religion
- Started
- Last post
- 3,175 Responses
- ukit20
^ Exactly, I don't think most people are completely ruling out the existence of God, we're just saying it's extremely unlikely. Especially a God as depicted in the Bible that watches over people and intervenes in the world. The idea of a God that is all knowing, all powerful and cares about humans can pretty much be debunked just on a theoretical level. So why waste time on a theory that is contradicted by evidence when there are so many other possibilities?
- bobkat0
As Hitchen's said “That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.” The onus of proof of a God is not on the Atheist, but on the Believer.
Want me to belive in God? Show me the proof. Otherwise there isn't one. Want me to belive Elvis is still alive? Let me meet him. Otherwise there ain't no way in hell I'm gonna belive someone who comes up to me on the street and claims that Elvis is alive. Likewise God.
Simples.
- Scientists are happy to change their world view if the evidence suggests that a theory is correct. Religious nutter ain't.bobkat
- Thats cool and thats your faith.yurimon
- once again, it's not faithmonospaced
- yurimon0
Ok. one more time.
this in written in plain english. websters dictionary.
"firm belief in something for which there is no proof" = faith.
^
If you have "a firm believe that there is no god because for which there is no proof" .. it falls under faith by definition. plain fuckin english.Not faith is "maybe there is no god and maybe there is a god." No firm belief.
- sorry typos. typed fast.yurimon
- It's easy to say you have faith in something without fact. Fact isn't given it's earned by sacrifice of time and effort.ZOOP
- well... I have no firm believe there is god or no god. until someone proof to me either one, I have no faith. lolpango
- when someone tells me "hey man there's god" I'll be like "cool story bro! you'd like fries with that?"pango
- what scientists are saying is "there is no evidence for god". if god shows up they will accept it. you're adding all the belief bullshit.scarabin
- bullshit so you can shoehorn the word "faith" in.scarabin
- science doesn't make up a conclusion and have faith in it, that's what religion does. science collects data and makes predictions based on observed data and probability.scarabin
- predictions based on observed data and probability. you are operating on an inaccurate idea of what science is.scarabin
- you can't have any valid viewpoint or logical discourse on the matter until you stop operating on incorrect assumptions.scarabin
- assumptions.scarabin
- pango0
so what if god exist and we don't acknowledge. it's not like he gonna help us with our life. we are dusts compare to this god figure you talk about. why would this god thing care about us?
we are better off not to care and just mind our own life.
- scarabin0
it's clear yuri isn't responding to reason as he's still operating under the science=faith delusion he came in here with. I can only assume he's trying trolling us
- Dude. Can you read?
" firm belief in something for which there is no proof." ei faith.yurimon - thats you guys. still cant put it together?yurimon
- I know, you've been typing that all day. scientists don't have a firm belief in that which has no evidence, so no faith.scarabin
- Thats not true because some scientist keep firm beliefs not for the sake of truth but for sake of grants and keeping a job.yurimon
- then they aren't scientists and it's idiotic to assume all users of science are like that.scarabin
- it's like saying some cars are broken and have 2 wheels therefore cars have 2 wheels.scarabin
- you can't be taken seriously as long as you're coddling this logical fallacy.scarabin
- Dude. Can you read?
- hereswhatidid0
The problem with the religious zealots like yuri is that they simply can't comprehend not having some kind of faith system. It's beyond them to understand that, as an atheist, the notion of faith doesn't apply. They simply make the false assumption that believing in observable, scientific evidence is our religion and that we blindly follow it. I'd gladly believe in a creator if, as scarabin pointed out, you could provide some solid evidence. Not this "we only observe .0000008 of everything" metaphysical bullshit.
