Why Should Jesus Love Me?

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#548972 Jun 20, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Because you have confidence, faith, trust in your opinion that there is no god.
Nope. That's not how it works.

It's commonly said that the position of not having a belief in god(s), "atheism", is just as tenuous a position as a belief in god(s),"theism". The notion being atheism requires a faith of some sort to not have a belief in whatever deity is being discussed.

Essentially saying an atheist has to maintain a counter belief in Vishnu, Brahma,Yahweh, Allah( the un-same 'god"), Jaguar gods, Tree gods etc...at all times.

By that reasoning, a theist who believes in one god, then by extension has to maintain a belief in the non belief of all other gods...I don't think that's the case.I think if it's considered in that light, then most would see why being atheist doesn't require a faith in not having a belief.

Atheism isn't specific towards any particular god(s). It isn't a belief.

Theists will argue, no matter the god they believe in, that an atheist somehow maintains a belief that is specific to each individual's god of not existing.

I'd add it's said the atheist and agnostic, wouldn't exist if not for the beliefs of theist's, this is correct.

Anyway, the following are some creatures, beings, gods, etc..that required belief, and do not require a belief to not believe in...from various cultures and regions: Minotaur, Re'em, Kholomodumo, Apollo, Dead Sea Apes, Centaur, Trenti, Hel, Haetae,?kubi, Golem, Polong...
The following are from the U.K ..Lubber fiend, Joint-eater, Joan the Wad,(love you guys), and finally for a contemporary example from the U.S, although the Catholic church I'm sure shudders at the name.........(drumroll& cymbal clash)

The nefarious Pope Lick Monster.

There are numerous others, and I assert that in each instance the people who said or say "no, these creatures/beings are not real" were accused of having a faith in a belief that they didn't exist. In retrospect, it's obvious they didn't(exist), and by the same token you can't say that by lacking a belief in something that is found to be real, is a form of faith in "un-belief" either. As an example: the Minotaur is found, archaeological skeletal evidence.That would only support the people who believed in them years ago(who are dead and gained nothing by the faith in the belief).

Yet , god belief is seen as a separate issue, and is in reality no more deserving of maintaining a belief in by faith, than anything else that people have believed in (mythical creatures , monsters etc...) using faith to support, past or present.

I should add that if any of those previous , current or future beings/creatures/"superna tural things" that people have believed in or yet to believe in are found to be actual...they will not require one bit of belief, or faith to support a belief, to understand that they are in fact real.

If that were to happen, I'd have no problem changing my lack of a belief in any of them to a position of knowing they are real, btw.

No faith required.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
This is not a fact, this is your belief. And you have complete faith in that belief.
But we both know what you call faith and how you apply that in your deity belief - and how you apply that to atheists - isn't the same.

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#548973 Jun 21, 2013
Lacez wrote:
<quoted text>
Did Hitler say he wasn't a Christian?
No, he continued to admit it.
Did Mark say he is a Christian lately?
No, he recently and quite often said he isn't.
The problem is that because you don't like a person, you're trying to disconnect yourself from them.
Hitler was a Christian and you are a Christian, therefore you want to remove hitler from he equation.
Though reality doesn't work like that.
Yeah, the "No True Christian™" fallacy. Only the Christians that cast a favorable light on Christianity are True Christians™, all others that present a less than favorable, or downright bad image concerning Christians are automatically said to not be True Christians™.

Sorta like a football team, and every time a pass is caught, a touchdown made or crucial tackle is made everyone says:

"OH YEAH, THAT'S A REAL DALLAS COWBOY!"

Then every time a pass is dropped, a touchdown failed, or tackle missed, they say:

"THAT'S NOT A REAL DALLAS COWBOY!"

Since: May 09

Location hidden

#548974 Jun 21, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Fair enough.
And atheists of all flavors say the sane thing, too.
That's great.

A subconscious slip, perhaps?

“It's Time. . .”

Since: Jun 13

New Holland

#548975 Jun 21, 2013
_-Alice-_ wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, I knew I couldn't fool you. You confiscated all my panties.
This Chastity Belt is starting to chafe, though. FYI
;-)
Very good, Maid Marion.

“It's Time. . .”

Since: Jun 13

New Holland

#548976 Jun 21, 2013
G_O_D wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope. The Gospel of Mary dispells that Pauline lie once and for all.
The great thing about the discovery of new texts proves that Modern Christianity is built on a pack of lies.
I would love to read them then. You know, expand the old brain box.

“It's Time. . .”

Since: Jun 13

New Holland

#548977 Jun 21, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you mad?
Google Archbishop Torquemada.
Si, si, we certainly can't forget him. A twisted individual, for sure.
Chess Jurist

Columbus, OH

#548978 Jun 21, 2013
Rosa_Winkel wrote:
<quoted text>
I would love to read them then. You know, expand the old brain box.
Well good for you.

http://gnosis.org/naghamm/nhl.html

But the texts change nothing.

“It's Time. . .”

Since: Jun 13

New Holland

#548979 Jun 21, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Torquemada was an archbishop.
A representative of the Church.
Tied at 69.
I won't say anymore until I've done my research. Except that those days should never be forgotten.

“It's Time. . .”

Since: Jun 13

New Holland

#548980 Jun 21, 2013
Chess Jurist wrote:
<quoted text>
Well good for you.
http://gnosis.org/naghamm/nhl.html
But the texts change nothing.
Ta muchly.
Chess Jurist

Columbus, OH

#548981 Jun 21, 2013
Rosa_Winkel wrote:
<quoted text>
Ta muchly.
Said the fool.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#548982 Jun 21, 2013
Chris Clearwater wrote:
you are a bigot with nothing but hate for people you don't know
You people and your double standards are a tiresome, contemptible lot. Tell it to a donkey in a Mexican slum.

