It is common for skeptics to sneer at christianity because it makes so much account of faith. They seem to assume that they have no need of faith, in anything. It would be easy to show that of all men, religious skeptics must be most credulous and must have most faith, of some sort.
It would be easy to show that skeptics have the most faith IFF humans were born with a belief in god. But as the Christians so proudly proclaim, we are all born without god and must seek him out. So no, the ground state is no belief and the religious ones are those with the faith.
The chief peculiarity in their case is, that having rejected the light and the evidence of truth through their radical enmity of heart against it, they are shut up to the necessity of believing things without evidence and against evidence as their only resort. They are compelled to believe that to "leap into the dark" at death is the best ending of human life.
Is there a God? is Dawkins confident around his position? let`s suppose that Mr foolish Biologist had been living all his entire life in New York city. unfortunately, when it comes to 9/11, I cannon imagine a picture about Dawkins hit at the exact center of those targets ... in this case, regarding to the past twin towers, I got a mental image, if this stupid man were showed up at that moment precisely, he would be imploring for a true God, supplicating to God, and praying to God desperately.
I'm all for atheism and secularism etc... but could someone tell me the part where God demands to have pain inflicted on himself for sexual pleasure? Masochism? Really?
@bapee105 Dawkins supports rationalism - if you're going to defend him, at least be rational. You're response was an ad hominem fallacy. You are clearly very unintelligent and quite irrational.
@geoffrz450 Sadomasochism doesn't inherently mean sexual pleasure, or to be subjected to pain. I think the definition Dawkin's was going for was the whole fact that the god of the OT took extreme pleasure from the humiliation, destruction and suffering of his 'children'
look....people like me will never understand religion at all....i was born that way, and even as a child saw it as wrong....because it makes no fucking sense....i liked to read books as a kid...i knew the difference between fantasy and reality....and the bullshit of wishfull thinking....the only thing that ever mind boggled me was how people older than me were so stupid to swallow such crap....thats why i feel superior to everyone else that cant grow fucking up and see reality
Topics: The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com etc.
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
or
figure4etc3.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
How can Mr. Dawkins even know right from wrong? I love how he steals concepts from Christianity (right and wrong) and then tries to use them to disprove Christianity - talk about circular reasoning!
@staum607 you know right/wrong from inborn capability of empathy and societal norms; right/wrong wasn't invented by Christianity; he isn't disproving Christianity - just describes God
@kid29a is that the only criteria for determining right from wrong? Since the majority supported execution for blasphemy (in various religions) can we the condemn those actions today, or should we say those were good at the time, but now we have a different opinion?
@staum607 What criteria? I didn't say about criteria. People learn them as humanity progresses and learn how to distinguish right from wrong better. For example: We know now that many other animals are almost as self-conscious as we are and hurting them is as wrong as hurting humans. People couldn't know that without enough brain structure research and observations.
@kid29a not sure where this came from. You said, "Some things we see as right or wrong might not be regarded so by people living then." My question was is this (people's opinions, majority rules, etc) how you determine right from wrong. Sorry about any confusion.
@staum607 How do I determine right from wrong? Sometimes I have hard time doing it. I try to use empathy (golden rule), rational thinking but also I'm under influence of societal norms and taboos, I respect some values and try to act accordingly.
@kid29a When faced with someone who claims to believe in opposing morals to yourself (or commits acts as if they do), do you try to enforce your viewpoint/morals (applying absolutist moral logic) or do you simply say whatever works for them (relativistic moral logic)?
@staum607 I'd share and reason my point of view as clear as possible somebody would claim his/her opposing morals. If he/she would act, then it depends on the importance of this act. Man beating a woman would probably urge me to react and enforce my point of view on it. Are you asking these questions to make a point or you just want to get to know me better? ;)
@kid29a I am attempting to make a point, that if someone believes morals are not absolute; then to try to force someone else to live by their personal standard (even when watching a crime happen to someone else) seems to indicate that while their beliefs say "relative" their actions indicate "absolute"
@staum607 While it seems to indicate that, you can't say moral rules are absolute. If they were killing a man would always be a bad thing to do. It's not so because, for example, you can kill a man who tries to purposely kill innocent person and the only way to avoid it is to kill him. While generally murder is wrong.
@kid29a Here I think we are differing on fine points. I admit that not all laws are moral absolutes, however it doesn't follow then that there are no moral absolutes. In your example, murder is always wrong, but killing someone is not (war, self-defense, etc). Killing would be the more generic term, while murder (the unlawful killing of another human being: dictionary definition) would be more specific.
@kid29a again we can agree that in this example someone will be killed. Killing though is not murder. And while this specific issue can be debated, it does not answer the question "is murder always wrong?". I agree that not everyone agree on what constitutes murder in every single case (mennonites believe war is murder for example), but everyone agrees that murder is always wrong.
@staum607 If you define murder as immoral act of killing a person then yes it is immoral by definition. It's not a proper definition of murder in my opinion though. From what I know murder is an act of purposely/premeditatedly killing a person and it's not always wrong (like killing the big man in the trolley example).
@kid29a I wouldn't define murder as " immoral act of killing a person" - I think that is circular reasoning? The statement is true though. Premeditation/purpose is not enough to change killing into murder (trolly example, war, police, etc). However, I am sure you (and the whole world) would agree that someone who picked out a baby at random and decided to saw it in half just for fun would be committing murder.
@staum607 Things like genocide, slavery, POWs as rape slaves, burning people alive for heresy and "witchcraft", or killing kids for simple disobedience? No way, man, nobody could EVER think those were OK!
What the Bible states in the first testament, Richard Dawkins does in this sentence. The error does not lie in belief of god, but rather the anthropomorphization of god. The Bible was not a tool for intent to enslave and control the thoughtless, for they are no threat to elites; but rather a tool to control the thoughtful via aversion of anything spiritual.
@leej70 He didn't, you chose to have faith that he doesn't exist. Its called free will. If God wanted robots he would have made them, instead he made you and me and gave us the knowledge to make our own robots..
@liebengood2 My disbelief in god has got nothing to do with faith, It's your beliefs that require faith and as the great Mark Twain once said, "Faith is believing what you know ain't so".
Oh but it does. No other theory of how our world was created has hard evidence either so sorry man you may call it something else but it amounts to the same thing..
@liebengood24 Hard evidence of what? The existence of god? So what is this hard evidence pray tell (pun intended) because that is something that has eluded mankind ever since someone first said "hey maybe this god fellow ain't real after all".
Im more interested on the reality of Alien cilisations visiting this planet cause its happening now, wake up folks! thats another astronaut thats came out and said the same.
christianity is the belief that a cosmic zombie can grant you eternal life if you promis to drink his blood and eat his flesh, in order to rid yourself of the sin you have within you because a woman made from the rib of a clay man was convinced by a talking snake to eat the fruit from a magic tree ....... and if i believe this everything will be ok?
That's strange, because I know the God of the Old Testament as a just judge who had set rules before people, and because of man's wickedness they could not meet God's standard. But what Dawkins doesn't mention is the God of the New Testament. Because we could never meet God's standard, He sent His only Son to die for our sins, so that we could be in close relationship to Him and have eternal life. Hmm...
@ShilohPepBand So what you're saying is, because God failed to create a species capable of abiding by his rules, he punishes them for his own mistakes by causing genocides, plagues, wiping out practically the entire planets inhabitants in the 'great flood' along with hundreds of other hideous stories. Finally, to correct his mistake (which a 'perfect' god cannot have made) he sends down a form of himself, to sacrifice himself, TO himself, to create a loop hole in his failed plan. Really?
@callumcubes God gave us free-will. If WE make a mistake, it's OUR fault. We all have a choice to do something --whether it be good or bad-- and we are held accountable for it. If a person kills a person, he/she goes to jail; If a person kills a bunch of people, he/she gets the death sentence. For our actions are consequences and God carried out the judgments because He was/is the only one qualified to do so.
Also, God sent down Jesus to be a sacrifice in order to allow humans to sin and repent.
@Hydroxis Isnt it his fault for giving us free will then? Why would god even create the idea of evil? Just to judge us? What is the point?
If a person kills another, thats murder right? Well what if a god kills a lot of people? Why doesnt god heal infant amputees? Why does christianity have the same beliefs as older religions? You dont think its a complete sham and based off of older religions? Do you honestly think the earth is 6000 years old?
@spiderpig85 Would you rather have God make you a mindless slave, to obey everything he says, or would you rather have the free will to make your own decisions? Also, it was not His intention to create evil. But, because His creation disobeyed Him, evil was created in the process.
@OpurumD Answer the question. Do you believe the earth is 6000 years old? Also Christianity is a complete ripoff of many other older religions, just so you know.
@spiderpig85 I'm not exactly sure how old the Earth really is, so I don't know how you expect me to answer that (you didn't even ask me that question at first, anyway). Nonetheless, the age of the planet has nothing to do with my faith. There are some things about the Bible that even I question.
