Understanding the Mentality and World View of the Christian Fundamentalist

[BluePhantom]

It feels like us athiests are in an insane asylum and this belief in god while insane is keeping the patients calm. Do you attack the psychosis or leave it alone? Do the pros outweigh the cops? Will you ever truly be cured if the psychosis remains? I guess some of you are harmless as far as cutting our heads off but you still do stupid things like make gays feel bad about themselves, blow up abortion clinics, dont encourage birth control or stem cell. On the crazy spectrum I'm glad I'm in america and not Iran.

Well that's a pretty egocentric point of view.

But I will tell you a secret. I don't cut off people's heads, I support gay marriage, I am pro-choice, have no problem with birth control, and am pro-stem cell research and I still manage to be a Christian. Here's the real kicker....I am not that unusual. Most Christians have the same or at least similar beliefs as I do on those issues. You are just used to dealing with the crackpot extremists and have reached the conclusion that they are the standard. They aren't. They annoy us just as much as they annoy you.

 

[sealybobo]

Yes I realize how deep the brainwashing goes. I was once a theist myself and the road or path to truth wasn't easy.

Or perhaps you got distracted by the shadows cast on the wall and forgot about the light casting them. It's Plato. Nevermind.

Maybe not always but in this case absence of evidence is evidence of absence. Its why when we are new to it and ask for proof theists say " you just gotta have faith". All that is telling me is "you just gotta want it to be true". Well I'm sorry but what you want to believe is getting in the way of what you should believe. And no wonder the masses are such sheep when they think this way. If you can be convinced a god that cares exists without any proof what can't you be convinced of?

No, no, no.....you can't say "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence unless we are talking about God and then it is". Now you are starting to talk like Orogen and applying criteria as it fits your personal set of beliefs. That's total bullshit and making that argument has a negative impact on your credibility. You can provide much better arguments than 'well it's true when it suits me and false when it doesn't' which is exactly what you are saying.

I could argue that there is a destroyer just as rationally and logically as you do a creator. Should I? Would you waste your time?

Maybe if I told you the destroyer talked to me. Would you believe it more then?

I dont need evidence do I? I've got scripture divinely inspired by the destroyer. Now worship him and pay me.

 

[sealybobo]

It feels like us athiests are in an insane asylum and this belief in god while insane is keeping the patients calm. Do you attack the psychosis or leave it alone? Do the pros outweigh the cops? Will you ever truly be cured if the psychosis remains? I guess some of you are harmless as far as cutting our heads off but you still do stupid things like make gays feel bad about themselves, blow up abortion clinics, dont encourage birth control or stem cell. On the crazy spectrum I'm glad I'm in america and not Iran.

Well that's a pretty egocentric point of view.

But I will tell you a secret. I don't cut off people's heads, I support gay marriage, I am pro-choice, have no problem with birth control, and am pro-stem cell research and I still manage to be a Christian. Here's the real kicker....I am not that unusual. Most Christians have the same or at least similar beliefs as I do on those issues. You are just used to dealing with the crackpot extremists and have reached the conclusion that they are the standard. They aren't. They annoy us just as much as they annoy you.

I know you cherry pick.

If you dont believe only christians go to heaven maybe you should stop calling yourself a christian because your lord supposedly said it.

 

[BluePhantom]

Let's start over. From the very beginning. You have no holy books and I have no opinion. You walk up to me and say " you know a god created the universe". I first need you to tell me what a god is. Ask 200 different theists that and you get 200 different answers. But let's say you mean something that created the universe. Forget about proving he cares and that heaven and hell exist. I'm just talking about a generic thing that you claim created the universe because "how could all this be by itself" argument that my dad gives me when he doesnt want to listen to the answers science gives to a lot of his quesfions.

Ok...hold up. It doesn't matter how far back you go. You say the universe was created by the Big Bang, I will say God caused the Big Bang (actually I will say God WAS/IS the Big Bang). You say there is a multi-verse of an infinite number of parallel universes, I say 'God just got a whole lot bigger'. We can play this game all day and in fact that kind of back and forth has been going on since the dawn of man and neither side has been able to prove a single thing about the existence or non-existence (is that a word) of God.

This I see is why religion hates science. Because science tries to answer your philosophical questions. You think there must be a god and there really is not. The cosmos is eternal and created us.

Religion doesn't hate science. God gave us the ability to study and learn about the universe for a reason. Religion that hates science is bad religion. Science that hates religion is bad science. Science and religion can, and ought to, work together for they both seek to answer important questions about life. However, there are certain things science can provide no answer for and will never be able to. There are also certain things theology struggles to answer. Each should be left to their own best applications.

You say a god who cares did. Prove that.

