Question for Athiests - Page 17 - Political Forum

Bill Shatner · 12-05-2007, 04:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caltex

Atheism IS NOT A RELIGION. Why must you keep saying this. It is the complete lack of a religion. It is a belief or rather a lack of a belief in gods and higher powers. If an individual who lacks faith rallies against faith, they are doing on on their own. There is no organized religion telling them to do it.

Don't worry, rather than respond to your rational and sensible questions or comments he's just start ignoring you.

Out of sight; out of mind.

Ygorl · 12-05-2007, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caltex

You just don't get it. Hitler, Stalin, and Mao. were NOT intolerant because of they didn't believe in a god. It is pure coincidence. You can be intolerant for a multitude of reasons, Religion is one of those possibilities. Atheism does not have an intolerant past, since their is no religion of Atheism, it cannot have a reason to advocate intolerance.

An Atheist who happens to be intolerant is intolerant for their own reasons. They are not so because their religion tells them so.

I don't see how that quote proves anything. All it shows is someone who's standing up for their beliefs. There is no church or holy books that advocate doing that. He's an individual going against something he believes.

Religions like Christianity, Islam, and Judaism, specifically include intolerance of "heretics" and "infidels" in their teachings. So one could become intolerant by obeying the teachings of the religion. To be a tolerant Christian, you must first disobey or at least ignore part of the teachings of your faith. This is key.

Atheism IS NOT A RELIGION. Why must you keep saying this. It is the complete lack of a religion. It is a belief or rather a lack of a belief in gods and higher powers. If an individual who lacks faith rallies against faith, they are doing on on their own. There is no organized religion telling them to do it.

The lack of faith cannot be intolerant, or advocate intolerance. An organized Religion or an individual can do that. Just as a Christian can be intolerant for reasons other then their religion, an Atheist must be, because of not having one.

Atheism IS a religion. We have here An atheist pleaded with a federal appeals court Tuesday to remove the words ''under God'' from the Pledge of Allegiance and ''In God We Trust'' from U.S. currency, saying the references disrespect his religious beliefs. - Newsmax.com - Federal Court Hears Pledge, In God We Trust Cases - an atheist ADMITTING it.

Atheists beleive there is no God. They can't prove there is no God, but they firmly beleive there IS no God.

Religious people beleive there IS a God. They can't prove there is a God, but they firmly beleive there IS a God.

There is "no logical reason to believe there" is or there isn't.

They are both on the same footing as far as taking faith in, and beleiving that they are RIGHT.

So atheism is just another form of religion. A form of religion that TRIES desperately to hide behind "logic and reason."

There's no more "logic and reason" to beleive there's NOT a God than there is to believing that there IS a God.

You can keep repeating (you're not the first) that atheism isn't a religion until your blue in the face.

The truth is out. We've finally heard from an honest atheist. An honest atheist who ...pleaded with a federal appeals court Tuesday to remove the words ''under God'' from the Pledge of Allegiance and ''In God We Trust'' from U.S. currency, saying the references disrespect his religious beliefs !

------------------------------------------

Sure is an interesting "coincidence" that three of histories most successful mass murderers were atheists.

Dismiss this fact as a "coincidence" if it helps you ignore that the religion of atheism has shown it's ugly head as the most dangerous, intolerant religion humanity has yet dreamed UP.

Ygorl · 12-05-2007, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bill Shatner

I know you're ascaird of me and probably won't reply but I am going to go ahead and respond to your assertions anyway - for the sake of exposing you.

The first absurd notion here is assuming that we cannot possibly understand something as pedomorphic as cloud fairies.

What a crock.

We can comprehend how space time is curved by matter to create gravity but we simply cannot a mythical fairy up in the sky?

Come on jack, you're going to have to do way better than that to get even the smallest bit of respect.

Anyway bubby, when we "sit next to god" is that on a puffy love seat or does god have separate barcaloungers so he doesn't "look gay"?

...........more bullshit

Yes B.S. I have you on ignore. You've proven that I did the right thing putting you there:

I know you're ascaird of me .......

....for the sake of exposing you.

The first absurd notion .... pedomorphic as cloud fairies......What a crock.

We can comprehend how space time is curved by matter to create gravity but we simply cannot a mythical fairy up in the sky?

Come on jack, you're going to have to do way better than that to get even the smallest bit of respect.

Anyway bubby, when we "sit next to god" is that on a puffy love seat or does god have separate barcaloungers so he doesn't "look gay"?

You're purpose isn't discussion. It's only insulting troll-baiting.

But, that you're so arrogant you beleive you're capable of knowing and understanding God and Gods purpose, explains your nasty attitude.

Do tell everyone else what a fool I am for "beleiving in cloud fairies".

Keep on like this and I don't see you lasting long here "bubby."

Seer · 12-05-2007, 06:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rodog

But then there is the question as to how the Creator was created. By accident?

“Created” is a verb that implies the passage of time. If god(s) made time, s/he doesn’t need to be "created" does s/he?

Seer · 12-05-2007, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rodog

But then there is the question as to how the Creator was created. By accident?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seer

“Created” is a verb that implies the passage of time. If god(s) made time, s/he doesn’t need to be "created" does s/he?

Quote:

Originally Posted by rodog

Sounds like nothing more then a cope out. ...

