I don't like not reading an entire topic before posting, but with that wall of text and my response not being related to it, I am going ahead and just posting.

 

The topic title says all theist and atheist TIFers, isn't everyone one or the other (or undecided) meaning you want everyone to look at this topic? Why don't you just say everyone?

I don't like not reading an entire topic before posting, but with that wall of text and my response not being related to it, I am going ahead and just posting.

 

The topic title says all theist and atheist TIFers, isn't everyone one or the other (or undecided) meaning you want everyone to look at this topic? Why don't you just say everyone?

Because some people like me are agnostic.

 

Logical burn.

I thought we'd see a more serious discussion by now.

 

 

I'm not accusing anyone by that, only saying that posts like "yeah, that's nothing new" are semi-off topic.

Make a better topic next time.

I don't like not reading an entire topic before posting, but with that wall of text and my response not being related to it, I am going ahead and just posting.

 

The topic title says all theist and atheist TIFers, isn't everyone one or the other (or undecided) meaning you want everyone to look at this topic? Why don't you just say everyone?

Because some people like me are agnostic.

 

Logical burn. :lol:

And some of us are Clausist. :lol:

Whenever I see people writing huge essays about things like these I can't help thinking that they just need to take a philosophical step or two backwards. I just can't find the will to get into debates about things that are not worth debating anymore, either because I'm becoming increasingly busy in everyday life or maybe I just realize that it really doesn't matter whether a god exists or not.

Because some people like me are agnostic.

 

Logical burn.

Does that mean we're not wanted? :cry:

 

The whole Atheism v. Christianity debate seems to be two sides with no evidence arguing about why the other is wrong... This is pretty much similar to every other point made by Atheists on this forum, except says a lot less in many more words than they've used here.

 

Christians have the bible. Atheists have imperfections in the bible. All that says is that some people don't agree with the bible's definition of God.

 

If people want their religions, that's fine. If people don't want to believe, that's fine too. But really, the whole battle between the two is immature and shows how far both sides still have to go in terms of acceptance. Let people believe what they want, it just makes you look like an [wagon] if you try to ruin that for anyone (Not directed at anyone, "you" used for lack of a better word).

Sounds like every other kid who's read a couple online articles and espoused the exact same words. People make better "arguments" on here."

Furthermore, omniscience does not equal predestination. God knows, knew, and will know what we do, he sees time from a different perspective as us. He may know what we do, but it doesn't mean he decided that's what we'll do, we picked it, he saw it..

 

God knows, knew, and will know what we do

but it doesn't mean he decided that's what we'll do

 

How do you not see how incorrect this is? I don't understand this. If he knows what you're going to do, it's been decided. You don't have the power to change what God knows, and everything you do is something that he already knew was going to happen. He knew whether or not you're going to hell before you existed, otherwise he wouldn't be be omniscient.

I don't like not reading an entire topic before posting, but with that wall of text and my response not being related to it, I am going ahead and just posting.

 

The topic title says all theist and atheist TIFers, isn't everyone one or the other (or undecided) meaning you want everyone to look at this topic? Why don't you just say everyone?

 

Personally I think this title is better for it, because it tells you that it's going to be about religion.

 

 

 

Double post oops - Meant to edit my old post. I hate the multiquote system on this.

Sounds like every other kid who's read a couple online articles and espoused the exact same words. People make better "arguments" on here."

Furthermore, omniscience does not equal predestination. God knows, knew, and will know what we do, he sees time from a different perspective as us. He may know what we do, but it doesn't mean he decided that's what we'll do, we picked it, he saw it..

 

God knows, knew, and will know what we do

but it doesn't mean he decided that's what we'll do

 

How do you not see how incorrect this is? I don't understand this. If he knows what you're going to do, it's been decided. You don't have the power to change what God knows, and everything you do is something that he already knew was going to happen. He knew whether or not you're going to hell before you existed, otherwise he wouldn't be be omniscient.

