Who here is an atheist?

[sealybobo]

Remember for years theist’s would ask us atheist why we were so angry or even worse of being the devil for being against their religion or challenging their beliefs. At least those people don’t come here because they can’t be taken serious. In fact anyone who believes a god poofed land animals into existence into existence shouldn’t be taken seriously yet 50% of Americans apparently do

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Rather he is asking that we respect his right to have his beliefs.

Yeah....and? Who is attempting to take this way? Nobody. What Peach is doing is called manipulation. Like when a toddler asks for a puppy, you say no, and the toddler asks, "Why do you hate puppies, Daddy? Why do you hate me, Daddy?"

Peach can believe whatever Peach wants to believe. But if Peach doesn't want anyone scrutinizing or criticizing his beliefs, then he should keep them to himself, and certainly not go post them on open internet forums that exist precisely for the open scrutiny amd exchange of ideas.

This is also a tactic they use when debating this subject. Guilt. Make you feel bad for criticizing them on a personal level when there’s really nothing personal about this discussion

Yes, and I don't even think it's conscious manipulation. They internalize these beliefs, because "Because I say so!" is the inly support they have for any of it. So, when you criticize these ideas, they see it as an insult to their own credibility.

 

[sealybobo]

If there is a god he isn’t a Christian Muslim or Jew. He’s a scientologist

If there is "a" god, then there are probably an infinite number of gods

The universe and universes beyond the dark matter bubble we are in are alive. The universe was born and will die. We are like a cell or atom in the body. But how amazing here I am in zero degree weather warm and watching football. I’d like to thank the universe for my place. Man am I lucky.

That doesn’t mean I’ll ever buy into any organized religion ttHat claims to have been visited. I don’t care how good a lies intentions are.

Control. The churches use heaven and hell to control.

Organized religion is just that, a creation of humans. There is matter, there is a creator(.) How else do atheists explain what caused, and comprised, the "Big Bang"?

We don’t. We don’t conclude anything. We say we don’t know yet. We are honest and keep on looking for answers

That is agnosticism, much different than the committed, zealotry of atheists.

We are all agnostics

 

[Peach]

If there is "a" god, then there are probably an infinite number of gods

The universe and universes beyond the dark matter bubble we are in are alive. The universe was born and will die. We are like a cell or atom in the body. But how amazing here I am in zero degree weather warm and watching football. I’d like to thank the universe for my place. Man am I lucky.

That doesn’t mean I’ll ever buy into any organized religion ttHat claims to have been visited. I don’t care how good a lies intentions are.

Control. The churches use heaven and hell to control.

Organized religion is just that, a creation of humans. There is matter, there is a creator(.) How else do atheists explain what caused, and comprised, the "Big Bang"?

We don’t. We don’t conclude anything. We say we don’t know yet. We are honest and keep on looking for answers

That is agnosticism, much different than the committed, zealotry of atheists.

We are all agnostics

In a sense, yet I know my Creator liveth.

 

[sealybobo]

Funny you say that because what it looks like to the rest of the world and half of America that it’s you fundamentalist Christians who are the only ones denying evolution and global warming.

In other words it’s you who’s brainwashed.

If you added up all the CO2 that has ever been emitted by man, do you know what percentage of CO2 that is compared to what is presently stored in the ocean and the atmosphere. We'll just ignore plants and grasses for the moment?

If you don't know that answer and what it means, maybe you are the one who is brainwashed, no?

You say things based upon emotion. You saying things like "it looks like to the rest of the world and half of America that it’s you fundamentalist Christians who are the only ones denying evolution and global warming" is so riddled with error that no rational person would say that.

First of all the facts are this.... the US and Western Europe CO2 emissions have been falling for the past 14 plus years, while the emissions of your so called rest of the world have been increasing by 1 billion tons per year. They will produce a new US worth of emissions every 5 years. Where do the Christians live?

I absolutely deny that atmospheric CO drive climate change. The data does not support it. That data you think you have is a model. That's inaccurate. Has been revised downwards multiple times. And has multiple cases for emissions most of which are unrealistically high.