I can't. Prove that is not the case. You can't. Again we find ourselves at the stalemate that has existed between atheists and theists since the dawn of mankind. I think we would both agree that someone who says "God absolutely exists" is offering an opinion and not a fact. However, someone who says "God absolutely doe not exist" is doing the exact same thing. They are merely opposite sides of the same coin.

 

[BluePhantom]

It feels like us athiests are in an insane asylum and this belief in god while insane is keeping the patients calm. Do you attack the psychosis or leave it alone? Do the pros outweigh the cops? Will you ever truly be cured if the psychosis remains? I guess some of you are harmless as far as cutting our heads off but you still do stupid things like make gays feel bad about themselves, blow up abortion clinics, dont encourage birth control or stem cell. On the crazy spectrum I'm glad I'm in america and not Iran.

Well that's a pretty egocentric point of view.

But I will tell you a secret. I don't cut off people's heads, I support gay marriage, I am pro-choice, have no problem with birth control, and am pro-stem cell research and I still manage to be a Christian. Here's the real kicker....I am not that unusual. Most Christians have the same or at least similar beliefs as I do on those issues. You are just used to dealing with the crackpot extremists and have reached the conclusion that they are the standard. They aren't. They annoy us just as much as they annoy you.

I know you cherry pick.

If you dont believe only christians go to heaven maybe you should stop calling yourself a christian because your lord supposedly said it.

According to traditional Christian thought in 2015 that would be somewhat correct. According to what is actually written in the Bible...well...not so much. But that is an indictment of Christianity as an institution and human fallibility, not the fault of Jesus or God.

Oh and I don't cherry pick so much as I take the time to actually study things beyond what a pastor tells me

 

[sealybobo]

It feels like us athiests are in an insane asylum and this belief in god while insane is keeping the patients calm. Do you attack the psychosis or leave it alone? Do the pros outweigh the cops? Will you ever truly be cured if the psychosis remains? I guess some of you are harmless as far as cutting our heads off but you still do stupid things like make gays feel bad about themselves, blow up abortion clinics, dont encourage birth control or stem cell. On the crazy spectrum I'm glad I'm in america and not Iran.

Well that's a pretty egocentric point of view.

But I will tell you a secret. I don't cut off people's heads, I support gay marriage, I am pro-choice, have no problem with birth control, and am pro-stem cell research and I still manage to be a Christian. Here's the real kicker....I am not that unusual. Most Christians have the same or at least similar beliefs as I do on those issues. You are just used to dealing with the crackpot extremists and have reached the conclusion that they are the standard. They aren't. They annoy us just as much as they annoy you.

Until Reagan got in bed with the moral majority conservatives I always thought religion was all good and good for society and without it people would do bad things. Turns out I was wrong. Until isis I didn't think anything was wrong with believing in god. I didnt even mind the christians who believed non christians go to hell. I didn't believe god would say that.

Then I realized the idea that god said anything to anyone is ridiculous.

 

[BluePhantom]

It feels like us athiests are in an insane asylum and this belief in god while insane is keeping the patients calm. Do you attack the psychosis or leave it alone? Do the pros outweigh the cops? Will you ever truly be cured if the psychosis remains? I guess some of you are harmless as far as cutting our heads off but you still do stupid things like make gays feel bad about themselves, blow up abortion clinics, dont encourage birth control or stem cell. On the crazy spectrum I'm glad I'm in america and not Iran.

Well that's a pretty egocentric point of view.

But I will tell you a secret. I don't cut off people's heads, I support gay marriage, I am pro-choice, have no problem with birth control, and am pro-stem cell research and I still manage to be a Christian. Here's the real kicker....I am not that unusual. Most Christians have the same or at least similar beliefs as I do on those issues. You are just used to dealing with the crackpot extremists and have reached the conclusion that they are the standard. They aren't. They annoy us just as much as they annoy you.

Until Reagan got in bed with the moral majority conservatives I always thought religion was all good and good for society and without it people would do bad things. Turns out I was wrong. Until isis I didn't think anything was wrong with believing in god. I didnt even mind the christians who believed non christians go to hell. I didn't believe god would say that.

Then I realized the idea that god said anything to anyone is ridiculous.

It's a shame that you would allow extremists to influence you in such ways. I imagine they would be very satisfied to know they have been able to manipulate your way of thinking

 

[sealybobo]

Let's start over. From the very beginning. You have no holy books and I have no opinion. You walk up to me and say " you know a god created the universe". I first need you to tell me what a god is. Ask 200 different theists that and you get 200 different answers. But let's say you mean something that created the universe. Forget about proving he cares and that heaven and hell exist. I'm just talking about a generic thing that you claim created the universe because "how could all this be by itself" argument that my dad gives me when he doesnt want to listen to the answers science gives to a lot of his quesfions.

