Low level atheists

[Mael]

I suggest you stop posting threads immediately. Ironically, that goes for low level theists like Veritas, who's doing an embarrassing job of proving nothing but his intellectual incompetence.

I'd suggest if you're going to have debates regarding religion, you at least try to get familiar with common arguments for/against the existence of God, summed up pretty well on Wikipedia. Better yet, join a philosophical forum and browse the religion sections.

@Diode, the image you posted is a classic unsophisticated atheist attempt at proving the absurdity of intelligent design. Reminds me of the kid's game "which image does not belong?". You're shooting yourself in your own foot when you reverse the logic you're proposing; i.e, There exists a universe, in this universe is a galaxy, in this galaxy is a solar system, in this solar system are 9 planets, on one of these planets is a 30 year old man dressed as up as a purple dinosaur singing "I love you, you love me" with a bunch of miniature humans. The logic is now reversed to examine the absurdity of the human life, and why is seems to arise out of nothing.

If you want to debate a well-versed theist, come at me, bro. Or anyone else for that matter, if not, please stop making a complete fool of yourself. I've got David Hume's Induction fallacy and Ockham's chainsaw in the bag.

[Destroyer]

the burden of proof rests with the believer, homie
so, have at it.
I'll wait

[veritas]

yeah, all I have done is make the complex simple and ask questions that they can't answer.


carry on. ego +1

[Frank Metts]

" Science investigates; religion interprets. Science gives man knowledge, which is power; religion gives man wisdom, which is control. Science deals mainly with facts; religion deals mainly with values. The two are not rivals. " Dr. Martin Luther King

[Dope girl]

smh @ this thread!

[Diode]

There was nothing atheist about my post. Learn 2 reading comprehend amg lol.

It may have offended a fundamentalist Christian, however.

Further, you used a fallacy in the main context of your argument above. Hi5.

[Mael]

Originally Posted by Destroyer

the burden of proof rests with the believer, homie
so, have at it.
I'll wait

The believer believes by faith. If evidence was provided that God exists, faith would be negated and rendered useless. But then again, we're assuming our cognitive apparatus isn't meddling with how we perceive reality.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_spectrum
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dream_argument
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualia

Not to mention, by the way, that everything is based on faith. You thinking you'll wake up tomorrow is based on faith - it's based on nothing. You have absolutely zero evidence or proof that you'll wake up tomorrow. What you would do in an attempt to convince me you'll wake up tomorrow is show me data you collected from the past of you waking up every morning since you were born and then provide probability of what would happen tomorrow. Sadly, this, along with everything that has ever happened in the history of existence and all our predictions about the future fall prey to Hume's Problem of induction -

"Presupposing that a sequence of events in the future will occur as it always has in the past (for example, that the laws of physics will hold as they have always been observed to hold). Hume called this the principle uniformity of nature."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Problem_of_induction

The burden of proof lies with the atheist because you have to disprove the existence of God, and if you were any good at it, we'd all be atheists by now, wouldn't we? Some things aren't suppose to be based on evidence, or science. Somethings are based on emotions, feelings.

[Diode]

Arguing science with philosophy.

Every college student's wet dream.

[Mael]

@Diode

You don't even know what science is, brah.

[Mael]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science

Also, arguments against God are not scientific at all. Nothing about science disproves the existence of God. So I'm not arguing science, I'm arguing people failing to use science as proof of his non-existence.

[dead man]

http://www.durt.info/2011Summer/text...id%20Carr).pdf

[Mael]

@dead man

Concerning Mathematical universes, I posted this recently:
http://www.netcees.co/showpost.php?p...7&postcount=79

[Destroyer]

hey mael
there may be a god, I doubt it, but let's say there is
why would he give a fuck about you or I?

[Mael]

Originally Posted by Destroyer

hey mael
there may be a god, I doubt it, but let's say there is
why would he give a fuck about you or I?

According to Christianity, He died for everyone, but I won't go into that in detail. I suppose you've heard the story a million times.

Let's assume you're correct, there is no God. Well, interesting fact - your Godless world is hell. Sure, you may call it life, you may have the time of day to do things that include sipping wine and having your friends over for a BBQ where they laugh at your witty one-liners, things categorized as pleasure, but to some people this is a living, breathing hell filled with nothing but pain, misery and suffering. Some people, believe it or not, are literally brought out of nothingness just to get raped and tortured daily till they die at the age of 10. Is that fair?

Now, you say God doesn't exist, but atheism pushes the idea of hell. The theistic hell, at least, doesn't contain children because their too young to be accountable for their actions. But look at your atheistic world, it's filled with kids in pain you couldn't handle with a dose of steroids. What did they do to deserve that? Were they told of the suffering they would endure?

So why is it hard for you atheists to grasp the idea of Hell? I love the Eskimo argument; "Eskimos didn't hear about Jesus, would they go to hell?" - Yes. Just as people are thrown into this world without their knowledge just to burn and die, literally. What on earth could you possibly argue about your existence in Hell? That is isn't "fair"? That it's "unethical"?

If God exists, it ends with him. Justice is served. The imbalances of life are realigned in the afterlife.

[Diode]

atheism pushes the idea of hell

So we're just making things up now.

Mael, you don't happen to be in your early 20s, do you?

[Greed]

All eskimos going to hell is what mael has taught me.

[Mael]

Originally Posted by Diode

So we're just making things up now.

Mael, you don't happen to be in your early 20s, do you?

I stated in the age thread that I was 22, why? That changes nothing.

If you actually read my post in context, you'd know I wasn't talking about the theistic idea of Hell, i.e. burning furnace, demons etc. I was talking about hell in the sense of despair, a lack of truth, an overall feeling of pointlessness and absurdity through pain.

At least in theological ideas of Hell;

1) You know why you're there
2) Children aren't there because they aren't accountable for their actions

Nature, on the other hand.

[Diode]

Originally Posted by Mael

I stated in the age thread that I was 22, why? That changes nothing.

If you actually read my post in context, you'd know I wasn't talking about the theistic idea of Hell, i.e. burning furnace, demons etc. I was talking about hell in the sense of despair, a lack of truth, an overall feeling of pointlessness and absurdity through pain.

At least in theological ideas of Hell;

1) You know why you're there
2) Children aren't there because they aren't accountable for their actions

Nature, on the other hand.

You are stating as fact that atheists struggle with the idea that there is suffering in the world.

Ergo, you are making things up.

Also, yes, your age has absolutely everything to do with your perspective ITT.

[Mael]

Originally Posted by Greed

All eskimos going to hell is what mael has taught me.

There is no fairness in this reality. Why on earth would you think nihilism should save you from the reoccurring nightmare?

Nihilism is atheism's version of wishful thinking. Good luck with that.

[Greed]

Dare I ask your thoughts on other religions aside from christianity?