Confusing Bible Question No. 72 [Pic]

Submitted by: fancylad 7 years ago in Misc

That must be some strange-looking family tree...
There are 202 comments:
Male 12,365
[quote]It does require such assumption its part of the method if the assumption is not there then the scientific method would be useless because if the universe didn`t follow a set of rules experiments and observations would be useless because each experiment and observation would have infinitely possible results with great variations.[/quote]

Which doesn`t happen. Which means there is evidence. Which means that there is no need for the faith you`re trying to find in it.
0
Reply
Male 771
@ Angilion Science is not a faith I said it is faith based. It does require such assumption its part of the method if the assumption is not there then the scientific method would be useless because if the universe didn`t follow a set of rules experiments and observations would be useless because each experiment and observation would have infinitely possible results with great variations. Not undermining science in anyway whether its faith based or not its allowed us to make many advancements if I`m undermining anything its the belief of some atheists that they are beyond faith and that whose do have faith are somehow ignorant.

Science will never be able to prove or disprove God, believe what you want and find out, let others believe what they want and they`ll find out. But both sides need to quit with he High and mighty act while we wait and see.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@madest:

"Why do you need a book to determine right from wrong?"

Isn`t the answer obvious? It`s easier for some to be told what to do rather than think about it for themselves.

He can just buy a bible and be told a bunch of certain truths about the world. It doesn`t matter if they`re true or not; it`s the feeling of certainty he likes.

It`s a comfort blanket for the brain. It suppresses all those unsettling thoughts about the uncertainty of the world...the kind of thoughts that make the rest of us become explorers and thinkers...the kind of thoughts that make him whimper and clutch for reassuring platitudes.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@CrakrJak:

"What reality is that ? Is it the `I do whatever I feel like` Reality ?"

If us athiests do whatever we feel like, and we still do good things, then that surely means we are good people who feel like doing good things.

Whereas if you only do good through fear of being punished, then you might not even be a good person; if the threat ever lifted and you were unconstrained, who knows what you might be.

"Society needs a basis for it`s morals or they are just empty platitudes that can be swept away because they lack authority."

Maybe weak-minded people who don`t like to think for themselves need an instruction book.

And for them, we have such an instruction book; the rule of law, written democratically by all of us, not a handful of priests and prophets who appointed themselves rule-givers.

Because we abandoned that method of governance when we turned away from emperors and kings.
0
Reply
Male 335
@ CrakrJak - Why is a book the only possible basis for morality? Do you think Atheists go around killing and raping any more than Christians?
0
Reply
Male 12,365
Arguing that science is faith because it seeks to find rules that describe how things work does not convince me.

It doesn`t even require an assumption that there are rules - if there aren`t, you won`t find any when you look.

There is also that inconvenient issue of evidence - many such rules have been found, so the available evidence very strongly indicates that such rules exist.

It`s silly to argue that science is faith when it so obviously isn`t. I think you`re trying to undermine science by misrepresenting it as nothing more than another religion.
0
Reply
Female 446
*Move along people, there is nothing to see...move along¸...Do not cross the yellow tape*...:-)
0
Reply
Male 771
@ Angilion here`s the final point the nitty gritty.

"The scientific method makes one assumption, and one assumption only: the Universe obeys a set of rules. That’s it. There is one corollary, and that is that if the Universe follows these rules, then those rules can be deduced by observing the way Universe behaves. This follows naturally; if it obeys the rules, then the rules must be revealed by that behavior."

This is the basis of science is that the scientist believes the universe obeys a set of laws. Once again faith is the belief in an idea.

And therefore to continue to say science isn`t faith based is silly, so if you don`t like the word science makes certain "assumptions". Then everyone else in the world theist and atheist make their own "assumptions" as well. Does it nullify my point no...
0
Reply
Male 17,511
madest: [quote]Why do you need a book to determine right from wrong?[/quote]

Society needs a basis for it`s morals or they are just empty platitudes that can be swept away because they lack authority.
0
Reply
Male 15,510
The good thing about flamewars is they are a equalizer. At the end we all lose!
0
Reply
Male 17,511
madest: Dahmer had a morality you agree with.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
madest: What reality is that ? Is it the `I do whatever I feel like` Reality ?

"I’m a passionate Darwinian when it comes to science, when it comes to explaining the world, but I’m a passionate anti-Darwinian when it comes to morality and politics." - Richard Dawkins

"If a person doesn’t think there is a God to be accountable to, then what’s the point of trying to modify your behavior to keep it within acceptable ranges? That’s how I thought anyway." - Jeffrey Dahmer

0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Also do you think all things can be explained through science?[/quote]

No. Not even in the hypothetical case of a perfect and complete body of scientific knowledge. Some things simply aren`t covered by science. Hence the quote from Steven Jay Gould that the author of the article you linked to disagrees with.

However, I don`t mind admitting when I don`t know something. So I don`t need faith.

Why did the universe start? I don`t know. Maybe there isn`t a reason. Maybe there`s an unknown reason. Maybe the question is meaningless because time is a function of the universe and thus there cannot be any such thing as before the universe. Maybe we`re a simulation running on an alien computer. Maybe the universe was created by some person or people...but that just moves the question to one of how they were created. So religion also doesn`t answer and can`t answer that question.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]If you still some how believe Science is completely separate from faith read this article [/quote]

The author makes the usual mistake of confusing evidence and faith almost straight away, with some meaningless statements thrown in. Here`s a good example:

[quote]You couldn’t be a scientist if you thought the universe was a meaningless jumble of odds and ends haphazardly juxtaposed.[/quote]

We have ample *evidence* that the universe isn`t a meaningless jumble of odds and ends haphazardly juxtaposed. Evidence is not faith. How many times do I have to say that before it sinks in?

or

[quote]All science proceeds on the assumption that nature is ordered in a rational and intelligible way.[/quote]

As a result of the vast amount of evidence indicating that it is. Drawing conclusions from evidence is not faith.

Many theists are really desperate to make out that science is a religion, desperate enough to look silly.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]When scientists have little or no evidence they guess, They imagine and develop philosophies. So Yes, Scientists have faith or they`d never makes `guesses`.[/quote]

Your conclusion doesn`t follow from your argument. Making an educated guess about what might be true and then testing it is not faith.

If a scientist makes a guess and then decides that it`s true regardless of any and all evidence, that would be faith...and it would be the opposite of science.

You might be referring to unverifiable hypotheses, but (a) they`re not really important and (b) no scientist should simply believe that they`re true.

Sometimes scientists do have faith. That`s when they`re doing it wrong.

[quote]Faith is the evidence of things not seen.[/quote]

Hallucinogenic drugs work very well for that.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Musuko42: When scientists have little or no evidence they guess, They imagine and develop philosophies. So Yes, Scientists have faith or they`d never makes `guesses`.

Faith is the evidence of things not seen.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
madest: I`m free to pick and choose what I believe just as you are free to pick and choose what `morals` you want to follow.

