Don't dictate beliefs

Sep 5, 2012 Full story: The Star Press 11,175

No one else can say otherwise? That is basically saying those who do "believe in God" are better? Hardly.

Full Story

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#10816 Jan 9, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
"Choice? Like there is no book, and your name hasn't been written there-in? If your name is not there, can you do anything to get it put in? If your name is there, can you do anything that would get your name taken out?"
Yes choice
Yes there is a book of life.
Yes our name are in that book.
Yes you can get you name added to the book of life.
Yes just keep doing what you're doing. That should keep your name out of that book.
So your god doesn't know who will and who won't be in the book? Really, not much of a god.

I like that we are in charge of how we bounce him around.

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#10817 Jan 9, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
"It's too bad for you and lucky for your spell casters that just about every human ever born has a bastard or twelve in just about every generation, so really nobody gets to go to heaven. No proof works best for the man with the sermon, and his pet politician"
Note to Reason Personified: try and not show your complete ignorance of the Christian faith with postings like this.
(Nut case!)
Jesus is consigned to the lake of fire already. If you believe the bible, then you have to believe that. Mary and Jehovah cuckolded Joseph, and his marrying her did not make the illegitimate child his at all. The child was born a bastard, and bound for hell, just ask your god.
KJV

United States

#10818 Jan 9, 2013
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>So your god doesn't know who will and who won't be in the book? Really, not much of a god.

I like that we are in charge of how we bounce him around.
I don't know what you're talking about.
I don't have a god.
KJV

United States

#10819 Jan 9, 2013
Reason Personified wrote:
<quoted text>Jesus is consigned to the lake of fire already. If you believe the bible, then you have to believe that. Mary and Jehovah cuckolded Joseph, and his marrying her did not make the illegitimate child his at all. The child was born a bastard, and bound for hell, just ask your god.
As stated before.(Nut case)

Since: Mar 11

United States

#10820 Jan 9, 2013
For someone who doesn't care about atheism you sure spend a lot of time writing about it.
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
For someone who doesn't care what the Bible says, you sure spend a lot of time writing about it.

Since: Mar 11

United States

#10821 Jan 9, 2013
Again why should anyone accept this creator is anything more than a figment of someone's imagination a delusion handed down generation to generation?

The bible is a hodge podge of legends collected from the Middle East. Why would it be so difficult for a writer to read or hear a story from a century ago and then pen his own similar story incorporating some of the same characters. Hell Joseph Smith did that, nothing special I could write some bible myth inspired fan fiction like he did, that doesn't prove that God is real.

All you have done is argue band wagon fallacy, injected your biased opinion and then went off on some random temper tantrum about an off topic subject like Darwin. Sorry but evolution has nothing to do with atheism.

I am not even asking for proof of God here, I am merely asking why I or anyone should accept him as anything more than a figment of someone's imagination.

It seems you don't have an answer as expected.
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
God is the Creator of heaven and earth and everything else. The Bible was not written by “someone”(s) imagination. It has many authors, spanning centuries. None of it has ever been proven untrue. People try all the time, and fail, because there are valid explanations for anything that on the surface appears to be a discrepancy. One part of it refers to another, confirms another, and all can be reconciled. Why would so many authors from so many centuries create an imaginary story? How could they confer with one another to do so when their lives did not overlap? Why would they endure persecution and die for an imaginary belief? What was to be gained?

Since: Mar 11

United States

#10822 Jan 9, 2013
I asked a question and I believe you are unable to answer it as you have clearly demonstrated.
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
If that's what you believe.

Since: Mar 11

United States

#10823 Jan 9, 2013
My main point was just that, not letting them frame the debate into a God vs Darwin argument. We're smarter than that. Retired pharmacist sorry I can't get you a discount on Z-packs anymore :(

My drug reaction example was really more geared towards the theist or person who wants to use the 100% claim on atheists and that of we can't show that the sky wizard doesn't exist 100% we are the same as a religious person. Few things can be demonstrated 100% but what we people of reason do is examine the facts and come to the best possible answer.