Ok...hold up. It doesn't matter how far back you go. You say the universe was created by the Big Bang, I will say God caused the Big Bang (actually I will say God WAS/IS the Big Bang). You say there is a multi-verse of an infinite number of parallel universes, I say 'God just got a whole lot bigger'. We can play this game all day and in fact that kind of back and forth has been going on since the dawn of man and neither side has been able to prove a single thing about the existence or non-existence (is that a word) of God.

This I see is why religion hates science. Because science tries to answer your philosophical questions. You think there must be a god and there really is not. The cosmos is eternal and created us.

Religion doesn't hate science. God gave us the ability to study and learn about the universe for a reason. Religion that hates science is bad religion. Science that hates religion is bad science. Science and religion can, and ought to, work together for they both seek to answer important questions about life. However, there are certain things science can provide no answer for and will never be able to. There are also certain things theology struggles to answer. Each should be left to their own best applications.

You say a god who cares did. Prove that.

I can't. Prove that is not the case. You can't. Again we find ourselves at the stalemate that has existed between atheists and theists since the dawn of mankind. I think we would both agree that someone who says "God absolutely exists" is offering an opinion and not a fact. However, someone who says "God absolutely doe not exist" is doing the exact same thing. They are merely opposite sides of the same coin.

Maybe your side got sick of the stalemate and that's when theists made up the moses and Jesus stories where they claim god is a fact.

Athiests dont say there is no way a god exists. You would have to be a god yourself to know 100% certain of that.

It would be wonderful if theists admitted their ignorance but they know god. Literally he talked to them. And some of you believe that?

 

[sealybobo]

It feels like us athiests are in an insane asylum and this belief in god while insane is keeping the patients calm. Do you attack the psychosis or leave it alone? Do the pros outweigh the cops? Will you ever truly be cured if the psychosis remains? I guess some of you are harmless as far as cutting our heads off but you still do stupid things like make gays feel bad about themselves, blow up abortion clinics, dont encourage birth control or stem cell. On the crazy spectrum I'm glad I'm in america and not Iran.

Well that's a pretty egocentric point of view.

But I will tell you a secret. I don't cut off people's heads, I support gay marriage, I am pro-choice, have no problem with birth control, and am pro-stem cell research and I still manage to be a Christian. Here's the real kicker....I am not that unusual. Most Christians have the same or at least similar beliefs as I do on those issues. You are just used to dealing with the crackpot extremists and have reached the conclusion that they are the standard. They aren't. They annoy us just as much as they annoy you.

Until Reagan got in bed with the moral majority conservatives I always thought religion was all good and good for society and without it people would do bad things. Turns out I was wrong. Until isis I didn't think anything was wrong with believing in god. I didnt even mind the christians who believed non christians go to hell. I didn't believe god would say that.

Then I realized the idea that god said anything to anyone is ridiculous.

It's a shame that you would allow extremists to influence you in such ways. I imagine they would be very satisfied to know they have been able to manipulate your way of thinking

Actually if they realized their recruitment tactics no longer worked they'd stop and they would switch to your more subtle tactics. Maybe religion shouldn't be so rooted in a lie.

 

[sealybobo]

It feels like us athiests are in an insane asylum and this belief in god while insane is keeping the patients calm. Do you attack the psychosis or leave it alone? Do the pros outweigh the cops? Will you ever truly be cured if the psychosis remains? I guess some of you are harmless as far as cutting our heads off but you still do stupid things like make gays feel bad about themselves, blow up abortion clinics, dont encourage birth control or stem cell. On the crazy spectrum I'm glad I'm in america and not Iran.

Well that's a pretty egocentric point of view.

But I will tell you a secret. I don't cut off people's heads, I support gay marriage, I am pro-choice, have no problem with birth control, and am pro-stem cell research and I still manage to be a Christian. Here's the real kicker....I am not that unusual. Most Christians have the same or at least similar beliefs as I do on those issues. You are just used to dealing with the crackpot extremists and have reached the conclusion that they are the standard. They aren't. They annoy us just as much as they annoy you.

Until Reagan got in bed with the moral majority conservatives I always thought religion was all good and good for society and without it people would do bad things. Turns out I was wrong. Until isis I didn't think anything was wrong with believing in god. I didnt even mind the christians who believed non christians go to hell. I didn't believe god would say that.

Then I realized the idea that god said anything to anyone is ridiculous.

It's a shame that you would allow extremists to influence you in such ways. I imagine they would be very satisfied to know they have been able to manipulate your way of thinking

I appreciated my liars to be obvious and my homos flaming. I want to know what I'm dealing with. So I appreciate christians who admit they believe non christians go to hell. Perhaps you dont believe what so many christians believe because it sounds ridiculous to you too when you think about it.

