Atheism: What's the point?

[Lunatic Goofballs]

Atheists get free cookies.

That's okay, I would rather get nothing and have a purpose than get a cookie and only exist by random chance.

Anthropic principle + inflationary cosmology + many worlds interpretation = no need whatsoever to postulate a god for any reason whatsoever

Add in the fact that things behave randomly on the fundamental level, and your insistence that the universe is neat and orderly is an entirely empty one that does not square with reality.

Of course, in an infinite number of universes, the likelihood of a being existing capable of creating universes approaches 1.

[Dakini]

Yeah, but the Roman pantheon was kinda enforced. Especially on the Celts, Christians and Jews.

Which is why Romans had the cult of Isis and a number of mystery cults that were fine and trendy?

Well, they were "fine and trendy" because those gods were allowed to be worshipped, but only as minor gods, i.e., minor additions to the Pantheon instead of only worshipping your gods.

Which sort of makes your thing about the Celts a bit iffy... many of the Celtic gods had analogous Roman counterparts. It would be very easy to just claim that you're worshiping Mars when you're actually worshiping Camulos.

[Bassyruk]

You'd rather exist at the whim of an omnipotent being who either requires your worship or will send you to a realm of eternal torment, pain and humiliation out of an act of love?

You know, the more I read about this 'God' fellow, the more I'm glad I believe in less... fucked up God.

Yup
Who's you're God? The rocks from whence you came?

[Bassyruk]

Well, they were "fine and trendy" because those gods were allowed to be worshipped, but only as minor gods, i.e., minor additions to the Pantheon instead of only worshipping your gods.

Which sort of makes your thing about the Celts a bit iffy... many of the Celtic gods had analogous Roman counterparts. It would be very easy to just claim that you're worshiping Mars when you're actually worshiping Camulos.[/quote]
Well, it was really the Druids they were persecuting, but the Druids were basically just priests, so that's why I said Celts.

[Dakini]

Uhh... look at it

I did. I decided it was too much text that you didn't bother to write (but could have written since it's basically presenting an argument). It doesn't have any corroborating evidence. It just shows that you're too lazy to make your own arguments. I give you the courtesy of spending my time typing each response to things that you say. If I was going to highlight a particular link, I would make a statement, follow it with a link and if the page I link is long and the relevant section is not at the top, I would probably quote the relevant portions in my post.

Instead, you just googled "proof of Jesus" and shoved a link in this discussion without an explanation.

No, I read it, and I think it's obvious that you should read what's under best answer, but if you insist:

Dr. Simon Greenleaf, former professor of law at Harvard University and once recognized by the Supreme Court to be perhaps the greatest authority on legal evidence who has ever lived, made a detailed examination of the evidence relating to the resurrection of Jesus Christ, quoted by L.A. Drummon and P.R. Baxter in the 1986 book How to Respond to a Skeptic. (Chicago: Moody Press, p 117.) He concluded that in any uinbiased courtroom in the world, the evidence would establish the fact that Jesus was resurrected from the dead. The documentary evidence has been examined independently by millions of people, each of whom had the opportunity to find mistakes if there were any. St. Luke, for example, turns out to be as meticulous a geographer and historian as anyone now living. Calling his Gospel "mythology" is like calling Caesar's Gallic Wars "legendary." Contempt prior to investigation is no way to determine the facts. Unlike some religious literature, the Bible is filled with specific names, dates, places. Fifty or sixty years ago it was commonplace to scorn these as legendary or inaccurate, but having such an attitude today requires one to ignore libraries full of research in history, archeology and linguistics. Which of course is your privilege; but the recently-published "Under the Influence" by Alvin Schmidt shows that virtually everything that makes the world today better than it was in Roman times stems directly from the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth.

Appeal to authority. No actual evidence presented.

Also, the last statement is highly inaccurate. Personal hygiene did not stem from the teachings of Jesus, nor did sanitation, electricity, the automobile, antibiotics, modern medicine, feminism... I could go on.

Now that I look more closely, there are definitely a lot more glaring errors... but it's an appeal to authority in the first place so it sort of doesn't matter.