0
Reply
Male 771
If you still some how believe Science is completely separate from faith read this article Also do you think all things can be explained through science?
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@CrakrJak

For the record, science is all about doubt. It`s what the scientific method is BUILT upon; you doubt doubt doubt, so you are constantly exploring and testing and experimenting to cure that doubt with knowledge.

I think that`s why religious types like you get so prissy about science; you don`t like uncertainty, so you`d rather be certain about something you have no idea is true, rather than be uncertain and use that as motivation to learn.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@CrakrJak:

"Isn`t it a bit Ironic that Atheist scientists believe in, Gravitons, Something they can`t see, hear, touch or measure and yet they denigrate those that believe in God for the same reasons."

They don`t "believe" in them.

They see evidence that suggests they exist. So they look to see if they can find out more about them. And the more they find out, the more certain they can be about whether or not they exist.

But why do I bother arguing with you? Your ways of thinking are so alien that I might as well be trying to explain the offside rule to a dog.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@CrakrJak

So those two lines of the bible refuting slavery that you quoted directly contradict the line of the bible I quoted that condones slavery?

Tell me again, then, how this book can be a reliable code of morality?
0
Reply
Male 17,511
madest: Pulling a Lewinskyesque "What the definition of is is", Interesting.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
MattPrince: Most people don`t understand theoretical sub-atomic physics, That and `Big Bang` theory start entering the realm of philosophy and imagination.
The definition of a graviton is that it has no mass and even it`s effects have not been observed.

Isn`t it a bit Ironic that Atheist scientists believe in, Gravitons, Something they can`t see, hear, touch or measure and yet they denigrate those that believe in God for the same reasons.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
madest: Seeing madest doubt science theory, Has got to be one of the most ironic things ever.
0
Reply
Male 2,220
Crackerjack, my point was that newtonian mechanics is a beautiful simplification, which arose naturally enough as Newton tested his laws against what was observable on a human scale.

Gravity isn`t actually covered by Newton`s 3 laws as they relate to dynamic motion. If you`re talking about Newtons theory of gravitation - then its not that it doesn`t hold at the atomic level - its just that its very small compared to the other three forces on this scale.

At the sub-atomic... well...

Unification theories, (and there are many) do struggle with gravity, a lot of them tied up with the elusive and hypothetical graviton, and you`re getting into areas I don`t understand, nor I suspect, do you ;)
0
Reply
Male 17,511
MattPrince: Actually on the atomic and subatomic scale of things gravity literally has zero effect, At that scale gravity pretty much doesn`t exist. Where as on the other end, The big bang, Gravity is unified with the other 3 forces at first, Then gravity breaks away from them a few moments after the initial explosion.

(That`s just an example of one force, Gravity, That doesn`t always follow Newton`s Laws)
0
Reply
Male 15
picture reminds me of greek myths where almost every god is actively participating in mass orgies...with their families.
0
Reply
Male 2,220
@Mischief - faith?

Scientists are much more interested in the truth...

0
Reply
Male 2,220
Crackerjack said.."particles at the atomic level do not follow Newton`s laws, Neither do the events shortly after the `big bang`. It`s not just revisions of the rules, They are a wholly different set of rules. "

You`re looking at this from the wrong end Crackerjack sir. Newtons rules are simplifications of the actual rules. The rules haven`t changed, its just that its easier from the human reference frame to use the simpler (Newtonian) set where relativistic and quantum effects aren`t readily observable.
0
Reply
Male 265
lame.
0
Reply
Female 1,070
I`ll just link this video to all of you who haven`t watched it yet:

Tales of a Mere Existence - God

I`m sure it`s been posted on I-A-B before too.
0
Reply
Male 4,793
Hah, it`s true. I`m glad somebody else can see how evil god is.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Not to mention money is no longer backed by gold but is a whole credit system built on faith.[/quote]

No, it isn`t built on faith. It`s built on estimated resources. Gold is no different, really. It`s just a rare material that doesn`t decay. It was used as a symbol of resources, in essence a more organised barter system.

[quote]Also you think race car drivers are willing to die to race, and construction workers to be on high rises?[/quote]

No, I think what I wrote. That`s why I wrote it. They know the risks and they consider the benefits worth the risks.

[quote]If it bothers some of you to think it`s faith use another word won`t change the fact that all humans have faith in some way shape or form religious or secular. [/quote]

That`s not a fact. Being able to do a risk-benefit analysis, however informally, is not faith.
0
Reply
Female 1,963
I`m in too good of a mood today to get all involved in the debate, so I`ll just say that I was amused by this post. People just need to be able to not take themselves and their beliefs so seriously sometimes.

I`m going to go play with my kitty now, after seeing her for the first time in 6 months.
0
Reply
Male 1,505
"god made people because even though he is god, he nees to vent his frustration too"

God must`ve been having a *really* bad day when he came up with Harlequin Ichthyosis.
0
Reply
Male 771
Faith is a belief in the trustworthiness of an idea.*
0
Reply
Male 771
@ jendrian its sad that you know cosmologists and I know next to nothing of the subject yet I can show you that at the time people believed in the geocentric model which was later superseded by what we theorized today. They theorized this model due to observations that seemed to make sense and I knew that was a theory i remembered off the top of my head from grade school.

@ Angilion
Not to mention money is no longer backed by gold but is a whole credit system built on faith. Also you think race car drivers are willing to die to race, and construction workers to be on high rises? Maybe they don`t think they`ll suffer despite evidence they may. If it bothers some of you to think it`s faith use another word won`t change the fact that all humans have faith in some way shape or form religious or secular.

Funny you would have to argue that when some atheists biggest argument is that religions divide people.

Faith - is a belief in the trustworthiness of a
0
Reply
Male 541
because Painter13 only those who earned it can live with him. He`s our Father and if you don`t respect your father then surly would you not expect to get punished? Us Catholics are just like the rest of you guys trust me
0
Reply
Male 1,365
No shortone you are right..god made people because even though he is god, he nees to vent his frustration too. Also to any religous people, I have a question that you can help me understand, if god is responsible for flooding out mankind and turning us into pillars of salt for looking back etc.etc. What makes you think he wants us to come live with him after he kils us all? Just askin`.
0
Reply
Female 1,798
@ Hitaki:

even though "he" is a pronoun, capitalizing it is simply a sign of respect for the Lord.
0
Reply
Female 193
..It`s really annoying how people expect me to type He instead of he. `He` is not a name, it is a pronoun. Weirdochristians. D:
-runs from people who reply-
0
Reply
Male 2,748
ha. i find this funny. all those who oppose or who are offended are just humourless twats who sit at home and like getting pissed off about jesus. plus, this makes perfect sense.
0
Reply
Female 1,244
That isn`t why God made people..fancylad pisses me off
0
Reply
Female 57
ok IAB/fancy where is your pro religion post!?!?!
0
Reply
Female 57
ignorance is bliss dumb dumb
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Brassbull: particles at the atomic level do not follow Newton`s laws, Neither do the events shortly after the `big bang`. It`s not just revisions of the rules, They are a wholly different set of rules.

