Atheists are just as deluded as theists...

[ding]

I’m not trying to convince you. I couldn’t care less.

You made a statement that they are open to being convinced and I am curious what kind of evidence it would take.

Because it is my belief that there is no evidence you would accept. Which means you are not open to being convinced.

You are free to believe what you want. I told you I was open to being convinced. I'm guessing you just don't have anything that makes sense. If you did, you would present it.

Bullshit. There’s no evidence you would accept.

I'm amazed at your ability to know more about what I will or won't accept than I do. Is this a skill that you learned, or did a fairy princess grant you that ability in your crib?

I can only go off the fact that you can’t tell me what it would take to convince you. That’s how set you are on not being convinced.

Sorry, but I can't tell you what it would take to convince me that unicorns are real, but only virgins can see them, either. I have no idea how you would convince me that the moon is made of green cheese as well.

That’s because there is no evidence you would accept.

 

[BULLDOG]

You are free to believe what you want. I told you I was open to being convinced. I'm guessing you just don't have anything that makes sense. If you did, you would present it.

Bullshit. There’s no evidence you would accept.

I'm amazed at your ability to know more about what I will or won't accept than I do. Is this a skill that you learned, or did a fairy princess grant you that ability in your crib?

I can only go off the fact that you can’t tell me what it would take to convince you. That’s how set you are on not being convinced.

Sorry, but I can't tell you what it would take to convince me that unicorns are real, but only virgins can see them, either. I have no idea how you would convince me that the moon is made of green cheese as well.

That’s because there is no evidence you would accept.

You're talking in circles. If you come up with something, let me know.

 

[ThisIsMe]

If not for God, what would be the purpose of the Bible? It would have had to have been one elaborate plan, that spanned hundreds of years, perpetrated by people who lived in different times, different regions of the world, from different backgrounds and who believe in different things. What would have been the purpose of this? Control?

Control would assume that people had already believed in a god type of person and they could have used the Bible to steer them toward a particular religion. If people hadn't already believed in a god, then writing all those letters and books would have had a dramatically reduced effect. Most people would have thought them to be crazy.

Remember, most of the Bible was letter written that depicted eye witness accounts, or things they experienced.

Again, due to the span of time that the Bible covers, and the span of time over which all those letters were written, it would have had to have either been some people reading the old letters and continuing the story, perpetrating the story, or group of people who kept passing the story down from generation to generation. Seems like a very complicated plan.

Or, it could be that the Bible is true. Most people say they dont believe the Bible because it's just a book, and they won't believe a book, they want to see proof.

Isn't believing in evolution really the same thing? Most people have never seen actual science that supports big bang, or evolution, they just believe it because someone else told them there is scientific evidence to support it. So, what takes more faith? Having an old book tell you about a creator and God, or someone telling you they read a new book that said that the universe sprang out of nothing and just magically appeared through some big bang of material that previously didn't exist, but just spontaneously combusted into being...from nothing?

Both require an extraordinary amount of faith.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Bullshit. There’s no evidence you would accept.

I'm amazed at your ability to know more about what I will or won't accept than I do. Is this a skill that you learned, or did a fairy princess grant you that ability in your crib?

I can only go off the fact that you can’t tell me what it would take to convince you. That’s how set you are on not being convinced.

Sorry, but I can't tell you what it would take to convince me that unicorns are real, but only virgins can see them, either. I have no idea how you would convince me that the moon is made of green cheese as well.

That’s because there is no evidence you would accept.

You're talking in circles. If you come up with something, let me know.

The last thing you want to do is circle the drain with ding, trying to parse his goofy rhetoric. The moment you point out something doesn't make sense, he will just tell you that you didn't understand it correctly and change the meaning.

Which is easy for a magical thinker to do, since reason and evidence do not constrain magical horseshit.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

If not for God, what would be the purpose of the Bible?

What was the purpose of the greek and Roman treatises on their gods? What was the purpose of the Ghitas, or the Vedas? What was the purpose of the the works of cofuscianism?

Sometimes, people dream up nonsense amd write it down. Sometimes, people see divine authority as easier and more convenient that authority based on reason, and use these books as a cudgel to control people.

 

[BULLDOG]

I'm amazed at your ability to know more about what I will or won't accept than I do. Is this a skill that you learned, or did a fairy princess grant you that ability in your crib?

I can only go off the fact that you can’t tell me what it would take to convince you. That’s how set you are on not being convinced.

Sorry, but I can't tell you what it would take to convince me that unicorns are real, but only virgins can see them, either. I have no idea how you would convince me that the moon is made of green cheese as well.

That’s because there is no evidence you would accept.