Oh and also, based on your earlier post there was absolutely no way for me to know that this is the part that I was supposed to care about.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

Of course, in an infinite number of universes, the likelihood of a being existing capable of creating universes approaches 1.

So, there is a god, just not one that created this universe. Actually, this more supports the existence of an infinite number of gods. Not even Hinduism is potent enough.

In all honesty, I'm not sure how far the variations go, perhaps they allow for the evolution of complex godlike beings, or perhaps they don't. Remember, there is an infinite amount of possibilities just between 1 and 2. Also, if time and space are quantized just like everything else, then there really aren't an infinite number of universes, just a number so large that we can't even begin to imagine it.

[Lithzenze]

im not sure if it was this thread or another but anyway, someone asked a "scientist" (in otherwords someone who likes the idea of evolution but wants a nice title) to prove the sky is blue, and they said something like this

"you want prove ok ask anyone to look up and ask another and another and they will all tell you the sky is blue"

early in the same thread another one of the "scientists" said that using numbers to prove something, is not prove at all..... well u could say its just as hypercritical as some religious fanatics.

anywho before you "scientists" tell me that i have used the same argument to prove that the Bible does not Contridict blah blah blah, well you see, religion isnt science so i dont need scientific prove, and realy i dont need any prove.

just thought i would share this with you scientists, have fun with you little Chemistry sets and all that.
night.

[Bassyruk]

Also, the last statement is highly inaccurate. Personal hygiene did not stem from the teachings of Jesus, nor did sanitation, electricity, the automobile, antibiotics, modern medicine, feminism... I could go on.

He never said that all that came from the teachings of Jesus. He just said it made life better.

Hmm, let's think what would've happened if Jesus never happened. Europe would remain pagan. The Barbarian tribes' religion would dominate. This paganism would spread to America, and so on, it would corrupt society. There would most likely be much violence.

[Bassyruk]

Of course, in an infinite number of universes, the likelihood of a being existing capable of creating universes approaches 1.

So, there is a god, just not one that created this universe. Actually, this more supports the existence of an infinite number of gods. Not even Hinduism is potent enough.

In all honesty, I'm not sure how far the variations go, perhaps they allow for the evolution of complex godlike beings, or perhaps they don't. Remember, there is an infinite amount of possibilities just between 1 and 2. Also, if time and space are quantized just like everything else, then there really aren't an infinite number of universes, just a number so large that we can't even begin to imagine it.

That quantum physics crap again.... How is it proven that there are an infinite amount of parallel universes? Or "a number so large we can't even begin to imagine it" number of parallel universes?

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

Also, the last statement is highly inaccurate. Personal hygiene did not stem from the teachings of Jesus, nor did sanitation, electricity, the automobile, antibiotics, modern medicine, feminism... I could go on.

He never said that all that came from the teachings of Jesus. He just said it made life better.

Hmm, let's think what would've happened if Jesus never happened. Europe would remain pagan. The Barbarian tribes' religion would dominate. This paganism would spread to America, and so on, it would corrupt society. There would most likely be much violence.

Even if Jesus did teach about hygiene, so what? The Greeks and Romans of the time, as well as the Jews, were well aware of the fact that bathing is beneficial. Now, if Jesus would have postulated the existence of atoms like Democritus did over a hundred years before Jesus was born, I met be slightly more impressed.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

Of course, in an infinite number of universes, the likelihood of a being existing capable of creating universes approaches 1.

So, there is a god, just not one that created this universe. Actually, this more supports the existence of an infinite number of gods. Not even Hinduism is potent enough.

In all honesty, I'm not sure how far the variations go, perhaps they allow for the evolution of complex godlike beings, or perhaps they don't. Remember, there is an infinite amount of possibilities just between 1 and 2. Also, if time and space are quantized just like everything else, then there really aren't an infinite number of universes, just a number so large that we can't even begin to imagine it.

That quantum physics crap again.... How is it proven that there are an infinite amount of parallel universes? Or "a number so large we can't even begin to imagine it" number of parallel universes?

You know that whole computer thing that you're using? It's entire construction and function is based on that "quantum physics crap." The many worlds interpretation of quantum theory is falsifiable, but only in extreme conditions, like perhaps some seen at the LHC. It is, however, supported by science that we do have incredible evidence for, it's called quantum field theory, and it is the most accurate physical theory ever formulated by man, so the existence of other universes is vastly more likely than your extremely specific claims about the inerrancy of the Bible, and the very existence of the many worlds interpretation shows conclusively that one need not postulate a god to explain the universe.

