Is There a God?

[Frisivisia]

Wow. just wow. You realize what you just said. Oh my God. What a Christian centered way of thinking. Romans were not atheists. In fact, I'd say that anyone who proclaimed that there was no Gods would be thrown in the lion pit with the Christians. The Romans are a great example of religion killing. You've defeated yourself worse then I when I made my dumbshit post.

When did I say the Romans were Atheist? I simply said that the Romans and modern-day Atheists have the same views of Christianity, "Ewww, icky, make it go away"... You'll want to retract that statement too.

Poor persecuted Christian, only runs one sixth of the world. You're not being persecuted, you're being proved wrong. I'm not throwing you to the lions, you realize. I am just as opposed to Roman religion as I am to Christianity.

[Of the Free Socialist Territories]

There is a god. End of story.
Now, I'm leaving this thread.

There isn't a god. End of story.

I can make claims without providing proof too.

[Abatael]

Can you not read? I already answered that exact question...

You answered it with something factually incorrect. Persecuting religion for political power=/=persecuting religions because of atheism.

I'll ask again, what did Joseoh Stalin's atheism have to do with his actions?

He is an outlier for atheists in that he had immense amounts of power, and is responsible for the many deaths, so, using the guy's logic above, we can say atheists are like Josef Stalin.

[Frisivisia]

There is a god. End of story.
Now, I'm leaving this thread.

By the Emperor, we've won.

Hooray! Now we can finally stop with the whole "logic" thing and go back to worshiping Satan and persecuting Christians for their beliefs!

[Samuraikoku]

Hooray! Now we can finally stop with the whole "logic" thing and go back to worshiping Satan and persecuting Christians for their beliefs!

The Emperor protects.

[The Crimson Realm]

You actually take joy in frustrating someone of religious holdings? Impressive.

[Samuraikoku]

You actually take joy in frustrating someone of religious holdings? Impressive.

I spread the Imperial Truth, as an instrument of the Emperor's will.

[Mavorpen]

You answered it with something factually incorrect. Persecuting religion for political power=/=persecuting religions because of atheism.

I'll ask again, what did Joseoh Stalin's atheism have to do with his actions?

He is an outlier for atheists in that he had immense amounts of power, and is responsible for the many deaths, so, using the guy's logic above, we can say atheists are like Josef Stalin.

No, you can't. The poster above made the point that Christianity causes individuals to do heinous crimes. In other words, these people commit crimes due to their faith. Stalin's actions had nothing to do with his disbelief in God, and all to do with political power. Thus your argument doesn't hold any weight.

[Frisivisia]

You actually take joy in frustrating someone of religious holdings? Impressive.

I like it when I win. Should I not?

[Veladio]

There is a god. End of story.
Now, I'm leaving this thread.

By Jove we finally have the answer. Fuck proof, we have Anollasia to dictate truth to us!

[Frisivisia]

There is a god. End of story.
Now, I'm leaving this thread.

By Jove we finally have the answer. Fuck proof, we have Anollasia to dictate truth to us!

I am a talking taco, End of story.

[Samuraikoku]

By Jove we finally have the answer. Fuck proof, we have Anollasia to dictate truth to us!

I am a talking taco, End of story.

And I am Samuraikoku, Jedi Samurai Paladin of the Ultramarines. End of story.

[North Suran]

My words came wrong, I don't see religion as something to revolutionarily destroy, I see it as something to evolutionarily weed out. Do not create a false equivalency between atheism and religion, they just aren't the same thing. Atheism is a scientific fact, but it needs a label because there is a similar label for groups that reject such a fact with several divisions.

Atheism is simply a set of beliefs. Just because it lacks the iconography or pageantry of religion does not mean that they are utterly dissimilar. Christianity did not begin with bishops and cathedrals, but with one man and a movement. Atheism is likewise a movement. Obviously, atheism is more loosely organised as a whole than religion is, but it still has an orthodoxy, a leadership, and organisations to represent it. Atheism is not a 'scientific fact': it is a personal belief. It may be based on scientific fact, but that does not make it fact in of itself.

As for weeding out theism, I would say in that case that the 'New Atheists' have done a great disservice to you. Men such as Richard Dawkins excel at applauding their supporters, but they isolate potential converts. Dawkins practices preaching to the choir; arrogant rhetoric that convinced atheists will find satisfying, but which unconvinced atheists may feel obnoxious. I was an atheist when I went to secondary school. Nonetheless, I did Religious Studies as a subject. This involved many documentaries involving Dawkins, who I found to be repulsively smug and self-gratifying. So I decided to give theism another go, and found myself in agreement.

Atheism needs leaders who will establish it as a distinct and attractive moment, not self-styled 'anti-theists'.