Knowing does not mean deciding. And as I said, God is outside of our vision time, so when we are still to decide something it has already happened for him, it is currently happening for him and it is still to happen. Just because he knew you'd do something doesn't mean he decided it. Plus there is a concept in Catholicism and some Orthodoxies called purgatory, where you get purged for your sin if you are sorry, and you don't go to hell. God sees your actions, but he especially does not determine the level of repentance you respond to something with.

 

Because some people like me are agnostic.

 

Logical burn.

Does that mean we're not wanted? :cry:

 

The whole Atheism v. Christianity debate seems to be two sides with no evidence arguing about why the other is wrong... This is pretty much similar to every other point made by Atheists on this forum, except says a lot less in many more words than they've used here.

 

Christians have the bible. Atheists have imperfections in the bible. All that says is that some people don't agree with the bible's definition of God.

 

If people want their religions, that's fine. If people don't want to believe, that's fine too. But really, the whole battle between the two is immature and shows how far both sides still have to go in terms of acceptance. Let people believe what they want, it just makes you look like an [wagon] if you try to ruin that for anyone (Not directed at anyone, "you" used for lack of a better word).

I love you... :P :thumbup:

Sounds like every other kid who's read a couple online articles and espoused the exact same words. People make better "arguments" on here."

Furthermore, omniscience does not equal predestination. God knows, knew, and will know what we do, he sees time from a different perspective as us. He may know what we do, but it doesn't mean he decided that's what we'll do, we picked it, he saw it..

 

God knows, knew, and will know what we do

but it doesn't mean he decided that's what we'll do

 

How do you not see how incorrect this is? I don't understand this. If he knows what you're going to do, it's been decided. You don't have the power to change what God knows, and everything you do is something that he already knew was going to happen. He knew whether or not you're going to hell before you existed, otherwise he wouldn't be be omniscient.

Knowing does not mean deciding. And as I said, God is outside of our vision time, so when we are still to decide something it has already happened for him, it is currently happening for him and it is still to happen. Just because he knew you'd do something doesn't mean he decided it. Plus there is a concept in Catholicism and some Orthodoxies called purgatory, where you get purged for your sin if you are sorry, and you don't go to hell. God sees your actions, but he especially does not determine the level of repentance you respond to something with.

 

You don't understand what predestination is. Say you are given free will, and that you decide how you're going to act, which determines how where you're going after you die. God already knew everything you were going to do, and whether or not you're going to Hell/Heaven. It was already going to happen, it's been decided. You're trying to push the idea that knowing doesn't mean things are decided, but that's wrong. We're not discussing things on a human level, where we can't ever "know" things. We're discussing this on the idea God knows everything that's going happen, which MUST include whether or not you're going to heaven or hell.

I don't like not reading an entire topic before posting, but with that wall of text and my response not being related to it, I am going ahead and just posting.

 

The topic title says all theist and atheist TIFers, isn't everyone one or the other (or undecided) meaning you want everyone to look at this topic? Why don't you just say everyone?

Because some people like me are agnostic.

 

Logical burn.

 

That's what I meant by undecided. I almost wrote undecided/agnostic but figured it was implied.

Read it all.. he makes several points typical of athiests.

 

A quick point: He asks why God hasn't revealed himself to us? He has...in Jesus. Oh, but that's right, the bible is a complete lie. But I'm sure all the other historical documents he referenced are accurate. Looks like thiests aren't the only ones picking and choosing.

 

Free will: God doesn't control us. I'm sure someone's going to quote this post and argue with me, but that doesn't oblige him to do it. People who claim to tell the future, maybe they can, but they don't control it.

 

Lets look as well at his theory of "design by chance". A common analogy used by athiests and beleivers in design by chance is that if you put monkeys to keyboards they would eventually write a shakesperean sonnet. Makes sense, right? Well, not quite.