Read up on Unified Field Theory and String Theory, It`s really a biazarro world sort of science.
0
Reply
Male 5,626
"sometimes I think things like this are posted just to make 8 pages of arguments "
Yep. Because something worth 8 pages is not boring...
0
Reply
Male 208
Seriously? You can`t just read it and move on?
0
Reply
Female 199
sometimes I think things like this are posted just to make 8 pages of arguments
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Out of a billion ways to die here`s just one
Car accidents but do you stay in the house in fear even though evidence shows you can die at any moment no, because you have faith that it will not happen to you.[/quote]

Wrong. People assess the probability and do a risk-benefit analysis or simply assess the probability and dismiss it as being low enough to not matter.

If the chance of dying in a car crash was high and driving wasn`t necessary or even particularly useful and people did it anyway because they believed they were protected by something they had no evidence for, that would be faith.

People who race cars are different - they have accepted the risk of death because they consider the benefits to outweigh the risks. Which still isn`t faith.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
mischeif954:

You are confusing faith with extrapolations based on available evidence and with probability.

For example, creditors do not lend on faith that borrowers will repay. Creditors examine a potential borrower`s previous borrowing and repayment records (a credit check), examine a potential borrower`s current income and current expenditure to see if the borrower has the spare money to repay the new debt and *then* the creditor assesses the probability of repayment based on that available evidence (and often others, such as observations of the potential borrower made by a person trained by the creditor) and decides whether or not to make a loan based on that assessment of probability.

That is not faith.
0
Reply
Male 1,610
[quote]For instance, There are many examples of things that do not follow `Newton`s Laws`. That is why scientists have separate rules for dealing with different conditions (mainly based on size and time)[/quote]

Scientific ideas and concepts deserve scientific terminology, and generalizations like that deserve some supporting evidence. I`m guessing one such example is the perihelion of Mercury`s orbit which Newton`s theory of gravity didn`t explain. Einstein`s new theory explaining this anomaly isn`t a separate rule for a different condition. Rather is is a new, expanded rule accounting for all conditions.

Mischeif954

People drive because they love driving and they`re not going to let fear dictate what they can and cannot do. I`m sure the concept of death never even occur to some drivers. Some people drive as if they wanted to die.
0
Reply
Male 2,516
@mischief954: the part that there was a time where scientists said there was evidence earth was the center of the universe.

There was never such evidence in fact back then there was a great debate on whether that notion was true precisely because there was no evidence. It wasn`t until the church adopted the idea that earth was the center that it became a war and others "had" to be silenced (this is in Carl Sagan`s "Cosmos" series).

On the other hand, no cosmologist I know (and I work on the field of general relativity and cosmology) rejects the idea of the big bang, they reject hypothesis related to what happened before and after, but the big bang itself is a proven theory supported by the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation (for which there are pictures) and the Doppler redshift observed.
0
Reply
Male 771
Well just to leave you guys here with something to think about, especially who believe that living with religion is living on faith and atheism and science somehow faithless and more logical cause its based completely on evidence.

The Money/Credit system - creditors lend on faith that debtors will repay them.
Theories of Economics - heavily based on the faith of the consumer of the market.
Science/Statistics there is a confidence interval in which you have faith that your desired result will lie.

Out of a billion ways to die here`s just one
Car accidents but do you stay in the house in fear even though evidence shows you can die at any moment no, because you have faith that it will not happen to you.
0
Reply
Female 446
My kids and i are Catholics. One day i was driving my car and my son (8yrs old) seemed to be in a serious thinking mode. I asked him why he was so quiet and he turned to me and asked me how the city decides to name streets. I told him that the city will sometimes honor people who have done great things by naming a street after them. So...my son stays quiet for a few seconds and then asked me...*Mom...if the city names streets to honor some great citizens...why isn`t there a street named for Jesus?....I was completely taken aback with this inspiring question.....Kids can sometimes be very inspiring....i thinks.
0
Reply
Male 771
"[i] If history has taught us anything its that nothing is absolute. There was a time where scientists said they had evidence earth was the center of the universe...[/i]

What a retard... stop making stuff up"

LOL I hope your joking which part of that was made up?
0
Reply
Male 441
If I truly believed in god, this is how my belief would go.

God didn`t create us to torture us, he made us to love him. Every one wants to be loved. God existed in a black abyss of nothing, so basically God did not exist until he made another being, something to compare him to. We are the down to his up. Without us there would be no God.

And he gave us free will to love him, or he gave us the ability to love him which gave us free will. Either way, to truly love something you have to have a choice to not love it.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
jendrian: Learn some history, Science is never set in stone because new evidence can always change it.

For instance, There are many examples of things that do not follow `Newton`s Laws`. That is why scientists have separate rules for dealing with different conditions (mainly based on size and time)
0
Reply
Male 2,516
[i] If history has taught us anything its that nothing is absolute. There was a time where scientists said they had evidence earth was the center of the universe...[/i]

What a retard... stop making stuff up
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Galatians 3:28 - There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

Matthew 22:36-40 - Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.`This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: `Love your neighbor as yourself.` All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments."

These verses refute slavery better than any other, We are all `One blood` and we are to treat others as we would treat ourselves.
0
Reply
Male 106
Brassbull: "However, science does not require faith because faith is the belief in that for which there is no evidence."

That`s not true, science requires faith in induction. Admittedly that`s not exactly the same leap of faith that`s required to believe in the bible, but scientists aren`t entirely faith-free.
0
Reply
Female 446
But wait! What about the Holy Trinity...The Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit? Now, make a family tree outa that...lolll
0
Reply
Male 771
Nothing serious I meant like finding Noah`s arc and the red sea parting. Not exactly because evidence alone is not enough you must form a hypothesis based off evidence, and test the hypothesis even then its still not 100%
0
Reply
Male 1,351
The first two sentences by "dad" aren`t complete sentences, and shouldn`t have a period. Discuss.(instead of this constant religion debate charade)
0
Reply
Male 2,850
Bondsman, by the way, is a word relating to serfdom: "a condition of bondage or modified slavery which developed primarily during the High Middle Ages in Europe."
0
Reply
Male 2,850
The bible says, right there, that you can take foreigners as slaves.

So...is it moral to take slaves, or is that part of the bible immoral, therefore casting the certainty of the rest of the bible into doubt, or are you going to say "it was different back then", therefore admitting that the morality from god changes over time?

Checkmate, now naff off.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@CrakrJak

"Yes, Old testament people did have servants but they were not `Slaves` as the south practiced it."

Doesn`t it hurt your brain when you twist your thinking THAT hard?

Explain:

Leviticus 25:44-46

Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, shall be of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids.

45Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.

46And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour.
0
Reply
Male 1,610
[quote]There are things in the bible that have been scientifically backed with evidence and/or very plausible theories.[/quote]

Ooooooo, sounds like we`re gonna transition into an argument about creationism. Please, give some examples of these things from the bible which were backed by science.

[quote]Well Gravity is a theory yet we create things in a fashion that tailor to the theories we have, which mean we have Faith that the theories hold true wouldn`t you agree?[/quote]

First, this sentence is a little confusing to me. An example would help.