[Dakini]

Also, the last statement is highly inaccurate. Personal hygiene did not stem from the teachings of Jesus, nor did sanitation, electricity, the automobile, antibiotics, modern medicine, feminism... I could go on.

He never said that all that came from the teachings of Jesus. He just said it made life better.

Hmm, let's think what would've happened if Jesus never happened. Europe would remain pagan. The Barbarian tribes' religion would dominate. This paganism would spread to America, and so on, it would corrupt society. There would most likely be much violence.

First of all, you talk as though life in Christian Europe was amazing and non-violent (see: the dark ages, inquisition, crusades, witch hunts). You also talk as though other advanced societies were not pagan and that North America was not pagan before European contact. Life in Europe didn't really get nice until the Renaissance, when Muslim science and the preserved knowledge of the Greeks came back into Europe.
Secondly, you haven't shown any evidence that Jesus did happen. It's likely that he didn't "happen" and people invented him.
Third, yes, he did say that virtually everything that made the world better than Roman times stems from Jesus' teachings:

shows that virtually everything that makes the world today better than it was in Roman times stems directly from the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth.

(from your earlier post). So tell me, how does modern medicine stem from the teachings of Jesus (especially when it was held back by the Church)? How does home insulation stem from the teachings of Jesus? How do personal hygiene and indoor plumbing stem from the teachings of Jesus?

[Bassyruk]

Also, the last statement is highly inaccurate. Personal hygiene did not stem from the teachings of Jesus, nor did sanitation, electricity, the automobile, antibiotics, modern medicine, feminism... I could go on.

He never said that all that came from the teachings of Jesus. He just said it made life better.

Hmm, let's think what would've happened if Jesus never happened. Europe would remain pagan. The Barbarian tribes' religion would dominate. This paganism would spread to America, and so on, it would corrupt society. There would most likely be much violence.

Even if Jesus did teach about hygiene, so what? The Greeks and Romans of the time, as well as the Jews, were well aware of the fact that bathing is beneficial. Now, if Jesus would have postulated the existence of atoms like Democritus did over a hundred years before Jesus was born, I met be slightly more impressed.

Actually, Jesus did know the importance of washing. If you read the Gospel you would know.

[Dakini]

Also, the last statement is highly inaccurate. Personal hygiene did not stem from the teachings of Jesus, nor did sanitation, electricity, the automobile, antibiotics, modern medicine, feminism... I could go on.

He never said that all that came from the teachings of Jesus. He just said it made life better.

Hmm, let's think what would've happened if Jesus never happened. Europe would remain pagan. The Barbarian tribes' religion would dominate. This paganism would spread to America, and so on, it would corrupt society. There would most likely be much violence.

Even if Jesus did teach about hygiene, so what? The Greeks and Romans of the time, as well as the Jews, were well aware of the fact that bathing is beneficial. Now, if Jesus would have postulated the existence of atoms like Democritus did over a hundred years before Jesus was born, I met be slightly more impressed.

Actually, funny thing though, in Christian Europe, bathing regularly was viewed as unhealthy. It helped the black death along nicely.

Oh, I guess this isn't something that was that much worse during Roman times either... it just became worse once the Christians were put in charge and then got better.

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

Actually, Jesus did know the importance of washing. If you read the Gospel you would know.

Read my post again, and actually answer my assertion. Where in my post did I even make an attempt to refute the notion that Jesus new the benefits of hygiene? Show me where I said that at all.

[Tmutarakhan]

Why would you think it's an account detailing thoughts from 50 years earlier?

It is what it is: an account of the events from 50 years earlier and what people said about the alleged perpetrators.

Considering that the Christians were making themselves obnoxious around the turn of the second century

That's not true. In the early second century when Tacitus was writing, the policy was very much "don't ask don't tell" (look at Pliny for an account of what attitudes in 116 were like) and there hadn't been any major eruption about Christianity for decades.

and it's likely that blaming Christians was an attempt to shift blame for the fire away from Nero. It's much more likely that this is a 116CE interpretation, not a 64CE interpretation.