You're talking in circles. If you come up with something, let me know.

The last thing you want to do is circle the drain with ding, trying to parse his goofy rhetoric. The moment you point out something doesn't make sense, he will just tell you that you didn't understand it correctly and change the meaning.

Which is easy for a magical thinker to do, since reason and evidence do not constrain magical horseshit.

I agree, and he is pretty goofy, but I'll give him an honest shot if he can come up with something different than all the same "YOU GOTTA WANT TO BELIEVE" crap.

 

[BULLDOG]

If not for God, what would be the purpose of the Bible? It would have had to have been one elaborate plan, that spanned hundreds of years, perpetrated by people who lived in different times, different regions of the world, from different backgrounds and who believe in different things. What would have been the purpose of this? Control?

Control would assume that people had already believed in a god type of person and they could have used the Bible to steer them toward a particular religion. If people hadn't already believed in a god, then writing all those letters and books would have had a dramatically reduced effect. Most people would have thought them to be crazy.

Remember, most of the Bible was letter written that depicted eye witness accounts, or things they experienced.

Again, due to the span of time that the Bible covers, and the span of time over which all those letters were written, it would have had to have either been some people reading the old letters and continuing the story, perpetrating the story, or group of people who kept passing the story down from generation to generation. Seems like a very complicated plan.

Or, it could be that the Bible is true. Most people say they dont believe the Bible because it's just a book, and they won't believe a book, they want to see proof.

Isn't believing in evolution really the same thing? Most people have never seen actual science that supports big bang, or evolution, they just believe it because someone else told them there is scientific evidence to support it. So, what takes more faith? Having an old book tell you about a creator and God, or someone telling you they read a new book that said that the universe sprang out of nothing and just magically appeared through some big bang of material that previously didn't exist, but just spontaneously combusted into being...from nothing?

Both require an extraordinary amount of faith.

Most of the new testament was written by people who never even met Jesus. You really should study a little history of how the bible was compiled.

 

[ThisIsMe]

If not for God, what would be the purpose of the Bible?

What was the purpose of the greek and Roman treatises on their gods? What was the purpose of the Ghitas, or the Vedas? What was the purpose of the the works of cofuscianism?

Sometimes, people dream up nonsense amd write it down. Sometimes, people see divine authority as easier and more convenient that authority based on reason, and use these books as a cudgel to control people.

Ok, but I just think if it was just random people just writing stuff down, there were quite a few who had the same thoughts, from different eras and different places of the world.

Again, control would have been hard to achieve on a people who never believed in a god in the first place. They would have read those stories and thought the people were just telling fantasy tales.

If there wasnt some truth to it, I don't think it would have gotten as big as it has. I'm not just talking about christianity, like 70% of the world believes in some form of higher power. If this was all just a big hoax, then those people who lived back in those days were the smartest and most advanced authors that ever existed.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I can only go off the fact that you can’t tell me what it would take to convince you. That’s how set you are on not being convinced.

Sorry, but I can't tell you what it would take to convince me that unicorns are real, but only virgins can see them, either. I have no idea how you would convince me that the moon is made of green cheese as well.

That’s because there is no evidence you would accept.

You're talking in circles. If you come up with something, let me know.

The last thing you want to do is circle the drain with ding, trying to parse his goofy rhetoric. The moment you point out something doesn't make sense, he will just tell you that you didn't understand it correctly and change the meaning.

Which is easy for a magical thinker to do, since reason and evidence do not constrain magical horseshit.

I agree, and he is pretty goofy, but I'll give him an honest shot if he can come up with something different than all the same "YOU GOTTA WANT TO BELIEVE" crap.

Then you are begging for it. Get ready for a nonsensical stream of what ding believes is evidence for the existence not just of god, but for god precisely has he sees god. Ding does not aim to convince anyone...he aims to confuse and obfuscate. At the end of this Gish Gallop, ding will then remind you that belief in god is "faith", which directly implies that there is no good evidnece.

And if you want to spend your time trying to dissect the cognitive dissonance required to put on such a charade, be my guest.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Ok, but I just think if it was just random people just writing stuff down, there were quite a few who had the same thoughts, from different eras and different places of the world.

In which case it would make sense to examine the eras and the places in the world. For instance, the astounding ignorance of the physical world that is unimaginable even to a 2nd grader in today's society. For instance, the tendency to explain things with magical nonsense, in lieu of any other explanations. Or, for instance, the tendency of entire national identities and power structures to be built in the context of the these magical paradigms.

If you deny god on this message board, you will be treated to a few hissy fits and some decent discussion. If you denied Zeus in ancient Greece, you and your family were promptly killed.

