Recent Posts

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10
41
Chatter / Re: God's Pick?
« Last post by LoriPinkAngel on Today at 11:57:47 AM »
Does not matter who you think will win.  It is who God wants to win.  After all, He died for our sins and football.

Maybe God deflated the balls and made Brady insensitive to the sensation of his deflated balls so he really didn't know.
42
General Religious Discussion / Re: Understanding Atheism
« Last post by LoriPinkAngel on Today at 11:52:30 AM »
Theists and believers aren't the ones who need to prove there are gods.  The gods need to prove themselves.  Heal an amputee maybe?
43
General Religious Discussion / Re: Understanding Atheism
« Last post by ParkingPlaces on Today at 11:13:51 AM »
Most likely the majority of atheists who think they are atheists are not really atheists. They are agnostics. This weird subset of "agnostic atheist" was recently invented out of thin air. It's too much of a contradiction. if you don't believe in something, how can you say it's unknowable? There must be something you know about it in order to say that you don't believe in God.

It's too sloppy, IMO.

We all like to redefine our enemies in ways that allow us to pretend we understand them. What you've done here is natural.

I am an atheist. What I know is not the specifics of gods, but the specifics of humans. That they make shit up. And believe it. Between that propensity and the blatant lack of evidence otherwise, I am an atheist. If you guys hadn't invented theists, I wouldn't have to take my stance. But you did, so I do.

The history of humans as story tellers will follow us in to oblivion. Every story containing mass appeal will be believed by someone. The mass appeal was included to make people do that. The religious are suckers for a story that they like. Gods are not involved. So technically I'm an asilliest, or an aignorancist, or an aidioticstoriest. But atheist covers everything, and the term has been around a long time. So I make it fit.

Enjoy your religion all you want. But as long as you go so far as to presume it is true, I am forced to take an opposite stance. Were you only believing in fairies and witches in the woods, it wouldn't matter, but since people with religious beliefs get righteous on everyone's ass, since people with religious beliefs condemn, since people with religious beliefs banish, and since people with religious beliefs kill, I sort of have to speak up every now and then. Get used to it.

If there are gods as powerful as you claim, that would surprise me. But even if there are, none of them are yours. It would be impossible for an actual god to contain that many contradictions so apparent to mere humans. A real god couldn't possibly be as trite as the one you claim. It would be impossible for a real god to create beings that have infinitely more compassion than it has. That big rock he couldn't move thing would be more likely.

So I am an atheist because of humans, not because of gods. Hence my certainty.
44
Science / Re: The sounds of space
« Last post by Nam on Today at 10:37:42 AM »
Yeah that's great.

Also, can all you science buffs explain the picture of Saturn please?

If you look at the shadow cast by the planet and you follow the edges of the shadow in the rings.
If you follow the line of the edges they do NOT meet up with the bit of Saturn that is supposedly blocking the sunlight!

Is gravity curving the light? I did not think that Saturn was massive enough! But then I have not done the maths.

Is this just an optical illusion? Or something do with the wide-angled lens used  for the picture?

It could be an optical illusion. It'd be better if we were right there to see for ourselves. Maybe in a few hundred years.

-Nam
45
Science / Re: traditional family and science
« Last post by Nam on Today at 10:34:42 AM »
it is interesting that there is nothing on the interwebs pointing to the actual study.  the site that ran the story is a catholic site promoting world news from a catholic perspective, which is fine, i don't have an issue with that... but i do have an issue with the article not linking to the actual study... pretty fishy in my book.

They could be like arabnews.com -- where they actually link to the original but twist the info so much you just can swim in the hatred.

-Nam
46
Religion & Society / Re: atheist superhero drives local xians mad
« Last post by Nam on Today at 10:32:05 AM »
^bigotry?

-Nam
47
General Religious Discussion / Re: Understanding Atheism
« Last post by Nam on Today at 10:30:36 AM »
Atheist means No God.
Agnostic means not sure, maybe.

A lot of atheists are changing the definition because they view agnostics as gutless, like Madalyn Murray O'Hair did. So they make agnosticism into a definition of atheism.

If you can't say, "there is no God" for certain, then you are NOT an atheist. Period. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

Most likely the majority of atheists who think they are atheists are not really atheists. They are agnostics. This weird subset of "agnostic atheist" was recently invented out of thin air. It's too much of a contradiction. if you don't believe in something, how can you say it's unknowable? There must be something you know about it in order to say that you don't believe in God.

It's too sloppy, IMO.

^what a load of bullshit.

-Nam
48
General Religious Discussion / Re: Understanding Atheism
« Last post by One Above All on Today at 10:28:20 AM »
That gets us nowhere. That is the Pee Wee Herman type of argumentation.

I'm sorry my point went over your head. Let's try something simpler then.
What is the origin of the word "elbow"?
49
General Religious Discussion / Re: Understanding Atheism
« Last post by skeptic54768 on Today at 10:26:17 AM »
Atheist means No God.
Agnostic means not sure, maybe.

A lot of atheists are changing the definition because they view agnostics as gutless, like Madalyn Murray O'Hair did. So they make agnosticism into a definition of atheism.

If you can't say, "there is no God" for certain, then you are NOT an atheist. Period. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

Most likely the majority of atheists who think they are atheists are not really atheists. They are agnostics. This weird subset of "agnostic atheist" was recently invented out of thin air. It's too much of a contradiction. if you don't believe in something, how can you say it's unknowable? There must be something you know about it in order to say that you don't believe in God.

It's too sloppy, IMO.

Christian means fanatic.
Anything else is not a true christian.

A lot of christians are changing the definition because they view true christians as fanatics, like skeptic54768 does. So they make true christianity into fanaticism.

If you can't say "I follow the Bible word for word", then you are NOT a christian. Period. No ifs, ands, or buts about it.

Most likely the majority of christians who think they are christians are not really christians. They are heathens. This weird "OT doesn't apply" was recently invented out of thin air. It's too much of a contradiction. If you believe in something, how can you not follow what it says? There must be something you know about true christians in order to choose to be a heathen.

It's too sloppy, IMO.

See how that works, skeptic54768?

That gets us nowhere. That is the Pee Wee Herman type of argumentation.
50
Religion & Society / Re: atheist superhero drives local xians mad
« Last post by One Above All on Today at 10:24:54 AM »
I really can't believe he's standing next to a Darwin sign.

IKR. Standing next to a sign stating that it was once the home of a famous person? Unthinkable! I told my mom the same thing when we visited Van Gogh's house.

This furthers the stereotype that atheists are obsessed with Darwin.

Which christian stereotype do you think your posts further?
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5] 6 7 ... 10