 

[BluePhantom]

Let's start over. From the very beginning. You have no holy books and I have no opinion. You walk up to me and say " you know a god created the universe". I first need you to tell me what a god is. Ask 200 different theists that and you get 200 different answers. But let's say you mean something that created the universe. Forget about proving he cares and that heaven and hell exist. I'm just talking about a generic thing that you claim created the universe because "how could all this be by itself" argument that my dad gives me when he doesnt want to listen to the answers science gives to a lot of his quesfions.

Ok...hold up. It doesn't matter how far back you go. You say the universe was created by the Big Bang, I will say God caused the Big Bang (actually I will say God WAS/IS the Big Bang). You say there is a multi-verse of an infinite number of parallel universes, I say 'God just got a whole lot bigger'. We can play this game all day and in fact that kind of back and forth has been going on since the dawn of man and neither side has been able to prove a single thing about the existence or non-existence (is that a word) of God.

This I see is why religion hates science. Because science tries to answer your philosophical questions. You think there must be a god and there really is not. The cosmos is eternal and created us.

Religion doesn't hate science. God gave us the ability to study and learn about the universe for a reason. Religion that hates science is bad religion. Science that hates religion is bad science. Science and religion can, and ought to, work together for they both seek to answer important questions about life. However, there are certain things science can provide no answer for and will never be able to. There are also certain things theology struggles to answer. Each should be left to their own best applications.

You say a god who cares did. Prove that.

I can't. Prove that is not the case. You can't. Again we find ourselves at the stalemate that has existed between atheists and theists since the dawn of mankind. I think we would both agree that someone who says "God absolutely exists" is offering an opinion and not a fact. However, someone who says "God absolutely doe not exist" is doing the exact same thing. They are merely opposite sides of the same coin.

Maybe your side got sick of the stalemate and that's when theists made up the moses and Jesus stories where they claim god is a fact.

Athiests dont say there is no way a god exists. You would have to be a god yourself to know 100% certain of that.

It would be wonderful if theists admitted their ignorance but they know god. Literally he talked to them. And some of you believe that?

Go back and read this thread brother. Orogen states constantly and absolutely that there is no way God exists. These boards are filled with atheists making absolute statements that God does not exist. Who are you kidding? Better yet, who do you think you are kidding 'cause it sure aint me. I have been saying through this whole thread 'it is possible that God does not exist'. I have yet to hear an atheist say 'it's possible that He does'. This was my whole point in my earlier posts where I said I found it very interesting that the guy who is open to all possibilities and is applying consistent criteria is the theist, not the scientist.

I think it would be equally as wonderful if atheists admitted their ignorance and simply said "I don't know...there is no way to prove or disprove God so it remains unknown". But apparently they have such astonishing intellect that they know things that cannot even begin to address. And some of you believe that as well.

 

[BluePhantom]

I appreciated my liars to be obvious and my homos flaming. I want to know what I'm dealing with. So I appreciate christians who admit they believe non christians go to hell. Perhaps you dont believe what so many christians believe because it sounds ridiculous to you too when you think about it.

Actually, it's because when some pastor told me about hell and Satan I went out and did some research and found out that Satan was a concept that developed over time as a way to explain why bad things were happening to the Jews despite the covenant. Satan doesn't show up until the book of Job and then Satan is an adviser of sorts and not the personification of all evil. That didn't happen until far later. Hell as a place of eternal torment for sin didn't develop until even later after that. The words in the Bible that are translated into hell in English come from the Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic words Gehenna, Tartarus, Hades, and Sheol. None of them have anything to do with a place of eternal torment.

Gehenna was the city dump of Jerusalem where people would be banished to because if they were forced from the cities there would be nowhere else to go. They also burnt the city's trash there. Hence, Genhenna is a place of fire and torment....while you are alive. Hades was simply the Greek afterlife. Everyone went to Hades whether they were good or bad. Tartarus is a particularly nasty place but it is reserved for fallen angels and it leads to immediate destruction, not eternal torment. Sheol just means "grave", "dead", "gone", "hasta la vista, baby". Has nothing to do with an afterlife. So in all these words which of them describes a place of eternal torment for sin? None! It's was bullshit the Church made up (Pope Gregory I, I believe, advanced it the most aggressively) to get people to behave.

The problem is after Gregory and until very recently, those words were translated into "hell" by tradition and thus the concepts of Satan and hell have endured to the present age. When you read the Bible in English, that's what it says so you can't fault readers for accepting that. When you read it in Greek and Hebrew that's not what it says. So is that cherry-picking or just doing some research?

