Planet of the Atheists

[Sun Wukong]

Jesus is not god, he is the son of god.

Christians believe that Jesus is God. He is one person of the Trinity (specifically, the Son). The Trinity is God.

Christians who state that Christians must believe in the trinity to be Christian are just as annoying as those who deny it as such.

[Salandriagado]

Can you explain, please. You can't just make a claim without backing it up in a debate forum.

Ok here a go.
1. Their is a God because of the arguments from
A. Authority(most people believe in him)

Popularity is not an argument. At one time, most people believed in the four humours.

B. If theirs a big bang their must be a Big Banger

False.

C. Physics(especially Quantum physics) points to design, if the laws of Physics were even the slightest different any life would never be possible

Garbage on all points.

D. Something outside of time and space must exist to create them

False. Something outside of time is entirely incapable of acting. Something outside of space does not exist.

E: Numerous people attest to miracles and the presence of the supernatural

Zero of them with any evidence.

F: Natural law and absolute ethics exist(Murder and Rape are wrong is agreed be every sane human being, this is contour evolutionary)

Nope. They clearly aren't absolute - if they were, there would be zero murderers and rapists in the world.

G: Man desires God intensely, like food or sex, therefore something must exist to fulfill our hunger

1) No I fucking don't. But then, I don't desire sex either.
2) I want an FTL starship. That doesn't mean they exist.

H: The immense faith of man throughout history, look a medieval Cathedral

What about it? It's a nice piece of architecture, but not evidence for the existence of any god.

I: Pascals wager
Part two coming in a few

Pascal should have stuck to maths. He was good at maths. Theology, he was abysmal at.

Part two:
Jesus is God because
1. He claimed to be God, therefore he is either God, a lair or a lunatic

I'll give you that, with the proviso that I'm far from confident that he actually claimed to be god (as opposed to being labelled as such after the fact).

2. Jesus is not a lunatic, he has attracted billions of followers throughout history and does not sound like one

Popularity does not make you sane.

3. The people of his time testify to miracles

No they don't. Not in any extant work. People of a fair bit later testify to being told about some supposed miracles.

4. Jesus does not seem to have the traits of a pathological lair

Says who?

5. Jesus had no incentive to lie, he knew that they would kill him if claimed to God why would he say so

The same reason all the thousands of other people claiming to be prophets: attention. These days, those kind of people can be readily found on Reddit.

6. Many attested to seeing him post death

No they didn't.

7. The Apostles had no incentive to claim he was alive, they risked their lives, they must have believed he came back

Yes they did. They had already committed themselves to their new religion, and needed to attract people to it.

8. Pentecost

What about it? That's not an argument.

9. Billions of other people also says hes God

And billions more disagree.

The Catholic Church
1. Jesus gave authority to Peter
2. Therefore Peters successor should inherit power over the Church
3. The pope is the successor to Peter

The fuck does this have with to do with anything?

1. This should be good.
A. If everyone believed the earth was flat that wouldn't make it true. Argumentum ad populum
B. Any evidence for this immense claim?
C. Again false, just because something is a certain way does not point to design, it just means it's that way.
D. Any evidence for this immense claim?
E. I saw a UFO, therefore aliens are real.
F. False, the existence of sociopath's thoroughly debunks this.
G. False, man desires answers and god was originally the answer. Now we have science.
H. Proves nothing/
I. What if God isn't real but the Chaos God's are? If you don't praise Khorne he is going to rape your soul when you die and it goes to the warp

Thank you come again.

A. Sure, most the time the vast majority are correct

This is not even remotely true in any way.

B. Think about it, any other explanation for the Big Bang, please propose a better one before throwing mine out the window

Instability of quantum vacuum. Membrane collision.

C. So the laws that govern the universe just happen to be perfect for life, that's a really nice coincidence, if quantum particles were will absorb smaller amounts of energy all matter would be impossible, a nice coincidence that they don't (also do you really thing Human life just happened)

They aren't perfect for life. They are good for the variety of life that has developed in it. We see lots of things that are good for our form of life because we evolved to match it, not because it was set up for us.

D. How did time and space create itself

I don't know. That doesn't mean that you can stick any absurd explanation you like in there though.

E: No, have 1000s of people claimed to see it, 1000s of people have claimed to see miracles

Zero of them have provided any evidence.

F: Sociopaths are not sane, Rape makes evolutionary sense, yet even without law or religion most people wouldn't go around Raping each other,

Evolution of sexual exclusivity, social structure and morality: 1, 2, 3, 4.

