The Nonsense of Atheists

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by RenaissanceMan, Nov 16, 2010.

  1. NMSquirrel OCD ADHD THC IMO UR12 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,478
    if a computer did show up, how would it be described?
    they do not have the terminology to describe it..
    if 12 ppl sat down and described it the best they could,you would get 12 different answers..if those records were to survive till this day, would we be able to see that they were talking about a computer?
    i say we would be able to tease out the clues from the various sources to get a yes answer..this is why i say not everyones opinion is invalid..

    .
    now you are asking me not to question my own beliefs..
    to accept and not speculate..

    i agree

    the clues in the definition gives it value..IOW as data it should be valued..as a rule of life (unquestioning obedience) is what you are talking about..

    IOW even wrong definitions have value..it lets you know what it is not..

    don't avoid the texts..read them in context..man wrote them,man is attempting to describe god,(not define)..
    i think thats where we are getting mixed up..you are using the term 'define' which means a definitive description that everyone can agree on..
    like a suspect in case..you ask 12 different ppl and would get 12 different answers..in order to sort out the truth one must hear all those descriptions to get a better picture of who the suspect is..
    with god you cannot ask enough ppl to get a clear picture of who/what god is..at some point you have to make a decision as to who/what god is..
    that question does not come down to his definition but of 'is god a good thing or a bad thing?'

    thats cause religion is filled with ppl who love to verbalize their opinions..
    some are more influential/charismatic than others

    i have said this..

    are you saying you want to believe me when i say that?
    or do you just want to hear what i say and compare it to what you know/believe about god..
    IOW are you trying to make me responsible for telling you 'this is true' or would you rather make up your own mind? IOW do you believe it just cause i said so or does it ring of truth?(see above analogy about computers and suspects)

    the only disagreement we have right now that i can see is the difference between objective definitions equaling knowledge and subjective descriptions equaling knowledge..

    .
    faulty does not equal wrong..(see edison and how many ways he found to NOT build a lightbulb),
    there have been many advances in science cause they learned from being (avoiding the term 'wrong').. faulty..

    agnostic? wishy washy? sometime believer?
    i believe all the time..
    just cause they cannot know does not mean they don't have a clue..


    this is getting down to the definition of knowledge as being objective or subjective..knowledge can be subjective..

    i agree with this..but with all myths there are truths in them..
    ( i did NOT just call religion a myth..

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    )
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. 420Joey SF's Incontestable Pimp Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,189
    Athiests demand proof from religion, Religion demands proof from athiests. Alas there are none to reference, just speculation. Its immaterial whether athiests believe in god or not, they live in a shallow shell (the ones that believe in "god" just not organized religion are okay), I for one believe I am an expression of a collective source (god) which is maintained by energy that cannot be created or destroyed just transfered and everchanging
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,077
    you're making stupid assumptions and statements and that's why most theists are "nonsense."

    atheist does not mean 'empty shell'. that is your belief because without a concept of god, YOU would feel empty.

    atheists have a lot in life to think about, experience, absorb and even wonder/speculate. that is a hell of a lot better and more enriching than everthing excluded unless it fits into one's narrow definition of what god is or that it's an entity.

    that is not a belief in "god", oh mighty theistic genius. you are just calling energy, the laws of nature or physics or consciousness 'god'. in fact, you have hijacked other new age or scientific interpretations of life experience and tacked on the word 'god'. how is that any realistically different whether what label they use for it?

    energy or consciousness exists whether you believe in it or not which also affects atheists and they also embody it. how does that make you less of an 'empty shell'?
     
    Last edited: Dec 11, 2010
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. NMSquirrel OCD ADHD THC IMO UR12 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,478
    judgemental much?

    .
    he was using an analogy..

    they have to convince themselves there is no god...otherwise they know they are going to hell...

    need more be said..

    very bitter comment.

    now here is the statement/question.
    why can't you just post this birch?
    why do you have to judge and demean before you ask the good questions?
     
  8. 420Joey SF's Incontestable Pimp Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,189
    What came first, matter or consiousness?

    Existence is inextricably intertwined with the ego organization providing the illusion of self in the physical domain. Notice how we sometimes lose the emulaton of self in dreams? The framework for subjective experience has a few static properties: existance, identity, and consiousness. On this basis I can understand why you dont believe in god. Perception needs the "identity" property to understand its nature (what kind, whatever is) but this thinking is an assembled standpoint from left-brain operations. The fact is we can't confirm the creation of existance; like before we could confirm the world was round - your belief lies in your scope.

