Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

[mtimber]

Hedonist wrote:

<quoted text>
Yes, if you claim that morals come from an invisible supernatural sky deity without any evidence what-so-ever to substantiat your claim or at least differentiate it from all the other deity claims, then you are right.
I do try to be patient with stupidity, but not with those that are so proud of it as you are.

So you come back to this argument.

Stupid: God did it.

Intelligent: A Rock did it.

Do you really want to chase that cat up the tree again?

This is also not a question of evidence, it would not matter what evidence I showed you, you already have a priori position, that denying God is essential for you to justify your own personal choices in life.

Evidence will never convince you, because you are not really open to evidence.

Your presuppositional worldview precludes it.

[mtimber]

Hedonist wrote:

<quoted text>
Do you still kill witches?
Religious morality is the most inconsistent morality imaginable.

Why would you care?

Atheists embrace inconsistent morality.

They promote the idea of subjective morality.

So why are you contending that it is wrong to be inconsistent morally?

Are you using Gods laws of morality to argue that God doesn't exist again and has no claim on you?

[Thinking]

You have been doing what?

mtimber wrote:

<quoted text>
I have been doing...
By showing the inconsistencies in atheistic thinking, particularly in the realm of morality.

[Thinking]

BS

mtimber wrote:

<quoted text>
So you are your own absolute standard when it comes to defining morality?
What if your neighbour believes they are also their own absolute standard and they disagree with you.
Who is right, them or you?
You are making arbitrary claims about absolute morality, based on your own perceived authority.
But are you omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent and eternal in nature?
Because that is what you need to be if you want to set yourself as the final authority on absolute morality...
Do you understand your own reasoning on this point and the absurd conclusion it takes you to?

[mtimber]

Thinking wrote:

BS
<quoted text>

Do you have a rational response to make, or can you only offer arbitrary opinions when you disagree with something?

Your hostility reveals some deep seated anger about something...

[madscot]

This...this here :

mtimber wrote:

What if your neighbour believes they are also their own absolute standard and they disagree with you.

[Givemeliberty]

Wow so many words and yet saying nothing. So now you are not only part of the godhead but also a co creator of the universe? Lmfao!

This one is nuttier than squirrel droppings!

So stop stalling and tell us your solutions to fix things. You claimed as a god and creator of the universe that you had these solutions so by all means share these solutions with us captain crazysht!

Wrathbone wrote:

<quoted text>
Obviously you find the idea of being part of God threatening, and yet you are not personally diminished. As co-creators with God, we have the ability to create a sane and just society in which to live. Isn't that what we all want? Or do you need "evil" religions to exonerate your perception of the goodness of atheism?
A belief in good without a belief in evil, may seem highly unrealistic to you but this belief is the best kind of insurance you can have, both during physical life and afterwards..

[Givemeliberty]

Well let's see we have this turd who refuses to acknowledge the answers given him an just blindly repeats them again and again.

Game over turd. Time to flush.

:Flush:

mtimber wrote:

<quoted text>
Absolute morality requires an absolute God by definition...
It is self attesting.
All absolute moral positions come from God.

[Hedonist]

mtimber wrote:

<quoted text>
...This is also not a question of evidence, it would not matter what evidence I showed you, you already have a priori position, that denying God is essential for you to justify your own personal choices in life.
Evidence will never convince you, because you are not really open to evidence.
Your presuppositional worldview precludes it.

How would you know, you never have presented any.

Should I just take everybody's word for whatever they claim to be true or should I require real evidence before believing that Shiva is real?

[Hedonist]

mtimber wrote:

<quoted text>
Why would you care?
Atheists embrace inconsistent morality.
They promote the idea of subjective morality.
So why are you contending that it is wrong to be inconsistent morally?
Are you using Gods laws of morality to argue that God doesn't exist again and has no claim on you?

Still trying to pass of your straw man fallacy. Nobody's buying it.

I notice you continue to side step any discussion of how inconsistent religious morals are. Do you still kill witches? Wouldn't you just love to burn me at the stake right now if it was still legal?