 

[sealybobo]

Let's start over. From the very beginning. You have no holy books and I have no opinion. You walk up to me and say " you know a god created the universe". I first need you to tell me what a god is. Ask 200 different theists that and you get 200 different answers. But let's say you mean something that created the universe. Forget about proving he cares and that heaven and hell exist. I'm just talking about a generic thing that you claim created the universe because "how could all this be by itself" argument that my dad gives me when he doesnt want to listen to the answers science gives to a lot of his quesfions.

Ok...hold up. It doesn't matter how far back you go. You say the universe was created by the Big Bang, I will say God caused the Big Bang (actually I will say God WAS/IS the Big Bang). You say there is a multi-verse of an infinite number of parallel universes, I say 'God just got a whole lot bigger'. We can play this game all day and in fact that kind of back and forth has been going on since the dawn of man and neither side has been able to prove a single thing about the existence or non-existence (is that a word) of God.

This I see is why religion hates science. Because science tries to answer your philosophical questions. You think there must be a god and there really is not. The cosmos is eternal and created us.

Religion doesn't hate science. God gave us the ability to study and learn about the universe for a reason. Religion that hates science is bad religion. Science that hates religion is bad science. Science and religion can, and ought to, work together for they both seek to answer important questions about life. However, there are certain things science can provide no answer for and will never be able to. There are also certain things theology struggles to answer. Each should be left to their own best applications.

You say a god who cares did. Prove that.

I can't. Prove that is not the case. You can't. Again we find ourselves at the stalemate that has existed between atheists and theists since the dawn of mankind. I think we would both agree that someone who says "God absolutely exists" is offering an opinion and not a fact. However, someone who says "God absolutely doe not exist" is doing the exact same thing. They are merely opposite sides of the same coin.

Maybe your side got sick of the stalemate and that's when theists made up the moses and Jesus stories where they claim god is a fact.

Athiests dont say there is no way a god exists. You would have to be a god yourself to know 100% certain of that.

It would be wonderful if theists admitted their ignorance but they know god. Literally he talked to them. And some of you believe that?

Go back and read this thread brother. Orogen states constantly and absolutely that there is no way God exists. These boards are filled with atheists making absolute statements that God does not exist. Who are you kidding? Better yet, who do you think you are kidding 'cause it sure aint me. I have been saying through this whole thread 'it is possible that God does not exist'. I have yet to hear an atheist say 'it's possible that He does'. This was my whole point in my earlier posts where I said I found it very interesting that the guy who is open to all possibilities and is applying consistent criteria is the theist, not the scientist.

I think it would be equally as wonderful if atheists admitted their ignorance and simply said "I don't know...there is no way to prove or disprove God so it remains unknown". But apparently they have such astonishing intellect that they know things that cannot even begin to address. And some of you believe that as well.

I think any rational athiest would admit there is no way to know 100% that there is no intelligent designer but what we are saying is we are 100% certain of is the god you refer to doesnt exist. And when I say you I mean you who belong to organized religions who claim he visited them.



I'm an agnostic athiest.

The problem is atheism is the opposite of theism. The truth is there are no theists either. Unless god visited you all you can be is an agnostic theist. You dont know but believe.

 

[BluePhantom]

Think of it like this Sealy. You are a good left-wing party man. So let's say Hillary Clinton says something in a speech and Fox News takes a portion of what she says, reports it completely out of context, and makes her look like an ass. Are you going to say "ok well that's what Hillary said so there it is?" or are you going to go check it out? When you find out that her comments were represented are you going to blow it off or say "whoa! Whoa! Hold on, that's not what she meant!" Is that cherry-picking or simply checking it out for yourself?

Are you going to be pissed? Probably, but are you going to be pissed at Hillary? No, you are going to be pissed at Fox News for misreporting it. So if Jesus is taken out of context, why would you blame Jesus? Blame the guy who twisted what He said.

Would you leave the Democratic party because Hillary was misquoted? Of course not. So why should I abandon Christianity because the message of Jesus has been fucked up?

So should Jesus or God be blamed for this "hell" thing? No...blame Pope Gregory I and the institution that sprung up after Jesus. They are the ones that fucked it up.

 

[sealybobo]

I appreciated my liars to be obvious and my homos flaming. I want to know what I'm dealing with. So I appreciate christians who admit they believe non christians go to hell. Perhaps you dont believe what so many christians believe because it sounds ridiculous to you too when you think about it.

Actually, it's because when some pastor told me about hell and Satan I went out and did some research and found out that Satan was a concept that developed over time as a way to explain why bad things were happening to the Jews despite the covenant. Satan doesn't show up until the book of Job and then Satan is an adviser of sorts and not the personification of all evil. That didn't happen until far later. Hell as a place of eternal torment for sin didn't develop until even later after that. The words in the Bible that are translated into hell in English come from the Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic words Gehenna, Tartarus, Hades, and Sheol. None of them have anything to do with a place of eternal torment.