As far as Christianity being derived (yes, derived is a better term to use) from older religions, you're telling me this as if I was born yesterday. It doesn't make Christianity wrong, however.
@OpurumD If the bible is the word of god, and god is infallible, then how can anything in it be wrong? And if one thing is wrong, how can you believe the rest?
The real issue of Christianity being "Derived" from other religions is proof that the whole thing is made up! Its just recycled BS that keeps stupid people under control. Stupid people like you. Believe what you want, doesn't make it true. Fact is fact, and BS is BS, no matter how many people believe it.
@spiderpig85 Where in my post does it say that the earth being 6000 years old is wrong? I said that there are things that I question in the Bible, not that they are wrong. Semantics.
Believing in Christianity doesn't make me stupid. If you don't believe in it, fine. Don't be ignorant and call people names because they don't stand in line with you. I'm not here calling you an idiot because you're a non-believer, or that it's BS that you don't believe, am I? Have some respect, will you? LOL.
@spiderpig85 Also, the religions that Christianity was derived from were all based on the same God, anyway. But, like you said, you can also believe what you want. It doesn't make it true, either. The fact that you think religion is to keep people under control (when it's more of a personal choice and not an obligation; you're a perfect example) is your opinion. That is the only real 'fact' I see here.
@OpurumD "Also, the religions that Christianity was derived from were all based on the same God, anyway."
Really? Maybe you should know what you're talking about before talking.
And yes, religion is a form of control. It always has been and always will be. If you do not want to believe that then you should open your eyes and see yourself from a reasonable perspective.
@spiderpig85 Christianity, derived from Judaism, Catholicism, and Islam, has the same God (Yahweh in Judaism, Allah in Islam) as it's predecessors. That isn't a lie. If there are others, please let me know.
If religion was actually a form of control, you'd be religious right now. You can't claim something as controlling if it isn't controlling you. Like I said, a personal choice, not an obligation.
@spiderpig85 Christianity, derived from Judaism, Catholicism, and Islam, has the same God (Yahweh in Judaism, Allah in Islam) as it's predecessors. That isn't a lie. If there are others, please let me know.
If religion was actually a form of control, you'd be religious right now. You can't claim something as controlling if it isn't controlling you. Like I said, a personal choice, not an obligation.
@OpurumD Zoroastrianism, Paganism, Mithraism and Sol Invictus, and others, like Egyptian beliefs all share various core principles. The thing is that Christianity is younger than these religions. As such, you have to draw the conclusion that Christianity has amalgamated ideas from other, older religions. So how can you believe something that is plagiarized?
The thing is you can fool all the people some of the time, or some people all of the time. But not both.
@spiderpig85 Paganism and many Egyptian beliefs are polytheistic (LOL, nice try). Mithraism and Sol Invictus are not the same as the Christian God. In Zoroastrianism, Ahura Mazda =/= Christian God. Even if Christianity was derived from these religions (more or less), they are not completely the same, they don't have the same God, and Christianity is closer to the religions I stated (and they all have the same God).
@OpurumD No part of Christianity is unique. It is an amalgamation of other religions. If you don't want to believe this that doesn't affect me really. Refusing to believe in facts is common for the close minded.
@spiderpig85 LOL @ you. You didn't even read EXACTLY what I posted, and you're calling me close-minded? I just got through saying that Christianity is what you say it is, but not completely the same as those religions for the reasons stated. If what I'm saying doesn't affect you, do me a favor and don't respond to me. Maybe then, we'll see if you not really affected. -_-
@OpurumD I never said it was exactly the same as any other religion. I said it's core principles are the same as many other religions. Calm down there big guy.
@spiderpig85 If ridiculing Him makes you feel better about this discussion, have at you. Doesn't really change how I feel or what I believe in. LOL. Anything else?
@OpurumD Ridiculing the magic spaghetti monster doesn't make me feel any better or worse, because it doesn't exist, just like your magic space man. Now as far as you believing in something, that's your choice. I for one, choose to believe in things that are real and not live in a fantasy land.
The point is that I have the reason and sense to ask questions, you decide to believe in something that has never in the history of man been proven in any way.
As someone who believes in magic and deities, the burden of proof is on you. I do not have to prove that something doesn't exist if there is no proof that it does. That's like proving that Santa is not real.
I'm well aware of the fact that I can't prove His existence. Something that I've admitted to twice already. You've convinced He doesn't exist when you don't have a clue if He does or doesn't. So what if it's never been proven? I don't need His existence to be proven to reinforce my faith in Him. You're saying the burden of proof is on me as if I'm trying to prove He exists. Maybe you haven't been paying attention. The absence of evidence isn't the evidence of absence. Food for thought.
@spiderpig85 LOL science is a theory though which means evolution theory can't be proven big bang theory can't be proven which means you have faith that God doesn't exist. Its not odd to you the bible is full of prophecies that have come true or that it speaks of crusification 100's of years before the first recorded use in scholars history? Have you read the bible? Its interesting what Christianity is based on,(faith) we are ridiculed for yet everyone has faith. Good discussion lets keep it up
@liebengood24 I think it's important that we establish a common vernacular when discussing scientific theories. A theory, in the colloquial sense, more or less means that you are not really sure of what you are asserting. This leas to the common saying, "oh it's just a theory." A scientific theory, however, is quite different. In this domain, a theory is a collection of assertions that make quantifiable predictions that agree with physically testable and reproducible observations.
@liebengood24 You cite evolution and the big bang as theories.I think along these lines it's important to keep in mind some other theories:
cell theory, germ theory -have you ever taken antibiotics?
quantum mechanics, general relativity [do you use a computer or cell phone?] PS) general relativity superseded Newton's *theory* of gravity
So remember, if you feel you can't depend on "theories," then don't take medicine, use a computer/phone, or fly in an airplane. After all, they're just theories
@ilovecrad didn't say you couldn't depend on them. The bible has just as many facts to back up. Its easier for me to have faith in God than man. But if you don't agree that's your opinion. No harm its a discussion.
@liebengood24 Science is a theory? What are you talking about? Science has delivered us the modern world on a silver platter, people give their lives to science to try and help the rest of us understand our universe. Religion gives us very little that is positive. Holy wars and religious persecution are the causes of religion. So take your self-righteous ass and go fuck yourself.
@spiderpig85 religion also saves many lives in Africa, mexico etc and drives people to destroy hundreds of people with planes and science makes guns which can be used to save a family from attackers or provide food as well as murder people. religion I'd say is good or bad like a tool it just depends on how it's used.
@ikaninjau2 Science is just a system of rules that lets us understand more about our environments. What we do with that knowledge is up to individual people. Religion is a system of convoluted rules that tries to keep people living in a dream. You say it helps people in Africa. Really? The ban on condoms ALONE is why Aids is such an issue in that continent. Religion does not help people. Charitable people help people. Red cross, unicef, etc. are what help people, religion does not.
@spiderpig85 well first i wanted to make it sure that you are not classifying islam and christianity together there are almost polar opposites and I've never heard of the condom ban and im sure it's not true because they would be easy to smuggle and unless there is rape (in which a condom is rare in anyway) people even in countries like that would not willingly have sex with someone that may be unclean and most Christians are VERY charitable so....
@spiderpig85 I don't understand why you are so angry, its a discussion. I've never acted self-righteous. Here is the def of a theory ...A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena. Since you don't believe anyway, you of course wouldn't mind me praying for you. Talking down on people doesn't help you get your point across either
The problem with Atheism is that it is only the rejection in and/or disbelief of God. There isn't any solid evidence that supports the non-existence of God in this world. Like Christianity, Atheism is just a belief. It's not proof of anything.
@OpurumD "There isn't any solid evidence that supports the non-existence of God in this world."
The thing is, as a believer, your saying something exists. The burden of proof is on you. I can say an invisible man lives in my car, but without proof, I'm saying nothing of substance, and can't carpool alone.
And Atheism is not a belief like Christianity. It's actually the opposite of a belief.
@spiderpig85 Yeah, as a believer, I am saying something exists, but that doesn't mean that I can prove that it exists. God encourages people to believe in Him, not to prove his existence.
Atheism is a belief. There are people that believe God isn't real, but there's nothing to support what they're saying, either. It's like saying 'how do you know there isn't a God?' It's no different from religion itself. God is believed to have a purpose. That invisible man in your car doesn't.
@badpanda84 Kill all known life (in wrath at flaws built into life by the killer himself) to the point that all the survivors could fit on a single boat?
Nah, even that would surely be paid for after a few hundred thousand years.
Jehovah: not afraid of a little thing like irony.