 

[BULLDOG]

Sorry, but I can't tell you what it would take to convince me that unicorns are real, but only virgins can see them, either. I have no idea how you would convince me that the moon is made of green cheese as well.

That’s because there is no evidence you would accept.

You're talking in circles. If you come up with something, let me know.

The last thing you want to do is circle the drain with ding, trying to parse his goofy rhetoric. The moment you point out something doesn't make sense, he will just tell you that you didn't understand it correctly and change the meaning.

Which is easy for a magical thinker to do, since reason and evidence do not constrain magical horseshit.

I agree, and he is pretty goofy, but I'll give him an honest shot if he can come up with something different than all the same "YOU GOTTA WANT TO BELIEVE" crap.

Then you are begging for it. Get ready for a nonsensical stream of what ding believes is evidence for the existence not just of god, but for god precisely has he sees god. Ding does not aim to convince anyone...he aims to confuse and obfuscate. At the end of this Gish Gallop, ding will then remind you that belief in god is "faith", which directly implies that there is no good evidnece.

And if you want to spend your time trying to dissect the cognitive dissonance required to put on such a charade, be my guest.

No big deal. I find it entertaining to give nut bags free reign and see just how far they will roam. I spent more than a month of IMs letting Dale Smith exhaust every reason he had to believe that chem trails are real. I was honestly prepared to accept any provable evidence he might have. Sadly, it all came down to "those clouds sure look funny to me", but entertaining still.

 

[ThisIsMe]

Ok, but I just think if it was just random people just writing stuff down, there were quite a few who had the same thoughts, from different eras and different places of the world.

In which case it would make sense to examine the eras and the places in the world. For instance, the astounding ignorance of the physical world that is unimaginable even to a 2nd grader in today's society. For instance, the tendency to explain things with magical nonsense, in lieu of any other explanations. Or, for instance, the tendency of entire national identities and power structures to be built in the context of the these magical paradigms.

If you deny god on this message board, you will be treated to a few hissy fits and some decent discussion. If you denied Zeus in ancient Greece, you and your family were promptly killed.

I get where you are coming from. You contend that christianity is like a lot of other religions of the time, it was forced into those people. If they didn't accept, they were punished for doing so. Just like those that push the stories of the Greek gods. I understand that thinking and can see how that would cause some doubt.

The fact remains, however, that as far as we know, people have believed in a "god" type of power from as far back as recorded history goes. Whether its God, zeus, athena, Shiva, etc.. people have believed that for millenia. Question is, where did those beliefs come from? Something had to have started it all.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You contend that christianity is like a lot of other religions of the time, it was forced into those people.

For many, absolutely. See:Roman empire.

Question is, where did those beliefs come from?

Where does all superstition come from? Many religions have come and gone. Some gained more traction and still remain today. Religions are still emerging, even in modern times: Mormonism, Scientology, Moonies...

Humans are not much biologically different than they were 10 thousand years ago.

 

[ding]

Bullshit. There’s no evidence you would accept.

I'm amazed at your ability to know more about what I will or won't accept than I do. Is this a skill that you learned, or did a fairy princess grant you that ability in your crib?

I can only go off the fact that you can’t tell me what it would take to convince you. That’s how set you are on not being convinced.

Sorry, but I can't tell you what it would take to convince me that unicorns are real, but only virgins can see them, either. I have no idea how you would convince me that the moon is made of green cheese as well.

That’s because there is no evidence you would accept.

You're talking in circles. If you come up with something, let me know.

That’s only because your belief that you are open minded is circular logic.

 

[ding]

Sorry, but I can't tell you what it would take to convince me that unicorns are real, but only virgins can see them, either. I have no idea how you would convince me that the moon is made of green cheese as well.

That’s because there is no evidence you would accept.

You're talking in circles. If you come up with something, let me know.

The last thing you want to do is circle the drain with ding, trying to parse his goofy rhetoric. The moment you point out something doesn't make sense, he will just tell you that you didn't understand it correctly and change the meaning.

Which is easy for a magical thinker to do, since reason and evidence do not constrain magical horseshit.

I agree, and he is pretty goofy, but I'll give him an honest shot if he can come up with something different than all the same "YOU GOTTA WANT TO BELIEVE" crap.

Then you are begging for it. Get ready for a nonsensical stream of what ding believes is evidence for the existence not just of god, but for god precisely has he sees god. Ding does not aim to convince anyone...he aims to confuse and obfuscate. At the end of this Gish Gallop, ding will then remind you that belief in god is "faith", which directly implies that there is no good evidnece.