    I for one cannot believe in a random world that created : universe, matter, volume, space, time, sound, motion, light, forces, fields, voiliton and consiousess. I believe god is everything, the bind, if you will.

    Most theiests are nonsense not because "the belief in god" but because the exploit of "religion" (which I personally believe is controlled by athiest masonry or some shadow goverment) Its not nonsense to assume the created has a creator, its nonsense to think that the creation is random and that our existance is purposeless to think that all of this exists as a perfect byproduct of randomness is stupid.

    "Photons come out of nowhere, they cannot be stored, they can barely be pinned down in time, and they have no home in space whatsoever. That is, light occupies no volume and has no mass. The similarity between a thought and a photon is very deep. Both are born in the region beyond space and time where nature controls all processes in that void which is full of creative intelligence." Deepak Chopra

    "Today a young man on acid realized that all matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration. That we are all one consciousness experiencing tself subjectively. There is no such thing as death. Life is only a dream and we are the imagination of ourselves."
    Bill Hicks


    Yes I would feel empty thinking my boundary of existance is limited to five senses and would feel empty without "God". My concept of god is radically different from what most would believe. I do believe in reincarnation, ascension, etc.

    .

    It appears to me that you just like the label of athiest. How is the experience of "existance" more enriching than everything excuded? My definition of god is far from narrow..

    The laws of nature and physics are all based on energy, enlightened one. God as a collective source of energy is not a hijack? I dont understand what you are implying...

    How do athiests compensate there lack of purpose? tantilization? Energy and consiousness to me = direct evidence of god. Universe independent of consiouness?
     
  9. NMSquirrel OCD ADHD THC IMO UR12 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,478
    Birch;
    if you are such a hater of religion and christians..

    What are you doing in the religious forum?
     
  10. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,077
    and this entire thread is not judgemental of atheists? it's not judgemental to say that atheists live in an 'empty shell'?

    are you really that blind or is it purposeful?
     
  11. NMSquirrel OCD ADHD THC IMO UR12 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,478
    no, not the ENTIRE thread...just certain users..

    you tend to take everything as a personal attack birch..what if you are reading more into that?
    IOW instead of getting all defensive about the word 'nonesense' IOW focusing on ones own emotional state of being(IE how you FEEL about it)..
    or instead of going on the attack..
    prove to the OP that it is not true..(lead by example)

    you can start by verifying you are understanding what is communicated..
    didn't you just post something like..;



    to which i replied..
    IOW the term 'Empty shell' is is an attempt to describe the 'source' but it doesn't necessarily corelate to what it actually means..
     
  12. NMSquirrel OCD ADHD THC IMO UR12 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,478
    JP;

    I understand the difference between saying;
    "i think god doesn't want that."
    and
    "god doesn't want that"

    but sometimes saying "i think" just undermines how strongly i feel about the statement..
     
  13. krreagan Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    96
    The length and breadth to which people will traverse just to convince themselves that they are not alone in the universe still amazes me.

    This is just one in many billions of concepts to define a god fr the purposes of comfort. This one is no more probable then any of the rest, simply a deeper rationalization to be more specific to ones needs. This one has all the trimmings which indicate that ends defined the means. You said it yourself...
    It seems likely that your definitions were produced to fill a personal very specific pre-existing belief.

    KRR
     
  14. NevaChu Registered Member

    Messages:
    13
    I think this thread proves how diverse idiots are ...atheist, agnostic, christian, etc.
     
  15. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    It's the religion section on a Science board.
     
  16. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    so what?
    hatred of religion is scientific?
    Sounds like more nonsense from atheists ...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    Last edited: Dec 13, 2010
  17. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    If you feel hatred, you are paranoid.

    Since when did a theist ever make any sense.
     
  18. pjdude1219 The biscuit has risen Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    16,068

    things matter its just relative the idea that a being on the level of power of god talking to one such as a humaning being is to give humanity a worth it doesn't have. things just happen.
     
  19. wynn ˙ Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    15,058
    You are, of course, full of wub.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  20. gmilam Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,157
    What does belief in god have to do with hell (or lack thereof)?