@badpanda84 these idiots are twisted and convinced that pain is not meant for a defence mechanism in physiology of all lifeforms, but are actually "designed" for the torture and masochism, and So called punishment that we deserve for being born in sin....they dont accept evolution because it debunks genesis and origional sin...which would make what their jesus did, as pointless, and not a savior from origional sin, thus destroying christianity alltogether like dominoes
@MadMAn12gauge One could argue that, and one could not. Christianity has it's many diversities, and not all, especially Gnostic christianity, don't believe in original sin in the first place! There may be subtle spiritual truths about the crucificktion which the average fundamentalist nor the athiest understands. But we can both agree that Original sin and eternal damnation is stupid, made up by the church ^^
@warmsteel but in the end these people are convinced by something that human beings have told them in the long run, and do not understand natural split personality....the human mind is an intricate thing....it is natural to have split personality and to think something else is guiding them thats our intelligence its not a god
@MadMAn12gauge No, it's not our intelligence, it's our hearts. Our intelligence should be a serveant to our hearts, not the other way around. If you look really deep at the bible, and the teachings of Jesus, from a spiritual perspective, one understands that Jesus isn't what religion made him to be. Rather, Jesus thought 'Heaven in you' - which means "God" really is us. And the devil is us too. The devil really is our egos, the part of us which feels hate, jealousy and so on. . . Continues. . .
@MadMAn12gauge And Jesus came to show us the way to not be slaves under the ego but to find the father in ourselvs. And the father really isn't Jehova, but the pure, inner, most deep part of our self. The unconditional love, the peace, the joy, the inner wisdom one finds when following the heart and not the mind The brilliant insight of life, the universe and everything. That is what god is. Nothing else deserves to be called God. So, Jesus crucified His ego for our sake, to show us the way. . .
@MadMAn12gauge So that we can "crucifie" our own egos and live with a pure heart. And really, if one look closely, this is what all the great teachers of religion (except muhammed perhaps) teached. Buddha thaught it, Lao Tsu thaught it, Malahavira thaught it, Krishna thaught it and so on. Even philosophers like Aristoteles thaught that all wisdom comes from knowing yourself. And when one completely finds oneself, and loves oneself unconditionally, one discovers "God" is a part of oneself.
@warmsteel you are missing some important things.... i dont feel thos emotions, or feelings....you cant explain that at all, i wasnt born with that type of brain....my brain doesnt understand the things you do or feel....it seeks the emotion constantly, but thats my "curse" i never can feel that type of thing....its one thing to get off on sex, but theres something about "love" that i can never feel or understand at all....i am not born with the type of brain capable of understanding religion
@MadMAn12gauge Maybe it's the 'god gene?' who knows? anyway, I'm not your average fundamentalist christian bigot who force their beliefs down on others. I love debating and discussing these ideas, and I enjoy reading up on all religions, as well as atheism too. I'm not offended by atheism at all, or atheists in general. I go to church since it makes me feel better. ^^ But I would probably enjoy being in a buddhist temple or mosque as well. I admire Jesus most but not the teology of christianity.
@warmsteel so let me get this straight...you admire a man that died for a lie? the only purpose of his death was said to be in the nature to get around the idea of origional sin....well that is all baced from the book of genesis, which every bit of that particular has been proven to be fantasy...so what did jesus die for? absolutely nothing that a "god" cant fix on his own, it does not make sense to require a blood sacrifice to forgive people who never even been born yet to commit a crime
@MadMAn12gauge No, I don't think he died for original sin in genesis, original sin is stupid. He died for other reasons. At least for me. For me he died because he was a brave man who didn't care that the inmature and ignorant jews wanted to kill him because he was starting a revolution and was revealing their hypocrocy and ignorance. His death served as a kind of 11 september event, if he hadn't died, we wouldn't remember him nor what he said.
@MadMAn12gauge Why did they kill such a pure, good and wise man? if he hadn't died the revolution in that time hadn't happened. . . Also, one can say that he died to save all the poor animals that the barbaric jews sacrificed to their "god". He sacrificed himself to give room for the holy spirit. He was crucified to show us they way to take up our own cross and crucifie our own egos and beastly nature and live pure and free as he did. That's what I believe.
@warmsteel say what you want about em...but dont expect me to believe that jesus was divine or that his actions would even TOUCH a gods mind to forgive people through one sacrificed human being...forgiveness is the easiest thing for a living thing to perform...A god has no need for human emotions and can probubly care less about what its creations even do...if i created something i would marvel at what it does in life good or bad, it wouldnt matter.if it did i would interviene, which god doesn't
@MadMAn12gauge Perhaps, perhaps not, maybe we are God? Have you ever thought about that? What if God is us, experiencing itself trough life. Atheism then would be God's existential doubts about itself. xD So the I AM in the bible would really be I AM? I AM WHAT? In Hindu philosophy, that's actually the case i think. . . They don't see God as the creator of the world, but as the actor of the world. Anyway, "God" is a useless word to describe God, it's a loaded word too. let's agree we don't know?
@warmsteel no...i dont hold any reservations that my existance means anything more than a BEE in a bee hive...(.and bee's are very significant to human food resourses....without them...say good bye)...and its not just that....we kill each other for resourses that just so happen to be in the area....the main reason is our ancestors were not smart enough to figure that out....and religion is the main reason we justify our vices, instead of just admitting that we are part of a group in the world
@warmsteel i hope one day man.you wake up to the harsh reality of it all.would give everything to believe in that fantasy..i just cant justify it.i want some religion to be true..but i care about what i believe .I only care about the truth,it is something nobody has yet found in life.that doesnt mean i should give up and just throw my life away into a fantasy, just because it logically makes sense, that is taking an easy way out of finding the truth
@MadMAn12gauge Perhaps I have been too gullible. . . I can see that. Religion is dangerous. But just like you I just want it to be true. And that's the hard thing. Maybe one should stick totally to objective stuff. I'm sorry if I caused you any harm. :)
@callumcubes Actually God chose to give man free will which led to man choosing to break his one rule.(adam and eve). the flood was sent because, like man is doing once again, we were trying to be our own God and cutting out our creator, which of course cannot be done. He gave notice through Moses of the flood , which man chose to disregard. The consequence of sin is death which is where Jesus comes in to play. Through Jesus we are forgiven. Everyone has faith in something. I choose Jesus.
@borat4u123 In what way, as far as I can see Dawkins does not partake in genocide, neither has he bullied anyone into considering Evolution as a viable theory. On the other hand, what you may percieve as god, can be described with all of these characteristics. One example is the famous plagues of Egypt, not only did he partake in the genocide of an entire generation with the last plague, but he was generally a bastard by killing livestock and by destroying an entire ecosystem of fish. Bastard!
@borat4u123 The worst luck any son of a bitch has ever seen ;) Either that or the entire thing was just a load of bull, an entire river of blood? From where exactly? Maybe god became an emo and accidentally spilled his blood into the Nile
He can describe God yet He doesn't believe in God. You can't dispute God especially when many people have faith in God! In the end God will prove Himself but you see God is a merciful God. He's beeen merciful to me and all of us. He's a God of second chances!
@ABeanieBug just because the majority of a population beleive something to be "true" doesn't mean it is. Read "1984" by George Orwell, it'll open your eyes to how we view truths.
@ABeanieBug You can't dispute a unicorn, or leprechauns existing because many people believe in these, yet we say these people are crazy. Your logic is extremely flawed. I would go as far as to say your someone who would use pascal's wager to try to convert an atheist.
@ABeanieBug I think the main -if not the only- reason you believe in a "merciful God of second chances" is just that...you feel like you get mercy and a second chance...because you get comfort. The whole basis of religion is comfort (meaning) and to make people be nice to each other. So why not just admit that?
Well if you admit that, then the you're trouble; by admitting that whatever you believe in is fictitious it totally cancels out the comfort you get.
@noodlenate So why not just try to live as best you can for its own sake instead of for some eternal reward or fear or eternal punishment?
And if you feel like you need a second chance at life because you've had a lot of trouble, I don't know about that. I think it's a lot harder to *make* yourself feel like you have a second chance than it is to get that feeling from believing in something that says *for sure* that you do.
Proving that god doesn't exist is just as hard as proving that he does. At least agnostics admit they don't know, which is really a more honest approach. I've got respect for considered atheists - people who have actually thought about it and made the decision after due reflection. But there are lots of trendy hipsters out there claiming to be atheist because its "cool". Next week they'll be buddhists, the week after something else.
@VegasSkateCulture You're just listening to the cosmic bully say he is good. If you actually sit back and evaluate your god in terms of every other thing we call moral or immoral he is exactly what Dawkins describes. But your mind has been twisted and deluded into your religion that you can't see just how absurd your God is.
Those who "believe" in religion are the stupidest people in the world.. i mean.. c'mon!!! Wake up and smell the REALITY!!!! Talking snakes, living in a fish, talking bushes, walking on water, creating somebody from a fucking rib, etc, etc, etc... Just stop for a second e see how STUPID this fucking things are.... they were awesome in late 80's BD!!!!!!! When the smartest person in the world believed in sea monsters and flat earth and stuf like that. Oh man.. religious people ROFFLMFAO!!!!!!!!
Consider if you will, that the world can be divided into two very distinct groups. Those who believe in a supreme being, and those who seem to spend all of their time saying there isn't one.
