NationStates

Cut out the picspamfest.

Risottia wrote:Cut out the picspamfest.

Sorry I have no idea what the hell happened I think I clicked post wayyyy to much.

Lipnitia wrote:

Kyuji wrote:Hope?

Hope or Belief, I don't care. They must at least be a tad convinced.

Why?

Do you think all theists all secretly hope or believe in all the other religions that aren't their own?

Grave_n_idle wrote:

Lipnitia wrote:Hope or Belief, I don't care. They must at least be a tad convinced.

Why?

Do you think all theists all secretly hope or believe in all the other religions that aren't their own?

Not all of the theists, just the ones who aren't his religion.

Mistelemr wrote:

Grave_n_idle wrote:
Why?

Do you think all theists all secretly hope or believe in all the other religions that aren't their own?

Not all of the theists, just the ones who aren't his religion.

So he has all the answers and we have none ?

Phoenixfox wrote:The entire study of any science depends on truth being absolute, but their is no atheistic justification for believing in it.
What do you think about this line of reasoning? I think it makes a lot of sense.

Ever heard of the logical absolutes? They are what all logic and reason extrapolates from. They are if anything the few absolute truths that we know.

The law of Identity is best summed up as A=A, and if A=/=Y and B=Y then A=/=B.
Summed up, things are what they are, they are not what they are not.
We draw from this fact syllogisms which bestow truth both in the empirical and rational sense.

If owls are birds, and a potato is not a bird, then a potato can not be an owl.

No god is neccesary for this process.
I reccomend looking up the history of reasoning. The logical absolutes are older than christianity.

I thought this would be fun, but the op's full of nonsense oh well

So...Explain to me, why I must believe in God? And if I was to believe in Norse mytho, Greek, Roman, Hinduism, Scientology, Church of the flying spaghetti monster- should I still convert because you say so? Because you know the "Absolute truth"? No. No. NO. NO!
If I refuse to believe in any religion, should I be forced? No.
Do I force you to stop believing? Do I force you to convert into Hinduism, Islam, or any of the mythologies? No.

Achasic wrote:So...Explain to me, why I must believe in God? And if I was to believe in Norse mytho, Greek, Roman, Hinduism, Scientology, Church of the flying spaghetti monster- should I still convert because you say so? Because you know the "Absolute truth"? No. No. NO. NO!
If I refuse to believe in any religion, should I be forced? No.
Do I force you to stop believing? Do I force you to convert into Hinduism, Islam, or any of the mythologies? No.

Why is Scientology included as a religion?

Benuty wrote:

Achasic wrote:So...Explain to me, why I must believe in God? And if I was to believe in Norse mytho, Greek, Roman, Hinduism, Scientology, Church of the flying spaghetti monster- should I still convert because you say so? Because you know the "Absolute truth"? No. No. NO. NO!
If I refuse to believe in any religion, should I be forced? No.
Do I force you to stop believing? Do I force you to convert into Hinduism, Islam, or any of the mythologies? No.

Why is Scientology included as a religion?

Well shit, I don't know, mate. I don't really fancy religions in general. No, I have not researched Scientology before I made a post that took about 1½ minute of my life. Sorry.

Phoenixfox wrote:If you ask an atheist why they disavow belief in God, they will undoubtably cite either their reason or science.¹ Here are some thing that need to be around in order for science to make sense. Possibly the most basic of these Absolute truth (Truth being that which conforms to reality)²

Science can tell us almost any trait we want to know about anything, it can tell us the size, shape, weight, color, temperature, density and even the molecular structure of an object, but none of these things even matter if we can not be sure that the object even exists. Science is irrelevant if absolute truth does not exist.³
The entire study of any science depends on truth being absolute⁴, but their is no atheistic justification for believing in it. It is ironic that those who say their alleged disbelief in God is based on reason have absolutely no reason to believe in the very things on which they base their reason!⁵

What do you think about this line of reasoning? I think it makes a lot of sense.⁶

1. ....or, maybe it's possible I, like millions (if not billions) of other people around the world, grew up in a non-religious household where God was never mentioned?