 

You see, a very famous athiest tested this theory. He trained 6 monkeys to type on keyboards. After 6 months of typing they had not written a single English word..inluding " a ". One single word, as a percentage of a shakespearean sonnet, would have taken millions of years for them to write. A rough calucation based on the number of "random chances" needed to create us basically told him that the universe hasn't existed long enough for those random chances to all have occured. And Ps. This athiest is now Catholic.

 

I'll try to find a link explaining this, it's probably pretty confusing and I don't remember it too well.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theorem - Here's the wiki, can't find who actuall did the experiment though.

 

There's a major problem with the typewriter analogy to evolution. Natural selection would keep each letter that contributes towards making a shakespearean sonnet, while the monkeys don't. Their actions are pure chance, while natural selection is not.

 

The way he disproved the omnipotence is ridiculous, God doesn't need to prove himself. Also, he disproved creationism, which even I as a christian find stupid. Why wouldn't God be the first cause? God doesn't need a designer himself, He has just always been there and will always be there, and well, we don't really need to know where He Himself came from. The way he reasoned was kinda ridiculous, personally, I believe in Darwin's evolution theory, but I also believe God has had a hand in making evolution possible.

 

So there was a first cause and we don't need to know where it came from. And you don't find this reasoning to be rediculous? It's perfectly reasonable to question where everything came from, but to say that someone else did it and pretend that where they came from doesn't matter is pretty rediculous. It really defeats the purpose of questioning where everything came from.

 

The point he was making in the article is that if there is a first cause, it doesn't prove that it's a god with supernatural qualities. It could just be a natural occurance.

So there was a first cause and we don't need to know where it came from. And you don't find this reasoning to be rediculous? It's perfectly reasonable to question where everything came from, but to say that someone else did it and pretend that where they came from doesn't matter is pretty rediculous. It really defeats the purpose of questioning where everything came from.

 

The point he was making in the article is that if there is a first cause, it doesn't prove that it's a god with supernatural qualities. It could just be a natural occurance.

Could I come up with some kind of sci-fi explanation or would that be too much like scientology? :lol:

The thing is, as far as I've heard so far, the scientific explanations are either ridiculous or about as close as you can get to suggesting divine intervention as possible without actually suggesting it. Unless I'm wrong (probable) it's that an infinitely small particle that had all of the mass/energy in the universe exploded outward in the big bang. If that is the case, how did that particle get there and why did it explode outward then and not earlier/later? Until we know the answer (probably will never find it) it's actually reasonable to assume something created it. But even if not you still get into the infinite loop of creators.

 

I can't say I know enough about physics to be accurate about this. Though I assume knowing would only make it more of a mind screw. If there is a god it has a sense of humor.

So there was a first cause and we don't need to know where it came from. And you don't find this reasoning to be rediculous? It's perfectly reasonable to question where everything came from, but to say that someone else did it and pretend that where they came from doesn't matter is pretty rediculous. It really defeats the purpose of questioning where everything came from.

 

The point he was making in the article is that if there is a first cause, it doesn't prove that it's a god with supernatural qualities. It could just be a natural occurance.

Could I come up with some kind of sci-fi explanation or would that be too much like scientology? :lol:

The thing is, as far as I've heard so far, the scientific explanations are either ridiculous or about as close as you can get to suggesting divine intervention as possible without actually suggesting it. Unless I'm wrong (probable) it's that an infinitely small particle that had all of the mass/energy in the universe exploded outward in the big bang. If that is the case, how did that particle get there and why did it explode outward then and not earlier/later? Until we know the answer (probably will never find it) it's actually reasonable to assume something created it. But even if not you still get into the infinite loop of creators.

 

I can't say I know enough about physics to be accurate about this. Though I assume knowing would only make it more of a mind screw. If there is a god it has a sense of humor.

 

I actualy think that's where the problem comes from.

 

 

 

Human-beings do not know where that particle came from, just as much as the ancient greeks didn't know where lightining came from, or how the sun works. So? We don't know how lightining is created... Must be some sort of God for it!