[The Crimson Realm]

You actually take joy in frustrating someone of religious holdings? Impressive.

I like it when I win. Should I not?

Winning? That's what you're worried about? Not intellectual debate on a subject that is miles above your head?... Pfft.jpg Atheists being real cool bros about religion and stuff. Never fail to disgust me... But! That's ok, I'll actually pray for you.

Sincerely,
Ray

[Fortarius]

Just to add my thoughts into this mess of a discussion, I don't believe that there is a God, god, gods, goddess, five-headed evil dragon goddess, or anything else that could be called divine. I do not mean this as an insult to those who do believe, but I think that it is silly to pick one particular faith and call that one the 'one true faith' when there are so many faiths that all claim that title. There were faiths that once had many followers, but they lost them all and were declared to be nothing more than myth. There will be faiths that arise in the future that gain many followers, replacing popular faiths that people follow right now. Why then do people claim that their faith, which is but one of many that millions believe, is the one that we must all follow? In my opinion, it is simply not logical to just pick a faith that feels right or seems correct to you and call that the one true faith. If you do believe in a god or have some faith, that's fine by me, but I can't see how that's logical or something that I should also believe.

Again, I don't have an issue with people who believe in a faith of some kind. Actually, while I myself am an atheist and believe in ideas based on that view, I can freely admit that I can't disprove faith or prove the absence of the divine. I can't say that the belief in a god is wrong or foolish, only that I don't believe it to be logical. I cannot answer the question that is the possible existence of such a being. That being said, no person of faith has ever been able to prove that their faith is absolutely true. I've never seen anything that makes me doubt my belief in no divine being, so I will continue to not believe in such things. I will continue to believe that we humans are a creation of evolution and science, and that this universe came about due to natural events caused by forces that science can't yet fully explain. I may debate things with people who believe in a divine being, and I may say that I disagree with them on core issues, but I will never claim that they have to be wrong because I don't believe what they believe. Only when such a person uses their faith to deny what we know to be fact will I call them wrong.

Basically, live and let live when it comes to this issue. None of us can actually know, at least for the time being, which of us is right and which of us is wrong. Perhaps I will go to Hell for my lack of belief, or perhaps we will all vanish forever upon death, but none of us can actually say that we know for certain what will happen. Perhaps we will all go before the Divine Clown of Masterful Pranks and Wisdom when we die, and all but a few of us will go to Pie-Throwing Hell for our disturbing lack of humor. None of us can truly know until we die, and even then, we can't share that knowledge with anyone else. Let us all keep that in mind as this topic is discussed, shall we? Belief is fine. Defending that belief is fine, just as a lack of belief is fine. Let no one claim that they truly know these core truths of our existence, for there isn't a one of us that knows.

[Samuraikoku]

That's ok, I'll actually pray for you.

I don't need your prayers.

[Frisivisia]

I like it when I win. Should I not?

Winning? That's what you're worried about? Not intellectual debate on a subject that is miles above your head?... Pfft.jpg Atheists being real cool bros about religion and stuff. Never fail to disgust me... But! That's ok, I'll actually pray for you.

Sincerely,
Ray

The debate is miles above my head? I dunno 'bout you, but my kind don't take to kindly to folks such as yerself callin' us stupid. But when you are in a debate, you try to prove your point. When you prove your point to the point where the other party quits the discussion out of rage at having had their logic beaten, it means that the other side is the victor, and is allowed to feel good that their argument trumped their adversary's. But I sure am glad that you'll put God on my side for me, wouldn't want me to go to hell.

[North Suran]

No, you can't. The poster above made the point that Christianity causes individuals to do heinous crimes. In other words, these people commit crimes due to their faith. Stalin's actions had nothing to do with his disbelief in God, and all to do with political power. Thus your argument doesn't hold any weight.

Does any one still seriously believe that Crusaders such as Richard I went to the Holy Land out of a burgeoning urge to protect Christendom, instead of seeing an opportunity to amass wealth, territory and prestige? Religion does not commit heinous crimes; people commit heinous crimes. A belief system cannot be inherently blamed for the violence of its followers - especially when that violence is motivated by personal reasons.

Pretexts are always used to shield ulterior, pragmatic motives. Democracy was the pretext for the Iraq War, but no one blames democracy for the deaths of thousands of Iraqis. State atheism was the pretext Josef Stalin used to suppress Christianity, even if his real motive was to consolidate power. The Pope claimed that God had called on him to save Jerusalem from the Muslims, when it was really the Byzantine Emperor. Perhaps what you're really saying is that people will find any justification which is convenient to their motives.

[Mavorpen]

I like it when I win. Should I not?