@NihilNominis You are saying that we cannot judge God, because any moral code we use is ineffective if God sets the moral code, thus he is the amoral source. What makes you assume that God exists? Why would he exist? If you had never heard of such an idea of God or faith, would you still believe (and I stress *believe*) in such an entity? No! Just because a bunch of texts say so, that doesn't mean its correct. At least with science you can *test* what you read, so use your brain a little!
That's because you met lots of believers in God, but you've never had an encounter with Jesus Christ. I hope someday soon, you will...oh and Dawkins, too.
atheists, theists.... you need each other. without the other, you'd be even more bored than you are currently. binary, parasitic relationship. silly children. western world thought=shit :D we are the only ones who argue like this. jews, christians, muslims, atheists. why? cause we're dumb and bored. we should just uh, be daoists or buddhists :D or hindu. those nigs are cool. pick a sweet aboriginal way of life. rid yourself of fear. if you can't handle this....fuck the fuck off :D:D:D:D:D!!!!!!!
atheists, theists.... you need each other. without the other, you'd be even more bored than you are currently. binary, parasitic relationship. silly children. western world thought=shit :D we are the only ones who argue like this. jews, christians, muslims, atheists. why? cause we're dumb and bored. we should just uh, be daoists or buddhists :D or hindu. those nigs are cool. pick a sweet aboriginal way of life. rid yourself of fear. if you can't handle this....fuck the fuck off :D:D:D:D:D!!!!!!!
i'm an atheist in that if there is a god, i dont believe he acts on earth and so spending any time whatsoever on worshipping him or spreading a false message, is a waste of my time and everyone's. If noone cared about god, we'd have a lot more time on our hands and probably be a lot more advanced technologically.
All terrible attributes to ascribe to any human person. Pity that God is without attribute, Whose Substance is His Essence, the ultimately simple Being.
Who's anthropomorphising in the sky, Dawkins, you or me? Who's making God into a man, you or me?
If it is to be considered at all significant that God became Man in Christ Jesus, God and Man must be substantially different. And if they so differ, they must be judged according to different criteria. Do you accuse a Chimpanzee of ignorance because it does not speak English, though it have been raised in England? No! For what is proper to Man is not necessarily proper to Chimp. What is proper to God, although it be improper to Man, is not therefore improper to God!
@Murdulo A child must obey its parents because of its relationship to them as progeny. The father's boss, however, needn't obey the father simply because the child must obey the father: he relates to the father as his subordinate, for he is relationally distinct from the child as regards the father. So, just as we men are forbidden of divine Law to kill our fellow man, since relationally they are our fellow man, God who made man is of course not bound not to kill for any such reason.
@NihilNominis Richard Dawkins hasn't the competence to comment on these matters in such a public and authoritative way. He doesn't know what he is saying.
@NihilNominis If you want to know my real problem with the whole damned debate it's that we reason too much by analogy and never get at the thing itself. Science reasons by placing the higher things in analogous terms to the lower, not imagining them as distinct. Likewise the creationist will say, "DNA seems the result of rational mind" reasoning only from humans as rational minds; we have no analogy to an uncreated rational creative mind. That is God. I confess Him Lord and His Christ.
@NihilNominis So yes, he has another set of morals. Killing is OK if it's in god's name. This is the way of thinking terrorists justify themselves with, awesome.
@Murdulo Yes, of course He does. That was my point. My point was also that this is neither illogical, beyond comprehension, or "immoral".
Terrorists answer, as all men, to God. If they have caused scandal by using God to justify unjust acts, the just judge will deal harshly with them. The point of the Old Testament, however, is that there is no final cause but God. No moral code, however pleasant, is an end in itself. Only following God is an end in itself.
@Murdulo No, you've got to use your brain a little. Just a little. Quit using talking points. Treating good philosophy and good theology like mental illness does not make them such. Now, we must admit, if we are to admit morality at all, that something is an end in itself, towards which all actions must be directed. If that be God, then we cannot treat other things, even a moral code which applies 99.99% of the time, as an ends against which to judge God. God is morality's amoral source.
haha :) there is a lot of people who accept the fact that they have to, should pray for a supernatural thing they cant even see or feel. If god is real, and really exists, then he is really like the description of Dawkins, because he wants us to pray and pray all day for him. a selfish and arcissist god? well, thats ridicilous to me.
Thats just the vatican- the godz creatures their just cosmic shit
dberry999666 3 months ago
It is common for skeptics to sneer at christianity because it makes so much account of faith. They seem to assume that they have no need of faith, in anything. It would be easy to show that of all men, religious skeptics must be most credulous and must have most faith, of some sort.
OtonielRochaSC 5 months ago
@OtonielRochaSC
It would be easy to show that skeptics have the most faith IFF humans were born with a belief in god. But as the Christians so proudly proclaim, we are all born without god and must seek him out. So no, the ground state is no belief and the religious ones are those with the faith.
mbucari1 5 months ago
The chief peculiarity in their case is, that having rejected the light and the evidence of truth through their radical enmity of heart against it, they are shut up to the necessity of believing things without evidence and against evidence as their only resort. They are compelled to believe that to "leap into the dark" at death is the best ending of human life.
OtonielRochaSC 5 months ago
Is there a God? is Dawkins confident around his position? let`s suppose that Mr foolish Biologist had been living all his entire life in New York city. unfortunately, when it comes to 9/11, I cannon imagine a picture about Dawkins hit at the exact center of those targets ... in this case, regarding to the past twin towers, I got a mental image, if this stupid man were showed up at that moment precisely, he would be imploring for a true God, supplicating to God, and praying to God desperately.
Gust46 5 months ago
I'm all for atheism and secularism etc... but could someone tell me the part where God demands to have pain inflicted on himself for sexual pleasure? Masochism? Really?
geoffrz450 6 months ago
@geoffrz450 yo faggot.
shutup
bapee105 6 months ago
@bapee105 Dawkins supports rationalism - if you're going to defend him, at least be rational. You're response was an ad hominem fallacy. You are clearly very unintelligent and quite irrational.
geoffrz450 6 months ago
@geoffrz450 cool story.
bapee105 6 months ago
@bapee105 That doesn't make any sense.
geoffrz450 6 months ago
@geoffrz450 Sadomasochism doesn't inherently mean sexual pleasure, or to be subjected to pain. I think the definition Dawkin's was going for was the whole fact that the god of the OT took extreme pleasure from the humiliation, destruction and suffering of his 'children'
TheAsymmetrical 5 months ago
@TheAsymmetrical I see your point, but Sadomasochism does denote sexual pleasure from the giving and receiving of pain.
geoffrz450 5 months ago
look....people like me will never understand religion at all....i was born that way, and even as a child saw it as wrong....because it makes no fucking sense....i liked to read books as a kid...i knew the difference between fantasy and reality....and the bullshit of wishfull thinking....the only thing that ever mind boggled me was how people older than me were so stupid to swallow such crap....thats why i feel superior to everyone else that cant grow fucking up and see reality
MadMAn12gauge 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
NEW BOOK FOR DEBATES AND GOVERNANCE
Topics: The Issue On The Criminal Liability Of Foretelling The END OF THE WORLD, Other Debated Issues, Terrorism, War, Law, Politics, Religion, Philosophy, Science, Others.
Websites: balanceddiet1.yolasite.com etc.
See Figure 4, which is THE MEANING OF THE PYRAMID, at figure4etc.yolasite.com
or
figure4etc3.yolasite.com
See Announcements at announcements-balancedway.weebly.com announcements-balancedway.yolasite.com
TheServiceWeb 7 months ago
Other than that, what do you really think of Him?
INDIANBLANKET 8 months ago
Fight fire with fire ppl where like that so God had to be like that to tame them.............
joseph1122002 8 months ago
You left out the best part!
"... whose only redeeming feature is that he doesn't exist."