Besides which, religion and morality are entirely and completely unrelated concepts.

G: Me and millions of others desire him

That doesn't mean he exists.

H: I've been too them, why have millions of people dedicated their life's wholly to God, also believe that thiers one God many pathways, therefore other religions great art and architecture count and also please him.

Because they've been convinced by other people. Usually people with a financial stake in the issue. That's not an argument.

Most religions are basically the same.

No they fucking aren't.

I: I think that the God outlined in the bible seems like the most likely one

You mean the one that isn't even internally consistent?

[Intelectual Atheists]

"Your argument is false"
"No, your is."
"No, your is."
"No, you arguments are the false ones!"
Repeat forever.

[Neutraligon]

"Your argument is false"
"No, your is."
"No, your is."
"No, you arguments are the false ones!"
Repeat forever.

Except one is backed by science, while the other is backed...by itself.

[Calimera II]

"Your argument is false"
"No, your is."
"No, your is."
"No, you arguments are the false ones!"
Repeat forever.

Except one is backed by science, while the other is backed...by itself.

No. Many things of the atheist are backed by "assumptions".

I believe in god, I believe in the bible. I wouldn't even care if some things are false. I prefet believimg in god than believing in nothing.

[The Vekta-Helghast Empire]

Part two:
Jesus is God because
1. He claimed to be God, therefore he is either God, a lair or a lunatic
2. Jesus is not a lunatic, he has attracted billions of followers throughout history and does not sound like one
3. The people of his time testify to miracles
4. Jesus does not seem to have the traits of a pathological lair
5. Jesus had no incentive to lie, he knew that they would kill him if claimed to God why would he say so
6. Many attested to seeing him post death
7. The Apostles had no incentive to claim he was alive, they risked their lives, they must have believed he came back
8. Pentecost
9. Billions of other people also says hes God
The Catholic Church
1. Jesus gave authority to Peter
2. Therefore Peters successor should inherit power over the Church
3. The pope is the successor to Peter

Jesus is not god, he is the son of god.

Ever heard of the trinity? It's kinda a fundamental part of Christianity..

No. Many things of the atheist are backed by "assumptions".

Examples, please? It's just so I can grasp what your version of an 'assumption' is.

I believe in god, I believe in the bible. I wouldn't even care if some things are false. I prefet believimg in god than believing in nothing.

So, you'd prefer to believe in what could potentially be a lie, rather than what is almost assured to be a truth?

[The Isles of New Babylon]

Except one is backed by science, while the other is backed...by itself.

No. Many things of the atheist are backed by "assumptions".

I believe in god, I believe in the bible. I wouldn't even care if some things are false. I prefet believimg in god than believing in nothing.

What assumptions might these be?

[Sociobiology]

[ Religion =/= Social bonds.

I didn't say they were the same. I said religion contributes to social bonds, and atheism doesn't.

I disagree, judging people as people instead of isolating yourself from the vast number of the populace who do not share your religion opens up far more bonds than it closes.

Political ideology and secular social movements can also contribute to social bonds. But it's not as if the people who abandon religion always replace it with a political ideology or a secular social movement in their lives. Most of them replace it with nothing.

you can't replace it if you never had it, you assume most atheists abandon religion, many never pick it up in the first place.
abandoning any organization will sever social ties, what makes religions ties better than other organizational ties.

[Chinese Regions]

I know Charlton Heston is Christian but is he a Creationist? Did he not realize he was the star of a film that was an allegory for the controversy at the time?

[Christiaanistan]

Maybe this is what happens whenever you give voters (respondents) the option of "none of the above"?

Which could also possibly be a more direct path toward a minimalist government than the one now charted by the GOP.

The GOP actually has a considerably poorer record for fiscal responsibility, and their governments tend to be intrusively larger. Republicans love big government as long as it happens to be in their ideological territory. For instance, in my state, they tried to ban Tesla from doing business, based on really dubious pretenses.

http://www.newsobserver.com/2013/05/09/ ... ctric.html

You can keep your ears plugged to reality all you like, but the GOP are basically just sociopaths with no redeeming qualities whatsoever. I'd sooner vote for a dingo, American or otherwise.

http://www.carolinadogs.com/

[Sociobiology]

Part two:
Jesus is God because
1. He claimed to be God, therefore he is either God, a lair or a lunatic
2. Jesus is not a lunatic, he has attracted billions of followers throughout history

Charlie manson, and a slew of other cult leaders also attracted large followings. And kill or convert religions tend to spread.

and does not sound like one

to you, the whole telling slaves to be good slaves sounds crazy to me.