Gehenna was the city dump of Jerusalem where people would be banished to because if they were forced from the cities there would be nowhere else to go. They also burnt the city's trash there. Hence, Genhenna is a place of fire and torment....while you are alive. Hades was simply the Greek afterlife. Everyone went to Hades whether they were good or bad. Tartarus is a particularly nasty place but it is reserved for fallen angels and it leads to immediate destruction, not eternal torment. Sheol just means "grave", "dead", "gone", "hasta la vista, baby". Has nothing to do with an afterlife. So in all these words which of them describes a place of eternal torment for sin? None! It's was bullshit the Church made up (Pope Gregory I, I believe, advanced it the most aggressively) to get people to behave.

The problem is after Gregory and until very recently, those words were translated into "hell" by tradition and thus the concepts of Satan and hell have endured to the present age. When you read the Bible in English, that's what it says so you can't fault readers for accepting that. When you read it in Greek and Hebrew that's not what it says. So is that cherry-picking or just doing some research?

What did Jesus mean only thru me can you enter heaven?

By the way I use to be a liberal theist too. You aren't telling me anything I dont already know about how religion has been twisted. If all you guys did was worship our creator we wouldnt care. Its all the extra baggage you bring. Lol

 

[sealybobo]

Think of it like this Sealy. You are a good left-wing party man. So let's say Hillary Clinton says something in a speech and Fox News takes a portion of what she says, reports it completely out of context, and makes her look like an ass. Are you going to say "ok well that's what Hillary said so there it is?" or are you going to go check it out? When you find out that her comments were represented are you going to blow it off or say "whoa! Whoa! Hold on, that's not what she meant!" Is that cherry-picking or simply checking it out for yourself?

Are you going to be pissed? Probably, but are you going to be pissed at Hillary? No, you are going to be pissed at Fox News for misreporting it. So if Jesus is taken out of context, why would you blame Jesus? Blame the guy who twisted what He said.

Would you leave the Democratic party because Hillary was misquoted? Of course not. So why should I abandon Christianity because the message of Jesus has been fucked up?

So should Jesus or God be blamed for this "hell" thing? No...blame Pope Gregory I and the institution that sprung up after Jesus. They are the ones that fucked it up.

I still dont believe but still agree with your post.

 

[BluePhantom]

Let's start over. From the very beginning. You have no holy books and I have no opinion. You walk up to me and say " you know a god created the universe". I first need you to tell me what a god is. Ask 200 different theists that and you get 200 different answers. But let's say you mean something that created the universe. Forget about proving he cares and that heaven and hell exist. I'm just talking about a generic thing that you claim created the universe because "how could all this be by itself" argument that my dad gives me when he doesnt want to listen to the answers science gives to a lot of his quesfions.

Ok...hold up. It doesn't matter how far back you go. You say the universe was created by the Big Bang, I will say God caused the Big Bang (actually I will say God WAS/IS the Big Bang). You say there is a multi-verse of an infinite number of parallel universes, I say 'God just got a whole lot bigger'. We can play this game all day and in fact that kind of back and forth has been going on since the dawn of man and neither side has been able to prove a single thing about the existence or non-existence (is that a word) of God.

This I see is why religion hates science. Because science tries to answer your philosophical questions. You think there must be a god and there really is not. The cosmos is eternal and created us.

Religion doesn't hate science. God gave us the ability to study and learn about the universe for a reason. Religion that hates science is bad religion. Science that hates religion is bad science. Science and religion can, and ought to, work together for they both seek to answer important questions about life. However, there are certain things science can provide no answer for and will never be able to. There are also certain things theology struggles to answer. Each should be left to their own best applications.

You say a god who cares did. Prove that.

I can't. Prove that is not the case. You can't. Again we find ourselves at the stalemate that has existed between atheists and theists since the dawn of mankind. I think we would both agree that someone who says "God absolutely exists" is offering an opinion and not a fact. However, someone who says "God absolutely doe not exist" is doing the exact same thing. They are merely opposite sides of the same coin.

Maybe your side got sick of the stalemate and that's when theists made up the moses and Jesus stories where they claim god is a fact.

Athiests dont say there is no way a god exists. You would have to be a god yourself to know 100% certain of that.

It would be wonderful if theists admitted their ignorance but they know god. Literally he talked to them. And some of you believe that?

Go back and read this thread brother. Orogen states constantly and absolutely that there is no way God exists. These boards are filled with atheists making absolute statements that God does not exist. Who are you kidding? Better yet, who do you think you are kidding 'cause it sure aint me. I have been saying through this whole thread 'it is possible that God does not exist'. I have yet to hear an atheist say 'it's possible that He does'. This was my whole point in my earlier posts where I said I found it very interesting that the guy who is open to all possibilities and is applying consistent criteria is the theist, not the scientist.