I would love to share more data and information with you but you have been brainwashed by your religion of climatology (Scientology's kissing cousin).

As for evolution, compared to me, you are an evolution denier.

Don’t want to hear right wing spin on global warming.

We are in an interglacial cycle. That's what happens. The earth warms up.

See the differences?

View attachment 169051

View attachment 169053

I know the right wing spin. If you were lying for decades that’s its a hoax then now argue its being exaggerated why believe anything you say.

I’ve heard more truth from newt Rex and Nikki than from you. The world knows the truth

How much has the earth warmed up since the industrial revolution?

You’re in kindergarten. Just stop. Please.im not taking anything you say seriously

 

[sealybobo]

The universe and universes beyond the dark matter bubble we are in are alive. The universe was born and will die. We are like a cell or atom in the body. But how amazing here I am in zero degree weather warm and watching football. I’d like to thank the universe for my place. Man am I lucky.

That doesn’t mean I’ll ever buy into any organized religion ttHat claims to have been visited. I don’t care how good a lies intentions are.

Control. The churches use heaven and hell to control.

Organized religion is just that, a creation of humans. There is matter, there is a creator(.) How else do atheists explain what caused, and comprised, the "Big Bang"?

We don’t. We don’t conclude anything. We say we don’t know yet. We are honest and keep on looking for answers

That is agnosticism, much different than the committed, zealotry of atheists.

We are all agnostics

In a sense, yet I know my Creator liveth.

Hope it? Wish it? Want it? Sure. But know it? I don’t think so. If you knew it you’d celebrate death and look forward to it.

And you’d have some evidence that made you sure and could convince a scientist

 

[Peach]

Organized religion is just that, a creation of humans. There is matter, there is a creator(.) How else do atheists explain what caused, and comprised, the "Big Bang"?

We don’t. We don’t conclude anything. We say we don’t know yet. We are honest and keep on looking for answers

That is agnosticism, much different than the committed, zealotry of atheists.

We are all agnostics

In a sense, yet I know my Creator liveth.

Hope it? Wish it? Want it? Sure. But know it? I don’t think so. If you knew it you’d celebrate death and look forward to it.

And you’d have some evidence that made you sure and could convince a scientist

I know those in science that believe, and I know in my heart; the universe is too complex to be an accident. Einstein wrote it best:

In 1930, Einstein composed a kind of creed entitled “What I Believe,” at the conclusion of which he wrote: “To sense that behind everything that can be experienced there is something that our minds cannot grasp, whose beauty and sublimity reaches us only indirectly: this is religiousness. In this sense...I am a devoutly religious man.” In response to a young girl who had asked him whether he believed in God, he wrote: “everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe—a Spirit vastly superior to that of man.” And during a talk at Union Theological Seminary on the relationship between religion and science, Einstein declared: “the situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

We don’t. We don’t conclude anything. We say we don’t know yet. We are honest and keep on looking for answers

That is agnosticism, much different than the committed, zealotry of atheists.

We are all agnostics

In a sense, yet I know my Creator liveth.

Hope it? Wish it? Want it? Sure. But know it? I don’t think so. If you knew it you’d celebrate death and look forward to it.

And you’d have some evidence that made you sure and could convince a scientist

I know those in science that believe, and I know in my heart; the universe is too complex to be an accident. Einstein wrote it best:

In 1930, Einstein composed a kind of creed entitled “What I Believe,” at the conclusion of which he wrote: “To sense that behind everything that can be experienced there is something that our minds cannot grasp, whose beauty and sublimity reaches us only indirectly: this is religiousness. In this sense...I am a devoutly religious man.” In response to a young girl who had asked him whether he believed in God, he wrote: “everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe—a Spirit vastly superior to that of man.” And during a talk at Union Theological Seminary on the relationship between religion and science, Einstein declared: “the situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”

Ugh, it is so annoying when people misrepresent Einstein's beliefs. And no, none of you "know" anything. You believe it is too complex to have happened without a god, but this is merely an egocentric, arrogant belief which arises from all of you thinking your brains are "super special" and represent some sort of pinnacle of what can be understood. No. We have puny, finite, limited brains that cant even comprehend large numbers, like 1 million.