Tacitus has no interest in shifting blame away from Nero. Despite his low opinion of the Christians, he reports Nero's scapegoating of the Christians as being "more in the interest of glutting one man's cruelty" than in the interest of getting to the truth about who really started the fire.

If, in 2009, I write down my memories of the Kennedy assassination, I am not going to mention the role of the Westboro Baptist Church just because the WBC exists in 2009, because the WBC has nothing to do with my memories of 1963.

If you have a political agenda to support you might.

No, I would not write about WBC picketing the Kennedy funeral; that would be absurd, particularly when my audience would include a lot of people who had also been around since 1963 or before and would know perfectly well that WBC was a phenomenon of later decades. I'm sorry, but you are just not thinking realistically here; you are just making up whatever you need to make up to support a predetermined and frankly ridiculous conclusion.

[Lunatic Goofballs]

Uhh... look at it

I did. I decided it was too much text that you didn't bother to write (but could have written since it's basically presenting an argument). It doesn't have any corroborating evidence. It just shows that you're too lazy to make your own arguments. I give you the courtesy of spending my time typing each response to things that you say. If I was going to highlight a particular link, I would make a statement, follow it with a link and if the page I link is long and the relevant section is not at the top, I would probably quote the relevant portions in my post.

Instead, you just googled "proof of Jesus" and shoved a link in this discussion without an explanation.

No, I read it, and I think it's obvious that you should read what's under best answer, but if you insist:

Dr. Simon Greenleaf, former professor of law at Harvard University and once recognized by the Supreme Court to be perhaps the greatest authority on legal evidence who has ever lived, made a detailed examination of the evidence relating to the resurrection of Jesus Christ, quoted by L.A. Drummon and P.R. Baxter in the 1986 book How to Respond to a Skeptic. (Chicago: Moody Press, p 117.) He concluded that in any uinbiased courtroom in the world, the evidence would establish the fact that Jesus was resurrected from the dead. The documentary evidence has been examined independently by millions of people, each of whom had the opportunity to find mistakes if there were any. St. Luke, for example, turns out to be as meticulous a geographer and historian as anyone now living. Calling his Gospel "mythology" is like calling Caesar's Gallic Wars "legendary." Contempt prior to investigation is no way to determine the facts. Unlike some religious literature, the Bible is filled with specific names, dates, places. Fifty or sixty years ago it was commonplace to scorn these as legendary or inaccurate, but having such an attitude today requires one to ignore libraries full of research in history, archeology and linguistics. Which of course is your privilege; but the recently-published "Under the Influence" by Alvin Schmidt shows that virtually everything that makes the world today better than it was in Roman times stems directly from the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth.

Some more info on Dr Simon Greenleaf: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Greenleaf

[Bassyruk]

Also, the last statement is highly inaccurate. Personal hygiene did not stem from the teachings of Jesus, nor did sanitation, electricity, the automobile, antibiotics, modern medicine, feminism... I could go on.

He never said that all that came from the teachings of Jesus. He just said it made life better.

Hmm, let's think what would've happened if Jesus never happened. Europe would remain pagan. The Barbarian tribes' religion would dominate. This paganism would spread to America, and so on, it would corrupt society. There would most likely be much violence.

First of all, you talk as though life in Christian Europe was amazing and non-violent (see: the dark ages, inquisition, crusades, witch hunts). You also talk as though other advanced societies were not pagan and that North America was not pagan before European contact. Life in Europe didn't really get nice until the Renaissance, when Muslim science and the preserved knowledge of the Greeks came back into Europe.
Secondly, you haven't shown any evidence that Jesus did happen. It's likely that he didn't "happen" and people invented him.
Third, yes, he did say that virtually everything that made the world better than Roman times stems from Jesus' teachings:

shows that virtually everything that makes the world today better than it was in Roman times stems directly from the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth.

(from your earlier post). So tell me, how does modern medicine stem from the teachings of Jesus (especially when it was held back by the Church)? How does home insulation stem from the teachings of Jesus? How do personal hygiene and indoor plumbing stem from the teachings of Jesus?