3. The people of his time testify to miracles
people claim to have been abducted by aliens too, at the same time as jesus there were half a dozen other would be messiah to which people also claimed to have witnessed miracles. See Apollonius of Tyana.

4. Jesus does not seem to have the traits of a pathological lair

what does pathological have to do with it?

5. Jesus had no incentive to lie, he knew that they would kill him if claimed to God why would he say so

they were going to kill him anyway, massive fame is an incentive in and of itself.
see most of american television and of course fame seeking crime.

6. Many attested to seeing him post death

many people still think Elvis is alive.

7. The Apostles had no incentive to claim he was alive, they risked their lives, they must have believed he came back

see Elvis.
also of course they had incentive, they had devoted their lives to him, assuring others and themselves that they were not wrong to do so is perfectly normal human behavior.

8. Pentecost

Mardi gras

9. Billions of other people also says hes God

Billions of people think Columbus set out to prove the world was round.
Billions of people think getting heads on a coin a dozen times in a row makes tails more likely on the next toss.
Billions of people are wrong all the time.

The Catholic Church

has a massive vested interest in preserving the error.

[Calimera II]

Explanation for those who do not understand that Jesus was god's son too, I have taken it from a website.

So the Bible tells us that Jesus isn’t ‘God’s human son’, rather, that Jesus, who is co-eternal with God (that means that like God, he existed forever)became human. Jesus was like God - eternal and perfect - but he became human so that he could enter into our world and die for humans. The Bible treats this as something to marvel at: ... Jesus Christ ‘though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross.’ (Philippians 2:6-8) The actual ‘mechanics’ of how God had a human son are not explained to us, but we are left in no doubt that Mary’s conception and pregnancy are miraculous - you could read chapter 1 of the gospel of Luke to see the angel tell Mary that she will fall pregnant. The gospel of John, which is written in very symbolic language at the beginning, speaks about ‘the word becoming flesh’. ‘The word’ is Jesus - who was with God in the beginning - and he became flesh - this is what ‘incarnate’ means - to be made flesh. This makes it clear that Jesus is the eternal God becoming human. So in answer to your second question, it isn’t so much that God had a human son, but that God’s son became human for our sake.

A correct explanation I took from a website. Jesus is gods son.

So, to look at the first part of your question, what does it mean for God to have a son? Well, actually, when we say ‘God’ we could almost mean three people - God the Father, God the Son, or God the Holy Spirit. These three are called ‘the trinity’ and each one is called a ‘person’ of the trinity. It is quite hard to understand how these three work together. Some people find it easier to understand with an analogy - so, for example, God is like water - ice, water and steam are all water but they are all different. The analogy fails at various points but that might be a way to start to get your head around it. So a few things about the trinity that we should keep in mind:

* There is only one God - so even as we talk about the three persons of the trinity we are talking about one God. All three persons of the trinity are God. If you want to look at some verses, you could look at Deuteronomy 6:4,Galatians 1:1, John 1:1-18, and Matthew 28:19.

* There is relationship in the trinity - the Son (Jesus) is obedient to the Father (Luke 22:42); the Holy Spirit is sent by the Father and the Son (John 16:15ff).

So the three persons of the trinity are the same God, but they are each distinct. They have different roles, but each action any member of the trinity might do is God’s action, regardless of who did it.

* We see this distinction / unity when Jesus identifies himself with the Father, saying that he and the Father ‘are one’ (John 10:38, 17:11,21), and that he is in the Father and vice versa (John 14:11). Jesus does not say that he IS the Father, or that he and the Father are the SAME, but that they are ONE. So they are distinct, yet unified. 
* Because Jesus and the Father are both one and distinct, we can say that God ‘sent his son into the world’ - (John 3:16), and also that Jesus came into the world (1 Tim 1:15) - we are speaking about essentially the same action on the part of God, but on the one hand, God the Father sends, on the other, God the Son comes.
*We also see the distinction / unity at work when Jesus speaks about sending the Holy Spirit in John 16 - he describes this as both he and the Father coming.  So the three persons of the trinity are distinct, but they are all God - they all share the same motivations and objectives. They are all co-eternal, they are all perfect.

God is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit - one God, existing in perfect relationship within himself. This is how God can be both Father and Son - because he just is! It’s a bit unsatisfying - to not wrap our heads around it more - but if we want to have a right idea of who God is and what he is like, it’s necessary to hold these strands together.