 

[Peach]

That is agnosticism, much different than the committed, zealotry of atheists.

We are all agnostics

In a sense, yet I know my Creator liveth.

Hope it? Wish it? Want it? Sure. But know it? I don’t think so. If you knew it you’d celebrate death and look forward to it.

And you’d have some evidence that made you sure and could convince a scientist

I know those in science that believe, and I know in my heart; the universe is too complex to be an accident. Einstein wrote it best:

In 1930, Einstein composed a kind of creed entitled “What I Believe,” at the conclusion of which he wrote: “To sense that behind everything that can be experienced there is something that our minds cannot grasp, whose beauty and sublimity reaches us only indirectly: this is religiousness. In this sense...I am a devoutly religious man.” In response to a young girl who had asked him whether he believed in God, he wrote: “everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe—a Spirit vastly superior to that of man.” And during a talk at Union Theological Seminary on the relationship between religion and science, Einstein declared: “the situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”

Ugh, it is so annoying when people misrepresent Einstein's beliefs. And no, none of you "know" anything. You believe it is too complex to have happened without a god, but this is merely an egocentric, arrogant belief which arises from all of you thinking your brains are "super special" and represent some sort of pinnacle of what can be understood. No. We have puny, finite, limited brains that cant even comprehend large numbers, like 1 million.

Yet your brain knows there is no creator?

 

[Meriweather]

Ha, yes, same default argument every time : "You just dont understand the Bible correctly!"

Hilariously, you can fjnd devout Christians saying this about each other as well. And every one of them, to a man, declares his own account to be the correct one, and does so by dferring to his own authority. Just like you are right now.

I will counter your authoritative declaration with the only appropriate response: "Nuh uh! I'm right, and YOU'RE wrong!" And the discussion ends there, as there is no way to ever figure out who is right and who is wrong. That's the downfall of magical bullshit.

It is the Protestant stance that each person can understand and interpret the Bible for himself. In fact, the Bible has already been interpreted, and in studying the Old Testament I went straight to Jewish commentary which included the Hebrew language, culture, and history.

Many accounts--even when studied through the original faith and the proper historical lens--do have different interpretations. So no, the Old Testament not "my" interpretation, but the interpretation of many, many Rabbis who lived before I was even born. I have studied the New Testament in the same manner, through the lens of the early Church, not through the lens of post Protestant "Reformation".

What we are seeing on many Internet Religion Forums today is similar to what would be seen on a math forum where no one knew or agreed upon the Order of Operations, insisting because they know numbers and symbols, they know they will arrive at the correct solution.

I judge any modern Internet interpretation of the Bible by how close it comes to the author's original intent and early commentary on that story. Can people interpret a story any which way they please? Absolutely, just as anyone can solve any math problem without using the Order of Operations. Just as I can identify when a student ignores the Order of Operations on a math test, it is as easy to identify when someone skips over the millennia and arrives at a twenty-first century understanding of a Bible Story.

There is no problem believing a twenty-first century perspective of a Bible story is correct and declaring oneself right. But shouldn't we also be aware of the earliest interpretations, many of which date back to the Early Church or Bible times? Many Protestants say no, and say that the Holy Spirit will guide everyone to how the Bible should be read today. (Atheists seem to agree with this Protestant perspective.) Jews and Catholics tend to more interest in interpretation then over interpretation now. Who is right? You say you are, and that's fine by me. But I believe you are missing a lot by refusing to budge from the twenty-first century.

 

[ding]

If you added up all the CO2 that has ever been emitted by man, do you know what percentage of CO2 that is compared to what is presently stored in the ocean and the atmosphere. We'll just ignore plants and grasses for the moment?

If you don't know that answer and what it means, maybe you are the one who is brainwashed, no?