Scurvebeard 8 months ago
How can Mr. Dawkins even know right from wrong? I love how he steals concepts from Christianity (right and wrong) and then tries to use them to disprove Christianity - talk about circular reasoning!
staum607 8 months ago
@staum607 you know right/wrong from inborn capability of empathy and societal norms; right/wrong wasn't invented by Christianity; he isn't disproving Christianity - just describes God
kid29a 8 months ago
@kid29a are you saying right/wrong are only relative then? That things we see as right/wrong today might not be right/wrong 1,000 years from now?
staum607 8 months ago
@staum607 No. Some things we see as right or wrong might not be regarded so by people living then.
kid29a 8 months ago
@kid29a is that the only criteria for determining right from wrong? Since the majority supported execution for blasphemy (in various religions) can we the condemn those actions today, or should we say those were good at the time, but now we have a different opinion?
staum607 8 months ago
@staum607 What criteria? I didn't say about criteria. People learn them as humanity progresses and learn how to distinguish right from wrong better. For example: We know now that many other animals are almost as self-conscious as we are and hurting them is as wrong as hurting humans. People couldn't know that without enough brain structure research and observations.
kid29a 8 months ago
@kid29a not sure where this came from. You said, "Some things we see as right or wrong might not be regarded so by people living then." My question was is this (people's opinions, majority rules, etc) how you determine right from wrong. Sorry about any confusion.
staum607 8 months ago
@staum607 How do I determine right from wrong? Sometimes I have hard time doing it. I try to use empathy (golden rule), rational thinking but also I'm under influence of societal norms and taboos, I respect some values and try to act accordingly.
kid29a 8 months ago
@kid29a When faced with someone who claims to believe in opposing morals to yourself (or commits acts as if they do), do you try to enforce your viewpoint/morals (applying absolutist moral logic) or do you simply say whatever works for them (relativistic moral logic)?
staum607 8 months ago
@staum607 I'd share and reason my point of view as clear as possible somebody would claim his/her opposing morals. If he/she would act, then it depends on the importance of this act. Man beating a woman would probably urge me to react and enforce my point of view on it. Are you asking these questions to make a point or you just want to get to know me better? ;)
kid29a 8 months ago
@kid29a I am attempting to make a point, that if someone believes morals are not absolute; then to try to force someone else to live by their personal standard (even when watching a crime happen to someone else) seems to indicate that while their beliefs say "relative" their actions indicate "absolute"
staum607 8 months ago
@staum607 While it seems to indicate that, you can't say moral rules are absolute. If they were killing a man would always be a bad thing to do. It's not so because, for example, you can kill a man who tries to purposely kill innocent person and the only way to avoid it is to kill him. While generally murder is wrong.
kid29a 8 months ago
@kid29a Here I think we are differing on fine points. I admit that not all laws are moral absolutes, however it doesn't follow then that there are no moral absolutes. In your example, murder is always wrong, but killing someone is not (war, self-defense, etc). Killing would be the more generic term, while murder (the unlawful killing of another human being: dictionary definition) would be more specific.
staum607 8 months ago
@staum607 Every moral 'absolute' has exceptions. When it comes to murder there is the famous trolley example (JJ Thompson).
kid29a 8 months ago
@kid29a again we can agree that in this example someone will be killed. Killing though is not murder. And while this specific issue can be debated, it does not answer the question "is murder always wrong?". I agree that not everyone agree on what constitutes murder in every single case (mennonites believe war is murder for example), but everyone agrees that murder is always wrong.
staum607 8 months ago
@staum607 If you define murder as immoral act of killing a person then yes it is immoral by definition. It's not a proper definition of murder in my opinion though. From what I know murder is an act of purposely/premeditatedly killing a person and it's not always wrong (like killing the big man in the trolley example).
kid29a 8 months ago
@kid29a I wouldn't define murder as " immoral act of killing a person" - I think that is circular reasoning? The statement is true though. Premeditation/purpose is not enough to change killing into murder (trolly example, war, police, etc). However, I am sure you (and the whole world) would agree that someone who picked out a baby at random and decided to saw it in half just for fun would be committing murder.
staum607 7 months ago
@staum607 Things like genocide, slavery, POWs as rape slaves, burning people alive for heresy and "witchcraft", or killing kids for simple disobedience? No way, man, nobody could EVER think those were OK!
DuhIdiot1 8 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@DuhIdiot1 are you saying there are moral absolutes?
staum607 8 months ago
That's the finest description of God from the Old Testament I've ever heard.
eugene1 9 months ago
Ramen
Legit73Resurected 9 months ago
AMEN BROTHER!!
floridamadman59 9 months ago
@leej70 God made you to freely choose. you choose to be an atheist. but God made you a human being just like the rest of human, and not a leprechaun.
Voltar143 10 months ago
What the Bible states in the first testament, Richard Dawkins does in this sentence. The error does not lie in belief of god, but rather the anthropomorphization of god. The Bible was not a tool for intent to enslave and control the thoughtless, for they are no threat to elites; but rather a tool to control the thoughtful via aversion of anything spiritual.
MysteriousFairLady 10 months ago 6
If god made me why did he make me an athiest?
leej70 11 months ago 8
@leej70 He didn't you chose to have faith he doesn't exist
liebengood24 10 months ago
@leej70 He didn't, you chose to have faith that he doesn't exist. Its called free will. If God wanted robots he would have made them, instead he made you and me and gave us the knowledge to make our own robots..
liebengood24 10 months ago
@liebengood2 My disbelief in god has got nothing to do with faith, It's your beliefs that require faith and as the great Mark Twain once said, "Faith is believing what you know ain't so".
leej70 9 months ago
Oh but it does. No other theory of how our world was created has hard evidence either so sorry man you may call it something else but it amounts to the same thing..
liebengood24 9 months ago
@liebengood24 Hard evidence of what? The existence of god? So what is this hard evidence pray tell (pun intended) because that is something that has eluded mankind ever since someone first said "hey maybe this god fellow ain't real after all".
leej70 9 months ago
@leej70 We'll if there WAS a god (which there isnt) he gave each one of us the freewill to choose. Nice line from Ricky Gervais tho lol
TheReclamation14 6 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
evolutionist just the hair fell but the brain did not evolve they still have the same brain from the monkey
ThePinomoca 1 year ago
wow... hey man, he's not just a malevolent bully, he's a CAPRICIOUSLY malevolent bully!
tgz5001 1 year ago
besides, Is really atheist anyone who attacks belief on God this way?
Leivinn20 1 year ago
would be all those concepts about of God produced by evolution randomness?, I don't think so. Richard is guilty.
Leivinn20 1 year ago
You just have to read the bible to see that Dawkins´ description is true!
Noxilein2008 1 year ago
ONE of my favorite quotes thanks for posting it. I just love the way he describes "God" its artisitic and beautiful.
octavoch 1 year ago
And he gets pissed off when I masturbate. What the hell is his problem?!
davidls11 1 year ago
Im more interested on the reality of Alien cilisations visiting this planet cause its happening now, wake up folks! thats another astronaut thats came out and said the same.
Helios601 1 year ago
christianity is the belief that a cosmic zombie can grant you eternal life if you promis to drink his blood and eat his flesh, in order to rid yourself of the sin you have within you because a woman made from the rib of a clay man was convinced by a talking snake to eat the fruit from a magic tree ....... and if i believe this everything will be ok?
apoplexy1974 1 year ago
Spot on.... Only if these people could open their eyes.
Redmilitiageneral 1 year ago
That's strange, because I know the God of the Old Testament as a just judge who had set rules before people, and because of man's wickedness they could not meet God's standard. But what Dawkins doesn't mention is the God of the New Testament. Because we could never meet God's standard, He sent His only Son to die for our sins, so that we could be in close relationship to Him and have eternal life. Hmm...
ShilohPepBand 1 year ago
@ShilohPepBand So what you're saying is, because God failed to create a species capable of abiding by his rules, he punishes them for his own mistakes by causing genocides, plagues, wiping out practically the entire planets inhabitants in the 'great flood' along with hundreds of other hideous stories. Finally, to correct his mistake (which a 'perfect' god cannot have made) he sends down a form of himself, to sacrifice himself, TO himself, to create a loop hole in his failed plan. Really?
callumcubes 1 year ago 57
@callumcubes God gave us free-will. If WE make a mistake, it's OUR fault. We all have a choice to do something --whether it be good or bad-- and we are held accountable for it. If a person kills a person, he/she goes to jail; If a person kills a bunch of people, he/she gets the death sentence. For our actions are consequences and God carried out the judgments because He was/is the only one qualified to do so.
Also, God sent down Jesus to be a sacrifice in order to allow humans to sin and repent.
Hydroxis 1 year ago
@Hydroxis Isnt it his fault for giving us free will then? Why would god even create the idea of evil? Just to judge us? What is the point?
If a person kills another, thats murder right? Well what if a god kills a lot of people? Why doesnt god heal infant amputees? Why does christianity have the same beliefs as older religions? You dont think its a complete sham and based off of older religions? Do you honestly think the earth is 6000 years old?
spiderpig85 1 year ago
@spiderpig85 Would you rather have God make you a mindless slave, to obey everything he says, or would you rather have the free will to make your own decisions? Also, it was not His intention to create evil. But, because His creation disobeyed Him, evil was created in the process.
OpurumD 11 months ago
@OpurumD Answer the question. Do you believe the earth is 6000 years old? Also Christianity is a complete ripoff of many other older religions, just so you know.
spiderpig85 11 months ago
@spiderpig85 I'm not exactly sure how old the Earth really is, so I don't know how you expect me to answer that (you didn't even ask me that question at first, anyway). Nonetheless, the age of the planet has nothing to do with my faith. There are some things about the Bible that even I question.
As far as Christianity being derived (yes, derived is a better term to use) from older religions, you're telling me this as if I was born yesterday. It doesn't make Christianity wrong, however.
OpurumD 11 months ago
@OpurumD If the bible is the word of god, and god is infallible, then how can anything in it be wrong? And if one thing is wrong, how can you believe the rest?