I hope this goes some way to answering your question. A really helpful thing to do would be to read John 14-16, where Jesus explains some of this himself. In fact, why not read John from the beginning to get the picture of the whole gospel and how it builds together our picture of the relationship of the Son to the Father, especially as the Son came to earth as a man to reveal the Father to us. These are hard things to understand but well worth the mental effort!

[Neutraligon]

No. Many things of the atheist are backed by "assumptions".

I believe in god, I believe in the bible. I wouldn't even care if some things are false. I prefet believimg in god than believing in nothing.

What assumptions might these be?

I was wondering the same thing. Although it's nice to know that the above poster doesn't care about the truth. (Kinda funny considering the commandments).

[Christiaanistan]

"All the lousy little poets coming 'round
Trying to sound like Charlie Manson!
I see those white men dancin'."

Charlie Manson, one of the most interesting psychopaths in history. Eschatology does really fucked-up things to the human mind. It's somewhere between a quasi-communicable mental disease and a memetic drug of abuse that has caused more destruction than crystal meth ever conceivably could.

Thread title sounds like a really cheesy horror movie made by a church group from the 1950s.

It would have to be better than Blood Freak.

[Crysuko]

"All the lousy little poets coming 'round
Trying to sound like Charlie Manson!
I see those white men dancin'."

Charlie Manson, one of the most interesting psychopaths in history. Eschatology does really fucked-up things to the human mind. It's somewhere between a quasi-communicable mental disease and a memetic drug of abuse that has caused more destruction than crystal meth ever conceivably could.

Thread title sounds like a really cheesy horror movie made by a church group from the 1950s.

It would have to be better than Blood Freak.

...wrong thread

[The Serbian Empire]

I think it probobly has to do with more and more scientific evidence coming up that proves religious beliefs wrong. Example: We have proof that snakes can't talk, unless your Harry potter, we have proof there was never a giant flood that wiped out humans, and unless Noah had poke balls it's impossible to fit all those animals on a boat, and also human kind would have died out from incest.

And the fact Buddhism is more of a philosophy than a religion.

[Crysuko]

I think it probobly has to do with more and more scientific evidence coming up that proves religious beliefs wrong. Example: We have proof that snakes can't talk, unless your Harry potter, we have proof there was never a giant flood that wiped out humans, and unless Noah had poke balls it's impossible to fit all those animals on a boat, and also human kind would have died out from incest.

And the fact Buddhism is more of a philosophy than a religion.

similar to confucianism

[Christiaanistan]

And the fact Buddhism is more of a philosophy than a religion.

similar to confucianism

Actually, no. Buddhism, as it is practiced in Mainland China, is actually a bona fide religion, and the Buddhists scriptures make a multitude of references to gods of various sorts (such as in the Mahagovinda Sutta). In fact, the "devas" referred to in Hindu and Buddhist relugions are the same as the devils referred to in Abrahamic religions, and their "asuras" are actually related to one of the chief gods of the Assyrians and an important group of Persian gods. Buddhism is a VERY religious religion.

Confucianism is not really a religion at all, although Confucius did have religious beliefs to an extent that was normal for the ruling class of his time. If you read the Analects, though, Confucious drones on a lot for a while about how you should respect authority, respect your parents, be a good and humble, little student, and blah-blah-blah, gradually becoming less and less comprehensible. The document eventually becomes a collection of disjointed stories that are interesting to read on drowsy afternoon on the porch, but it just gets increasingly difficult to make out a unified meaning in them.

The closest thing that China has to a truly Chinese religion, not counting Confucianism, is "Chinese folk religion," which is actually centered around veneration of obscure deities and various ancestors and shit. There is a lot of shamanism and witchcraft, also. It's not just one set of beliefs, though. China is really the most culturally diverse country in the world. If you are an anthropologist, they are either a wet dream or a hideous nightmare, depending on your proclivities. Joseph Needham loved them, though.

[Geilinor]

Except one is backed by science, while the other is backed...by itself.

No. Many things of the atheist are backed by "assumptions".

I believe in god, I believe in the bible. I wouldn't even care if some things are false. I prefet believimg in god than believing in nothing.

Atheism is the lack of an assumption.

[Christiaanistan]

No. Many things of the atheist are backed by "assumptions".

I believe in god, I believe in the bible. I wouldn't even care if some things are false. I prefet believimg in god than believing in nothing.