    IF there is a god AND all he cares about is what I believe
    (as opposed to how I live my life)

    THEN he's an asshole.
     
  21. jpappl Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,985
    NMSquirrel,

    Well sorry but you completely misunderstood the points I was making. Let me try again.

    What clues would we be teasing out of guesses at what a computer was from people who had no idea of what a computer was.

    And I did not present one, I just asked you to describe a computer without seeing it. You would't even know where to begin.

    Reverse this and you will better understand my point.

    What good is the information from these guesses ?

    They had no idea what a computer was so there was no knowledge in their definitions. Just like god, they can not have knowledge, so they are only throwing guesses around, but they want to claim they have knowledge.

    Do you understand ?

    This is what the texts are built upon. Claimed definitions of god, which they can not have knowledge of in the first place.

    No, I am stating that all you can have is faith. All of the supporting information for a belief in god(s) the texts etc are nonsense created by men, they are myths. This does not mean there is no god. It just means that the texts or definitions are all bunk. They can not know anything about god anymore than they could about a computer at the time.

    And there are no clues in there either. Anymore than there would be clues about a computer from guesses.

    Bold is mine. Here is where we are butting heads.

    What value does guesses about god, or made up definitions of god have ?

    You can not know if they are wrong or right. There is no value in there at all to define god, what god wants, doesn't want etc.

    Same thing. Scrutinize the texts and you see it's only men making stuff up.

    Again, how can they describe or attempt to describe the unknowable. If it was a book of opinions and left at that I wouldn't be so opposed to treating it with any value.

    You and you alone. That is my point. Faith only. No definitions, and no attempt to define. You can have beliefs without knowledge. The problem is people are turning their beliefs into claims of knowledge prematurely.

    Same thing. That is an attempt to define. Do you know god is good or bad ?

    You can only believe, once you start to claim god is good or bad, you are claiming knowledge of that which you can not know. Only believe.

    Right, you have, but then go on to claim knowledge. It's very hard not to if you believe, because your beliefs come out in statements.

    If you described your belief in your words I would accept that you believe it.

    However, when you start telling me that you collaborate or read the texts to have a better understanding about god, then you are no longer thinking about the god you believe in, and are now using someone elses made up ideas of god.

    Since none of you can know, your guesses or beliefs are as valuable as ideas 3000 years ago of what a computer is. There is no value to the information.

    Faith and faith only. No knowledge.

    :wallbang:

    No, you are making claims of knowledge when you say things like:

    That is not how god works
    It's not what god wants
    They are wrong about god
    etc etc

    Do you see ?

    I would definitely not accept your or anyone elses definition of god(s)

    Since nobody can have such information, nobody can possibly define god. Just like nobody could have described a computer 3000 years ago.

    Any attempt is a claim of knowledge or just a speculative guess for fun. What do you think the bible and the koran represent. A claim of knowledge or a fun speculative guess ?

    In this case it does, because there is noting to go on. There is no way to know what is a mistake or not. Just shooting blindly in the dark.

    You missed or ignored the questions.

    Do you believe in god ? YES (theist)
    Can you prove or know that god exists ? NO (agnostic)

    Don't have a clue about something that can not be known ?

    Scrutinize it more NMSquirrel. Go back to the idea that others can not define god for you. It's a personal thing, faith only, never knowledge.

    It can. However, on the subject of god which is unknown, any claims of knowledge are really just guesses, ideas and opinions.

    It's never knowledge. The bottom line is that you have to be content believing what you believe without trying to create definitions or claims of knowledge about god.

    The distinction I am making is to separate the theist from the religious.

    The problem is most theists can not stay away from defining or making claims of knowledge, as you have done here even while trying to avoid doing it. It's not easy to realize that you, me or anyone else has no knowledge on the subject and can not, as said before, until you die (if there is an afterlife and you/me/others actually go somewhere with our memories intact.

    LOL. Yes you went there.

    Not all myths have truth. Furthermore, god can not be known, so the texts are pure myth. The only truth is what man knew about man. He made the rest up.

    Man created god in his image.
     
  22. Lori_7 Go to church? I am the church! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,515
    this quote is so appropriate for this thread.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  23. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    lol
    its kind of funny the way you open with the mood that you are not arguing from an emotional standpoint and then follow up with an emotional quip.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    I think we can categorize it as yet another suitable contribution for this thread however .....

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     

Share This Page