Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Atheism is most appealing if one lacks the ability to assess reasonably & logically...wealth and/or power doesn't matter.
You could be loaded & ultra powerful...and if you hold to logic, reason, and evidence, you will not be able to reconcile that No God Entity Exists, or that it is rational to conclude that you should make the determination to lack belief based upon a lack of evidence.
No foundation in what, their make up, in molecular biology or American history? I do not have to go read your Holy Book to see that you are wrong about atheists or about other posters but you are right in that if you follow the words of Jesus you most likely will not beat your slave but you are definitely wrong in your statement that the atheist would be dangerous and it is rather easy for you to make all these claims about how someone following the so called words of Jesus would be so wonderful and yet personally ignore his alleged words yourself. I do not need to read the book of one of the many religions to know that you either no nothing about atheism or nothing about being honest and it really matters not to me which one it is. Until you pay some attention to the ninth Commandment I see no reason to take anything else from you that comes out of your Bible. You are like too many Christians in that you use the Bible as a weapon upon others rather than as a tool to help you become a better person. Perhaps it is you that should read the Gospels.
No, he doesn't understand Atheists at all. I suggested that he go read some threads in the A&A forum to learn how they think, but his posts indicate that no such reading has occurred. If he had read what Atheists have said about themselves, he would know that they live caring, moral lives just like everybody else. They are not dangerous to other people, and, in fact, have never committed violence on the basis of their [non]religious belief. They are not criminals in larger numbers than Christians. I remember in one thread they noted that the percentage of Christians in prison is greater than the percentage of Christians in the general population.
Therefore, badlander, I think this part of your post must be, based on the evidence of the posts, absolutely true: "You either no nothing about atheism or nothing about being honest."
BTW, since it has been mentioned in several posts, no public challenge to any "moderator" actions (edited posts, deleted posts, closed threads, infractions issued, posts in red text, etc.) has been made. We try to stay alert and react to violation of the Terms of Service. If anybody spots one, please report it. Nobody has asked how I came by my moniker for several years.
"No evidence, as evidence to draw a conclusion as to what position to take on belief"...you mean belief in Christ Resurrected?
Ancient writings are some of the evidence used by Religious Theists to support some of the details of their Belief Determinations.
The stories vary from Religion to Religion, of course...but rising from being dead, being raised, or will be raised in the future, is a staple story.
Not at all. And that is what I said.
The Atheists here always claim to go by what I have coined the "LOBBUNE Doctrine". That is, their position on the existence of God is they "Lack Belief Based Upon No Evidence".
The Theists always present the evidence they are working off of that is sufficient for them to make a Belief Determination upon. That evidence may not suit others, but it suits them...So...they have fulfilled The Burden of Proof to their satisfaction.
OTOH...the Atheists are the ones that conclude they should make a Belief Determination off of "No Evidence"...and fully admit they have no evidence.
It seems you are counfused as to what side is working off evidence, and what side is not.
From what I see, the Theists have evidence that is sufficient to them to support their position...while the Atheists fully admit they have no evidence to support the position they take.
Of course, "No Evidence" is a flawed premise to logically or reasonably support any conclusions or determinations off of...other than, "There is No Evidence", or, "I Don't Know".
But the Atheists don't use logic and reason. Instead, they try to use "No Evidence" as evidence (Argument From Ignorance), to draw the conclusion as to what position to take on "Belief".
Lack of belief is not a belief. It's more like "I see no evidence to believe that something is true, so I don't." It's not up to me to disprove something beyond a doubt before I don't believe that it is true. The burden of proof lies with one making the claim. And nobody has a problem with that logic until it comes to belief in a god, but then the tables are turned.
Lack of belief is not a belief. It's more like "I see no evidence to believe that something is true, so I don't." It's not up to me to disprove something beyond a doubt before I don't believe that it is true. The burden of proof lies with one making the claim. And nobody has a problem with that logic until it comes to belief in a god, but then the tables are turned.
Spot on! I don't get why they don't get these very simple concepts. It goes over their head every time.