 

 

Same works here, we don't know what caused the big bang, must be God then!

 

Humans can't stand not knowing something, and when they can't know something, they invent an explenation.

 

 

 

I'm not saying it's not possible that someone created that particle, I'm saying we shouldn't jump to conclusions. If any God exists, who said it's the Christian one? The Jewish one? Muslim? Hindi?

I hope you understand what I'm saying here, any religions revolving Gods today are a result of the human mind just as much as FSM or fairies and unicorns. If that's the case, anyone can pick on believing in a divine deity or not, and not necessarily follow a religion.

 

 

 

 

Also, if some God did create that particle, what makes you think it's the same one who supposedly helped us find a great career or win the lottery?

What I'm asking here is, who could possibly gurantee God still exists (if he ever did), or that he still is with us?

I rly hate religion topics. Atheists think that theists are essentially mental patients. Theists think atheists are going to hell.

 

 

/thread

 

All these threads rly boil down to this:

 

Atheists say we have no proof God exists.

Theists say you're not looking hard enough.

 

One question to all those who believe in Evolution:

A couple months ago, the majority of posters called the conservatives here ignorant, and stupid, because we didn't believe in GlobalWarming. Now that its been proven that was all fraud... All your scientists were wrong, so do you still hold the steadfast belief that after mountains of evidence, they're always right?

I rly hate religion topics. Atheists think that theists are essentially mental patients. Theists think atheists are going to hell.

 

 

/thread

 

All these threads rly boil down to this:

 

Atheists say we have no proof God exists.

Theists say you're not looking hard enough.

 

One question to all those who believe in Evolution:

A couple months ago, the majority of posters called the conservatives here ignorant, and stupid, because we didn't believe in GlobalWarming. Now that its been proven that was all fraud... All your scientists were wrong, so do you still hold the steadfast belief that after mountains of evidence, they're always right?

 

First of all, it hasn't been proven that global warming is all a fraud. The very proposition is absurd. Sure, there have been some mistakes along the way, but mistakes are weeded out and corrected. This is the nature of science.

 

In over 200 years of research, every single bit of evidence we have in the biological, geological and paleontological sciences supports evolution. But you might argue that dispite all this, in science we can't ever know things with 100% absolute certainty. This is true, but would you stop taking antibiotics because of the possibility that microbiology is wrong? Of course not. There's so much evidence supporting the fact that antibiotics work, so people accept that they do and move on with their lives. It's only when science contradicts creation myths and other religious dogma that people question it. Why not just look at the evidence - the real facts that we know and judge for yourself whether they support evolution? Just flat out claiming that scientists are wrong wont get you far.

@JoeDaStudd- I had and gave it away. Why do you ask?

Because that + (your sig)

I'm a Pastafarianist - I belong to the Flying Spaghetti Monster religion. R'amen.

= not an atheist.

 

The FSM bible states numerous times "he" (the flying spaghetti monster) exists.

By following it as a religion you can't class yourself as a atheist which makes pretty much 99% of your arguments on this topic hypocritical.

You claim to be a follower/believer in FSM and yet class yourself as atheist.

 

The FSM never once denies there being a God its just an alternative concept for a divine being like it was intended to be.

 

To me it looks like you want to be a religious rebel, but fail to get out of the stereotype boundaries it gives.

Google -> why god doesn't exist

Second result, this article strange hey?

 

Like I said in my second post this has been ton so many times the article is a bore to read.

Over 9,780,000 for the same search you did to get this article.

I rly hate religion topics. Atheists think that theists are essentially mental patients. Theists think atheists are going to hell.

 

 

/thread

 

All these threads rly boil down to this:

 

Atheists say we have no proof God exists.

Theists say you're not looking hard enough.

 

One question to all those who believe in Evolution:

A couple months ago, the majority of posters called the conservatives here ignorant, and stupid, because we didn't believe in GlobalWarming. Now that its been proven that was all fraud... All your scientists were wrong, so do you still hold the steadfast belief that after mountains of evidence, they're always right?

