Hey, ender! Glad to see you back.
Thanks Duracell. Wish I could stick around. Life remains busy and I cannot engage in this conversation as I’d like. I have debated this topic intelligently before, even in this forum, but it looks like sticking around to debate further would be a pointless endeavor and a waste of my scarce free time, given the quality of the opposition so far. Keep up the good work.
There is absolutely 0 evidence to support the existence of any god(s). It is a ridiculous ancient notion and I honestly can’t comprehend how intelligent, rational people in the modern age can believe in an invisible man in the sky who created everything and a centuries old man who rounded up two of every animal on a boat and a dirt man and a rib woman and a man living in a whale. It’s absolutely ridiculous. I’m sorry if this offends anyone but it’s all really silly.
Depends on what you call evidence. Not offended by you, but again, this is an age-old argument that any religious person has already addressed, so you score no points for originality. Sorry. To me there is ample evidence.
https://www.mormon.org/faq/faith-in-god
God has provided many evidences of His existence. One of these is the testimony of His creations: “The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork” (Psalms 19:1). Have you ever looked in awe at the night sky with its billions of stars? Or studied the intricate details of a leaf or flower? Or marveled at the miracle of a tiny new baby? These beautiful and complex creations didn’t come about by chance.
Or maybe they did.
That’s nice.
Indeed.
Given that there’s over 200 billion Galaxies in our universe it’s pretty much statistically impossible that we’re alone. Now whether there is intelligent life elsewhere is a whole other conversation.
Not necessarily. There are actually some studies that suggest that the likelihood of life—let alone highly intelligent life—emerging in a star system is 1 in “more than the number of stars in the universe.”
In other words, there are some scientists/statisticians who believe that that emergence of life in one solar system out of 200,000,000,000^200,000,000,000 is statistically impossible. Earth by this metric is an outlier. You can attribute that to the shortfalls of statistics, God, whatever suits your fancy.
Also your supposition that statistics prove the existence of life but not intelligent life is kind of odd. If you’re going to make up a stat to prove that life exists elsewhere, why not go one step further and claim evidence that intelligent life must have evolved elsewhere in the last 300B years?
I would put this in my sig if I weren’t so lazy.
There is absolutely 0 evidence to support the existence of any god(s). It is a ridiculous ancient notion and I honestly can’t comprehend how intelligent, rational people in the modern age can believe in an invisible man in the sky who created everything and a centuries old man who rounded up two of every animal on a boat and a dirt man and a rib woman and a man living in a whale. It’s absolutely ridiculous. I’m sorry if this offends anyone but it’s all really silly.
Depends on what you call evidence. Not offended by you, but again, this is an age-old argument that any religious person has already addressed, so you score no points for originality. Sorry. To me there is ample evidence.
But empirical evidence is not a subjective thing. I call evidence the same thing scientists do, which is in essence, something observable that supports the theory. I’m not trying to be original I’m just trying to ask questions and have a discussion.
You say “to me there is ample evidence” well, such as? I genuinely want to know. Again, I know I can come off as somewhat stand-offish at times. I don’t mean to. Just wanting to discuss.
Truthfully you would be the most fun to engage in. I do apologize but I must limit my rare appearances. Perhaps I can resume the conversation later, but at the present I cannot. Thanks for at least being thoughtful while presenting your views. I don’t have time for Lord Haseo’s obviously “thorough” knowledge of Christian beliefs. I’ll try to get back with you at a later point.
darth_ender said:
This is why I hardly post anymore because I get sucked into conversations I don’t have time for. However, you seem to have an extremely ignorant view of what morals truly are. They are not universal, set in stone, or permanent. They are arbitrary based on cultural acceptance. What you believe you hold as the epitome of morality demonstrates your ignorance. Sadly, I have no more time to talk to you, and you don’t provide very intellectually stimulating conversation anyway, so I will have to allow others to carry on the fruitless effort of pointing out your fallacious and foolish argument.For the record, I have no problem with atheists. I respect so many of them and enjoy intelligent conversation. Sadly, this thread is lacking in that department at the moment from the atheist side. Bring back CP3S.
I apologize for not being more open to reprehensible viewpoints.
Actually you seem to be a subscriber to them. You tout your tolerance of others, then demonstrate that you lack it. Well thought out.
Are you fucking kidding me? I am against women being oppressed, gay people being called abominations and anyone who is not a believer of Yahweh being killed and I have reprehensible viewpoints? Bitch how?