Second, if I am reading this correctly, they wouldn`t `believe` it was going to work as desired, but would be full of doubt about possible human errors and miscalculations, unforeseen problems, etc.

Third, if it is based on evidence, then by definition, it cannot be considered faith.
0
Reply
Male 771
You didn`t say that, my first reply that got me started on the topic was to someone who did. Well Gravity is a theory yet we create things in a fashion that tailor to the theories we have, which mean we have Faith that the theories hold true wouldn`t you agree?
0
Reply
Male 771
Again, you`ve obviously missed the point I`m not against science I used it as an example to show that everything is faith based. And as far as being stuck 2,000 years in it all of those books were written so long ago and translated that they are so open to interpretation. So is it irrelevant just because its old?, no because ideas of good and evil and morality are timeless in a sense the degree may change but the same general idea remains. To paint the line of religion and science is not as simple as its made to believe. There are things in the bible that have been scientifically backed with evidence and/or very plausible theories. They are just a book of stories whether they are real or not is all upon the you to decide.
0
Reply
Male 1,610
[quote]but to say its ignorant to be in a faith based system is stupid, because everything in life is faith based religious or secular.[/quote]

I never said it was ignorant to be in a faith based system, and I do not believe that it is ignorant. People are not necessarily ignorant for being religious. Most cannot help it; they were taught to believe what they believe.

However, science does not require faith because faith is the belief in that for which there is no evidence.

0
Reply
Male 17,511
Musuko42: `Slavery` was never moral, Even though the south tried to use bible quotes to justify it. Yes, Old testament people did have servants but they were not `Slaves` as the south practiced it.

Servants were to be treated like members of the family, Better than most of today`s `employees` are. The south treated slaves as livestock, Beasts of burden, They were `property` not human beings. Slavery ended because it was evil, A lot of abolitionists and union soldiers died to gain their freedom. The shame came after Lincoln died, States wrote `Jim Crow` racism into law for nearly a hundred years.
0
Reply
Male 771
Brassbull I completely agree, but to say its ignorant to be in a faith based system is stupid, because everything in life is faith based religious or secular.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
madest: I never `put myself on a pedestal` I`m a sinner like everyone else. You denigrate yourself with your malleable sense of `morality`.

And you`ve never stolen anything, Ever ? Not even a pen from a bank or a paper clip from some one`s desk ? Even by accident ? Of course you have, Everyone has inadvertently, Don`t be absurd.

You may be a modern man, But your far from being moral. If you were truly honest with yourself you`d own up to your frailties and drop the facade of your perfect super-ego.
0
Reply
Female 2,674
mischeif- "And when new evidence disproves that then.... If history has taught us anything its that nothing is absolute."
Exactly! This is the good thing about science, unlike religious texts, it has the ability to change. New evidence is discovered, prior theories change. Many of the previous beliefs in science also weren`t very scientific, they didn`t have anything close to the kind of tools we have now (plus many of the theories stemmed from religious texts). It`s extremely unlikely that something with so much evidence backing it, such as evolution, will eventually be completely nullified. But if it is, then it`s because we found a much better and more accurate explanation and that`s a great thing. It`s not like religious texts where you`re stuck thousands of years in the past!
0
Reply
Male 447
Hey everyone lets have a theological discussion on original sin, as this comic seems to be misinformed on the meaning and impact it has.
You see, when Adam and Eve were banished from paradise they committed a sin which forever condemns humanity to be impure and sinful by nature. This "original sin" was passed down to everyone forever, until God decided humanity had suffered long enough to be able to redeem itself, so he send down himself in the form of Jesus to "die" as a human and in doing so absolve humanity of original sin. (That`s why people say Jesus died for your sins) So therefore you no longer have original sin and can only be sent to Hell for committing...you know...actual sins. Of course that`s if you`re Catholic. Orthodox Christians have an entirely different take on this, but that`s a story for a different time.

TL;DR This comic appeals to people who don`t take the time to understand religious beliefs but still like to make fun of
0
Reply
Male 422
science=win (evidence for blah blah)
religion=bunchoflooneys (no evidence for yet try to control your thoughts)
0
Reply
Male 1,610
[quote]How about all the times science and medicine were wrong? You still believe in Science and medicine though, so why is it so wrong for people to continue to believe in religion then?[/quote]

I don`t think anyone is arguing that people should not have a religion, but we have every right to point out a religions faults and merits, just as we do with science.

Your criticism of science is actually it`s biggest merit. What is so beautiful about science and medicine is that they are open to criticism and scrutiny. We don`t so much trust the theories, or the scientists who make them, but rather the process by which they endure such heavy scrutiny and criticism, and will TRY to find faults in those theories so they can be revised, bringing us even closer to the truth.

Not to say we don`t trust scientists and doctors a lot as well. They work their asses off to do what they do.
0
Reply
Male 25,416
wow religious on IAB, never expected it!
0
Reply
Male 771
Actually I made it on a device made by engineering the application of science so that was a fail. I am not against science in any way shape or form but I think its ridiculous for one to sit here and say religion is bs because its all faith based and try to make it seem as there is a separation of religion and science, where in fact all humans are faith based whether you choose to acknowledge it or not. Like do some you people believe because someone believes existence started with god they don`t acknowledge the advances of science.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@madest

If anything, you are MORE moral. You do not have the threat of eternal damnation to make you behave. Thus, you are behaving decently without being threatened.

Any mindless animal can behave properly if they`re threatened with torture and death. It takes INTELLIGENCE to behave well on your own accord.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@CrakrJak:

"You seem to need nothing to be `moral` because you make up your own morality and can change it whenever you wish. That`s not morality, That`s relativism."

So the morality of religion is absolute and unchanging, hmm?

So what happened to that whole slavery thing?
0
Reply
Male 2,850
"If you need God or the bible to act morally then there`s something wrong with you."

THIS! This times a billion!

If you`re only good because you`ll be punished if you`re not, then you`re not good at all.
0
Reply
Male 771
Oh so we know the universe was small and so hot that it decided to forever expand to cool off its funny because everywhere I`m looking says they theorize this and that but they should just ask you because I guess you just know? And when new evidence disproves that then.... If history has taught us anything its that nothing is absolute. There was a time where scientists said they had evidence earth was the center of the universe...
0
Reply
Male 12
@mischeif954 so you say on a device MADE BY SCIENCE
0
Reply
Female 2,352
Time for another retarded IAB b-b-bible smackdown.
0
Reply
Male 2,516
@mischeif954: No actually the big bang theory is a fact because the universe is expanding by all accounts, there`s plenty of proof for that and in fact, proof was found before the theory was hypothesized.

The questions raised now about the big bang are not whether it happened or not (we KNOW it did), but about how exactly it happened and its implications.
0
Reply
Female 1,181
man i hate these bible posts. every freakin` time one pops up, every loony bible-thumper on iab feels they have to quote dumbass bible passages to the rest of us. so f*cking lame...
0
Reply
Male 771
"I do not believe that atheism requires faith, it is understandable to state that something does not exist if there is no evidence."