 

First of all, it hasn't been proven that global warming is all a fraud. The very proposition is absurd. Sure, there have been some mistakes along the way, but mistakes are weeded out and corrected. This is the nature of science.

 

In over 200 years of research, every single bit of evidence we have in the biological, geological and paleontological sciences supports evolution. But you might argue that dispite all this, in science we can't ever know things with 100% absolute certainty. This is true, but would you stop taking antibiotics because of the possibility that microbiology is wrong? Of course not. There's so much evidence supporting the fact that antibiotics work, so people accept that they do and move on with their lives. It's only when science contradicts creation myths and other religious dogma that people question it. Why not just look at the evidence - the real facts that we know and judge for yourself whether they support evolution? Just flat out claiming that scientists are wrong wont get you far.

 

The whole theory of evolution and spontaneous generation is laughable.

 

That is all. :D

@JoeDaStudd- I had and gave it away. Why do you ask?

Because that + (your sig)

I'm a Pastafarianist - I belong to the Flying Spaghetti Monster religion. R'amen.

= not an atheist.

 

The FSM bible states numerous times "he" (the flying spaghetti monster) exists.

By following it as a religion you can't class yourself as a atheist which makes pretty much 99% of your arguments on this topic hypocritical.

You claim to be a follower/believer in FSM and yet class yourself as atheist.

 

The FSM never once denies there being a God its just an alternative concept for a divine being like it was intended to be.

 

To me it looks like you want to be a religious rebel, but fail to get out of the stereotype boundaries it gives.

Google -> why god doesn't exist

Second result, this article strange hey?

 

Like I said in my second post this has been ton so many times the article is a bore to read.

Over 9,780,000 for the same search you did to get this article.

 

FSM is satire.. It's not a serious religion that people actually believe in (I hope - there could be someone crazy enough). It was invented by a university student who basically said if you want to teach ID in schools, teach pastafarianism as well.

 

And to DialgaPoke, spontaneous generation certainly is laughable, but evolution is perfectly consistent with the known facts of biology. In fact, it puts them all into a context which makes sense of them in a clear and coherent manner. If you want to add to your post with some kind of argument I'm all ears.

@JoeDaStudd- I had and gave it away. Why do you ask?

Because that + (your sig)

I'm a Pastafarianist - I belong to the Flying Spaghetti Monster religion. R'amen.

= not an atheist.

 

The FSM bible states numerous times "he" (the flying spaghetti monster) exists.

By following it as a religion you can't class yourself as a atheist which makes pretty much 99% of your arguments on this topic hypocritical.

You claim to be a follower/believer in FSM and yet class yourself as atheist.

 

The FSM never once denies there being a God its just an alternative concept for a divine being like it was intended to be.

 

To me it looks like you want to be a religious rebel, but fail to get out of the stereotype boundaries it gives.

Google -> why god doesn't exist

Second result, this article strange hey?

 

Like I said in my second post this has been ton so many times the article is a bore to read.

Over 9,780,000 for the same search you did to get this article.

 

FSM is satire.. It's not a serious religion that people actually believe in (I hope - there could be someone crazy enough). It was invented by a university student who basically said if you want to teach ID in schools, teach pastafarianism as well.

I own the book and have looked into numerous alternatives like the invisible pin unicorn and such. So I know they have humor at the roots.

Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is more of a comical thing but romy clearly states he/she belongs to it as a religion.

To class your self as belonging to a religion means you accept the beliefs of the religion, ie there is a FSM as your god.

 

Which ever way you look at it you can't truely call yourself a believer/follower of FSM and still class yourself as a atheist its a contradiction either way.

 

Religion with deity+atheist != atheist

 

All the humor religion only make humor of the modern conception of religion never the possibility of a divine being actually being present.

Does Bobby ever once state there's no divine being nope. He merely mocks the idea of modern churches as well as the idea of God being anything remotely like a human.