[BBSting]

Givemeliberty wrote:

Wow so many words and yet saying nothing. So now you are not only part of the godhead but also a co creator of the universe? Lmfao!
This one is nuttier than squirrel droppings!
So stop stalling and tell us your solutions to fix things. You claimed as a god and creator of the universe that you had these solutions so by all means share these solutions with us captain crazysht!
<quoted text>

What's your solution big mouth? I mean, besides twisting and distorting the words of others. The atheistic position that life happened randomly for no particular reason and nothing matters in the end has about as much appeal to the intelligent thinking individual as a turd in a punch bowl!

[Khatru]

mtimber wrote:

<quoted text>
Doesn't matter how you deny it, it is a standard fallacy of bifurcation you committed.
A little bit of research will show you that.
Why would you be concerned about genocide being something that is indefensible?
You are an atheist, you have no absolute moral standards to appeal to.
If one society decides to kill another for the sake of survival, why would you deem that wrong?
Why do you keep appealing to absolute moral standards?
We both know why.
You live in a universe created by God, which includes absolute moral standards.
Which makes sense as to why you appeal to them.
But knowing that you would have to acknowledge God if you recognise them, you will deny them, whilst using them.
Showing your inconsistency and revealing that you do really know the truth on this matter...
It is not a question of God existing or not, it is a question of Gods authority over you that you take the real issue with.

Who are you to dictate who has/hasn't got moral standards?

You would confine all of morality to your superstition and then limit it to an unprovable supernatural being.

[Khatru]

mtimber wrote:

<quoted text>
No, I am claiming absolute morality proceeds from Gods very nature.
The God revealed in the Bible.
You are not going to get very far if you cannot understand my most basic argument.
You can argue all day long with a strawman if you want to, but it will be quite a futile exercise.

You really shouldn't refer to your god as a strawman.

He's killed thousands for a lot less than that.

[Givemeliberty]

Strawman argument as expected. Ignored and rightly so.

Can you give is any reasons as to why your god is anything more than a delusion? Wrathbone claims that he himself is a god and creator of the universe, do you believe him? Do you worship him?

Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahahah a!

BBSting wrote:

<quoted text>
What's your solution big mouth? I mean, besides twisting and distorting the words of others. The atheistic position that life happened randomly for no particular reason and nothing matters in the end has about as much appeal to the intelligent thinking individual as a turd in a punch bowl!

[albtraum]

mtimber wrote:

<quoted text>
Your response was built on a number of false premises and assumptions.
However, how do you account for the concept of right and wrong?

Learning as a child how to get along with others is the start. How you treat others and how they respond teach you how to behave for the best social interaction.....that's just the start.

We learn about pain and pleasure as we go, our elders teach us the finer points sometimes but trial and error (personal experience) is what really counts.

I can read history of ALL nations, philosophy or novels and acquire more knowledge of good vs bad judgement than your outdated, conflicting and boring 'good' book.

You theists seem to think you invented the notion of morality....you didn't.

[albtraum]

mtimber wrote:

<quoted text>
Do you accept the idea that non-life produced life?
If you do, then my question is:
Did you observe that?

No and no.

[albtraum]

mtimber wrote:

<quoted text>
I reject your arbitrary claim of having superior scientific comprehension.
Why?
Because you still assert a "rock did it" without being able to supply any empirical evidence for it.
Why would I accept your authority if you cannot rationally establish a basis for your claim to greater knowledge on such a simple matter as this.

He has shown much more scientific knowledge than you could ever hope to display. Fact.

Also the little fact that you attempt to pronounce judgement on a concept you can't even begin to understand only accentuates your ignorance.

In your unwitting arrogance, you are a poster child in favor of atheism. Never drink and drive. Learn to separate reality from myths, they just don't mix well.

[albtraum]

mtimber wrote:

<quoted text>
Do you have a rational argument to make?

Already asked and answered, do try to move on.

[albtraum]

BBSting wrote:

<quoted text>
What's your solution big mouth? I mean, besides twisting and distorting the words of others. The atheistic position that life happened randomly for no particular reason and nothing matters in the end has about as much appeal to the intelligent thinking individual as a turd in a punch bowl!

What does truth and knowledge have to do with appeal? You only accept facts as facts if they are popular and appealing?

Very sad.

[BBSting]

albtraum wrote:

<quoted text>
What does truth and knowledge have to do with appeal? You only accept facts as facts if they are popular and appealing?
Very sad.

The myths of science are hardly truth and knowledge.