In regards to atheism.

Discussion in 'Religion' started by garbonzo, Oct 15, 2015.

  1. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,230
    I came up with a design for a new automobile,

    good for you BUT IT (automobile)

    DOES NOT EXIST

    it exists in spirit or as information. << this is NOT existence

    ex·ist
    \ig-ˈzist\
    • : to have actual being : to be real
    • : to continue to be or to live
    Mirriam-Webster

    exist
    ɪɡˈzɪst,ɛɡˈzɪst/
    verb
    1. 1.
      have objective reality or being.
    Google

    I could keep adding definetions but none would come up with spirit or information

    Please post link reference if you find different

    Would not matter if they were or were not aware of the idea <<< ideas do not exist

    Expected by whom?

    Cowpat

    Ummmm so you are contending

    belief in heaven and hell is information about the future

    whether true or not

    So let's go with not

    Prey tell if heaven and hell do not exist from whence comes the information for belief?

    The remainder of the post is a mix of pretzels in a can of worms tipped into a bowl of spaghetti

    Two hard to unravel

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Jan Ardena Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,001
    No.

    That's not what atheism is.
    I've posted a definition.

    No it's not.
    You simply don't want to go down my route, because you cannot direct or control it's outcome.

    We've already been through this.

    They were questions, as evidenced by the question marks, and the testimony of the person who composed them.

    Now at least pretend that you are rational, and go where the evidence leads.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Bye Sarkus.

    Jan.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,778
    also, society breeds and supports deception by raising children to believe the world is good when it isn't or with rose colored glasses. there is a difference between protection vs engendering notions towards false idealism. because paradoxically, being aware of the real bottomline is empowering and helps to alleviate evil and that is that the notion that most of society is good is a terrible untruth and it's not just a small fraction. children at a certain time in development should be told that many people in society have various corrupt tendencies or commited such deeds or would if upon chance opportunity. that doesn't mean they should not treat people with basic dignity but an outward act or appearance is just that. a healthy skepticism regarding humanity is a good immune system and compass because there are very few 'innocent' people and just because people may not commit offenses that would land them in prison doesn't mean they aren't manipulative to act out harm or exploit in other ways. it's important to protect while letting them know the real truth. deception and corruption grows and easily built on when people are less aware. evil is very content for people to wear veils over their eyes or be mostly hoodwinked so it can keep doing what it does under the surface where the real action takes place anyways. it's important society doesn't just doesn't define everything by the surface with pretense.

    and i realized how evil paradoxically even prospers also by this idea that spreading the 'light' to all is the epitomy of spreading good. because whitewashing the world's surface does nothing but add another mask. sometimes spreading the light means rooting out the truth by acknowledgeing the uglies because when evil people feed on the light, they almost never change their real values but its utilized as an additional form of cover or tool. it uses that energy to empower themselves even more to decieve making them even better at it because it just develops their charisma. evil is never made good by receiving good, i've learned by experience, but only by accountability and shedding 'light' on who they really are. this is because the root of true evil is built from becoming spoiled rotten, entitled and narcissism so until that is addressed, feeding the monster is like feeding cancer. this is the proverbial lucifer that feeds on light to shine a false light, charisma etc but at core has contrary agenda. strangely, love/goodwill extended towards evil people just empowers evil intent even more because they feel they can further get away with it. they don't produce their own inner good because they dont want to change their values to good that would develop their light, they exploit it from others so they can have their cake and eat it too. aka cheating. nature is horrible. good can't even win for losing at it's own cost with them.
     
    Last edited: May 10, 2017
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Jan Ardena Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,001
    I've been through this a good number of times with them. Explained the difference between a god, and God, to no avail.
    I think they cannot bring themselves to use the upper-case 'g', because in their minds, and their fellow atheists, it would look like they are respectful of God. And they can't have that (at least not in public

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    )

    Jan.
     
  8. Jan Ardena Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,001
    This what they want. Come up with some scientific theory, or hypothesis, then waste arguing from that perspective.

    When you decide not to play their game, they become quite aggressive (as you have witnessed)

    Jan.
     
  9. spidergoat Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    51,741
    I'm not a bit ashamed to be disrespectful of the idea of god. In all it's common forms, it's a monster.
     