The real issue of Christianity being "Derived" from other religions is proof that the whole thing is made up! Its just recycled BS that keeps stupid people under control. Stupid people like you. Believe what you want, doesn't make it true. Fact is fact, and BS is BS, no matter how many people believe it.
spiderpig85 11 months ago
@spiderpig85 Where in my post does it say that the earth being 6000 years old is wrong? I said that there are things that I question in the Bible, not that they are wrong. Semantics.
Believing in Christianity doesn't make me stupid. If you don't believe in it, fine. Don't be ignorant and call people names because they don't stand in line with you. I'm not here calling you an idiot because you're a non-believer, or that it's BS that you don't believe, am I? Have some respect, will you? LOL.
OpurumD 11 months ago
@spiderpig85 Also, the religions that Christianity was derived from were all based on the same God, anyway. But, like you said, you can also believe what you want. It doesn't make it true, either. The fact that you think religion is to keep people under control (when it's more of a personal choice and not an obligation; you're a perfect example) is your opinion. That is the only real 'fact' I see here.
OpurumD 11 months ago
@OpurumD "Also, the religions that Christianity was derived from were all based on the same God, anyway."
Really? Maybe you should know what you're talking about before talking.
And yes, religion is a form of control. It always has been and always will be. If you do not want to believe that then you should open your eyes and see yourself from a reasonable perspective.
spiderpig85 11 months ago
@spiderpig85 Christianity, derived from Judaism, Catholicism, and Islam, has the same God (Yahweh in Judaism, Allah in Islam) as it's predecessors. That isn't a lie. If there are others, please let me know.
If religion was actually a form of control, you'd be religious right now. You can't claim something as controlling if it isn't controlling you. Like I said, a personal choice, not an obligation.
OpurumD 11 months ago
@spiderpig85 Christianity, derived from Judaism, Catholicism, and Islam, has the same God (Yahweh in Judaism, Allah in Islam) as it's predecessors. That isn't a lie. If there are others, please let me know.
If religion was actually a form of control, you'd be religious right now. You can't claim something as controlling if it isn't controlling you. Like I said, a personal choice, not an obligation.
OpurumD 11 months ago
@OpurumD Zoroastrianism, Paganism, Mithraism and Sol Invictus, and others, like Egyptian beliefs all share various core principles. The thing is that Christianity is younger than these religions. As such, you have to draw the conclusion that Christianity has amalgamated ideas from other, older religions. So how can you believe something that is plagiarized?
The thing is you can fool all the people some of the time, or some people all of the time. But not both.
spiderpig85 11 months ago
@spiderpig85 Paganism and many Egyptian beliefs are polytheistic (LOL, nice try). Mithraism and Sol Invictus are not the same as the Christian God. In Zoroastrianism, Ahura Mazda =/= Christian God. Even if Christianity was derived from these religions (more or less), they are not completely the same, they don't have the same God, and Christianity is closer to the religions I stated (and they all have the same God).
This really isn't going anywhere, to be honest.
OpurumD 11 months ago
@OpurumD No part of Christianity is unique. It is an amalgamation of other religions. If you don't want to believe this that doesn't affect me really. Refusing to believe in facts is common for the close minded.
spiderpig85 11 months ago
@spiderpig85 LOL @ you. You didn't even read EXACTLY what I posted, and you're calling me close-minded? I just got through saying that Christianity is what you say it is, but not completely the same as those religions for the reasons stated. If what I'm saying doesn't affect you, do me a favor and don't respond to me. Maybe then, we'll see if you not really affected. -_-
OpurumD 11 months ago
@OpurumD I never said it was exactly the same as any other religion. I said it's core principles are the same as many other religions. Calm down there big guy.
spiderpig85 11 months ago
@spiderpig85 Heh. Maybe you are affected, then....
OpurumD 11 months ago
@OpurumD I doubt that. Affected by your magic god-man I assume you mean right?
spiderpig85 11 months ago
@spiderpig85 If ridiculing Him makes you feel better about this discussion, have at you. Doesn't really change how I feel or what I believe in. LOL. Anything else?
OpurumD 11 months ago
@OpurumD Ridiculing the magic spaghetti monster doesn't make me feel any better or worse, because it doesn't exist, just like your magic space man. Now as far as you believing in something, that's your choice. I for one, choose to believe in things that are real and not live in a fantasy land.
spiderpig85 11 months ago
@spiderpig85 You don't really know if He exists or not, but okay.
OpurumD 11 months ago
@OpurumD Neither do you.
The point is that I have the reason and sense to ask questions, you decide to believe in something that has never in the history of man been proven in any way.
As someone who believes in magic and deities, the burden of proof is on you. I do not have to prove that something doesn't exist if there is no proof that it does. That's like proving that Santa is not real.
spiderpig85 11 months ago 3
I'm well aware of the fact that I can't prove His existence. Something that I've admitted to twice already. You've convinced He doesn't exist when you don't have a clue if He does or doesn't. So what if it's never been proven? I don't need His existence to be proven to reinforce my faith in Him. You're saying the burden of proof is on me as if I'm trying to prove He exists. Maybe you haven't been paying attention. The absence of evidence isn't the evidence of absence. Food for thought.
OpurumD 11 months ago
@spiderpig85 LOL science is a theory though which means evolution theory can't be proven big bang theory can't be proven which means you have faith that God doesn't exist. Its not odd to you the bible is full of prophecies that have come true or that it speaks of crusification 100's of years before the first recorded use in scholars history? Have you read the bible? Its interesting what Christianity is based on,(faith) we are ridiculed for yet everyone has faith. Good discussion lets keep it up
liebengood24 10 months ago
@liebengood24 I think it's important that we establish a common vernacular when discussing scientific theories. A theory, in the colloquial sense, more or less means that you are not really sure of what you are asserting. This leas to the common saying, "oh it's just a theory." A scientific theory, however, is quite different. In this domain, a theory is a collection of assertions that make quantifiable predictions that agree with physically testable and reproducible observations.
ilovecrad 10 months ago
@liebengood24 You cite evolution and the big bang as theories.I think along these lines it's important to keep in mind some other theories:
cell theory, germ theory -have you ever taken antibiotics?
quantum mechanics, general relativity [do you use a computer or cell phone?] PS) general relativity superseded Newton's *theory* of gravity
So remember, if you feel you can't depend on "theories," then don't take medicine, use a computer/phone, or fly in an airplane. After all, they're just theories
ilovecrad 10 months ago
@ilovecrad didn't say you couldn't depend on them. The bible has just as many facts to back up. Its easier for me to have faith in God than man. But if you don't agree that's your opinion. No harm its a discussion.
liebengood24 9 months ago
@liebengood24 Science is a theory? What are you talking about? Science has delivered us the modern world on a silver platter, people give their lives to science to try and help the rest of us understand our universe. Religion gives us very little that is positive. Holy wars and religious persecution are the causes of religion. So take your self-righteous ass and go fuck yourself.
spiderpig85 9 months ago
@spiderpig85 religion also saves many lives in Africa, mexico etc and drives people to destroy hundreds of people with planes and science makes guns which can be used to save a family from attackers or provide food as well as murder people. religion I'd say is good or bad like a tool it just depends on how it's used.
ikaninjau2 9 months ago
@ikaninjau2 Science is just a system of rules that lets us understand more about our environments. What we do with that knowledge is up to individual people. Religion is a system of convoluted rules that tries to keep people living in a dream. You say it helps people in Africa. Really? The ban on condoms ALONE is why Aids is such an issue in that continent. Religion does not help people. Charitable people help people. Red cross, unicef, etc. are what help people, religion does not.
spiderpig85 9 months ago
@spiderpig85 well first i wanted to make it sure that you are not classifying islam and christianity together there are almost polar opposites and I've never heard of the condom ban and im sure it's not true because they would be easy to smuggle and unless there is rape (in which a condom is rare in anyway) people even in countries like that would not willingly have sex with someone that may be unclean and most Christians are VERY charitable so....
ikaninjau2 9 months ago
@spiderpig85 I don't understand why you are so angry, its a discussion. I've never acted self-righteous. Here is the def of a theory ...A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena. Since you don't believe anyway, you of course wouldn't mind me praying for you. Talking down on people doesn't help you get your point across either
liebengood24 9 months ago
@liebengood24 I dont want to get through to you. I want to make fun of you for believing in santa.
spiderpig85 9 months ago
The problem with Atheism is that it is only the rejection in and/or disbelief of God. There isn't any solid evidence that supports the non-existence of God in this world. Like Christianity, Atheism is just a belief. It's not proof of anything.
OpurumD 11 months ago
@OpurumD "There isn't any solid evidence that supports the non-existence of God in this world."
The thing is, as a believer, your saying something exists. The burden of proof is on you. I can say an invisible man lives in my car, but without proof, I'm saying nothing of substance, and can't carpool alone.
And Atheism is not a belief like Christianity. It's actually the opposite of a belief.
spiderpig85 11 months ago
@spiderpig85 Yeah, as a believer, I am saying something exists, but that doesn't mean that I can prove that it exists. God encourages people to believe in Him, not to prove his existence.