Do a little more research and a little less generalization and you might answer your own questions. I’m done conversing with you. You can stop having your tantrum now.
darth_ender said:
Do a little more research and a little less generalization and you might answer your own questions. I’m done conversing with you. You can stop having your tantrum now.
I haven’t generalized anyone; I have just judged the source of the teachings which is the Bible. You don’t even know what you’re arguing about. But go ahead and play victim.
darth_ender said:
Do a little more research and a little less generalization and you might answer your own questions. I’m done conversing with you. You can stop having your tantrum now.I haven’t generalized anyone; I have just judged the source of the teachings which is the Bible. You don’t even know what you’re arguing about. But go ahead and play victim.
But yes you have. You have blatantly dismissed an entire faith as misogynistic and homophobic based on a few passages that even most adherents to that same faith believe are ancient relics from a bygone era.
I would put this in my sig if I weren’t so lazy.
But why have faith? I’m not trying to be an ass so I’m sorry if it comes off that way I’m genuinely curious. Why blindly believe something without evidence?
sometimes you believe with the brain, sometimes you believe with the heart.
Is it just because you were raised to believe it’s true. I mean I can make just about any outrageous claim I want to a child, tell them it’s true enough times and they’ll probably believe it.
Why is it a good thing to have faith? If I told you I could fly, you wouldn’t just take me on faith and believe me. You would want me to prove it somehow before you believed it. Why does religion get a pass. You’re clearly an intelligent person, so why put that aside when it comes to Jesus?
This is best only answer I can give you:
ST John 20:24-29
24: But Thomas one of the twelve called Didymus was not with them when Jesus came.
25: The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe .
26: ¶ And after eight days again his disciples were within and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you.
27: Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing.
28: And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.
29: Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they have have not seen, and yet have believed.
I have faith that Christ is real, I don’t have faith in the others you mention. If it seems odd to you, it will have to remain that way.
But the question is why? Why do you believe one thing and not another if there’s no proof for either?
because I have faith in the one thing, but not the others.
That doesn’t answer the question.
It does for me. Sorry, I gave the best answer I could to you. I don’t know what else to say to you.
darth_ender said:
Do a little more research and a little less generalization and you might answer your own questions. I’m done conversing with you. You can stop having your tantrum now.I haven’t generalized anyone; I have just judged the source of the teachings which is the Bible. You don’t even know what you’re arguing about. But go ahead and play victim.
But yes you have. You have blatantly dismissed an entire faith as misogynistic and homophobic based on a few passages that even most adherents to that same faith believe are ancient relics from a bygone era.
If I had said “All Christians are bad because the Bible is evil” then yes I would be generalizing but I’m just stating the fact that there is reprehensible things in The Bible and that’s why I hate it. That’s all.
Why? There’s no definitive proof of any of those things.
Alien life is so mathematically probable that it might as well be proved.
A universe created by a literal interpretation of any religious story is so mathematically improbable that it might as be impossible.
I would argue for a large amount of wiggle room for a non-literal metaphorical interpretation of the various scriptures and religious books of the world.
Discovering that which unites them would certainly be a more constructive past-time than concentrating on trying to prop up the details of any individual credo.
There are understandable reasons why most seek a less prosaic explanation for why we are here and our place in the universe. Science is rarely described in beautiful or inspiring language. I loved Sagan for putting a bit of awe back into the sometimes dry non-religious creation stories of modern science.
darth_ender said:
Do a little more research and a little less generalization and you might answer your own questions. I’m done conversing with you. You can stop having your tantrum now.I haven’t generalized anyone; I have just judged the source of the teachings which is the Bible. You don’t even know what you’re arguing about. But go ahead and play victim.
But yes you have. You have blatantly dismissed an entire faith as misogynistic and homophobic based on a few passages that even most adherents to that same faith believe are ancient relics from a bygone era.
I don’t know about “most adherents” but it is heartening that the number seems to increase daily.
However it is disheartening that people still believe things like “homosexuality is a sin” because God supposedly said so.
darth_ender said:
Do a little more research and a little less generalization and you might answer your own questions. I’m done conversing with you. You can stop having your tantrum now.I haven’t generalized anyone; I have just judged the source of the teachings which is the Bible. You don’t even know what you’re arguing about. But go ahead and play victim.
Your attitude is not helping your arguments.
darth_ender said:
Do a little more research and a little less generalization and you might answer your own questions. I’m done conversing with you. You can stop having your tantrum now.I haven’t generalized anyone; I have just judged the source of the teachings which is the Bible. You don’t even know what you’re arguing about. But go ahead and play victim.
Your attitude is not helping your arguments.
Ender doesn’t really want to argue though. Also I wasn’t the one who threw shade first.