Also, you bore again when you call anybody that challenges your precious faith "liar" and "bigot."

Isn't there a scripture that says, "Go and bore no more"?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#548983 Jun 21, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Hmm... I see. What do you think of this:
"But isn't disbelieving in God the same thing as not believing God exists?"
"Definitely not. Disbelief in a proposition means that one does not believe it to be true. Not believing that something is true is not equivalent to believing that it is false; one may simply have no idea whether it is true or not."
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mathew...
That sounds pretty good. Not believing isn't the same as believing not the way that distrusting is not the same as not trusting. When I first meet a person, I neither trust nor distrust her. Over time, I will likely do one or the other.

Suppose she eventually gives me reason to distrust her. If so, I go from an uncommitted position with no belief about her to one that positively states a belief.

These are the same two positions possible with gods. An agnostic atheist neither affirms nor denies the existence of gods. Somehow, Christians are continually morphing that into gnostic atheism, which is the assertion that one claims he knows that no gods exist.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#548984 Jun 21, 2013
Dr Shrink wrote:
gealufen kleine prosie au der wiese and eat pferd Scheisse
Which word means "fart"?
Chess Jurist

Columbus, OH

#548985 Jun 21, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
Which word means "fart"?
Now *that's* funny.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#548986 Jun 21, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
To say that a fetus is alive is redundant nonsense, because the sperm and egg it comes from are both alive. But they, on their own, are not a life.
A gamete certainly is a life. It's an organism - a unicellular, mobile, independent life form like an amoeba or a bacteria.

Who's up for some botany? This will bore some,hopefully not you.

"Alternation of generations" is a term generally seen botany that describes how haploid organisms called gametophytes generate diploid organisms called sporophytes. Here is it is illustrated:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Alternation...

Here's a discussion of the subject at http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index...

"The gametophyte develops from a spore, is haploid, and produces gametes by mitosis, which merge (syngamy) to form diploid zygotes. The sporophyte develops from a zygote (the fusion of a sperm and egg), is diploid and produces haploid spores by meiosis.

"In a moss (bryophyte), the gametophyte is dominant, the sporophyte being a parasite of the gameophyte from which it grows, whereas in tracheophytes (ferns and seed-bearing plants), the sporophyte is independent of the gametophyte and is the dominant generation.

"In ferns (a pteridophyte, or simple vascular plant, the gametophyte is the prothallus, which is not the part that we are used to seeing (that would be the sporophyte that has the fronds and what you think of when you imagine a fern).

"In seed bearing plants (spermatophytes), the gametophyte generation is extremely miniscule, comprising only the pollen and embryo sac only.

"So, as plants have evolved, the sporophyte went from being the less significant, parasitic generation of the moss to the more significant and independent generation of the fern to the overwhelmingly more dominant generation of the seed bearing plants."

How does this apply to humanity? We also alternate between haploid gamete organism that produce diploid multicellular organisms like you and me by mitosis following syngamy, and back again to haploid organisms through meiosis in the gonads. We don't call them sporophytes or gametophytes, however. Nevertheless, you could create a graphic like the one in the link above for humanity.

In humans, the diploid organism is most conspicuous, the haploid form being visible only with a microscope. But it is just as valid to say that we diploid adults are just the way that haploid gametes produce more gametes as it is to say the opposite: that the aquatic sperm and egg are just the way that the terrestrial how adults produce more more adults.

If human spermatozoa and ova could think, that is what they would think about our diploid generation: We're here for them.

But I'll do the thinking for them and tell you that they are each a life, an individual living thing. This is most apparent with the sperm cell.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#548987 Jun 21, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Oh ya. I just looked into it, apparently, fetuses don't feel pain until 20-24 weeks.
Good for you for investigating.

In the future, it would be nice to share your research. Posts like yours are a little better if they contain a link and possibly an excerpt from it. After all, you were right there. Why not share your source and simultaneously teach us while supporting your claim?

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#548988 Jun 21, 2013
bONGO wrote:
What place have you found in the next world?
The same place that have you found in the world after that one.

“Educating the uneducated”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

#548989 Jun 21, 2013
Le_le wrote:
<quoted text>I find it interseting that the only posters
I have witnessed embracing you- even slightly, are the ones
who you have stroked, at times, Skom and Lawlest are great
examples..

Other than the likes of them.. I believe you are insignificant..
Don't talk to it.
It'll think you like it and create even more page filler.

“Educating the uneducated”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

#548990 Jun 21, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>What logic are YOU employing?!?

[QUOTE] He was a Christian, it doesn't mean he respected all the rules; he was still a Christian. "

So answer the question.

Do you think "once a Christian, always a Christian" is true?

[QUOTE] You are attempting to say that a few militant atheists being idiots represent all atheists, and so that logic applies to Hitler representing Christians as well."

No, I'm not saying that at all.
I did answer the question.
You ignored the answer.
I won't repeat myself.

“Educating the uneducated”

Since: Aug 12

Montreal

#548991 Jun 21, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>Well, shit.

You're the atheist that admits to a belief.
I have beliefs, yes, everyone does.
But I don't have any beliefs regarding a god.

You just don't seem to understand that.

There are three choices:
-believe in a god
-believe there is no god
-have no belief that there is or isn't a god

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing 3 min ImPeach 26,996
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 3 min Gods r Delusion x... 685,891
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 9 min Aura Mytha 985,719
solar eclipse a sign of the growing foolishness... 29 min Corvus 2
God is REAL - Miracles Happen! (Jun '11) 1 hr ChromiuMan 6,453
Anyone know nicole horne that works at family d... 2 hr My Comment 5
News Can Americans trust the daily news? (Feb '15) 2 hr Television Engineer 5
More from around the web