Refers you to the big bang theory, just one of many theories, that work based on faith as soon as evidence comes to disprove the theory its scrapped for a new one, how is that any different from religion? You believe in the theory because you believe it is true. It`s funny how millions of people will point out all the times that these religions are wrong or contradictory. How about all the times science and medicine were wrong? You still believe in Science and medicine though, so why is it so wrong for people to continue to believe in religion then?
0
Reply
Male 17,511
madest: You seem to need nothing to be `moral` because you make up your own morality and can change it whenever you wish. That`s not morality, That`s relativism.

"Once individuals or societies become the source of right and wrong, "right" and "wrong" and "good" and "evil" are merely adjectives describing one`s preferences." - Dennis Prager, Stanford University

"At the heart of Leftist lies is moral relativism. Liberals must try to reconcile their evil and say that their “opponents,” the conservatives, have an equally evil ideologue hiding in their closet." - Steven Robert Travers
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Brassbull: Isaiah 53:5 (Prophecy, Written before Jesus was born) "But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed."

Our sins were the thorns in Christ`s head, the nails in his hands and feet, the spear in his side. He was delivered to the cross for our offenses.

When we accept Christ he enters our heart, Our sins hurt him and this is why Christians avoid sinning because we can the `feel` sin inside us. It is why we try our best not to sin and pray for his forgiveness.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
madest: So what you are saying is sin and guilt are outmoded ? I guess this allows you to justify anything you do as `moral`, Even if you`re wrong.

That`s was is really twisted, Your moral relativism allows you make up your own set of rules as you go.
0
Reply
Male 500
mankind.
0
Reply
Male 500
"This is just idiotic and someone made it to be divisive. Does nothing to foster love nor understanding of anyone.

Sounds like religion itself"
I utterly disagree with this comment. While there is no doubt that topics like this can be divisive, you have to remember that religion is progressive, insiduous and has power over all of us, rational athiests and "believers" alike. Christianity is at war with science and has recently attacked it like the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbour with it`s attempts to teach creationism in schools, ban on stem-cell therapy research and publications supporting intelligent design to name but a few. Non-believers and scientists (whether professional or lay folk) have had little choice but to be passive and neutral while they are attacked. Intelligent but peaceful debates like this are the only way to redress the balance, and educate the vunerable children and undecided adults. This may be essential for the very evolution of
0
Reply
Male 500
""the first cause argument, that warrant responses."

First cause - i.e. I don`t know what happened. I can`t comprehend what happened. God must have done it.

Lame. "


Sure is. False dichotomy is one of the great brainwashing arguments of the religious. It is much used in creationist argument. E.g. Science cant explain it (yet) therefore (for some completely unproven and unknown reason) the christian god exists.
0
Reply
Male 591
This is the kind of thing that makes me glad I choose to worship the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
0
Reply
Male 748
I think that atheists can quite reasonably claim that there is no God if no proof exists for God`s existence. Unless there is evidence, religion is based on faith.

I do not believe that atheism requires faith, it is understandable to state that something does not exist if there is no evidence - you don`t have to believe anything, you just say that it`s not there. If evidence arrives for a God, from then on Atheism WOULD require belief and faith.
0
Reply
Male 3,842
Anybody remember the bit on the Simpsons when one of the Flanders kids says "If Adam and Eve had two sons, did they have babies with their mother, or with each other?"
0
Reply
Female 322
To those who do wish religion was not brought onto this site: I just scroll over the items I am not interested in - why don`t you?
0
Reply
Male 3,255
@haveheart

Because it`s fun.
0
Reply
Male 106
@boredfjord
Ignosticism is different from agnosticism.
0
Reply
Male 177
I have to agree with have heart, it just seems to make the kookys kookier.

"why do you have to bring religion into this site."

Of course, had I written it, I would have probably put a `?` on the end. Just sayin.
0
Reply
Male 928
MattPrince and buscompany, agnosticism is the view that we don`t know whether God exists or that we can`t know whether God exists. Your definitions could certainly be reasons for an agnostic to hold that we don`t know whether God exists, though.
0
Reply
Male 1,610
[quote]If God truly was as sadist as this stupid cartoon suggests, He wouldn`t have sent his son down here to die for our sins in the first place.[/quote]

Dude, did you even SEE The Passion of the Christ?
0
Reply
Male 106
@MattPrince
This is where I tend to take a more ignostic position as I think people tend to attribute too many characteristics to god to make him more understandable. I simply acknowledge that either way you`re screwed (uncaused cause or infinite regress) and so something illogical and therefore incomprehensible must have taken place. This illogicality is what I define as god, though I`m reluctant to attach many more claims about him.

On a sidenote, this is exactly what I was talking about with atheists needing to provide justification. Arguments like what you made are exactly the sort of proof that atheists need to burden themselves with.
0
Reply
Female 407
why do you have to bring religion into this site.
0
Reply
Male 2,796
Sin certainly is a manmade concept
0
Reply
Male 2,220
@buscompany - not misunderstood - not defined. A vague wooly concept that makes people feel good.
0
Reply
Male 2,220
Buscompany : "You`re not even oversimplifying the first cause argument, you`ve just replaced it with a completely different argument. the first cause argument isn`t about not knowing what happened, it`s about the fact that our universe is based on a chain of causes and effects, and the only logical conclusion is that there is either an infinite regress (which seems illogical), or that there was an original cause which was not caused by anything else, which can best be explained by the presence of a god."

Nope - same argument - the first cause uses `a` god to "solve" a difficult conceptual problem. Still leaves you with an infinite regress. How did god exist in the first place?
0
Reply
Male 106
@MattPrince
If someone is taking a straight atheist position, than the proposition would be that there is no god. If you`re taking an ignostic position than the proposition would be that the concept of god is misunderstood.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
If God truly was as sadist as this stupid cartoon suggests, He wouldn`t have sent his son down here to die for our sins in the first place.
0
Reply
Male 106
@MattPrince
First off, the comment I had before with the @MattPrince was supposed to be @skine, my bad.

You`re not even oversimplifying the first cause argument, you`ve just replaced it with a completely different argument. the first cause argument isn`t about not knowing what happened, it`s about the fact that our universe is based on a chain of causes and effects, and the only logical conclusion is that there is either an infinite regress (which seems illogical), or that there was an original cause which was not caused by anything else, which can best be explained by the presence of a god.
0
Reply
Female 397
LOL!! hmmmmmm.
0
Reply
Male 2,220
"Any proposition requires justification."

Exactly, define the proposition then...
0
Reply
Male 2,220
@buscompany - I was just taking an ignostic position.
0
Reply
Male 39,882
I am soooooooooo glad there are some newer photos posted so we can let this one die!
0
Reply
Male 106
@feiku
Burden of proof has nothing to do with religion, it has to do with making a claim. Any proposition requires justification.
0
Reply
Male 2,220
"the first cause argument, that warrant responses."

First cause - i.e. I don`t know what happened. I can`t comprehend what happened. God must have done it.