You say things based upon emotion. You saying things like "it looks like to the rest of the world and half of America that it’s you fundamentalist Christians who are the only ones denying evolution and global warming" is so riddled with error that no rational person would say that.

First of all the facts are this.... the US and Western Europe CO2 emissions have been falling for the past 14 plus years, while the emissions of your so called rest of the world have been increasing by 1 billion tons per year. They will produce a new US worth of emissions every 5 years. Where do the Christians live?

I absolutely deny that atmospheric CO drive climate change. The data does not support it. That data you think you have is a model. That's inaccurate. Has been revised downwards multiple times. And has multiple cases for emissions most of which are unrealistically high.

I would love to share more data and information with you but you have been brainwashed by your religion of climatology (Scientology's kissing cousin).

As for evolution, compared to me, you are an evolution denier.

Don’t want to hear right wing spin on global warming.

We are in an interglacial cycle. That's what happens. The earth warms up.

See the differences?

View attachment 169051

View attachment 169053

I know the right wing spin. If you were lying for decades that’s its a hoax then now argue its being exaggerated why believe anything you say.

I’ve heard more truth from newt Rex and Nikki than from you. The world knows the truth

How much has the earth warmed up since the industrial revolution?

You’re in kindergarten. Just stop. Please.im not taking anything you say seriously

I just wanted to hear you say how ridiculously low of a number it was but I was even more pleasantly surprised to find out you didn't even know that.

 

[sealybobo]

We are all agnostics

In a sense, yet I know my Creator liveth.

Hope it? Wish it? Want it? Sure. But know it? I don’t think so. If you knew it you’d celebrate death and look forward to it.

And you’d have some evidence that made you sure and could convince a scientist

I know those in science that believe, and I know in my heart; the universe is too complex to be an accident. Einstein wrote it best:

In 1930, Einstein composed a kind of creed entitled “What I Believe,” at the conclusion of which he wrote: “To sense that behind everything that can be experienced there is something that our minds cannot grasp, whose beauty and sublimity reaches us only indirectly: this is religiousness. In this sense...I am a devoutly religious man.” In response to a young girl who had asked him whether he believed in God, he wrote: “everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is manifest in the laws of the Universe—a Spirit vastly superior to that of man.” And during a talk at Union Theological Seminary on the relationship between religion and science, Einstein declared: “the situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”

Ugh, it is so annoying when people misrepresent Einstein's beliefs. And no, none of you "know" anything. You believe it is too complex to have happened without a god, but this is merely an egocentric, arrogant belief which arises from all of you thinking your brains are "super special" and represent some sort of pinnacle of what can be understood. No. We have puny, finite, limited brains that cant even comprehend large numbers, like 1 million.

Yet your brain knows there is no creator?

The evolve man admits he don’t know. The atheist believes belief is holding us back. Your harmless beliefs may not be so harmless. Do you deny global warming and evolution like ding?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Yet your brain knows there is no creator?

No, "my brain" doesn't know if there is a creator or not. I also cannot be 100% sure that unicorns do not exist.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Ha, yes, same default argument every time : "You just dont understand the Bible correctly!"

Hilariously, you can fjnd devout Christians saying this about each other as well. And every one of them, to a man, declares his own account to be the correct one, and does so by dferring to his own authority. Just like you are right now.

I will counter your authoritative declaration with the only appropriate response: "Nuh uh! I'm right, and YOU'RE wrong!" And the discussion ends there, as there is no way to ever figure out who is right and who is wrong. That's the downfall of magical bullshit.

It is the Protestant stance that each person can understand and interpret the Bible for himself. In fact, the Bible has already been interpreted, and in studying the Old Testament I went straight to Jewish commentary which included the Hebrew language, culture, and history.

Many accounts--even when studied through the original faith and the proper historical lens--do have different interpretations. So no, the Old Testament not "my" interpretation, but the interpretation of many, many Rabbis who lived before I was even born. I have studied the New Testament in the same manner, through the lens of the early Church, not through the lens of post Protestant "Reformation".