- lol. geeze. 1.you dont know if i have religion or not. 2. 000 what ever # is done by a scientist, mathematician not a metaphysics guy.yurimon
- Being taught since infancy that there is a supreme being affects one's ability to see things otherwise.ZOOP
- not a metaphysics person. Faith " firm belief in something for which there is no proof"yurimon
- so, you can't prove a god or disprove thus your choice of not believing in one is still faithyurimon
- Only thing that would make it fact is if god does not exist if there was a scientific law. however there is non. thusyurimon
- it is a firm belief in something for which there is no proof ei faith.yurimon
- So far it seems that people coming out of the wood work have a firm belief.yurimon
- I can't believe you're still stuck on the idea that scientists operate on faith or belief. we've covered this alreadyscarabin
- it seems to be your only argument and it doesn't even work because it's not the casescarabin
- http://en.wikipedia.…hereswhatidid
- I'm not stuck on anything. you guys cant get over fact its faith by definition.yurimon
- LOL how can it be faith if you believe in nothing?pango
- i thought earth was flat because that's all we saw. but now we know earth is a sphere shape because new evidence surfaced.pango
- more people will believe god exist if there are any convincing evidence.pango
- i = we....pango
- ukit20
- good god damn that's relentlessalbums
- and? where is the creation of the universe fossil?yurimon
- it melted in the corealbums
- If you read the whole comic, it makes some great points about how the evidence actually points to the lack of a "designer"ukit2
- designer.ukit2
- evidence of just theories. Can anyone explain consciousness?yurimon
- You keep asking for explanations...but notice how none of this does anything to make existence of God more likelyukit2
- likely. Just because we can't answer everything, doesn't mean that the least likely theory is true.ukit2
- not knowing for sure is theory not fact by default.yurimon
- ya! there's no proof that god doesn't exist. there for it exist!pango
- Why are babies born with terminal cancer? Because GOD! that's why!pango
- ZOOP0
Babies born with terminal cancer. Explain that part of the "perfect plan" and then you'll have something. That is cruelty beyond anything that a loving deity would allow.
By the way I was born with congenital melanocytic nevus, across my abdomen, required surgery before it turned cancerous. I have a nice scar and an off center belly button from that.
Again... where is your god now?
- My case was advanced enough to protrude, and cracks formed throughout, it would fall out in pieces and replaced by more of the same.ZOOP
- the same. I won't pass this on, or anything else. My decision and my curse.ZOOP
- what have you been condition to think about this god topic? and where is this perfect plan concept coming from?yurimon
- ...ZOOP
- ukit20
Atheism shouldn't be that hard to understand...just think of a religion that you don't believe in, whether it's Scientology, Mormonism, Tokyo death cult, etc. I'm sure you can think of at least one religion that you think is bullshit. Now you understand how non religious people view all religions. Then ask yourself whether Christianity, or whatever it is you happen to believe in is really any different.
- ukit20
Can you prove that Earth wasn't colonized by an alien dictator named Xenu and his galactic army millions of years ago, leaving behind alien ghosts that control peoples' bodies? I think that's about as likely as Christianity...
- scarabin0
easy. how about: guy sits in a controlled environment and creates a world while scientists watch, complete with little humans 'n' shit. totally simple task for a god.
- next question?scarabin
- Well your in a place like that now. except you cant find proof.yurimon
- what?scarabin
- stop trying to be mystical and figurative. that's not the scenario i described.scarabin
- You in a world or environment with people that was created somehow. your missing the god or creation mystery part as proof.yurimon
- that's idiotic circular logic and you know itscarabin
- you're confusing the question with the answerscarabin
- yurimon0
So what is the expectation of proof or what would count as proof for the existence of god etc. How would you know what it is? How do you know you havent missed it if you can grasp or even define the expectation. and what if your expectations of proof wrong.
- seriously? it would be simple as shit to determine if someone was a god.scarabin
- ZOOP0
Laura Bush killed a guy.
- ZOOP0
Can we just go back to the good old days when the church killed you for using observation and deductive reasoning? God wants all those magical powers back he's lost to scientific discovery.
- Virgin birth... right. Walks on water, kills or heals with mere touch, yet no powers to stop being arrested. lolzZOOP
- That story was made by the romans that is a remake of an older story that is an allegoryyurimon
- it's all a story ;-)ZOOP
- It was actually the church that helped science in the sense that it claimed dominion of the mind and allowed the materialist view of science.yurimon
- the holy trinity was stolen from Asia, the origins are thereZOOP
- of science by the way. They killed those who basically the natives of europe. people with holistic view points of the world.yurimon
- wrongZOOP
- still wrongZOOP
- saying the church helped science is like saying Hitler helped the jewsZOOP
- Look at who the church killed and let live and you will see the chain of materialism that is todays science.yurimon
- yurimon, you couldn't be further from the truth. the church demonized and systematically destroyed anyone suspected of doing science, claiming it was witchcraft. one reason why alchemy was so villifiedscarabin
- doing science, claiming it was witchcraft. one reason why alchemy was so villifiedscarabin
- yawnZOOP
- yawn @ yuri* :DZOOP
- it helped unknowingly. It didnt let anyone merge or allow a holistic scientific view which interfered with their turf.