2. There is no "absolute truth" in science. I've never even seen these two terms put together until now. If you're talking about the basic fundamentals of science, that's the scientific method which we use to prove or disprove a scientific theory.

3. If you're saying science is pointless if we don't even know if anything in our world even exists, then you're missing the point of science completely. Otherwise, I have completely no idea what you're going on about this "absolute truth". I've certainly never heard of it used in a scientific context.

4. Nowhere in science does it say any certain theory, hypothesis, or idea is factually, absolutely, and infallibly true. If there is, I have yet to see it. Anything can be disproved in science; it's just that there are many theories we've found that have been proven countless times in our world to be working models and would need a lot of evidence to disprove.

5. What I got from this run-on sentence: "People who don't believe in God have no reason to believe in the evidence that they cite as reason!" You yourself yet to provide even a half-baked reason as to why this is the case.

6. Disbelief in God is simply just that, a lack of belief. I consider myself an apathetic; I'm a person who doesn't care or think about religion because I have never had a spiritual side to my life.

Something tells me you never bothered to reread your little rant.

Wow I cant believe this thread is still going. I would have thought the moderators would shut it down for spam and flaming.

Granadeseret wrote:

Menassa wrote:*snip*

And you know the exact meaning of the langue thousands of years ago... how exactly?

Generally when a language is taught to you from birth it becomes part of your speaking.

Granadeseret wrote:And my entire post was set up to target those claims laid down by Vashta Nerada. He seems to be asserting it is true, and that is what I was countering.

Okay? I was only bothering on a claim you made about a Levitical practice.

Granadeseret wrote: I apologize if I'm not going to learn Hebrew, every Native American tongue, Ancient Greek, Egyptian Hieroglyphics, Scandinavian Ruins, the various Celtic tongues, Sanskrit, ect. so I can have a perfectly accurate view of the various religious tales of the ancient word,but that is simply impractical to do so,

No one's asking you to do so, simply to not make claims based off of ignorance.

Granadeseret wrote:and if I would wager an educated guess, you seem to dismisses these texts and in all likelihood don't know all those languages.

It's regardless of whether I know the language or not, if someone presumably does know the language says a claim is made and others agree that this is the correct claim then why not argue for or against it?

Why does absolute truth require a God? Truth conforms to reality no matter what. Otherwise, it's not the truth. But that truth is obtainable through logical or scientific means. God doesn't need to enter the equation at all.

Ponderosa wrote:Why does absolute truth require a God? Truth conforms to reality no matter what. Otherwise, it's not the truth. But that truth is obtainable through logical or scientific means. God doesn't need to enter the equation at all.

Exactly.

Benuty wrote:

Achasic wrote:So...Explain to me, why I must believe in God? And if I was to believe in Norse mytho, Greek, Roman, Hinduism, Scientology, Church of the flying spaghetti monster- should I still convert because you say so? Because you know the "Absolute truth"? No. No. NO. NO!
If I refuse to believe in any religion, should I be forced? No.
Do I force you to stop believing? Do I force you to convert into Hinduism, Islam, or any of the mythologies? No.

Why is Scientology included as a religion?

Tax exempt status?

Benuty wrote:

Achasic wrote:So...Explain to me, why I must believe in God? And if I was to believe in Norse mytho, Greek, Roman, Hinduism, Scientology, Church of the flying spaghetti monster- should I still convert because you say so? Because you know the "Absolute truth"? No. No. NO. NO!
If I refuse to believe in any religion, should I be forced? No.
Do I force you to stop believing? Do I force you to convert into Hinduism, Islam, or any of the mythologies? No.

Why is Scientology included as a religion?

Because it is a religion?

Silthios wrote:Within the debate for whether or not God exists the same thing always occurs. I am an atheist because I've seen no scientific evidence whatsoever to the existence of a God, although the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. I do dislike the argument put fort by the pious.