Atheism is the lack of an assumption.

Yep! I'm more of a religious enthusiast than the majority of people who espouse an avowed belief in religion, but I have strong positivist instincts. I cannot, in good conscience, take a set of assumptions as far as stating a belief. In my head, if I am saying, "I believe x, y and z," I am saying, "I positively have sufficient evidence, satisfying reasonable expectations as far as validity, that these things verifiably exist." I would be lying. If I have been confronted with no such evidence and claim that I have, that's dishonest. How could I face the world feeling that I am a whole person?

But the various religions are very interesting.

[Quintium]

What is causing this decline in religiousness in humans today?

According to the article itself, the Chinese government.

Among the 1.1 billion unaffiliated people around the world, 62 per cent live in China alone and they make up 52.2 percent of the Chinese population.

Still, even that is open for debate. The Chinese government is not known to be very accurate or open about the religion of the Chinese, and seems highly unwilling to let others investigate or report on the situation there, meaning these results could seriously under-estimate the popularity of Christianity and Islam in China. There are said to be over a hundred and twenty million Christians in China, but the Chinese government tolerates only a handful of churches, and most Christians in China wouldn't want to be associated with the corrupt, monitored, partially state-controlled churches, so they are forced underground and they probably will not reveal their religion for fear of repercussions in case the government gets its hands on the data.

[Christiaanistan]

What is causing this decline in religiousness in humans today?

According to the article itself, the Chinese government.

Among the 1.1 billion unaffiliated people around the world, 62 per cent live in China alone and they make up 52.2 percent of the Chinese population.

Still, even that is open for debate. The Chinese government is not known to be very accurate or open about the religion of the Chinese, and seems highly unwilling to let others investigate or report on the situation there, meaning these results could seriously under-estimate the popularity of Christianity and Islam in China. There are said to be over a hundred and twenty million Christians in China, but the Chinese government tolerates only a handful of churches, and most Christians in China wouldn't want to be associated with the corrupt, monitored, partially state-controlled churches, so they are forced underground and they probably will not reveal their religion for fear of repercussions in case the government gets its hands on the data.

http://www.neublack.com/wp-content/uplo ... kten_1.jpg

"Underground," you say?

There is an "house church movement" in China, mostly because churches have to be registered with the government to operate openly. The Chinese are extremely paranoid, and they don't much like anything that they don't have some sort of presence in. I disagree with the Chinese government's paranoia, frankly. I regard it as counter-productive. Besides, I question the extent to which it's possible to police a population that large.

The Christians seem to masturbate over some sort of persecution complex, though. The government in China is intrusive, yes. That's part of why people in the west don't like communist governments. The Christians are not being singled out, though. The PRC treats everyone that way, including their homegrown Falun Gong wackos.

[Quintium]

The Christians seem to masturbate over some sort of persecution complex, though. The government in China is intrusive, yes. That's part of why people in the west don't like communist governments. The Christians are not being singled out, though. The PRC treats everyone that way, including their homegrown Falun Gong wackos.

They really are being singled out, though. The Chinese government does not apply rules equally. It is afraid of unrest in the west, so it lets the Muslims there build mosques to their heart's content. Christians, on the other hand, have every little bureaucratic rule or problem (building permits, zoning rules, budget mishaps) used against them by officials who want to crack down specifically on what they consider a corrupting western religion which is growing quickly in China.

[Othelos]

The Christians seem to masturbate over some sort of persecution complex, though. The government in China is intrusive, yes. That's part of why people in the west don't like communist governments. The Christians are not being singled out, though. The PRC treats everyone that way, including their homegrown Falun Gong wackos.

They really are being singled out, though. The Chinese government does not apply rules equally. It is afraid of unrest in the west, so it lets the Muslims there build mosques to their heart's content. Christians, on the other hand, have every little bureaucratic rule or problem (building permits, zoning rules, budget mishaps) used against them by officials who want to crack down specifically on what they consider a corrupting western religion which is growing quickly in China.

You need a source for that claim.

[Quintium]

They really are being singled out, though. The Chinese government does not apply rules equally. It is afraid of unrest in the west, so it lets the Muslims there build mosques to their heart's content. Christians, on the other hand, have every little bureaucratic rule or problem (building permits, zoning rules, budget mishaps) used against them by officials who want to crack down specifically on what they consider a corrupting western religion which is growing quickly in China.

You need a source for that claim.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... years.html
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/j ... g-churches
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-14838749