yurimon - materialism? are you fucking serious? have you seen the Vatican? FUCK MEZOOP
- eventually it lost power. thats what ive found for myself you dont have to believe it.yurimon
- dude, the church claimed dominion of the mind at one point. its power wasnt consistent. it eventually declined and it allowed what it felt wasnt a threat to its dominion that became a materialist view.yurimon
- ukit20
Actually if you're going by the evidence, there's plenty of evidence that supports the scientific theories of how life began and almost none that supports the religious view. The age of the Earth, the millions of life forms that existed before humans which we have physical evidence of...all directly contradicts the Biblical story of creation.
So pretty silly to say they are the same thing. Even when you have a speculative theory about how life began, it's based on the latest information about biology, evolution, etc. Religion on the other hand...is how people believed the universe worked thousands of years ago. When we still thought the Earth was flat and you could fall off the edge if you sailed far enough...
- Its still theory mind you. big difference between law and theory in science.yurimon
- that being said the theories only go so far thus it still hasnt proven or disproven the argument if god exists.yurimon
- Also there is a difference between telling the masses a story for the sake of control and keeping truth to yourselfyurimon
- You can't prove a negative, but you can look at the evidence and see that the Bible is wrongukit2
- for the sake of power which is what religion the masses accomplishes.yurimon
- er for the massesyurimon
- I mean claiming the world is a few thousand years old and it turns out to be billions of years old...I'd say that's a pretty big problem wouldn't you? :)ukit2
- problem with your theory wouldn't you? :)ukit2
- did you hear what monospaced said? just because it cant be proven doesnt mean its not true.yurimon
- I'm not arguing the bible. its an allegory.yurimon
- So the Bible is made up but God is real?ukit2
- scarabin0
yurimon, you seem to be under the idea that scientists "believe" everything absolutely proven and that there are no mysteries remaining to us. if this were true, there'd be no need for science. the fact is, we're busy observing, continually unwrapping the universe. if there were a god and we found him/it that data would be factored into our working model of the universe. i bet every one of them wishes it were that simple. but since we have found no evidence for god, he's not part of the model.
- there's no belief, only observation.scarabin
- until then its any bodies guess. considering we can only see .000018 of the universe we discovered so faryurimon
- yeah, well that's why we need science. so we don't have to guess. intelligence ends when you just guess and accept your imagination's answer.scarabin
- It means that its still one faith or another for that reason.yurimon
- imagination's answer. instead we continually observe and test.scarabin
- no, because faith assumes you have an answer you want to believe. science doesn't work like that.scarabin
- thats exactly what i'm saying.yurimon
- however if someone was to take a scientific theory. not proven. and believe it in the same manor a religious person does. how is it not faith?yurimon
- not faith? which by default definition simply means belief without proof.yurimon
- That's what you fail to understand, science is always based on proofukit2
- Even speculative theories are based on real world observations and extrapolating from them. That's how science has always worked.ukit2
- has always worked.ukit2
- AGAIN, scientists are not operating on unfounded "beliefs". there is no scientific dogma, only observation.scarabin
- < what ukit saidscarabin
- you're stuck on this idea that scientists believe something without evidence, which is counter to the definition of science.scarabin
- science.scarabin
- How can prove something that you dont even know what your looking for any expectation of what it is?yurimon
- reword that so it makes some sort of sense and i will address it properly. that's just gibberish matescarabin
- monospaced0
I saw this long ago, and I've posted it here before, but I'll do it again.
"Atheism is a faith like 'off' is a television channel."- It becomes a faith when you cant prove your belief dawg.yurimon
- You cant prove the existence or non existence of god thus your ideas default to faith. yo co peash?yurimon
- again, you're basing your whole argument on the mistaken idea that scientists have sets of dogma they "believe". this isn't true.scarabin
- true. when there's no "belief" involved there's no need for faith. your whole point is mootscarabin
- There are scientists who have careers set in certain ideas the do fight because of that.yurimon
- science is as much political as it is an industry.yurimon
- like whom?scarabin
- you mean like christian "scientists"?scarabin
