparison falls “shortâ€. BTW, as a child I was told (as soon as I could understand) that there was no Santa Claus (as presented as a currently living and magical being). However, I was also told the history behind Old Saint Nick and that only provided me with a deeper appreciation for the season.
“Can you provide evidence that a 1mm-diameter teapot does not exist in orbit around Jupiter?
Can you provide evidence for the non-existence of Unicorns?
Can you provide evidence for the non-existence of Santa-Claus?”
Ugh you beat me to the punch, and it’s my blog. How pathetic is that =p
“That has more to do with political structure and cultural mores than it does religion but it is still worth noting if only to promote democracy.”
There is no denying of those results. It’s a very noticeable trend.
“Does that mean that you don’t believe that Yeshua existed or that you just don’t believe He was the Son of God? ”
Does being religious give you the right to bastardize the English language? Why are you capitalizing the word “he” or “son”. I could argue that “god” shouldn’t be capitalized. The definition is a supreme beam, not an actual person or name.
This is getting tiresome.
Asa:
1) No, Jesus might have existed. As Apollonius of Tyana did. The thing is, Apollonius did not have miraculous properties as people believed back then he did (walking through walls, healing people, raising the dead… The word was that he also resurrected and ascended to “heaven” but came back and his followers saw him). I’m not confused here, but you might be (ignorance is bliss). My point is that the possibility that jesus lived here on earth says nothing about his alleged legacy or powers. Did you know that people back then thought of Pythagoras (yes, the famous one) as being able to raise the dead too? In fact, every other guy was thought to have magical powers. Come on, people were pretty much cavemen back then!
Enough is enough about Josephus! The guy was not even born when jesus is said to have died!!! Get your facts straight. Jesus is said to have lived years 1 through 33 and josephus was born on 37 and lived to 100. By the time josephus wrote his first work (year 75) some 32 whole years had passed since jesus’ death!! (75 since he was born!!!!!!) You really think that guy was writing events as they happened, not being influenced by the jesus-craze? Would you trust someone writing “first-hand” about events in 1970, today? No. You would want someone that wrote back then! Wikipedia is your friend: en.wikiped...i/Josephus
As for the burden of proof, you couldn’t be more wrong. Once again, wikipedia is your friend. en.wikiped...fallacy%29
It has nothing to do with the original claimant, but with positive assertions. Do not confuse the legal system with logic. In logic and epistemology (wikipedia is your friend, again) you start by saying “I know nothing”, and then trying to build on top of that. Now, you want to convince me that “God exists” fits in “I know nothing”?
Finally, as I said in my first post, if we are discussing a possible “force” that started it all, etc, etc, we’re on the field of deism. Then we should all be agnostics. We might never know. Maybe, or maybe not. But if we descent to the field of theism, there are empirical stuff we can check about the Christian god, or any other god that forces us to be atheists. What all theists do is disregard or twist the *facts*. [See: evolution]
May I ask, why do you not believe in Zeus? Or Ra? Or Osiris? Or Dionysus? Or Odin? Or Thor? Or Vishnu? Or Brahman? Or The Flying Spaghetti Monster?
en.wikiped...of_deities
Can you see your spot? You are one of them. Your place is side by side the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Understand that. Why do you reject all of the other gods? They are exactly as credible as yours.
Stephen F. Roberts once said:
“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.”
“Science… mans law… it’s all the same, it all comes from the same place and ultimately has mans agenda behind it. We can make anything up we want to occomodate mans needs/wants.”
Wrong wrong WRONG!
Science is not “man’s law” at all; it is a process that man uses to understand the workings of the universe around him. Those with an agenda don’t last long, and in science - you can’t make stuff up. Hypothesis have been made that turned out to be wrong - but that’s a far cry from “making things up.”
Seeing that a Christian commented defending his faith, I’d like to remind everyone that Christianity does no exclude the old testament. Christian began as, and, in essence, still is Judaism with the belief that Jesus is the Messiah. Current Jews simply deny that Jesus is the Messiah and continue to wait for the coming of a savior.
During the time of Jesus and before Saul’s influence on Christianity, one had to first be a Jew and then convert. This means that one must believe in both Jewish doctrine and that of Jesus, as he is the Messiah. That said, the old testament is just as valid as the new testament within Christianity, unless Jesus explicitly say so.
“So the big bang theory wasn’t make random shit up? How is the big bang theory more plausible that waving a wand in the sky? Or the other countless theories. They were all just made by normal scientists. Just because we are are capable of thought does not mean we know everything there is or are correct. Just a few centuries ago people thought the world was flat and the centre of the universe as you said, why should ideas now be any different? Waking up to what, another ‘possible’ idea. What may happen in centuries in the future when the big bang theory is disproved, and the ‘wake up’ to some new theory?”