It’s not really a cop out. I’ve been on only a few other forums before this one. The one I was on before this one was a comparative religion forum. I have seen your question asked a thousand times and the answer I gave you was always well supported by the opposition a thousand times in rebuttal. I’m not even religious either, I’m merely playing devils advocate (as I always will in a religious conversation because I’m (in a complicated way) agnostic). You have the right to think it is a cop out if you wish because there is no way to rebut it. It is merely an application to the idea of God that works within its context.

Quote:

Originally Posted by rodog

... Using your logical anything that created something as complex as the universe (if the universe had to occur on purpose) would have to be equally or more complex then the universe itself.

Who is saying God(dess) is or isn’t more complicated than the universe s/he created? Moreover, why would this matter?

Ygorl · 12-06-2007, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seer

It’s not really a cop out. I’ve been on only a few other forums before this one. The one I was on before this one was a comparative religion forum. I have seen your question asked a thousand times and the answer I gave you was always well supported by the opposition a thousand times in rebuttal. I’m not even religious either, I’m merely playing devils advocate (as I always will in a religious conversation because I’m (in a complicated way) agnostic).

Me too. We can always get into the arguments of accepting that the universe "just is" or saying that there's a God and asking where HE/IT came from and if HE/IT was created where did HIS creator come from ?

Somewhere there is an "it just IS."

Why ?

Don't ask me

Ask Mr. Shatner. He seems to know everything.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seer

Who is saying God(dess) is or isn’t more complicated than the universe s/he created? Moreover, why would this matter?

It comes down to this:

Many of us don't like accepting that we're ignorant on this subject. We don't LIKE being ignorant and not knowing something. Maybe it makes us feel inadequate or stupid.

However, it's not our fault.

It's work to accept the fact that we don't and CAN'T know everything. That we AREN'T "masters of the universe."

This is where and why faith comes in I suppose.

My OWN faith being that I have faith that I don't know everything. I'm pretty sure I'm absolutely right. Just as sure as those who have faith that there IS a God and just as sure as those who have faith that there ISN'T a God.

Of these three options:

1. Faith that we don't know everything.

2. Faith that there's a God who created everything for a "divine purpose."

3. Faith that there ISN'T a God.

Which is the most likely ?

Matthew.lincoln · 12-06-2007, 11:44 PM

One who says a god has to have a gender?

Seer · 12-07-2007, 01:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ygorl

Me too. We can always get into the arguments of accepting that the universe "just is" or saying that there's a God and asking where HE/IT came from and if HE/IT was created where did HIS creator come from ?

Somewhere there is an "it just IS."

Why ?

Don't ask me

Ask Mr. Shatner. He seems to know everything.

It comes down to this:

Many of us don't like accepting that we're ignorant on this subject. We don't LIKE being ignorant and not knowing something. Maybe it makes us feel inadequate or stupid.

However, it's not our fault.

It's work to accept the fact that we don't and CAN'T know everything. That we AREN'T "masters of the universe."

This is where and why faith comes in I suppose.

My OWN faith being that I have faith that I don't know everything. I'm pretty sure I'm absolutely right. Just as sure as those who have faith that there IS a God and just as sure as those who have faith that there ISN'T a God.

Of these three options:

1. Faith that we don't know everything.

2. Faith that there's a God who created everything for a "divine purpose."

3. Faith that there ISN'T a God.

Which is the most likely ?

Exactly.
I agree.
…
Which is more likely?
#1. In my mind is…
But because #1 is, they are all as equally likely… and unlikely
Oooo…. Existential… nice…

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matthew.lincoln

One who says a god has to have a gender?

huh?

Ygorl · 12-07-2007, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seer

Exactly.
I agree.
…
Which is more likely?
#1. In my mind is…
But because #1 is, they are all as equally likely… and unlikely
Oooo…. Existential… nice…

Yeah :-)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Seer

huh?

Yeah, I haven't the foggiest idea what that comment was about either.

Caltex · 12-07-2007, 12:26 PM

Ok, to further refute Ygorl's constant assertion that not believing in god is having faith in his non existence, rather then not having any faith in his existence, I shall do a test.

A logical stance is to not believe anything until you are shown it is true. This is a neutral stance to everything. I don't believe that the world is flat unless someone can prove it. Believing in things without proof leads to highly illogical thinking. Dragons are coming because my neighbor told me so! Abandon your homes and go south.

Next, in order to prove a god exists, a miracle must occur on demand. If there is a god, lightning will strike outside in my view as soon as I hit the post button. If this does not occur then it affirms either god does not exist, or that he ignores my requests.

So using logic alone I can conclude either god doesn't listen to me, or he does not exist. It is not logical to say that he does exist and that he just ignored me. Since I still have not seen any proof in his existence I will remain a skeptic.

This is why Agnostic Atheism is logical, and faith is not. I hold no faith in the non existence, I just doubt it unless proven otherwise. Just as I do not believe that there are fairies, I do not believe there is a god. If that lightning strikes I will become a believer, but alas it probably will not strike.

This is why Atheism is not a religion, but a skeptics belief system. A Skeptics belief system may take the place of a religion, but it is not one, as it does not follow any teachings or faith based beliefs, it is using ones own mind and logic.