Many people refute my atheism by stating that because I can't explain everything with science it must be the will of God. Bertrand Russell wrote that if he claims that a teapot orbits the Sun somewhere in space between the Earth and Mars, it is nonsensical for him to expect others to believe him on the grounds that they cannot prove him wrong. Religious argument to me is essentially just that, anything scientists write to disprove anything within the bible, a document allegedly written as the word of God, is immediately refuted as God's will. A good example of this is a debate between Richard Dawkins on evolution and Wendy Wright on creationism, everything he said, supplemented with as much evidence as has been recorded on evolution was refuted almost entirely with "that's not evidence" or "evolution is just a theory".

In the end, I would rather have a mind open to possibility and wonder then one closed by a pre-determined world as dictated by a deity. That is why I don't believe.

Blatantly false. Absence of evidence is most certainly evidence of absence.

Dyakovo wrote:

Silthios wrote:Within the debate for whether or not God exists the same thing always occurs. I am an atheist because I've seen no scientific evidence whatsoever to the existence of a God, although the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence. I do dislike the argument put fort by the pious.

Many people refute my atheism by stating that because I can't explain everything with science it must be the will of God. Bertrand Russell wrote that if he claims that a teapot orbits the Sun somewhere in space between the Earth and Mars, it is nonsensical for him to expect others to believe him on the grounds that they cannot prove him wrong. Religious argument to me is essentially just that, anything scientists write to disprove anything within the bible, a document allegedly written as the word of God, is immediately refuted as God's will. A good example of this is a debate between Richard Dawkins on evolution and Wendy Wright on creationism, everything he said, supplemented with as much evidence as has been recorded on evolution was refuted almost entirely with "that's not evidence" or "evolution is just a theory".

In the end, I would rather have a mind open to possibility and wonder then one closed by a pre-determined world as dictated by a deity. That is why I don't believe.

Blatantly false. Absence of evidence is most certainly evidence of absence.

I'm not certain if it is de facto evidence of absence. But it certainly is if, after looking for evidence really hard for a really long time, you've still got zilch.

Benuty wrote:

Achasic wrote:So...Explain to me, why I must believe in God? And if I was to believe in Norse mytho, Greek, Roman, Hinduism, Scientology, Church of the flying spaghetti monster- should I still convert because you say so? Because you know the "Absolute truth"? No. No. NO. NO!
If I refuse to believe in any religion, should I be forced? No.
Do I force you to stop believing? Do I force you to convert into Hinduism, Islam, or any of the mythologies? No.

Why is Scientology included as a religion?

Why not? It is no more ridiculous than any other.

Phoenixfox wrote:If you ask an atheist why they disavow belief in God, they will undoubtably cite either their reason or science. Here are some thing that need to be around in order for science to make sense. Possibly the most basic of these Absolute truth (Truth being that which conforms to reality)

Science can tell us almost any trait we want to know about anything, it can tell us the size, shape, weight, color, temperature, density and even the molecular structure of an object, but none of these things even matter if we can not be sure that the object even exists. Science is irrelevant if absolute truth does not exist.

The entire study of any science depends on truth being absolute, but their is no atheistic justification for believing in it. It is ironic that those who say their alleged disbelief in God is based on reason have absolutely no reason to believe in the very things on which they base their reason!

What do you think about this line of reasoning? I think it makes a lot of sense.

Everything is irrelevant. Please to meet you, i'm a nihilist.

Can we go home now that's sorted?

I think that your reasoning is utterly crazy. And nonsensical

Lipnitia wrote: They must at least have one spark of hope that there's a deity somwhere out there.

MUST. Interesting. I thought having a mind made me able to make my own decisions. Your "Must" means nothing to me. The only "must" I follow is the one that I decide for myself. That's why I oppose Christianity. Too many people saying you MUST do this and you MUST do that.

Lipnitia wrote: They must at least have one spark of hope that there's a deity somwhere out there.

Why?

Lipnitia wrote:

Kyuji wrote:Hope?

Hope or Belief, I don't care. They must at least be a tad convinced.

No, not at all.