Wow you are getting very annoying about this. I know about the dark ages and that stuff, but if it weren't for Jesus, the dark ages probaby would still be going on. Also, NO ONE EVER SAID ANYTHING ABOUT HYGIENE OR ANY OF THAT STUFF. JUST SHUT UP.

And seriously, isn't it common sense that Jesus was a real person? Could several different people's teachings that all agree have made such an impact on history? No, only a living person could do that. If Confucius wasn't real, and his followers just made him up, could they have such an impact just teaching about an imaginary man?

[Tmutarakhan]

If you're going to discuss what I am saying, actually discuss what I'm saying, rather than making up random shit you WISH I'd said.

My bad, I was conflating your views with Dakini's.

[Bassyruk]

He never said that all that came from the teachings of Jesus. He just said it made life better.

Hmm, let's think what would've happened if Jesus never happened. Europe would remain pagan. The Barbarian tribes' religion would dominate. This paganism would spread to America, and so on, it would corrupt society. There would most likely be much violence.[/quote]

Even if Jesus did teach about hygiene, so what? The Greeks and Romans of the time, as well as the Jews, were well aware of the fact that bathing is beneficial. Now, if Jesus would have postulated the existence of atoms like Democritus did over a hundred years before Jesus was born, I met be slightly more impressed.[/quote]
Actually, funny thing though, in Christian Europe, bathing regularly was viewed as unhealthy. It helped the black death along nicely.

Oh, I guess this isn't something that was that much worse during Roman times either... it just became worse once the Christians were put in charge and then got better.[/quote]
No, you don't understand. All the chaos of the Dark Ages and the like came because of the fall of Rome, it had nothing to do with Christians being in charge.

[Lunatic Goofballs]

And seriously, isn't it common sense that Jesus was a real person? Could several different people's teachings that all agree have made such an impact on history? No, only a living person could do that. If Confucius wasn't real, and his followers just made him up, could they have such an impact just teaching about an imaginary man?

Have you ever been to a Star Trek Convention?

[UnhealthyTruthseeker]

No, you don't understand. All the chaos of the Dark Ages and the like came because of the fall of Rome, it had nothing to do with Christians being in charge.

All of that chaos had to do with the burning of the library of Alexandria and the destruction of all available knowledge at the time. Care to guess who commanded the death of Hypatia and the destruction of the library? It sure wasn't Nero!

[Tmutarakhan]

Hmm, let's think what would've happened if Jesus never happened. Europe would remain pagan. The Barbarian tribes' religion would dominate... if it weren't for Jesus, the dark ages probaby would still be going on.

No, if it weren't for Christianity, the barbarian tribes wouldn't dominate, and the dark ages never would have started. It was only once the Roman Empire converted to Christianity that it started losing provinces left and right; it had been through many crises before, while still maintaining or expanding its borders, but Christianity diverted its best minds away from pursuing any practical careers into lives of speculation about invisible otherworlds, and the whole state just rotted, throwing the continent into devastating violence, ignorance, famine, and plague.

[Bassyruk]

No, you don't understand. All the chaos of the Dark Ages and the like came because of the fall of Rome, it had nothing to do with Christians being in charge.

All of that chaos had to do with the burning of the library of Alexandria and the destruction of all available knowledge at the time. Care to guess who commanded the death of Hypatia and the destruction of the library? It sure wasn't Nero!

Yes, the Catholic Church was very corrupt at that time, and killed many. But you still can't blame any of that on Jesus.

[Bassyruk]

Hmm, let's think what would've happened if Jesus never happened. Europe would remain pagan. The Barbarian tribes' religion would dominate... if it weren't for Jesus, the dark ages probaby would still be going on.

No, if it weren't for Christianity, the barbarian tribes wouldn't dominate, and the dark ages never would have started. It was only once the Roman Empire converted to Christianity that it started losing provinces left and right; it had been through many crises before, while still maintaining or expanding its borders, but Christianity diverted its best minds away from pursuing any practical careers into lives of speculation about invisible otherworlds, and the whole state just rotted, throwing the continent into devastating violence, ignorance, famine, and plague.

No, it was fighting over the throne of the emperor that weakened Rome so that the barbarians could overthrow them.