Atheism is a belief. There are people that believe God isn't real, but there's nothing to support what they're saying, either. It's like saying 'how do you know there isn't a God?' It's no different from religion itself. God is believed to have a purpose. That invisible man in your car doesn't.
OpurumD 11 months ago
@Hydroxis Prove it.
ninjajesus81 1 year ago
@Hydroxis
If a person kills a person, he/she goes to jail; If a person kills a bunch of people, he/she gets the death sentence.
BUT what would someone have to do to get tortured for all eternity in a lake of fire --
badpanda84 1 year ago 18
@badpanda84 Eat fish on the wrong day...
spiderpig85 11 months ago
@badpanda84 Kill all known life (in wrath at flaws built into life by the killer himself) to the point that all the survivors could fit on a single boat?
Nah, even that would surely be paid for after a few hundred thousand years.
Jehovah: not afraid of a little thing like irony.
DuhIdiot1 8 months ago
@badpanda84 It's simple!
Denounce the religion itself :P LOL
shhhh6661 8 months ago
@badpanda84 these idiots are twisted and convinced that pain is not meant for a defence mechanism in physiology of all lifeforms, but are actually "designed" for the torture and masochism, and So called punishment that we deserve for being born in sin....they dont accept evolution because it debunks genesis and origional sin...which would make what their jesus did, as pointless, and not a savior from origional sin, thus destroying christianity alltogether like dominoes
MadMAn12gauge 7 months ago
@MadMAn12gauge One could argue that, and one could not. Christianity has it's many diversities, and not all, especially Gnostic christianity, don't believe in original sin in the first place! There may be subtle spiritual truths about the crucificktion which the average fundamentalist nor the athiest understands. But we can both agree that Original sin and eternal damnation is stupid, made up by the church ^^
warmsteel 6 months ago
@warmsteel but in the end these people are convinced by something that human beings have told them in the long run, and do not understand natural split personality....the human mind is an intricate thing....it is natural to have split personality and to think something else is guiding them thats our intelligence its not a god
MadMAn12gauge 6 months ago
@MadMAn12gauge No, it's not our intelligence, it's our hearts. Our intelligence should be a serveant to our hearts, not the other way around. If you look really deep at the bible, and the teachings of Jesus, from a spiritual perspective, one understands that Jesus isn't what religion made him to be. Rather, Jesus thought 'Heaven in you' - which means "God" really is us. And the devil is us too. The devil really is our egos, the part of us which feels hate, jealousy and so on. . . Continues. . .
warmsteel 6 months ago
@MadMAn12gauge And Jesus came to show us the way to not be slaves under the ego but to find the father in ourselvs. And the father really isn't Jehova, but the pure, inner, most deep part of our self. The unconditional love, the peace, the joy, the inner wisdom one finds when following the heart and not the mind The brilliant insight of life, the universe and everything. That is what god is. Nothing else deserves to be called God. So, Jesus crucified His ego for our sake, to show us the way. . .
warmsteel 6 months ago
@MadMAn12gauge So that we can "crucifie" our own egos and live with a pure heart. And really, if one look closely, this is what all the great teachers of religion (except muhammed perhaps) teached. Buddha thaught it, Lao Tsu thaught it, Malahavira thaught it, Krishna thaught it and so on. Even philosophers like Aristoteles thaught that all wisdom comes from knowing yourself. And when one completely finds oneself, and loves oneself unconditionally, one discovers "God" is a part of oneself.
warmsteel 6 months ago
@warmsteel you are missing some important things.... i dont feel thos emotions, or feelings....you cant explain that at all, i wasnt born with that type of brain....my brain doesnt understand the things you do or feel....it seeks the emotion constantly, but thats my "curse" i never can feel that type of thing....its one thing to get off on sex, but theres something about "love" that i can never feel or understand at all....i am not born with the type of brain capable of understanding religion
MadMAn12gauge 6 months ago
@MadMAn12gauge Maybe it's the 'god gene?' who knows? anyway, I'm not your average fundamentalist christian bigot who force their beliefs down on others. I love debating and discussing these ideas, and I enjoy reading up on all religions, as well as atheism too. I'm not offended by atheism at all, or atheists in general. I go to church since it makes me feel better. ^^ But I would probably enjoy being in a buddhist temple or mosque as well. I admire Jesus most but not the teology of christianity.
warmsteel 6 months ago
@warmsteel so let me get this straight...you admire a man that died for a lie? the only purpose of his death was said to be in the nature to get around the idea of origional sin....well that is all baced from the book of genesis, which every bit of that particular has been proven to be fantasy...so what did jesus die for? absolutely nothing that a "god" cant fix on his own, it does not make sense to require a blood sacrifice to forgive people who never even been born yet to commit a crime
MadMAn12gauge 6 months ago
@MadMAn12gauge No, I don't think he died for original sin in genesis, original sin is stupid. He died for other reasons. At least for me. For me he died because he was a brave man who didn't care that the inmature and ignorant jews wanted to kill him because he was starting a revolution and was revealing their hypocrocy and ignorance. His death served as a kind of 11 september event, if he hadn't died, we wouldn't remember him nor what he said.
warmsteel 6 months ago
@MadMAn12gauge Why did they kill such a pure, good and wise man? if he hadn't died the revolution in that time hadn't happened. . . Also, one can say that he died to save all the poor animals that the barbaric jews sacrificed to their "god". He sacrificed himself to give room for the holy spirit. He was crucified to show us they way to take up our own cross and crucifie our own egos and beastly nature and live pure and free as he did. That's what I believe.
warmsteel 6 months ago
@warmsteel say what you want about em...but dont expect me to believe that jesus was divine or that his actions would even TOUCH a gods mind to forgive people through one sacrificed human being...forgiveness is the easiest thing for a living thing to perform...A god has no need for human emotions and can probubly care less about what its creations even do...if i created something i would marvel at what it does in life good or bad, it wouldnt matter.if it did i would interviene, which god doesn't
MadMAn12gauge 6 months ago
@MadMAn12gauge Perhaps, perhaps not, maybe we are God? Have you ever thought about that? What if God is us, experiencing itself trough life. Atheism then would be God's existential doubts about itself. xD So the I AM in the bible would really be I AM? I AM WHAT? In Hindu philosophy, that's actually the case i think. . . They don't see God as the creator of the world, but as the actor of the world. Anyway, "God" is a useless word to describe God, it's a loaded word too. let's agree we don't know?
warmsteel 6 months ago
@warmsteel no...i dont hold any reservations that my existance means anything more than a BEE in a bee hive...(.and bee's are very significant to human food resourses....without them...say good bye)...and its not just that....we kill each other for resourses that just so happen to be in the area....the main reason is our ancestors were not smart enough to figure that out....and religion is the main reason we justify our vices, instead of just admitting that we are part of a group in the world
MadMAn12gauge 6 months ago
@warmsteel i hope one day man.you wake up to the harsh reality of it all.would give everything to believe in that fantasy..i just cant justify it.i want some religion to be true..but i care about what i believe .I only care about the truth,it is something nobody has yet found in life.that doesnt mean i should give up and just throw my life away into a fantasy, just because it logically makes sense, that is taking an easy way out of finding the truth
MadMAn12gauge 6 months ago
@MadMAn12gauge The question is are there any truth?
warmsteel 6 months ago
@MadMAn12gauge Perhaps I have been too gullible. . . I can see that. Religion is dangerous. But just like you I just want it to be true. And that's the hard thing. Maybe one should stick totally to objective stuff. I'm sorry if I caused you any harm. :)
warmsteel 6 months ago
@callumcubes Actually God chose to give man free will which led to man choosing to break his one rule.(adam and eve). the flood was sent because, like man is doing once again, we were trying to be our own God and cutting out our creator, which of course cannot be done. He gave notice through Moses of the flood , which man chose to disregard. The consequence of sin is death which is where Jesus comes in to play. Through Jesus we are forgiven. Everyone has faith in something. I choose Jesus.
liebengood24 10 months ago
@callumcubes and all because a woman made from a rib was talked into eating from a magic tree by a talking snake.
autopsy87 8 months ago
HE JUST DESCRIBED ME. That means I'm just like god, worship me.
physcoticweirdo 1 year ago
sounds like hes describing ...himself..
borat4u123 1 year ago
@borat4u123 In what way, as far as I can see Dawkins does not partake in genocide, neither has he bullied anyone into considering Evolution as a viable theory. On the other hand, what you may percieve as god, can be described with all of these characteristics. One example is the famous plagues of Egypt, not only did he partake in the genocide of an entire generation with the last plague, but he was generally a bastard by killing livestock and by destroying an entire ecosystem of fish. Bastard!
bobsickle2 1 year ago
@bobsickle2 lol there must of been a reason behind the plagues of egypt...
borat4u123 1 year ago
@borat4u123 The worst luck any son of a bitch has ever seen ;) Either that or the entire thing was just a load of bull, an entire river of blood? From where exactly? Maybe god became an emo and accidentally spilled his blood into the Nile
bobsickle2 1 year ago
Dawkins rules. This fictional God is the worst charactor
twistyt 1 year ago
He can describe God yet He doesn't believe in God. You can't dispute God especially when many people have faith in God! In the end God will prove Himself but you see God is a merciful God. He's beeen merciful to me and all of us. He's a God of second chances!