I think it would be equally as wonderful if atheists admitted their ignorance and simply said "I don't know...there is no way to prove or disprove God so it remains unknown". But apparently they have such astonishing intellect that they know things that cannot even begin to address. And some of you believe that as well.

I think any rational athiest would admit there is no way to know 100% that there is no intelligent designer but what we are saying is we are 100% certain of is the god you refer to doesnt exist. And when I say you I mean you who belong to organized religions who claim he visited them.



I'm an agnostic athiest.

The problem is atheism is the opposite of theism. The truth is there are no theists either. Unless god visited you all you can be is an agnostic theist. You dont know but believe.

I would agree with that, but theists allow for belief without evidence. Many, not all, atheists don't yet profess disbelief all the same. However, you should have noticed by now that I try to be very careful when discussing religion and religious history that I distinguish between what is a belief and what I advance as fact. I will be the first one to say that when it comes to God, I don't know much of anything. I have developed a lot of theories and ideas, but I could be completely wrong. I will let you know when I die. But I cannot remember a single time when I heard an atheist say in regard to the existence of God, "I could be wrong". It would be nice to hear.

 

[Derideo_Te]

You will probably be disappointed to discover, however, that the learning you provide strengthens my faith instead of diminishes it.

Please do not make the mistake of believing that I am trying to "convert" you "from your faith". I support your right to your beliefs and I am willing to die fighting to support your right to freely believe as you wish.

My only concern is with those who fail to comprehend that there is no freedom OF religion WITHOUT freedom FROM religion.

It seems that the average theist around here has a really hard time grasping that concept. I am not including you in that category.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Plato wasn't the only one who wrote about him. The problem is that we know his works existed but were destroyed.

Then how do we know they existed? Go back and look at the WOW signal argument. You may be finally starting to get the point I was making.

]The problem Orogen advances is that he is attempting to establish his personal beliefs as facts and he does not seem to apply consistent criteria for what he accepts as probable and improbable . Yet, he is quick to point out to theists that since their beliefs lack evidence, they are nothing more than myth. Hence the contradiction in his positions.

To what personal beliefs are you referring?

Your beliefs in regard to religion. You clearly have one set of criteria for evaluating the probability of things that are not theological and a totally different set of criteria for evaluating things that are. You say Socrates probably existed although there is no proof that he did, yet God absolutely does not exist because there is no proof that He does. You use the same criterion with the exact same result to reach two opposite conclusions.

I respectfully reject DT's argument that it is not a contradiction because one deals with a historical event and one deals with what we would consider a supernatural event. "Supernatural" essentially means "beyond the laws of nature". But light existing as both a particle and a wave until observed is beyond the laws of nature and therefore supernatural. Yet we accept it despite our inability to understand it. This is because Young's two slit experiment has demonstrated it to happen regardless of whether we understand it or not. Therefore, an event cannot be disqualified as a possibility simply because it happens to be supernatural. If that was the case, we can throw quantum mechanics right out the window. M Theory requires the acceptance of eleven dimensions and gravitons (which, according to Orogen's criteria, would be mythical) flowing freely throughout the multi-verse from brane to brane. Science can accept that possibility but the existence of God is flat out impossible? What an incredibly selective application of scientific methodology.

"Supernatural" essentially means "beyond the laws of nature". But light existing as both a particle and a wave until observed is beyond the laws of nature and therefore supernatural.

The light particle experiment is not "supernatural". It is clearly a natural event that we are still trying to fully understand. In order for it to be "supernatural" it would have to occur only when invoked via prayer, seance or some other religious ritual. Instead it is a completely natural event because it can be easily reproduced and studied. Your use of the term "supernatural" is completely out of context in this regard.

M Theory requires the acceptance of eleven dimensions and gravitons

The 11 dimensions are quite logical and are based upon what we already know of the current 4 space-time dimensions. There is no theoretical reason why time should only move in one dimension. We can look backwards in time just by looking up into the night sky. The light that we observe from those stars was first produced many light years ago.

Science can accept that possibility but the existence of God is flat out impossible? What an incredibly selective application of scientific methodology.

Not at all. The language of science is mathematics. We can use math to describe these dimensions.

Care to explain how we would use math to describe God? How about the number zero? That would be an accurate result because there is nothing that can be measured that is an attribute of God or something that God has impacted. Nothing in the Universe contains any evidence of God. Therefore the scientific methodology for the measurement of God is zero.