What we are seeing on many Internet Religion Forums today is similar to what would be seen on a math forum where no one knew or agreed upon the Order of Operations, insisting because they know numbers and symbols, they know they will arrive at the correct solution.

I judge any modern Internet interpretation of the Bible by how close it comes to the author's original intent and early commentary on that story. Can people interpret a story any which way they please? Absolutely, just as anyone can solve any math problem without using the Order of Operations. Just as I can identify when a student ignores the Order of Operations on a math test, it is as easy to identify when someone skips over the millennia and arrives at a twenty-first century understanding of a Bible Story.

There is no problem believing a twenty-first century perspective of a Bible story is correct and declaring oneself right. But shouldn't we also be aware of the earliest interpretations, many of which date back to the Early Church or Bible times? Many Protestants say no, and say that the Holy Spirit will guide everyone to how the Bible should be read today. (Atheists seem to agree with this Protestant perspective.) Jews and Catholics tend to more interest in interpretation then over interpretation now. Who is right? You say you are, and that's fine by me. But I believe you are missing a lot by refusing to budge from the twenty-first century.

So, you dont claim your own personal authority, but rather defer to that of another human. And anyone not doing this (deferring to the particular human(s) you have chosen) is doing it wrong.

Because....you say so. Hey, wait a minute...as it turns out, you ARE deferring to your own authority, just like I said. 100 paragraphs of equivocation....all to end up right back where you started

 

[Peach]

Yet your brain knows there is no creator?

No, "my brain" doesn't know if there is a creator or not. I also cannot be 100% sure that unicorns do not exist.

I cannot be sure all who voted for Trump understood what they were doing.

 

[Meriweather]

So, you dont claim your own personal authority, but rather defer to that of another human. And anyone not doing this (deferring to the particular human(s) you have chosen) is doing it wrong.

Because....you say so. Hey, wait a minute...as it turns out, you ARE deferring to your own authority, just like I said. 100 paragraphs of equivocation....all to end up right back where you started

There is a little more to it than that. One way is the knowledge of one and forming a belief/opinion from oneself as the only source. The other way is studying all the knowledge available and forming a belief/opinion out of the many. With a microscope, one may indeed find life in one drop of water. However, how much more life might one find if they study the ocean.

 

[sealybobo]

not accepting Creation and Intelligent Design as being valid concepts

Those are not "valid scientific concepts". They arent scientific ideas at all. They have no place in a science department. That's true regardless of whatever sky wizard anyone does or does not believe in.

If there is a god he isn’t a Christian Muslim or Jew. He’s a scientologist

If there is "a" god, then there are probably an infinite number of gods

If there is no god there are probably an infinite number of universes separated by infinite amounts of dark matter.

What else? There can never be an end. There’s always something beyond any wall you come to trust me

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The other way is studying all the knowledge available and forming a belief/opinion out of the many

But there is a fatal flaw there...there is no "knowledge". None of those people have access to anything anyone else does not. They are all also just reading the bible and studying opinions of it.

 

[cnm]

All religions except Judaeo -Christianity are men seeking God. They do not claim otherwise. Judaeo -Christianity does.

A claim by men.

 

[Meriweather]

But there is a fatal flaw there...there is no "knowledge". None of those people have access to anything anyone else does not. They are all also just reading the bible and studying opinions of it.

A crucial point for anyone to remember when reading the Bible is, "It is not all about me." Much of it is about how people long ago saw God's interaction in the events of their own time. It is a mistake, I think, to bury one's head so much in past events that we are blind to what is taking place in our own lives. I was a mere tot when I decided I didn't want to just hear stories about how God entered the lives of people long ago. I wanted to find God in my own life. To my astonishment, people around me were of the mind that God didn't work like that any more--and probably never had in the lives of average, every day people. I kept in mind the instructions one had to knock, ask, seek--and to be persistent and diligent in this endeavor. This (in my experience) was not something one did steadily for days, weeks, months--but for years, even decades. (Take a look at how old Abraham, Noah, Moses, etc. were when they had their experiences.)