Winning? That's what you're worried about? Not intellectual debate on a subject that is miles above your head?... Pfft.jpg Atheists being real cool bros about religion and stuff. Never fail to disgust me... But! That's ok, I'll actually pray for you.

Sincerely,
Ray

I don't think you've made an intelligent point yet. You even hinted you're not here to debate.

[Frisivisia]

Just to add my thoughts into this mess of a discussion, I don't believe that there is a God, god, gods, goddess, five-headed evil dragon goddess, or anything else that could be called divine. I do not mean this as an insult to those who do believe, but I think that it is silly to pick one particular faith and call that one the 'one true faith' when there are so many faiths that all claim that title. There were faiths that once had many followers, but they lost them all and were declared to be nothing more than myth. There will be faiths that arise in the future that gain many followers, replacing popular faiths that people follow right now. Why then do people claim that their faith, which is but one of many that millions believe, is the one that we must all follow? In my opinion, it is simply not logical to just pick a faith that feels right or seems correct to you and call that the one true faith. If you do believe in a god or have some faith, that's fine by me, but I can't see how that's logical or something that I should also believe.

Again, I don't have an issue with people who believe in a faith of some kind. Actually, while I myself am an atheist and believe in ideas based on that view, I can freely admit that I can't disprove faith or prove the absence of the divine. I can't say that the belief in a god is wrong or foolish, only that I don't believe it to be logical. I cannot answer the question that is the possible existence of such a being. That being said, no person of faith has ever been able to prove that their faith is absolutely true. I've never seen anything that makes me doubt my belief in no divine being, so I will continue to not believe in such things. I will continue to believe that we humans are a creation of evolution and science, and that this universe came about due to natural events caused by forces that science can't yet fully explain. I may debate things with people who believe in a divine being, and I may say that I disagree with them on core issues, but I will never claim that they have to be wrong because I don't believe what they believe. Only when such a person uses their faith to deny what we know to be fact will I call them wrong.

Basically, live and let live when it comes to this issue. None of us can actually know, at least for the time being, which of us is right and which of us is wrong. Perhaps I will go to Hell for my lack of belief, or perhaps we will all vanish forever upon death, but none of us can actually say that we know for certain what will happen. Perhaps we will all go before the Divine Clown of Masterful Pranks and Wisdom when we die, and all but a few of us will go to Pie-Throwing Hell for our disturbing lack of humor. None of us can truly know until we die, and even then, we can't share that knowledge with anyone else. Let us all keep that in mind as this topic is discussed, shall we? Belief is fine. Defending that belief is fine, just as a lack of belief is fine. Let no one claim that they truly know these core truths of our existence, for there isn't a one of us that knows.

Religion is bad, alright? It puts a wrench in the machinery of progress and serves as a purpose for war and violence and strife. However, no one sensible wishes to kill all religious people or ban religion, as to do so would also be banned. I myself, however, am against the idea of religion and oppose religion vehemently. Again, no violence, no banning, no revolution, just gradual evolution of thought.

[Ebrithil]

From Eldest by Christopher Paolini, page 541-4:

Eragon presented himself to Oromis and said, "Master, it struck me last night that neither you nor the hundreds of elven scrolls I've read have mentioned your religion. What do elves believe?"

A long sigh was Oromis's first answer. Then: "We believe that the world behaves according to certain inviolable rules and that, by persistent effort, we can discover those rules and use them to predict events when circumstances repeat."

Eragon blinked. That did not tell him what he wanted to know. "But who, or what, do you worship?"

"Nothing."

"You worship the concept of nothing?"

"No, Eragon. We do not worship at all."

The thought was so alien, it took Eragon several moments to grasp what Oromis meant. The villagers of Carvahall ((his hometown)) lacked a single overriding doctrine, but they did share a collection of superstitions and rituals, most of which concerned warding off bad luck. During the course of his training, it had dawned upon Eragon that many of the phenomena that the villagers attributed to supernatural sources were in fact natural processes, such as when he learned in his meditations that maggots hatched from fly eggs, instead of spontaneously arising from the dirt, as he had thought before. Nor did it make sense for him to put out an offering of food to keep sprites from turning the milk sour when he knew that sour milk was actually caused by a proliferation of tiny organisms in the liquid. Still, Eragon remained convinced that otherworldly forces influenced the world in mysterious ways, a belief that his exposure to the dwarves' religion had bolstered. He said, "Where do you think the world came from, then, if it wasn't created by the gods?"

"Which gods, Eragon?"

"Your gods, the dwarf gods, our gods . . . someone must have created it."