That might not be the answer you wanted to hear but science is not about proving the existence of God. Science doesn't care one way or the other. If there was any such measurable evidence for the existence of God then the math would produce a result that was greater than zero and that would validate your belief.

Math doesn't lie. Math simply produces the results given the values provided. Now you are welcome to belief that we just haven't found these values yet but so far every result has been zero. I don't expect that to change in the future either but that shouldn't discourage you from hoping for a different outcome. After all that is what faith is all about. You have your faith and we Atheists have our math and science. We can always rely on them to tell us when we are are right or wrong because we know the math doesn't lie.

 

[Thunderbird]

I'll repeat my questions. Try answering them instead of offering long-winded deflections. I'll bold them to help you out.

This statement, is it true or false: The slightest change to either the strong or electromagnetic forces would alter the energy levels, resulting in greatly reduced production of carbon and an ultimately uninhabitable universe.

This statement, is it true or false: There are many such constants, the best known of which specify the strength of the four forces of nature: the strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, the electromagnetic force, and gravity. If these forces took on even slightly different strengths, the consequences for life would be devastating.

a) what range the constants could possibly assume in reality

What an odd statement. Of course theoretically the range is unlimited. What is the reason the range would be limited?

The universe is not fine-tuned for us, though I can well understand how such a fallacious conclusion gets made. If we were shellfish living at the bottom of the ocean where conditions are usually stable for a very long time geologically,.

The idea is the universe was designed to produce life not just humans.

What it supports is that life is fine tuned to its environment, not the other way around.

Again you don't seem to understand the concept.

Quote: "[The entire biological] evolutionary process depends upon the unusual chemistry of carbon, which allows it to bond to itself, as well as other elements, creating highly complex molecules that are stable over prevailing terrestrial temperatures, and are capable of conveying genetic information (especially DNA). […] Whereas it might be argued that nature creates its own fine-tuning, this can only be done if the primordial constituents of the universe are such that an evolutionary process can be initiated. The unique chemistry of carbon is the ultimate foundation of the capacity of nature to tune itself."

In the last analysis of the morality of Nature, we see no evidence of mercy in the cosmos;

What a dumb statement. Our planet nurtures millions of species. Other planets may also. Many animal species nurture their young.

The cries of humanity, whether the suffering is imposed by man upon
himself or upon other men, or by natural laws operating independantly of man, echo down the corridors of time and space and evoke no response from indifferent Nature.

OMG what awful prose. Grandiosity mixed with clichés. lol

I answered your question. That it was not the answered you wanted or expected is not my problem.

It's just circular reasoning. A logical fallacy a middle school student would be embarrassed by.

And I submit to you that because you fear that this world we live and die in is all we have,

And now an ad hominem to avoid the issue.

Yeah, how dare I rely on one of the most respected Astrophysicists and educators today,who was mentored by Carl Sagan.

Most respected = caught fabricating evidence?!

Neil deGrasse Tyson s Text-Burning Followers National Review Online

Emperical evidence works, counts, because it is quantifiable, repeatable, falsifiable.

lol C'mon don't you see this is just circular reasoning! Tell me why quantifiable, repeatable, falsifiable evidence describes reality.

How do you know empirical evidence is describing the real world?

How about an intelligent answer instead of a tantrum.

Okay so now we don't know if the supernatural exists?

No,

Glad to see you've backed down from your foolish earlier statement: "Because there is no such thing as the supernatural."

the probability that there is such a thing is as supernatural

Why do you say that? I mean how could you test it?

When you put words in my mouth, it makes you look like an ass.

You didn't use the word "voodoo"? You didn't mention lies and delusion? Please take responsibility for your ugly fact-free condemnation of all the world's cultures.

This is where I am supposed to apologize for who I am

No! Be as comically arrogant and intolerant as you want to be!

But if you can't see that nearly all of the world's violent conflicts today, and in the past, are/have been over religion, then you 've lived your life in the dark

Looks like most conflicts in the world today are caused by arrogant secular Western imperialists attacking impoverished countries: 25 Afghan Civilians Killed By NATO Bombs - CBS News

Communist atheists in only 80 years killed about 94 million! And the number of deaths caused by atheism is much higher. An atheist, Stalin, along with his fellow Christian-hater Hitler started the worst war in human history. And don't forget all the deaths caused by right wing atheists like Mussolini, who was in part inspired by another blood-thirsty atheist Nietzsche. And don't forget the Armenian genocide, committed by secular fanatics: the Young Turks.

Please also remember that the austere atheist philosophy has never attracted a large number of believers. Under 3% of the world population is atheist. So a small number of atheists are responsible for a tremendous amount of carnage. On a per capita basis atheists are by far the worst murderers in human history.

Please try to answer the bolded questions concisely while avoiding ad hominems, deflections, biographical digressions. Thanks!