  10. karenmansker HSIRI Banned

    Messages:
    638
    "Are there any other claims being made in the metaphysical arena?"
    More claims? . . . . . IMO, yes there are more, but I doubt atheists want to hear them . . . . except as an arena for defensive argument

    "So the processes are more complex than at first thought"
    Yes . . . IMO, complexity is one aspect of the Scientific Method that is seldom recognized . . . to make reality appear more complex than it actually is . . . . often manifest as a form of self-protection and survivalism to ensure one's professional recognition (ego) and funding (job) using other people's money! (HAHA!) . . . . . . HSIRI

    "HOW energy is converted relies on numerous processes of which tunneling now appears to be involved"
    IMO, perhaps . . . . . but there are less complex explanations. HSIRI
     
  11. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,230
    There is another thread around here asking to list who you think are the most evil persons

    Only has one on my list

    The pope

    I consider this person

    (or more precise the office and minions)

    has done more to spread

    death

    destruction and

    suffering

    while keeping millions in poverty

    while living in luxury

    than any other person

    alive or dead

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  12. karenmansker HSIRI Banned

    Messages:
    638
    H-m-m-m-m . . . . IMO, you are beginning to sound like a disillusioned Catholic (HAHA!)
     
  13. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,230
    The best aspects of the scientific method it is

    OPEN to everyone

    NEW explanations replace old explanations if they fit the observations and evidences better

    DO NOT require faith

    If you are under the impression that FAITH in a god is LESS complex than

    understanding scientific explanations

    then you really truly do not understand science

    More claims? . . . . . IMO, yes there are more, but I doubt atheists want to hear them . . . . except as an arena for defensive argument

    Here is a couple of fun facts

    FACTS are just that FACTS

    and are neutral as to IMOs

    Atheists do not have arenas to defend FACTS

    FACTS stand on their own two feet

    OPINIONS on the other hand may require some defending

    How do you defend OPINIONS?

    By producing FACTS to back your assertions

    By the by the continuous use (frequently incorrectly) of IMO is tiresome

    Since YOU are posting most of the participants in the thread would take it as a given it is YOUR opinion

    More claims? . . . . . IMO, yes there are more,

    Sample of incorrect use

    You imply there are more claims as an opinion when it should be a FACT

    More claims exist or do not

    You do yourself and others a disservice by then not listing other claims and doubting

    atheists want to hear them . . . . except as an arena for defensive argument

    How condersending of you to make up our minds for us without showing us the other claims


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  14. karenmansker HSIRI Banned

    Messages:
    638
    Thanks, Michael! . . . You prove my points exactly!
     
  15. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,230
    Oh god I created another bold IMO

    Along with a capital HAHA

    My apologies to all the other posters in the thread

    I truly did not mean to do so

    Having never been a catholic I'm not sure of the protocol in begging for forgiveness

    Is it three hail Mary's or four?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  16. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,410
    An honest answer for once, but no less helpful.
    The definition details the what, not the why. If you want to understand the atheist then you need to understand their thought processes, the whys. Are you interested in that?
    What route? You mean the one where you just repeat ad infinitum "you are without God" or "God does not exist for you"? The one where you simply assert your strawman vision of the atheist, and insist that whether or not they accept it that they conform to your vision? The one where you don't listen to what they actually say?
    You don't need this thread for that route, Jan. You and your strawman can have that conversation on your own.
    Much good it ever does given that you return each time, each thread, to your strawman.
    Whether or not they were questions (and I still doubt that they were intended as genuine questions), you put them forth as examples to be considered. As such my comment still stands: as examples they beg the question. So I ask again: do you have any examples that do not beg the question?
    The evidence leads to you being a troll, to being dishonest, and with no genuine interest in discussing, but rather to wage a war that you imagine is going on, irrespective of what people actually say.
    Don't let the door hit you on the way out.
     
