Athiests Obviously Believe in SOMETHING!

Wickedjews said:
X-rays are metaphysical?

If you used the above "logic" there are many things that science has explained that would suddenly become metaphysical.
Click to expand...
X-rays. Another excellent example of something which cannot be defined in terms of our senses and must be inferred. Excellent example WM!
 
Southern Man said:
Nah this is pretty much how I am. Some love it, many hate me. :)
Click to expand...

I like SM, just because I dont agree with his politics, I belive he is a good man.

For example, dispite his hate for homosexuals, I bet if he came across one, he would treat them with respect.
 
Dixie said:
Atheists don't bother me, they amuse me. It's always interesting to hear from Nihilists, just to see how they're hanging. I don't worship Jesus or anything else, I respect my God, and leave the rest for him to sort out. Now, say what you will about Jesus of Nazareth, he was considerably more profound than you, or even Grind, will ever be, and look at all the technological advantages you two have! Here we are, 2000 years later, and many people still believe in what he had to say, and follow his teachings. I doubt anyone will be interested in anything you have ever posted in 2000 years, I mean you guys do good to keep a thread going 24 hrs. You're welcome to bash him all you like, it helps to further expose your denial mechanism and make my point, so I like for that to happen, to be honest.... and Jesus can handle it, he probably understands that it's essential in your transformation, so he doesn't really care. So go ahead and get it all out of your system, that is healthy for you!
Click to expand...

Jesus never even existed, and Aristotle has been around for far longer.
 
So long as people keep their dogmatic relgious views out of MY life I don't care what people believe. If you believe that Christ is the only way to heaven, good for you. If you believe that the creator orbits the earth in a spaceship, fine. But it is not the job of the government to make us believers, save our souls or have us behave in way that is specifically for religious or spiritual purposes. You have churches and temples and medicine wheels of that, I am not going to try to convert you to believing anything, but when you try to use your god to legitimate some government function then I will resist you.
 
ImagineNoReligion.jpg
 
Socrtease said:
So long as people keep their dogmatic relgious views out of MY life I don't care what people believe. If you believe that Christ is the only way to heaven, good for you. If you believe that the creator orbits the earth in a spaceship, fine. But it is not the job of the government to make us believers, save our souls or have us behave in way that is specifically for religious or spiritual purposes. You have churches and temples and medicine wheels of that, I am not going to try to convert you to believing anything, but when you try to use your god to legitimate some government function then I will resist you.
Click to expand...
Word!

My religion is private and personal. I resent those like Dixie who try to make faith a public litmus test. Our founding fathers not only believed in freedom OF religion and promoted that but they also beleived in freedom FROM religion.
 
Last edited:
My spiritualism is private and personal. Its not relevant to anyone else and I dont like to use it to bolster my self image with others and I dont want to push it on anyone because it might not be relevant to them.
 
Jarod said:
My spiritualism is private and personal. Its not relevant to anyone else and I dont like to use it to bolster my self image with others and I dont want to push it on anyone because it might not be relevant to them.
Click to expand...

You're trying to act all "better than" just because you stay quiet about it. Like you get a cookie now or some shit.
 
Southern Man said:
:lol: Anything from this current or past century?
Click to expand...

So you are saying the church was wrong?

What a weak response. Like I said, shove it down the memory hole. Frankly, it's not different than what the Mormon's do with their many past embarassments.

As I mentioned the Church does evolve and did finally accept heliocentrism and acknolwdge their error in 1992. How modern of them. But, that was a couple years after the current pope said the inquisition was right on Galileo.

This is just one of the more well known cases. There is also demon possession and the general belief that disease is caused by sin.
 
RStringfield said:
So you are saying the church was wrong?

What a weak response. Like I said, shove it down the memory hole. Frankly, it's not different than what the Mormon's do with their many past embarassments.

As I mentioned the Church does evolve and did finally accept heliocentrism and acknolwdge their error in 1992. How modern of them. But, that was a couple years after the current pope said the inquisition was right on Galileo.

This is just one of the more well known cases. There is also demon possession and the general belief that disease is caused by sin.
Click to expand...
They are back pedaling on evolution too, the new Pope just can't hang with it, like the last one did!
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Nailed it? It's rhetorical nonsense. She just used logic, very poorly I might add, to prove the unprovable. Am I not the only person here who see's something wrong here? LOL

Look, alls you need to do is find one false premise that the authors covoluted reasoning is based upon and the whole house of cards comes falling down. One such false premise exists in the authors opening statement in proposition A.

"Proposition A: All things which exist can be defined in terms of the five senses, ie, taste, touch, sight, smell, sound. This is an enormously important statement as it is the foundation of all rational thought and the scientific revolution which emerged out of the so-called Age of Enlightenment in Western Europe some 300 years ago."

This is not only a false premise it borders on a lie. First science and rationalism makes no such claim as the author posits. Second, we know factually that all things which exist cannot be defined in terms of our 5 senses. We cannot define the following in terms of our senses, they must be inferred. An atom, an electron, the nucleus of an atom, the wave/particle nature of light and electrons, genetics, chemical reactions, the property of gasses, quantum elctrodynamics, aerodynamics, etc, etc,ad nuseum.

The authors whole argument is based on this premise of proposition A. If you demonstrate, as I just easily did, that proposition A is false, the authors entire argument collapses.
Click to expand...

You are so wrong. The author's premise only rests on Proposition A. in order to submit Proposition B. It is a tried and true position of philosophical study.

All Dixie has been proposing (which he should just give up on due to the stiff necked idiocy of his audience) is that there seems to be a driving force in man that causes him to seek the spiritual; his premis is that even in calling oneself an atheist seems to lend proof of this as evidenced by the need to deny the spiritual.

For further reading to those who actually want to explore the idea.

Dix if I have wrongly misrepresented you feel free to correct me :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top