To the 100% asking theist I would like to ask them if they could demonstrate 1% of evidence for their sky wizard :)

A pleasure as always IANS I hope you have been doing well.
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
OK. I see your point. I agree. I try to never let the Christian frame the discussion whenever I'm aware its happening.
<quoted text>
Drugs, huh? Are you a pharmacist?
<quoted text>
Sure. Interesting.
<quoted text>
You seem to think that the theist is your target. If that's what you think, I suggest looking at what you're doing from another perspective. We're your audience - the other skeptics. There's really nothing urgent about the post to the theist like there is when you're on the phone to a prescribing doc trying to prevent an untoward drug reaction. You don't really have to get through to the theist. In fact, you can bet you won't.
Look at it like this: If it were only you and Dim in this thread, or if it were just you and him sending emails back and forth,how long ago would you have been out of here? First day? Second?
If that's so, doesn't it mean that you already understand all of that intuitively, even if you weren't explicitly aware of it?
We're your audience, you're a good communicator, and you don't have to choose your words carefully for us.
Did I understand you correctly? Are we discussing the same thing?

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#10824 Jan 9, 2013
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
Post 10761 has been reported as abuse.
It's not abuse if it's true.

Since: Mar 11

United States

#10825 Jan 9, 2013
So you were going for the stupid.
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
That's ok I was not going for the laughs.

“There is no such thing”

Since: May 08

as a reasonable person

#10827 Jan 9, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
Me, too.
Are you old enough to remember the TV series I Spy? Bill Cosby was the first black actor in a leading role in a television series. What is even more remarkable is that he didn't play a black man. The actor was black, but the character was raceless, not ethnic.
BTW, was that a yes or a no?
I like old shows but I don't think that I am that old. I remeber Fat Albert and Picture pages.. sort of.
That would be a yes.

“There is no such thing”

Since: May 08

as a reasonable person

#10828 Jan 9, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
OK. I see your point. I agree. I try to never let the Christian frame the discussion whenever I'm aware its happening.
<quoted text>
I see no problem letting them frame the discussion. They end up wrong no matter who leads. One way takes longer but they always end up backing themselves into a corner.
Also, people tend to learn better when not directly confronted or told outright that their ideas are wrong. It works best to ease them into the concept than to attempt humiliate them into submission. I understand that with religion it is not as easy as it would be with physics because of the fall back of "godditit".
But what do I know?..
http://www.cie.uci.edu/prepare/shock.shtml


"when we teach, we must take into account what the learners know, including their incorrect knowledge."
http://www.physics.usyd.edu.au/pdfs/research/... (Muller).pdf
I understand that his paper is on teaching physics with multimedia but it does cover how people learn and it is quite interesting.

Since: Mar 11

United States

#10829 Jan 9, 2013
I have had people say that it's more productive to dub yourself an agnostic because it doesn't hurt the theist's feelings so much. It's nicer and gentler. But that seems cruel to me because I would be misleading them.

To me an honest realty which may seem cold to some is better than a comforting lie. These are adults and as adults they should be able to deal with reality.
Lil Ticked wrote:
<quoted text>I see no problem letting them frame the discussion. They end up wrong no matter who leads. One way takes longer but they always end up backing themselves into a corner.
Also, people tend to learn better when not directly confronted or told outright that their ideas are wrong. It works best to ease them into the concept than to attempt humiliate them into submission. I understand that with religion it is not as easy as it would be with physics because of the fall back of "godditit".
But what do I know?..
http://www.cie.uci.edu/prepare/shock.shtml
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =cY_o4A1wzsgXX
"when we teach, we must take into account what the learners know, including their incorrect knowledge."
http://www.physics.usyd.edu.au/pdfs/research/... (Muller).pdf
I understand that his paper is on teaching physics with multimedia but it does cover how people learn and it is quite interesting.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#10830 Jan 9, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
It's never too early to instill conformity. I've got some ideas for advertising bumper stickers.

Babies who wear Huggies, never become druggies. If you put Pampers on your child, they'll never go wild.
How about "It's never too early to instill conformity"?

Here are my contributions:

"Are you borin' again?"
"Praise the lowered."

