Atheists here

Do you have a problem with words being reflected back into your eyes?

Seems so.

Sounds loony.

You're loony too. You obviously do not understand human nature as deeply as I, or Quantum Quack, who is similar in his ways.

Have you ever given a rats ass? Must make an aweful gift.

Hah! Hard to give a rats ass when the ones who love you the most are fucking bastards. Are you saying that my "gift" cannot be changed, to something, some thing else? Deleted? I wouldn't call such a gift though....


Give me some details about <place your favorite diety here>. I'll disprove it for you.

You couldn't do that. My favoriate diety is Quantum Quack. Dis prove him.... Good luck, too...
...
 
Beautiful Tiassa.

I wish we could convince the whole world that god does not exist.... Would do wonders do you not believe?
 
Beautiful Tiassa.

I wish we could convince the whole world that god does not exist....

What would we do with all the churches, synagogues, mosques, etc.? :shrug:

Not to mention, what would become of the Vatican? :eek:
 
Sure. Ideas exist. Gods don't create people. It works the other way 'round.

God is a concept,
By which we can measure
Our pain.
I'll say it again:
God is a concept
By which we can measure
Our pain.
I don't believe in magic.
I don't believe in I-ching.
I don't believe in bible.
I don't believe in tarot.
I don't believe in Hitler.
I don't believe in Jesus.
I don't believe in Kennedy.
I don't believe in Buddha.
I don't believe in mantra.
I don't believe in Gita.
I don't believe in yoga.
I don't believe in kings.
I don't believe in Elvis.
I don't believe in Zimmerman.
I don't believe in Beatles.
I just believe in me.
Yoko and me.
And that's reality.
The dream is over.
What can I say?
The dream is over.
Yesterday
I was dreamweaver,
But now I'm reborn.
I was the walrus,
But now I'm John.
And so dear friends,
You just have to carry on,
The dream is over.


(John Lennon)​

lol

if believing in god is just a concept to measure our pain, what does that make yoko?
 
What would we do with all the churches, synagogues, mosques, etc.? :shrug:

Not to mention, what would become of the Vatican? :eek:

Pool halls, dog urinals and bat sanctuaries. Not in that order.
 
There just seems like so many possibilities. I cannot discount what is written in reason. If he is non-existant, then I want to see it proved. Otherwise, I am an agnostic. I do not know if he exists, or not. Reason? Has he been disproved? Out of all the things that exist, is there some superior ... thing? Is there not something else out there, which can hear me? Is there not something that exists that is not me???

Sorry I can't do better. Maybe if you could answer this I would be satisfied.
 
There just seems like so many possibilities. I cannot discount what is written in reason. If he is non-existant, then I want to see it proved. Otherwise, I am an agnostic. I do not know if he exists, or not. Reason? Has he been disproved? Out of all the things that exist, is there some superior ... thing? Is there not something else out there, which can hear me? Is there not something that exists that is not me???

Sorry I can't do better. Maybe if you could answer this I would be satisfied.

I cant proof God exists, but the burden of proof lies with the ones that claim his existance.
 
Existabrent said:

I wish we could convince the whole world that god does not exist.... Would do wonders do you not believe?

I don't think it's possible. There is a reason we invent gods, and as nature abhors a vacuum, what will go in its place? In the end, I would settle for intellectual integrity in assertions about the mysterium.

(Q) said:

What would we do with all the churches, synagogues, mosques, etc.?

Not to mention, what would become of the Vatican?

That's easy: upscale condos. In Seattle, condos with street-level retail are about the only acceptable development aside from office blocks.

Lightgigantic said:

if believing in god is just a concept to measure our pain, what does that make yoko?

The mother of his children? The light of his life? Whatever it is, Yoko is far more tangible than God.

Has anyone ever heard the track "Sean's In the Sky", from the Wonsuponatime collection?

Paul may have been the cute one, but John, in the end, was "Beautiful John".

How about if we settle on "John Lennon is God?"

Oh, wait, wait ... that title already goes to Brian Wilson.
 
I cant proof God exists, but the burden of proof lies with the ones that claim his existance.
and claims of direct perception usually come with the prerequisites that such perception is met by ......

(in otherwords if you have a person who is unwilling to undertake the process advocated to attain a state of direct perception, then never the twain shall meet ....)
 
tiassa
Originally Posted by Lightgigantic

if believing in god is just a concept to measure our pain, what does that make yoko?

The mother of his children?
.... now there's a concept to measure your pain by ....

The light of his life? Whatever it is, Yoko is far more tangible than God.
tangible to John perhaps

How about if we settle on "John Lennon is God?"

"the dream is over"
 
You SHOULD have a problem with that, that is the point. How many "intelligent creators" will mankind invent before you do have a problem?

It is not the creator in and of itself which is important; what truly matters is that people believe in the concept of creation itself.
 
It is not the creator in and of itself which is important; what truly matters is that people believe in the concept of creation itself.

Why is the concept of creation important even if there was no God ?
 
It is not the creator in and of itself which is important; what truly matters is that people believe in the concept of creation itself.

Why should anyone believe in a concept that is complex and confusing with no indication of self-identification over one that is simple, understandable and is based on observation?

:shrug:
 
Why should anyone believe in a concept that is complex and confusing with no indication of self-identification over one that is simple, understandable and is based on observation?

:shrug:

lets get this straight

is this an argument for or against Richard Dawkins .....
 
Why should anyone believe in a concept that is complex and confusing with no indication of self-identification over one that is simple, understandable and is based on observation?

:shrug:

So, (Q), what is the purely "scientific" explanation these understandable obvervations have concluded? Is the principle of origins in which you believe unanimous amongst all scientists/physicists? Do you ever wonder why science has never produced a theory to satisfy all questions? All the theories have flaws that other scientists themselves discover and criticize.
 
Back
Top