  17. karenmansker HSIRI Banned

    Messages:
    638
    In addition to the Hail Marys, your most hated person (the Pope) would likely also require a few Our Fathers . . . . but hey that's just IMO . . . you'd have to ask him directly, I suppose. But, enough off-topic banter . . . . we should try to get back on the OP topic. (ps/ I also have never been Catholic . . . .OMG! . . . we have something in common!!! HAHA!/ksm)
     
  18. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,778
    as i mentioned before that evil is also engendered through teaching ignorance and especially bringing up children to believe that "GOD" is watching and especially protecting them as well as indoctrinating them in a belief system that everything that occurs is his will. this disempowers them through naivetey and sets them up to be victims or deluded about how nature really works. it grooms victimhood as well as unrealistic reasoning. You see god's beautiful creation? everything is in order and as it should be. this is their schpiel. the difference with religion is it takes power away from people by believing god is in control of their lives as well as those religous psycopaths who believe they are the hand of god/like god. because they can exercise it against the vulnerable, how can they be wrong? well, according to nature they aren't wrong technically or ethically because nature is amoral but the god part just makes it even more obscene/perverted because people (even victims) tend to believe god created and loves them, looking out for them etc. and god really IS NOT which they can breakdown or have existential confusion over it. GOD is not trustworthy because it is absent or corrupt or nonexistent. religion fosters that one should give up trust in oneself (their inner compass/knowing/sense of direction etc) to some imagined entity which only makes people vulnerable to those who may be religious on the outside but know better in the inside and take control/advantage of them.

    Con artists love people that see only the good in everything. They exist both in and out of church/religious affiliation.

    One of the better new age philosophies, rather than orthodox, is just based on spirituality and that god exists 'within' all life rather than without. this is more, at least, respectful of the individual and their right to life, rather than demanding objective subjugation to a higher unquestioned authority, even at it's own expense or even demise.

    the evil of religion is the idea of blind faith and trust. anything that asks for blind faith and trust is non-trustworthy. The most successful of religious people though know/aware of this and are really directing their own lives based on their own drives/nature/wishes/self-preservation attributing it to a god outside of them.
     
    Last edited: May 11, 2017
  19. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,230
    https://www.quora.com/How-do-I-mock-atheists-1

    Ken Creten

    A man answers the door and sees two suited gentlemen outside the door. They look sort of religious.

    One of the men in suits hands the man a pamphlet. The man takes the pamphlet, flips through it and says, “there’s nothing in here, the pages are blank.”

    One of the suited gentlemen says, “we’re atheists.”

    Quora

    Will post this in jokes thread

    Just to sweet to pass up

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  20. Jan Ardena Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,001
    Yes, don't let it.
    See ya!

    Jan.
     
  21. Jan Ardena Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,001
    Yes I am interested in that.
    What's your point?

    This is part of your thought process. Isn't it?

    They were questions. As is this one...

    ... Have you stopped beating your wife yet?

    Jan.
     
  22. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,410
    "I prefer to keep it to this definition, as I don't believe that the question of God's existence is even present. At least not in this thread anyways." (#1660)
    "That is for a discussion regarding God's existence, which this thread is not." (#1665)
    "We don't need to go back through this existence thing. It has been done to death, and to no avail. So if you want to discuss God's "existence", be my guest. But it is one roller-coaster ride I will not be attending." (#1669)
    "In this thread it doesn't matter what regard as evidence for God, because that is not the topic." (#1697)
    (parts bolded by me for highlighting).

    Yet now you say you are interested in the matter of why, yet you refuse to actually address the issue at the core of the why: the evidence.
    So make up your mind. Atheists are telling you that the evidence (or lack of what they see as convincing evidence) is their why. You ignore them.
    You and honest discussion really don't go hand in hand, do they?
    No, it's part of your strawman's thought process, as explained many times in this thread.
    So you again confirm that you have zero interest in honest discussion, and instead you're here just to nosedive threads into the mire.

    Begone, troll.
     
  23. Jan Ardena Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,001

    Where have I ignored it?

    If you have a lack of evidence for God, you must have some idea of what would be classed as evidence. But you don't.
    If you don't have any idea, then as far as you're aware, God does not exist, even if you are open minded about God. This is the reason why you are atheist, and I don't need to talk to you to come to that conclusion.

    Of course you can argue that maybe God doesn't exist, and theists are some how delusional, or simply lying to themselves. But that is based on your position which holds that there is no evidence for God, because you cannot currently comprehend God. Which is why I state that you can only go as far as atheism.

    It's your mind that is processing that thought.

    Nosedive the thread into the mire? Are you kidding me.
    It's the most interesting thread in this forum, IMO.

    Jan.
     

Share This Page