The Big Bang theory does have proof. It’s called background radiation, and is present throughout the universe. It was first witnessed when we put the first sattelites up to facilitate intercontinental telecommunications, and has been used by astronomers to map the early universe. The fact that other bodies of matter in the universe seem to be moving away from us shows that there must have been some force which acted upon them, and it may well be an initial explosion which made it so that all of the matter in the universe today is not still a massive singularity.
The people who thought the world was flat were Catholic clergymen and uneducated peasants who could not read the Bible for themselves, and so believed whatever they were told. Way to go there, stating an argument against yourself ;)
It was also scientists of that age who proved these things wrong; Copernicus actually looked at the planets’ orbits and realized that they were either orbiting the sun or traveling highly unusual orbits. Galileo was the one to find out that Jupiter had moons, and that not all bodies of matter were perfect spheres.
Men of science are ordinary people, yes, but they are of considerable intelligence–the intelligence which wakes one up from blind religious belief–and take a logical approach to establishing a base of facts for further scientific work. Religion, on the other hand, states that the law and word of god are PERFECT and that everything within them is true. Why is it true? Because god dictated these things to whoever wrote it. This is known as circular logic, which is fallacious because the two arguments are interdependent and so cannot prove each other because they are both still in question, having no definite proof of their status as fact.
Yes, we will “wake up” to some new theory. Science has the advantage of being open to change when it is wrong. The Bible, on the other hand, continues to make fictitious statements long after they have been disproven. Just as one ceases to believe a liar upon discovering his habit, one should cease to believe a book full of logical fallacies and plainly incorrect statements. The new theory, though, will not only include proof of the Big Bang–background radiation and expansion of the universe evident of their movement away from the location of said singularity–but it will include what disproved the Big Bang theory. In this way, theories will only be more sophisticated and will be more inclusive to experimental results as time goes on and science continues to be practiced.
Bottom line: don’t talk about what you don’t know. You clearly only have superficial knowledge of the most popular scientific theories and have no good reason to believe in any religious dogma.
I don’t understand why some people are so determine to discredit someone’s GOD. I believe everyone has a choice to believe in what they choose. It makes no difference to me if my neighbor believes in GOD or not.
I think you have to be more sympathetic to the fact that some people may need a GOD. To some GOD gives people hope. GOD is also used to take away fear, as a cooping mechanism and a support system. Others need GOD as a moral guidance. GOD also puts meaning into people’s life. Things that I see nothing wrong with.
I think the real problem is not weather a GOD exist or not. I think the real problem with GOD is some people stop thinking for themselves. I have problem with people who use GOD to justify their actions and when people’s faith are used against them for another person’s personal/political gain.
There are a lot of current issues in society that need to be thought out and not just discounted because the bible says. I am sure we can all interpret the Bible how we want to support any argument.
I encourage people to never stop thinking or questioning with an open mind.
Here again:
World is flat = Big Bang Theory.
Both based on very few scientific facts.
World is flat - Must be true because when I sail out to see, all I see is more water.
Big Bang Theory - Must be true because space appears to be expanding. Oh, and radiation.
*You cannot disprove theory with theory*
Burden of proof? It was not the people who said the world was flat that had to prove it. It was the people who said it was not flat.
That being said, should it not be the, according to post 29, “smarter” scientists that must prove God does not exist? It’s only rational right? Tell me, big bang supporters. The explosion that created everything… what was it that exploded and who made it? It’s hard to argue an irrational theory with you “scientists” who know so much. The Bible has answers to these and other things. It is your choice to believe them, all I can do is try to open your mind to the possibility that it might be true (something that a scientist would not have a problem with, being that a scientist cannot rule it out just because it is not proven). A scientist cannot rule out any reason without proper testing and supporting evidence. To do so would produce tainted results that show the results the scientist wanted to see in the first place. If this is the case, why argue at all. A scientist must be open to all possibilities, and follow the evidence to a conclusion. If you have evidence of our current discussion we need to get a hold of the Nobel committee… because we need to start handing out prizes to these people. That prize was handed out to people who answered far more trivial quandaries of man.
35. Xeshire says
“Science is not “man’s law” at all; it is a process that man uses to understand the workings of the universe around him.”
Not man’s law? Process? Created by whom? While I don’t disagree that questioning things around him are good practice… you cannot deny it was a process made by man.