Lame.
0
Reply
Male 106
@MattPrince
Theism refers to anyone who believes in a god, interventionist or not. Some people do use to specifically refer to a specific monotheistic belief, but it doesn`t necessarily have to mean that. Deists are definitely more theistic then atheistic, although they hseem to have a lot more in common with atheists than theists.
0
Reply
Female 525
I`m pretty sure the burden of proof lays on the religious and not the unreligious..
0
Reply
Male 239
@skine

anyone who would stop being friends or caring about someone because they found out they aren`t christian or whatever are pooty friends. I`m christian and i have athiest friends.
0
Reply
Male 2,220
"Correct! And if someone says they believe god isn`t real it`s up to them to prove it. If no proof it`s faith in the idea there is no god."

Define god, then we`ll talk.
0
Reply
Male 719
@buscompany: Actually, that`s not quite how it`s split up.

-Gnostic means the person claims to have knowledge.
-Agnostic means the person does not claim to have knowledge.
-Theist means that the person does believe in an interventionist god.
-Atheist means they don`t.
-Deist means that the person does believe in a non-interventionist god.
-Even though deists are atheists, non-deists are called atheists while deists are not.

So there are gnostic theists, agnostic theists, gnostic deists, agnostic deists, gnostic atheists and agnostic atheists.

However, many gnostic theists might claim that there is no agnostic theist, because there religion requires one to know god. This is why most equate "agnostic" with "agnostic atheist."
0
Reply
Male 106
@gorgack2000
The bible never says that the earth is 5000 years old, just some christian sects based on their interpretation of Genesis. Anyways, I was talking about making an argument against god, not christianity.
0
Reply
Male 4,680
"If you are an atheist then there is a burden of proof on you because you are making a claim about the world that needs to be justified."
As it has been through contradictions between the bible and science.

One example:
The Bible says that the earth was created rougly 5000 years ago. Science has revealed that it was actually been around for six billion years. We have evidence of this through various scientific tests performed on rocks, radio-carbon dating of fossils etc.
0
Reply
Male 111
I am founding a new religion! I call it "Apathism". Our core belief consists of not giving a poo if there is a god or not. Now who wants to be an apathist?
0
Reply
Female 195
If we were able to thumbs up comments, I`d thumbs you up, SalokinX.
0
Reply
Male 566
Here`s my religion of non-belief:
There is no "God", Strive to be Good for it`s own sake, speak out against evil and ignorance. Oh and spaghetti diners once a week (stole that from FSM). Can I have my tax exemption now? (to pay for all the spaghetti)
0
Reply
Male 106
People really need to get better at defining what they are. If you think that it cannot be known whether there is a god or not, or simply lack a belief in god, then say that you`re agnostic or at least a weak atheist. Just saying that you are an atheist implies that you a have a belief that there is no god. Sorry, it`s just kinda a pet peeve of mine because it causes a lot of misunderstanding on both sides of the debate.

If you are an atheist then there is a burden of proof on you because you are making a claim about the world that needs to be justified. Saying that there`s no evidence for a god is not a good argument because there are many strong arguments for theism, such as the first cause argument, that warrant responses.
0
Reply
Male 51
This is just idiotic and someone made it to be divisive. Does nothing to foster love nor understanding of anyone.

Sounds like religion itself
0
Reply
Male 201
This is just idiotic and someone made it to be divisive. Does nothing to foster love nor understanding of anyone.
0
Reply
Male 719
@pui: The primary purpose of atheist communities is to bring together people with similar beliefs/ideals.

Most importantly, though, they provide a community or haven for people who have recently lost their faith and are afraid that they`ll lose their friends and family if they come out of the closet. Instead of the only options being:

a) Lie to yourself, your family and your friends for the rest of your life, and
b) Tell the truth and risk losing the people that matter to you,

there is a third option:

c) Tell the truth, risk losing the people that matter to you, but have a strong accepting community to turn to with many who have gone through the same thing.
0
Reply
Male 185
If God is everybody and Jesus is god, does that make everybody Jesus?
0
Reply
Male 2,850
"And if someone says they believe god isn`t real it`s up to them to prove it."

The absence of any proof that something does exist is enough proof that it doesn`t exist.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
"LOL Just call me a1Leopard"

Hehe. Yeah, that hyphen didn`t belong there.
0
Reply
Male 2,229
"God"(or whatever deity one chooses to call their god<s>) is 3 algorithms that govern all life, anywhere. The 4th algorithm pertains to conciseness emergence and emotions. These have been tested and peer reviewed. Any other claim of morality and `good vs evil`, and other subjective gibberish involving god, religion, and beliefs are just extra fluff to justify actions of one person (or group) against another. And history is chalk full of examples of this.

0
Reply
Male 4,807
Musuko42

"Well-spotted."

LOL Just call me a1Leopard
0
Reply
Male 39,882
Crax and Reganom

Correct! And if someone says they believe god isn`t real it`s up to them to prove it. If no proof it`s faith in the idea there is no god.

I never claimed any belief. I said "I don`t know" and would let you know after I die, if possible.
0
Reply
Male 3,819
"This is not what is meant"

"God sucks"

"You don`t understand"

"Science makes more sense"

"God is real"

"God is not real"

"If God is real then why does this, this and this happen?"

"You are oversimplifying, what the Bible means is..."

blahblahblah
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@5Cats

The f-word tends to work fine.

Happy: "f-word yes!"
Stubbed toe: Plain old "f-word!"

And "lolz"? Come now, an adult such as yourself shouldn`t be saying "lolz". Leave the kids to enjoy the kid talk in peace.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@a1butcher

Well-spotted.
0
Reply
Male 40,728
What do atheists say when they`re happy? "Thank the Big Bang!" ?? (as opposed to "thank God" eh?) Lolz!
Ouch, I stubbed my toe, Big Bang dammit!
0
Reply
Male 4,807
@Musuko42 >>> Hmmm.. still talking I see.
0
Reply
Male 2,229
I like your point Brassbull
0
Reply
Male 505
Gerry1of1:

The onus on proof isn`t on the disbeliever it`s on the believer. By your logic if i claim i am the son of a god it is on you to disprove me.
0
Reply
Male 258
Brassbull wrote:

"Atheism: does not get tax exempt status." i should make a t-shirt with that
0
Reply
Female 8,045
I cannot prove that God does not exist, I have seen no proof that he does- neither has anyone. What I can say is that God is not a sentient being with whom one can have a personal, two sided relationship. I do not believe in God- those who do are welcome to continue. I defend your right to believe anything thing you so wish, as long as in exercising those beliefs you do not inflict any harm upon others.
0
Reply
Male 55
@Gerry1of1
The burden of proof is on the believer, not the unbeliever. I could say there`s a leprechaun on your shoulder and you would probably ask me for proof, and you wouldn`t be wrong to ask.
0
Reply
Male 505
Mindless2164:

As compared to a theist community?
"Hey i`ve got a problem"
"Read the [insert religious book here] it tells you everything"
"i`m not sure it`s for me"
"well then you`re going to [insert form of punishment] because you are a horrid human being for potentially disagreeing with my beliefs"
0
Reply
Male 1,610
Gerry1of1:

Nothing logically points to there being a god, so I have no need to go looking for proof that one does not exist. I don`t even think you could prove a negative like that.