You know, you still haven't addressed anything I asked you to address. The basis of my argument was overlooked once again.
You know, you might spend too much time in this specific forum. You should broaden your interests because the time you spend here is ultimately wasted.
I mean, would you rather live in a world where people believe there are consequences for their actions on earth or not? Justice of no justice? See, you may think I am a lower life form than you, but I want to believe in justice even if it comes at my own expense because I know there are people that deserve more than I do. There are people that started life with less or ended up with less, but give much more.
Maybe you think that's crazy, but I think that it's the truth. And according to what I believe is the truth, which is righteousness as portrayed through the words of Christ, is the way we ought to conduct ourselves if only we had the discipline to do so. Unfortunately, human nature is so damn strong.
You've got to stop insulting people. Why do you this so much? You totally dismiss my argument without even reading anything even though you quote it as if you've read every word. You are starting to sound rehearsed. This is why I suggest you broaden your interests.
I mean really what good are you doing by ganging up on people and trying to make them look like idiots? Is that what you like to do? This is what gives you happiness?
Neither you nor I can prove anything. We are on the same level, so why do you act as if you are a level above?
Anyway, it is what it is. You are who you are going to be. I'm just saying that guys are stupid and we do tend to hang out with girls only because they are pretty because we think we can get something out of it. I noticed you laughed at the boyfriend comment, so I assume it's true. Maybe not.
You have yet to demonstrate in any measurable way that atheists believe there are no consequences for their actions. Some of us are still waiting patiently for your argument to get off the ground.
This post reads like a blathering, nonsensical rant. Is that your intention?
My point is that you can't believe everything you read. You have to question everything because if you don't innovation will ultimately be limited. We are human, we are prone to making mistakes. You should keep an open mind and stop thinking that you are so superior to everyone else.
Atheism is most appealing if one lacks the ability to assess reasonably & logically...wealth and/or power doesn't matter.
You could be loaded & ultra powerful...and if you hold to logic, reason, and evidence, you will not be able to reconcile that No God Entity Exists, or that it is rational to conclude that you should make the determination to lack belief based upon a lack of evidence.
You're saying it is rational to believe in things for which there is no evidence? There are an infinite number of things for which there is no evidence. How can a person possibly believe in them all?
Not at all. And that is what I said.
The Atheists here always claim to go by what I have coined the "LOBBUNE Doctrine". That is, their position on the existence of God is they "Lack Belief Based Upon No Evidence".
The Theists always present the evidence they are working off of that is sufficient for them to make a Belief Determination upon. That evidence may not suit others, but it suits them...So...they have fulfilled The Burden of Proof to their satisfaction.
OTOH...the Atheists are the ones that conclude they should make a Belief Determination off of "No Evidence"...and fully admit they have no evidence.
It seems you are counfused as to what side is working off evidence, and what side is not.
From what I see, the Theists have evidence that is sufficient to them to support their position...while the Atheists fully admit they have no evidence to support the position they take.
Of course, "No Evidence" is a flawed premise to logically or reasonably support any conclusions or determinations off of...other than, "There is No Evidence", or, "I Don't Know".
But the Atheists don't use logic and reason. Instead, they try to use "No Evidence" as evidence (Argument From Ignorance), to draw the conclusion as to what position to take on "Belief".
So an atheist should go ahead and pretend to believe in something? How should an atheist go about choosing which thing they should pretend to believe in?
You have yet to demonstrate in any measurable way that atheists believe there are no consequences for their actions. Some of us are still waiting patiently for your argument to get off the ground.
This post reads like a blathering, nonsensical rant. Is that your intention?
It's simple. Normally, I wouldn't respond to something that wastes my time, but it's just so simple.
Do you believe in an afterlife?
No.
So, if there is no afterlife, you don't face any consequences or personal responsibility for how you lived your life on earth.
Is it really this hard to understand? Isn't that the premise behind atheism? There is no afterlife.
Please, think about what you write before you address me so condescendingly. Please let this sink in.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