Oromis raised an eyebrow. "I would not necessarily agree with you. But, be that as it may, I cannot prove that gods do not exist. Nor can I prove that the world and everything in it was not created by an entity or entities in the distant past. But I can tell you that in the millenia we elves have studied nature, we have never witnessed an instance where the rules that govern the world have been broken. That is, we have never seen a miracle. Many events have defied our ability to explain, but we are convinced that we failed because we are still woefully ignorant about the universe and not because a deity altered the workings of nature."

"A god wouldn't have to alter nature to accomplish his will," asserted Eragon. "He could do it within the system that already exists. . . . He could use magic to affect events."

Oromis smiled. "Very true. But ask yourself this, Eragon: if gods exist, have they been good custodians of Alagaesia? Death, sickness, poverty, tyranny, and countless other miseries stalk the land. If this is the handiwork of divine beings, then they are to be rebelled against and overthrown, not given obeisance, obedience, and reverence."

"The dwarves believe--"

"Exactly! The dwarves believe. When it comes to certain matters, they rely upon faith rather than reason. They have even been known to ignore proven facts that contradict their dogma."

"Like what?" demanded Eragon.

"Dwarf priests use coral as proof that stone is alive and can grow, which also corroborates their story that Helzvog formed the race of dwarves out of granite. But we elves know that coral is actually an exoskeleton secreted by minuscule animals that live inside the coral. Any magician can sense the animals if he opens his mind. We explained this to the dwarves, but they refused to listen, saying that the life we felt resides in every kind of stone, although their priests are the only ones who are supposed to be able to detect the life in landlocked stones."

For a long time, Eragon stared out the window, turning Oromis's words over in his mind. "You don't believe in an afterlife, then."

"From what Glaedr said, you already knew that."

"And you don't put stock in gods."

"We only give credence to that which we can prove exists. Since we cannot find evidence that gods, miracles, and other supernatural things are real, we do not trouble ourselves about them. If that were to change, if Helzvog were to reveal himself to us, then we would accept the new information and revise our position."

"It seems a cold world without something . . . more."

"On the contrary," said Oromis, "it is a better world. A place where we are responsible for our own actions, where we can be kind to one another because we want to and because it is the right thing to do, instead of being frightened into behaving by the threat of divine [punishment. I won't tell you what to believe, Eragon. It is far better to be taught to think critically and then be allowed to make your own decisions than to have someone else's notions thrust upon you. You asked after our religion, and I have answered you true. Make of it what you will."

[Frisivisia]

No, you can't. The poster above made the point that Christianity causes individuals to do heinous crimes. In other words, these people commit crimes due to their faith. Stalin's actions had nothing to do with his disbelief in God, and all to do with political power. Thus your argument doesn't hold any weight.

Does any one still seriously believe that Crusaders such as Richard I went to the Holy Land out of a burgeoning urge to protect Christendom, instead of seeing an opportunity to amass wealth, territory and prestige? Religion does not commit heinous crimes; people commit heinous crimes. A belief system cannot be inherently blamed for the violence of its followers - especially when that violence is motivated by personal reasons.

Pretexts are always used to shield ulterior, pragmatic motives. Democracy was the pretext for the Iraq War, but no one blames democracy for the deaths of thousands of Iraqis. State atheism was the pretext Josef Stalin used to suppress Christianity, even if his real motive was to consolidate power. The Pope claimed that God had called on him to save Jerusalem from the Muslims, when it was really the Byzantine Emperor. Perhaps what you're really saying is that people will find any justification which is convenient to their motives.

The soldiers, however, were acting because they honestly, in their hearts, believed that God wanted them to kill all the muslims. The soldiers who purged Christians didn't do so to "save atheism" because Atheist God told them to, they did it because otherwise Stalin would have them fucking killed.

[Mavorpen]

No, you can't. The poster above made the point that Christianity causes individuals to do heinous crimes. In other words, these people commit crimes due to their faith. Stalin's actions had nothing to do with his disbelief in God, and all to do with political power. Thus your argument doesn't hold any weight.

Does any one still seriously believe that Crusaders such as Richard I went to the Holy Land out of a burgeoning urge to protect Christendom, instead of seeing an opportunity to amass wealth, territory and prestige? Religion does not commit heinous crimes; people commit heinous crimes. A belief system cannot be inherently blamed for the violence of its followers - especially when that violence is motivated by personal reasons.

That's nice, but not a response to anything I said. I didn't say religion commits heinous crimes. I said people following their religious faith commit heinous crimes.

[Yroc Island]

Yes there is a God and Jesus! Where do you think you go when you die?!

[Frisivisia]

Yes there is a God and Jesus! Where do you think you go when you die?!

I'm going to be stuffed, mounted, and put in my grandchildren's living room.