I think I am starting to see how you could misconstrue atheism as a belief because it is very subjective. To you, I am choosing not to believe something, which, to you, is a belief. To me, I am unmoved towards any belief by anything validly pointing towards said belief. It`s like saying I don`t believe in a 13th planet in our solar system. To you, if you believed in a 13th planet, I would be choosing not to believe, but to me, I only see 9 planets. I`m not creating a belief system out of not believing, but because my lack of belief offends so many people, I may choose to discuss things related to the planets with someone who is not going to get butt-hurt offended when i mention saturn.
0
Reply
Male 1,452
mindless is living up to his name
0
Reply
Male 2,850
"Judging by the forums, just on IAB....They just can`t seem to stop talking!
Sometimes it just get plain old, OLD!"

Theists have been talking about their religions for THOUSANDS of years.

In about four thousand years, THEN you can fairly complain about athiests going on and on. Not before.
0
Reply
Male 499
Why the hell would anyone want to join an Atheist community?

I can imagine the wonderfull conversations that take place there.

"I don`t believe in anything divine."
"Me neither."
"I agree."
"...See ya later, then."
0
Reply
Male 39,882
Brassbull:

I`ve no doubt the Big BANG happened.
What trigered it? Massive gravitational forces or was it directed?

You made the claim God doesn`t exist but offered no proof. Not very scientific. Where is your imperical data that shows difinatively there is no God?

Is it THAT hard for you to say "I don`t know"?
0
Reply
Male 4,807
PUI.. "...wtf are they going to talk about..."

Judging by the forums, just on IAB....They just can`t seem to stop talking!
Sometimes it just get plain old, OLD!
0
Reply
Female 3,574
So then why am I creating an Atheist community website for the Free Thought Association of Canada?

Clearly atheists have enough to talk about regarding atheism. If atheism is just the default and doesn`t have any sort of belief system, wtf are they going to talk about on their own version of Facebook that they couldn`t talk about on normal Facebook? o_O
0
Reply
Female 2,674
If no religion existed and never existed (Christianity, Greek Mythology, Hinduism, etc.), what would be left? Atheism. No one would believe in a deity of any kind. Of course, the term "atheism" wouldn`t exist because it wouldn`t be the alternative of anything so there`d be no reason to classify that, but everyone would still be atheists technically. I don`t understand how people can insist that it`s a religion when it`s clearly not. The only shared belief between all atheists is the disbelief in any deity. There`s no churches (meeting places =/= churches, you can meet and discuss anything in the world), there`s no holy book, there`s no atheist leader, there`s no commonly known mythology, there`s nothing but a simple shared belief. It`d be like saying that all people who wear red shirts today are a group and have many of the same beliefs or something like that, when all they have in common is they like red shirts.
0
Reply
Male 1,610
Gerry1of1

We have seen some observable proof which points towards the big bang theory. Energy is the equivalent of mass times the speed of light squared. Atomic bombs have already proven Einstein`s formula to be true, and the big bang theory really just expands on that. If mass can be converted to energy, then certainly the opposite is true. That is not faith. That my friend, is logic.
0
Reply
Male 914
why do you people insist on having the same stupid frigging arguments every second post? grow up and shut up.
0
Reply
Female 3,574
It`d be more funny if it was true.
0
Reply
Male 1,610
[quote]1. really how many of these "Scientific facts" have you physically observed? NONE scientist are the atheist equivalent to priest[/quote]

I`ve studied evolution quite a bit, both in college and on my own, and you can observe various different aspects of it everywhere. Fossils, natural selection, survival of the fittest, speciation, etc., can all be observed in either books, museums, classrooms, or in the natural world.

[quote]2. would gladly accept a tax free status and has tried to get one[/quote]

Care to provide a source for that claim?

[quote]3. really you have seen the "Big Bang" first hand?[/quote]

The big bang theory is based on some scientific principles that we have been able to observe, like the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This is what science does; it build on other tested and/or observable data.
0
Reply
Female 331
I don`t understand why it has to be science or religion and why they have to be constantly at war. I choose to believe that science exists and so does evolution but there is a god that directed it such. Just because there are laws in the universe does not mean that they weren`t made by a higher power (it also doesn`t mean that they were). The universe is so much greater than our imaginations and i figure even if i`m wrong, at least i led a blissful ignorant life, my believing didn`t hurt anyone.
0
Reply
Male 833
people need to chill out. like almost all jokes this is meant to be taken as a joke and not be over thought. you all need to stop taking each joke made about christianity, judaism, islam, atheism, etc etc as an act of war.
0
Reply
Male 34
Atheism is not based on science. There was atheism before science. However, it is backed by science to some extent.
0
Reply
Male 1,226
"you know I keep hearing how ALL the wars were fought over Christianity. People get a clue 99.9999999999% of all wars are fought over MONEY and LAND. hello it has nothing to do with religion. its always Money and you know this "

Yeah, because Jerusalem and everything totally isn`t about religion.
0
Reply
Male 39,882
Brassbull:

Atheism is the BELIEF that there is no God without proof. Belief w/o Proof is the most basic definition of religion. Faith based Athiesm. haha

Don`t point to evolution as "proof". A God could organize that, direct it. PROVE there is no god then you can claim it`s "scientific".

I DO have a scientific approach. "Not enough data for conclusion" or "I don`t know". When I get proof either way I`ll make up my mind. I guess when I die I`ll find out.
0
Reply
Male 256
Musuko42

thats not atheist thats the definition for "Agnostic"
0
Reply
Male 256
Atheism...

1. is based on science and not theology
2. does not get tax exempt status.
3. does not require faith
4. does not convert (educating is not converting, it`s f*cking education)
5. does not have a moral code
6. does not have a spiritual aspect, although atheists may independently choose to be spritual
7. has no deity to worship

It`s not a religion, it`s the absence of religion. Because it exists in place of religion does not qualify it as one.[/quote]

1. really how many of these "Scientific facts" have you physically observed? NONE scientist are the atheist equivalent to priest
2. would gladly accept a tax free status and has tried to get one
3. really you have seen the "Big Bang" first hand?

o.k. im out of characters but I think I have made a point. WHERE IS ANGILLION
0
Reply
Male 256
you know I keep hearing how ALL the wars were fought over Christianity. People get a clue 99.9999999999% of all wars are fought over MONEY and LAND. hello it has nothing to do with religion. its always Money and you know this
0
Reply
Female 4,039
*yawn*
0
Reply
Male 258
Brassbull wrote:

"Atheism: does not get tax exempt status." i should make a t-shirt with that
0
Reply
Male 2,850
Or to put it more simply;

Not believing in god is not the same as believing in no god.

And presented with the locked box of my analogy, an person of reason would not believe that the box is empty, or full, or anything; they would simply not hold any beliefs at all about the contents of that box, until it is open. They may speculate on possibilities of what`s in the box, or work with what they know (that the contents are likely to be smaller than the box, for example).