ABeanieBug 1 year ago
@ABeanieBug just because the majority of a population beleive something to be "true" doesn't mean it is. Read "1984" by George Orwell, it'll open your eyes to how we view truths.
stuffunoob 1 year ago
@ABeanieBug You can't dispute a unicorn, or leprechauns existing because many people believe in these, yet we say these people are crazy. Your logic is extremely flawed. I would go as far as to say your someone who would use pascal's wager to try to convert an atheist.
Ye4hBuddy 1 year ago
@ABeanieBug He's a God of non-existence, just like all other "dead" religions.
TylerIsMLG 1 year ago
@ABeanieBug I think the main -if not the only- reason you believe in a "merciful God of second chances" is just that...you feel like you get mercy and a second chance...because you get comfort. The whole basis of religion is comfort (meaning) and to make people be nice to each other. So why not just admit that?
Well if you admit that, then the you're trouble; by admitting that whatever you believe in is fictitious it totally cancels out the comfort you get.
noodlenate 1 year ago
@noodlenate So why not just try to live as best you can for its own sake instead of for some eternal reward or fear or eternal punishment?
And if you feel like you need a second chance at life because you've had a lot of trouble, I don't know about that. I think it's a lot harder to *make* yourself feel like you have a second chance than it is to get that feeling from believing in something that says *for sure* that you do.
noodlenate 1 year ago
Proving that god doesn't exist is just as hard as proving that he does. At least agnostics admit they don't know, which is really a more honest approach. I've got respect for considered atheists - people who have actually thought about it and made the decision after due reflection. But there are lots of trendy hipsters out there claiming to be atheist because its "cool". Next week they'll be buddhists, the week after something else.
bowiemott 1 year ago
Dawkins describes his god, not mine.
VegasSkateCulture 1 year ago
@VegasSkateCulture You're just listening to the cosmic bully say he is good. If you actually sit back and evaluate your god in terms of every other thing we call moral or immoral he is exactly what Dawkins describes. But your mind has been twisted and deluded into your religion that you can't see just how absurd your God is.
RuinSonic 1 year ago
@VegasSkateCulture Dawkins is describing the God of the Old Testament, Yahweh, the father of so called "Jesus".
MegaGayjesus 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Those who "believe" in religion are the stupidest people in the world.. i mean.. c'mon!!! Wake up and smell the REALITY!!!! Talking snakes, living in a fish, talking bushes, walking on water, creating somebody from a fucking rib, etc, etc, etc... Just stop for a second e see how STUPID this fucking things are.... they were awesome in late 80's BD!!!!!!! When the smartest person in the world believed in sea monsters and flat earth and stuf like that. Oh man.. religious people ROFFLMFAO!!!!!!!!
dsrsp 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Consider if you will, that the world can be divided into two very distinct groups. Those who believe in a supreme being, and those who seem to spend all of their time saying there isn't one.
digital0707neo 1 year ago
@NihilNominis You are saying that we cannot judge God, because any moral code we use is ineffective if God sets the moral code, thus he is the amoral source. What makes you assume that God exists? Why would he exist? If you had never heard of such an idea of God or faith, would you still believe (and I stress *believe*) in such an entity? No! Just because a bunch of texts say so, that doesn't mean its correct. At least with science you can *test* what you read, so use your brain a little!
ramuthra1 1 year ago
Very Nicely said, for all Jewish people, I'm afraid to say you just got owned!
ramuthra1 1 year ago
@maj1969
You mean Dawkins is a Tiefling? Dude, that is fucking awesome! :D
SirBroadsword 1 year ago
That's because you met lots of believers in God, but you've never had an encounter with Jesus Christ. I hope someday soon, you will...oh and Dawkins, too.
DamonCovert 1 year ago
I think he just angry cause he gay and its a sin.
ohnoes300c 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
atheists, theists.... you need each other. without the other, you'd be even more bored than you are currently. binary, parasitic relationship. silly children. western world thought=shit :D we are the only ones who argue like this. jews, christians, muslims, atheists. why? cause we're dumb and bored. we should just uh, be daoists or buddhists :D or hindu. those nigs are cool. pick a sweet aboriginal way of life. rid yourself of fear. if you can't handle this....fuck the fuck off :D:D:D:D:D!!!!!!!
DOWNundah123 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
atheists, theists.... you need each other. without the other, you'd be even more bored than you are currently. binary, parasitic relationship. silly children. western world thought=shit :D we are the only ones who argue like this. jews, christians, muslims, atheists. why? cause we're dumb and bored. we should just uh, be daoists or buddhists :D or hindu. those nigs are cool. pick a sweet aboriginal way of life. rid yourself of fear. if you can't handle this....fuck the fuck off :D:D:D:D:D!!!!!!!
DOWNundah123 1 year ago
The god of the hebrews appears to me to bear an uncanny resemblance to Netanjahu!
Squarerig 1 year ago
that sounds a lot like richard dawkins
halfbreed1426 1 year ago
Pure, carnal, anadulterated win
hankywiz12 1 year ago
i'm an atheist in that if there is a god, i dont believe he acts on earth and so spending any time whatsoever on worshipping him or spreading a false message, is a waste of my time and everyone's. If noone cared about god, we'd have a lot more time on our hands and probably be a lot more advanced technologically.
Agar101 1 year ago
All terrible attributes to ascribe to any human person. Pity that God is without attribute, Whose Substance is His Essence, the ultimately simple Being.
Who's anthropomorphising in the sky, Dawkins, you or me? Who's making God into a man, you or me?
NihilNominis 1 year ago
If it is to be considered at all significant that God became Man in Christ Jesus, God and Man must be substantially different. And if they so differ, they must be judged according to different criteria. Do you accuse a Chimpanzee of ignorance because it does not speak English, though it have been raised in England? No! For what is proper to Man is not necessarily proper to Chimp. What is proper to God, although it be improper to Man, is not therefore improper to God!
NihilNominis 1 year ago
@NihilNominis So god has another set of morals, apart from mankind? That's immoral in itself.
Murdulo 1 year ago
@Murdulo A child must obey its parents because of its relationship to them as progeny. The father's boss, however, needn't obey the father simply because the child must obey the father: he relates to the father as his subordinate, for he is relationally distinct from the child as regards the father. So, just as we men are forbidden of divine Law to kill our fellow man, since relationally they are our fellow man, God who made man is of course not bound not to kill for any such reason.
NihilNominis 1 year ago
@NihilNominis Richard Dawkins hasn't the competence to comment on these matters in such a public and authoritative way. He doesn't know what he is saying.
NihilNominis 1 year ago
@NihilNominis If you want to know my real problem with the whole damned debate it's that we reason too much by analogy and never get at the thing itself. Science reasons by placing the higher things in analogous terms to the lower, not imagining them as distinct. Likewise the creationist will say, "DNA seems the result of rational mind" reasoning only from humans as rational minds; we have no analogy to an uncreated rational creative mind. That is God. I confess Him Lord and His Christ.
NihilNominis 1 year ago
@NihilNominis So yes, he has another set of morals. Killing is OK if it's in god's name. This is the way of thinking terrorists justify themselves with, awesome.
Murdulo 1 year ago
@Murdulo Yes, of course He does. That was my point. My point was also that this is neither illogical, beyond comprehension, or "immoral".
Terrorists answer, as all men, to God. If they have caused scandal by using God to justify unjust acts, the just judge will deal harshly with them. The point of the Old Testament, however, is that there is no final cause but God. No moral code, however pleasant, is an end in itself. Only following God is an end in itself.
NihilNominis 1 year ago
@NihilNominis You are willing to believe in a god by which murder and rape are justifiable in some way. You seriously have a problem.
Murdulo 1 year ago
@Murdulo No, you've got to use your brain a little. Just a little. Quit using talking points. Treating good philosophy and good theology like mental illness does not make them such. Now, we must admit, if we are to admit morality at all, that something is an end in itself, towards which all actions must be directed. If that be God, then we cannot treat other things, even a moral code which applies 99.99% of the time, as an ends against which to judge God. God is morality's amoral source.
NihilNominis 1 year ago
@NihilNominis ... Rrrright.
Murdulo 1 year ago
Does anyone know which page this is on?
Grimreach 1 year ago
haha :) there is a lot of people who accept the fact that they have to, should pray for a supernatural thing they cant even see or feel. If god is real, and really exists, then he is really like the description of Dawkins, because he wants us to pray and pray all day for him. a selfish and arcissist god? well, thats ridicilous to me.
nilayozsuer 1 year ago
Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel
majorl31 1 year ago