Since: Mar 11

United States

#10831 Jan 9, 2013
Oh and as a follow up I have noticed many non believers hide away from the term atheist even though they are without theism. Often they at some point cite negative traits associated with the term atheist that are by the way placed on the term by theists. Or how a theist may perhaps be offended by someone calling themselves an atheist. Why should I care about their bigotry? That is their issue not mine.

Now in the end I could care less if a non believer calls themselves a super awesome reason loving non believing in deities dude/chick. That being said allowing theists to exercise that control over you because of their ill conceived notions is unacceptable to me.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#10832 Jan 9, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
What are the odds of the parts of an infinite god finding one another without an intelligent designer? Zero? My money is on a gene existing without a god before a god existing without a gene.
KJV wrote:
So you're a betting man.
You introduced probability when you assigned the odds of a 300 nucleotide sequence forming at 1 in 4E300. I thought that you were the betting man. I just showed you which was the better bet.

Why do you keep ignoring the argument above? Does you god get a pass from your analysis? For you, everything else is subjected to a statistical pseudoanalysis and rated unlikely - except the unlikeliest thing possible: an infinite creature. That gets a pass.

What make you believe that a god could exist uncreated? And if one could form, why not a race of them? Does the first one keep eating the new ones that form from the same process that formed it?

You apparently have no answer to any of that, so you just keep ignoring the god side of the problem. I guess that is your answer.

“There is no such thing”

Since: May 08

as a reasonable person

#10833 Jan 9, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
I have had people say that it's more productive to dub yourself an agnostic because it doesn't hurt the theist's feelings so much. It's nicer and gentler. But that seems cruel to me because I would be misleading them.
To me an honest realty which may seem cold to some is better than a comforting lie. These are adults and as adults they should be able to deal with reality.
<quoted text>
I find that some theists dislike agnostics just as much as they dislike atheists. That issue doesn't matter much. To most if you don't follow a religion you are an atheist.
The term reality can be a confusing thing.
http://www.newscientist.com/special/reality
http://www.bowperson.com/309BrainScienceWeb.p...
http://uwf.edu/wmikulas/Webpage/learning/intr...

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#10834 Jan 10, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
"Choice? Like there is no book, and your name hasn't been written there-in? If your name is not there, can you do anything to get it put in? If your name is there, can you do anything that would get your name taken out?"
Yes choice
Yes there is a book of life.
Yes our name are in that book.
Yes you can get you name added to the book of life.
Yes just keep doing what you're doing. That should keep your name out of that book.
Your book has already called all atheists fools and wicked people and I've never met a single Christian who has asked for that disgusting insult to be removed from your books.

That shows how hateful you people are when it comes down to the ink and paper in your cult's manual.

You preach love, while in your book is hatred for all to see.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#10835 Jan 10, 2013
Lil Ticked wrote:
<quoted text>I find that some theists dislike agnostics just as much as they dislike atheists. That issue doesn't matter much. To most if you don't follow a religion you are an atheist.
The term reality can be a confusing thing.
http://www.newscientist.com/special/reality
http://www.bowperson.com/309BrainScienceWeb.p...
http://uwf.edu/wmikulas/Webpage/learning/intr...
You don't find anything - you're not a researcher, you don't have a valid opinion - your just a mere creationists sing as an agnostic atheist .

Whenever the conversation becomes about how atheism factually beats theism, you chime in and disrupt e conversation.

That is your game, and it's up.

“There is no such thing”

Since: May 08

as a reasonable person

#10836 Jan 10, 2013
-Skeptic- wrote:
<quoted text>
You don't find anything - you're not a researcher, you don't have a valid opinion - your just a mere creationists sing as an agnostic atheist .
Whenever the conversation becomes about how atheism factually beats theism, you chime in and disrupt e conversation.
That is your game, and it's up.
You are the one disrupting the conversation here.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
The Consequences of Atheism 3 min polymath257 768
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 11 min thewordofme 235,671
Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... 1 hr woodtick57 4,817
"Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 4 hr One way or another 16,721
Is Religion Childish? 5 hr Thinking 142
Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 14 hr ChristineM 6,034
Richard Dawkins - God is evil, pedophilesa not ... (Sep '13) 14 hr ChristineM 3,036
More from around the web