But when a theist declares "god is in that box", the athiest will not say "no he isn`t." He will say "I see no evidence that would lead me to that answer."

Don`t you see?

The athiests do not say god is NOT in the box. The athiests simply state that there isn`t any evidence to say that he IS in the box.

God may very well be in the box; but until there`s proof, it`s no more likely than any other possibility.
0
Reply
Male 15,510
People, fight no more. This is the real way
0
Reply
Male 1,931
To those saying Atheism takes faith, you`re idiotic and don`t understand.

A metaphor would be that Religion is like watching TV. There are tons of different channels. Atheism is just not watching the TV at all, the TV is off.
0
Reply
Male 1,106
gymcoach29...

I should also apologize... the way I first worded my post was pretty insulting itself. I get a bit too defensive sometimes.

I have to remember that I also need to keep my tongue in check if there is going to be a healthy debate on the existence of God.
0
Reply
Male 1,610

[quote]Remember atheism is a religion?![/quote]

Atheism...

1. is based on science and not theology
2. does not get tax exempt status.
3. does not require faith
4. does not convert (educating is not converting, it`s f*cking education)
5. does not have a moral code
6. does not have a spiritual aspect, although atheists may independently choose to be spritual
7. has no deity to worship

It`s not a religion, it`s the absence of religion. Because it exists in place of religion does not qualify it as one.
0
Reply
Female 121
Angelmassb:

You could not be more WRONG.

Extreme Cheddar Goldfish are the single greatest invention known to man.
0
Reply
Male 6,693
I see said the blind man.
0
Reply
Male 363
DAVIDXJ - my apologies, I agree with you. Although this particular piece is not very logical, a bit funny maybe but not very intelligent. Glad there are still some religious people out there who operate on faith AND intelligence rather than blind faith alone. Religion is a good thing if it is a personal faith and kept to that. Once it starts becoming obsessive and forceful, it can be a very bad and dangerous thing.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
"athiest has come to mean and person who believes in non-belief of anything higher than themselves, that still requires FAITH and BELIEF."

Non-belief in something =/= a belief in nothing.

If I show you a locked box and say I don`t believe that there is an apple in the box, that doesn`t mean that I believe there is nothing at all in that box.

It just means that, whatever is in the box, I don`t think it`s an apple.

Athiests don`t believe in a deity. That doesn`t automatically mean they believe in an alternative (there being nothing). It just means that they see insufficient proof to believe in the deity.
0
Reply
Male 153
@ jamie76

sand in your vag much? so much fail.
0
Reply
Male 363
Narrow minded? Hmm...ok, I will grant you that 20th century wars (that the US was involved in), were often over resources and power, prior to that however, and even current wars around the globe are ALMOST exclusively over religion and the LONGEST running war in the middle east IS over religion and has been fighting for thousands of years.
0
Reply
Male 1,106
gymcoach29...

That`s not at all what I was saying. I`m saying this line of reasoning is not a very intelligent one. What I was implying is that this is piece of logical reasoning that is based on a super simplified understanding of Christianity. It seams to point out contradictions at first glance, but only if you have very little knowledge of the Christian faith.

Look, I understand how people come to the logical conclusion that there is no God. I just don`t think this one is a very good argument... it is un-informed and insulting rather than actually making a good logical argument.
0
Reply
Male 4,807
Yet another troll link?
These are getting very very lame!
0
Reply
Female 248
Gerry- Hey, at least its better than being bashed by christians for not being straight white males, like they seem to love doing a lot.
0
Reply
Male 2,344
Madest

remember, organized meetings, even if they do nto occur in a "church" istill qualifies. years ago I went to a church that had no permant location due to funding (it was new) and we met wherever we could but still, it was a church.

atheist have CENTERS all over the country where they meet on a regular basis and dicuss ways to knock the belief out of relgious people AKA CONVERT.
0
Reply
Male 15,510
Everything in extreme is bad. Hardcore atheist are as blind as hardcore religious people
0
Reply
Male 15,510
At least science makes sense, you must admit that
0
Reply
Male 2,344
madest,

really???? there are no churches for atheism? well then wtf is this

http://www.ocatheists.com/

this is just ONE county where they have regular meetings...tell me that is not the same damn thing.

athiest has come to mean and person who believes in non-belief of anything higher than themselves, that still requires FAITH and BELIEF. It has also come to mean a group of people that RELATE TO EACH OTHER in more ways then they do not and hold the same prevaling ideal and belief system.

it also means a group of people that CONVERT others and have declared a cultural war against other relgions, namely Chirstianity in the US.

tell me again oh wise one how that is not a religon when it meets so many of the criteria for one?
0
Reply
Male 2,344
gymcoach29

are you really that narrow minded to believe that? most wars have been fought over RESOURCES and used relgion, among other exuses, as a way to juftify it.

if you studied the hisotry of warfare for even a second you would find thousands of wars and armed conflict that had nothing to do with religon.

let`s not forget WWI, WWII, Korea, Nam, Iraq I&II to name some of the recent wars that had NOTHING to do with relgion at all.

seems to me that millions died between WWI and WWII...I know some on here will try to make the case that both of those wars were fought over religon or partly because of it but that is a load of BS and degrades the memory of those that died fighting a nation hungry for world power.
0
Reply
Male 587
Hey Fancy, It seems to me like all these religious posts are a bit one sided. I think you should stay impartial by adding few pro-Christian posts. Here is one for you start off with.

The Watchmaker
0
Reply
Male 2,344
and the faith bashing continues...there is a difference between making fun of organized religion and someone`s faith.

the faith bashing around here is getting a little thick...time to head to funnyjunk
0
Reply
Male 363
DavidXJ, So, your contention is that, anyone who does not believe in a Christian God is borderline retarded? Let see, how many religions existed before Christianity? The Greek and Roman gods of the time were a religion, now we think of them as a myth..what makes you think that Christianity will not be considered a myth 2000 or even 200 years from now?
0
Reply
Male 537
Haha... this is awesome.
0
Reply
Male 1,610
The truth hurts.
0
Reply
Male 39,882
this is just christian bashing. A sport I usually enjoy but this wasn`t funny nor clever.

just rude.
0
Reply
Female 354
@Gymcoach29...So true.

But now that this picture has spawned a religious fight on here. I`m staying out.

Remember atheism is a religion?!
0
Reply
Male 363
Throughout history, more wars were fought over religion, more people have been killed in the name of religion and yet, so many people believe...strange concept for any higher thinking being.
0
Reply
Female 248
"Ha ha. Sure, if you have an IQ that borders on mentally retarded, yes, I could see how this is the conclusion you come to when studying Christianity."

Trolllllllllllll
0
Reply
Female 248
Nice.
0
Reply
Male 1,106
Ha ha. Sure, if you have an IQ that borders on mentally retarded, yes, I could see how this is the conclusion you come to when studying Christianity.
0
Reply
Male 20,901
Link: Confusing Bible Question No. 72 [Pic] [Rate Link] - That must be some strange-looking family tree...
0
Reply