And if you want to spend your time trying to dissect the cognitive dissonance required to put on such a charade, be my guest.

Thank you both for proving my point that there is no evidence you will accept.

 

[Meriweather]

You don't understand what an atheist is. If you are not convinced that a God, any God, exists, then you are an atheist. Some don't believe a God is possible, but that is not the defining characteristic. Many, or even most are open to being convinced if someone would come up with something other than "because I believe it" but an atheist has no need to prove or disprove something he doesn't even believe in.

I start with the make-up of a human being: Body, mind/intelligence, spirit. Body (mass) comes from mass. Where does intelligence come from? Doesn't intelligence come from intelligence? This brings us to spirit coming from spirit. Intelligence can be argued that it evolved from chemical matter. Then what about spirit? Some argue that there is no "spirit", simply body and intelligence. There can be no evidence of spirit, because evidence requires matter, and there is no matter in spirit. Here we come to a standstill. The way I see it is that I have an intelligence that is forever arguing with itself, or, I have a spirit that takes what intelligence presents and comes to a decision that prompts me to action.

Most of the atheists I know (family and friends) tell me that the problem they have with God conceptually is that He doesn't act in the way they want or expect a God to act. Therefore, working at getting to know God (even if He does exist) is pointless since God won't meet their expectations of a God.

 

[ding]

You don't understand what an atheist is. If you are not convinced that a God, any God, exists, then you are an atheist. Some don't believe a God is possible, but that is not the defining characteristic. Many, or even most are open to being convinced if someone would come up with something other than "because I believe it" but an atheist has no need to prove or disprove something he doesn't even believe in.

I start with the make-up of a human being: Body, mind/intelligence, spirit. Body (mass) comes from mass. Where does intelligence come from? Doesn't intelligence come from intelligence? This brings us to spirit coming from spirit. Intelligence can be argued that it evolved from chemical matter. Then what about spirit? Some argue that there is no "spirit", simply body and intelligence. There can be no evidence of spirit, because evidence requires matter, and there is no matter in spirit. Here we come to a standstill. The way I see it is that I have an intelligence that is forever arguing with itself, or, I have a spirit that takes what intelligence presents and comes to a decision that prompts me to action.

Most of the atheists I know (family and friends) tell me that the problem they have with God conceptually is that He doesn't act in the way they want or expect a God to act. Therefore, working at getting to know God (even if He does exist) is pointless since God won't meet their expectations of a God.

Basically it comes down to their belief that unless everything is perfect there can be no God.

The problem with atheists who believe they have complete information to criticize what God has created is that it is an emotional response in that it ignores all the good that does exist.

Rather than seeing the beauty, complexity, harmony and joy that life brings, they only see the things they dislike.

 

[ding]

And because they ignore all that is good with this world, there will never be any evidence they will accept.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Most of the atheists I know (family and friends) tell me that the problem they have with God conceptually is that He doesn't act in the way they want or expect a God to act.

Interesting. The atheists I know simply do not accept a belief in magical God's and see no need to do so in order to explain anything at all, an idea which oays no respect to the nature or description of the personalities of gods.

 

[ding]

That’s because there is no evidence you would accept.

You're talking in circles. If you come up with something, let me know.

The last thing you want to do is circle the drain with ding, trying to parse his goofy rhetoric. The moment you point out something doesn't make sense, he will just tell you that you didn't understand it correctly and change the meaning.

Which is easy for a magical thinker to do, since reason and evidence do not constrain magical horseshit.

I agree, and he is pretty goofy, but I'll give him an honest shot if he can come up with something different than all the same "YOU GOTTA WANT TO BELIEVE" crap.

Then you are begging for it. Get ready for a nonsensical stream of what ding believes is evidence for the existence not just of god, but for god precisely has he sees god. Ding does not aim to convince anyone...he aims to confuse and obfuscate. At the end of this Gish Gallop, ding will then remind you that belief in god is "faith", which directly implies that there is no good evidnece.

And if you want to spend your time trying to dissect the cognitive dissonance required to put on such a charade, be my guest.

No big deal. I find it entertaining to give nut bags free reign and see just how far they will roam. I spent more than a month of IMs letting Dale Smith exhaust every reason he had to believe that chem trails are real. I was honestly prepared to accept any provable evidence he might have. Sadly, it all came down to "those clouds sure look funny to me", but entertaining still.

Nut bags?

A telltale trait of militant atheists is that they condemn respect for anyone who believes in God.

So because I have different beliefs than you and challenge your beliefs in a respectful manner you believe I am a nut bag?

Wouldn’t the nut bag be the person who condemns respect for someone else for no other reason that they didn’t believe the same thing?