Actually, I'm pretty sure he's just joking. I've never once seen anyone actually seriously believe in satirical religions.

I rly hate religion topics. Atheists think that theists are essentially mental patients. Theists think atheists are going to hell.

 

I'm an atheist and I don't see theists as mental patients. Some of the smartest people in the world believe in God. I see believing in God is something of bits of blindness, but that doesn't make the believers mentally ill, or dumb etc.

@JoeDaStudd- I had and gave it away. Why do you ask?

Because that + (your sig)

I'm a Pastafarianist - I belong to the Flying Spaghetti Monster religion. R'amen.

= not an atheist.

 

The FSM bible states numerous times "he" (the flying spaghetti monster) exists.

By following it as a religion you can't class yourself as a atheist which makes pretty much 99% of your arguments on this topic hypocritical.

You claim to be a follower/believer in FSM and yet class yourself as atheist.

 

The FSM never once denies there being a God its just an alternative concept for a divine being like it was intended to be.

 

To me it looks like you want to be a religious rebel, but fail to get out of the stereotype boundaries it gives.

Google -> why god doesn't exist

Second result, this article strange hey?

 

Like I said in my second post this has been ton so many times the article is a bore to read.

Over 9,780,000 for the same search you did to get this article.

 

To me it seems like you totaly missed the concept of FSM.

 

Today it's used mostly (or only as) a parody of religion. I highly doubt anyone in this world truely believes we get beer and strippers in Heaven, or that Pirates are the only true believers of a God... I call myself a Pastafarianist as means to balance my (very much faithful to God) environment.

 

 

That being said, with addition to the definition of atheist, I consider myself an atheist. I don't believe in any divine entity, and take FSM as a good counterpoint to "true" Gods, and as a joke.

 

 

 

As for my search... About 5 years ago (at the age of 13) I started to seriously question the existance of the Jewish God. For 13 years I found myself very close to God and have done anything I could to prove myself worthy of his attention.

 

But then I started questioning, and questioning. I asked my father who seemed like the #1 believer some questions left unanswered, later I asked Rabbis and anyone else who claimed to believe in God. Through internal research and much thought, I've come to the conclusion God doesn't exist. Later I started having doubts about the existance of a God, not necessarily the Jewish one or any other religion's God. Just an entity that created us all etc. I've come to the conclusion that we cannot prove whether this kind of God exists or not, but that believing in him is as pointless as believing fairies.

 

 

Through my internal research I never once used the Internet. I didn't want to be tilted this way or that way by others, I wanted to reach conclusions on my own. After some discussion here in the off-topic section, I decided to make a thread for discussion about God (I probably should have used the search button, but meh), and thought I'd add in an article that represents my thoughts. That's the first article that popped on Google and it had my every thought about God inside it, literally not one is missed (that's not saying the author didn't add something that never occured to me, such as the annoying facts section which was pointless and immature IMO). As it's the first article I read about atheism and since it had my every thought in it, I thought it would fit great in this thread.

The whole theory of evolution and spontaneous generation is laughable.

 

That is all. :D

I think we can all agree that trying to make you understand why your post is so fatally facepalming would be futile. However, I should say, if you think the paradigm in which ALL of biology is making it's headway in is something to laugh at, then doesn't that hint to you that you're a giant moron?

FSM is about an alternative view on religion and an alternative take on what we currently believe to be how god works.

Yes its a parody of religion, but its not atheist in anyway, shape or form. Its just wannabes think if you take make fun out of religion its the same as not believing in God(s).

It saddens me people take it that way. Hating or disliking religion doesn't directly make you an atheist.

 

If you read the book its actually midgets which are the chosen ones (made smaller people of his touch being so great on them) and more holy then pirates. Pirates are just the original followers, but midgets are the chosen ones.

 

I'm honestly surprised that it took you 5 years to find that article or something similar. I've seen those points on numerous magazines, TV shows, films and books.