You’re the only one name calling as far as I can see. I’m fairly anti-religion but I try to at least be civil about it.
Especially to respected members like Ender.
I said he threw shade. I didn’t say he called me any names.
darth_ender said:
Do a little more research and a little less generalization and you might answer your own questions. I’m done conversing with you. You can stop having your tantrum now.I haven’t generalized anyone; I have just judged the source of the teachings which is the Bible. You don’t even know what you’re arguing about. But go ahead and play victim.
But yes you have. You have blatantly dismissed an entire faith as misogynistic and homophobic based on a few passages that even most adherents to that same faith believe are ancient relics from a bygone era.
I don’t know about “most adherents” but it is heartening that the number seems to increase daily.
However it is disheartening that people still believe things like “homosexuality is a sin” because God supposedly said so.
Right. Like, none of those same Christians believe BBQing ribs is a sin. Yet that’s in Leviticus too. But the ban on pork existed for serious health reasons. Likewise the various rules on sexuality existed for reasons inherent to that society, and in some cases were actually liberal for the time. Leviticus didn’t mandate homophobia, it was already the dominant societal discourse. To totally reverse course would have been totally shocking. Things like this must change gradually, and they now have. There’s no good reason today to arrest people for sodomy, and even most clergy wouldn’t be in favor of such a thing. Yet many if not most of them remain opposed to gay marriage. It’s an evolutionary process.
I would put this in my sig if I weren’t so lazy.
I said he threw shade.
You kids say the weirdest things.
Whatever that means (and I don’t care so don’t bother) I’m sure it doesn’t justify name calling.
I said he threw shade.
You kids say the weirdest things.
Whatever that means (and I don’t care so don’t bother) I’m sure it doesn’t justify name calling.
darth_ender said:
This is why I hardly post anymore because I get sucked into conversations I don’t have time for. However, you seem to have an extremely ignorant view of what morals truly are. They are not universal, set in stone, or permanent. They are arbitrary based on cultural acceptance. What you believe you hold as the epitome of morality demonstrates your ignorance. Sadly, I have no more time to talk to you, and you don’t provide very intellectually stimulating conversation anyway, so I will have to allow others to carry on the fruitless effort of pointing out your fallacious and foolish argument.
I apologize for not being more open to reprehensible viewpoints.
Actually you seem to be a subscriber to them. You tout your tolerance of others, then demonstrate that you lack it. Well thought out.
I would have been perfectly content with actually debating but he wanted to poop on the ground, flail his arms about and act as if I was the one who initially started being rude.
I respect atheism. I understand the logic behind being an atheist. But, and maybe I’m just being a butthurt theist (who isn’t “christian” btw), the condescension, mocking, insulting, and name calling in this thread is despicable. I would never treat somebody like that for being an atheist. Sure, you could use the argument that Christians sometimes do that to nonchristians, and that is absolutely true, but aren’t you (not referring to any specific individual) supposed to be better and more ‘enlightened’?
Also, you can’t prove there isn’t a God any more than theists can prove that there is one. So “this bickering is pointless.”
Also, you can’t prove there isn’t a God any more than theists can prove that there is one. So “this bickering is pointless.”
Well to be fair, the burden of proof lies on the person making the claim, not the one disputing it.
But I agree this discussion is unfortunately going nowhere interesting and has turned into people of all opinions getting overly easily butthurt and bickering with each other.
Well to be fair, the burden of proof lies on the person making the claim, not the one disputing it.
But is not the supposition that reality exists spontaneously without some type of creation just as radical a claim as that which states there is some divine overseer?
Frankly, I think it is rather difficult to assign the burden of proof to a particular party in this debate.
I would put this in my sig if I weren’t so lazy.
Also, you can’t prove there isn’t a God any more than theists can prove that there is one. So “this bickering is pointless.”
Well to be fair, the burden of proof lies on the person making the claim, not the one disputing it.
Therefore, when making a claim that God doesn’t exist, the burden of proof is on the one claiming God doesn’t exist.
Also, you can’t prove there isn’t a God any more than theists can prove that there is one. So “this bickering is pointless.”
Well to be fair, the burden of proof lies on the person making the claim, not the one disputing it.
Therefore, when making a claim that God doesn’t exist, the burden of proof is on the one claiming God doesn’t exist.
Luckily, all I claim is that neither of us knows if God exists.
My proof is your lack of the same. :p
And considering the fact the many MANY deaths that have occurred because people were so adamant about their God existing the burden lies in direction of those who assert his/her’s/it’s existence.