Religion, or the lack thereof

Beldaran wrote:I'm not asking anyone to believe in me or anything else. I'm saying they shouldn't believe in anything for which there is no evidence.

As magic believers, you are the ones who think you know the answers to these questions. I am pointing out that these answers are not known.

I am sorry you are all so intellectually small that you must believe in magical invisible friends to feel good about yourselves, but don't accuse me of the intellectual sins you yourselves are commiting.

I am completely correct on this issue because I am arguing that you cannot prove your position scientifically. Unless you can prove your assertion of a god scientifically, you must accept that you are wrong and that I am absolutely correct.

Also, you should all read "The Demon Haunted World" by Carl Sagan. The books that support my position are written by renowned physicists. The books that support your position are written by ancient tribal nomads who believed the sun was controlled by magic, the earth was flat, and that the universe was a dome.

Beldaran wrote:Unless you can prove your assertion of a god scientifically, you must accept that you are wrong and that I am absolutely correct.

uhh... ?_? And how does that make any logical sense?

Science can't DISPROVE God's existence any more than it CAN. Therefore, you are not absolutely correct.

Honestly Beldaran, you're beginning to sound like the very same closed-minded zealots you so despise...

Beldaran, unless you can prove your assertion of no god religiously, you must accept that you are wrong and that I am absolutely correct.

😊

Gotta love twisted logic.

Don't doubt Beldaran, for He is never wrong. As a matter of fact, I'm going to start worshiping him... but he has to do something for me, like part the Red Sea for me (or was that Moses? 😛).

***

Y'know, when I was in a hotel in Orlando a few weekends ago for Disney, we had Bibles in our rooms. I checked it out, and I was seriously thinking, "Why couldn't some guy have just written this a thousand years ago as a work of fiction?"

For all we know, if we would have found some Dr. Seuss book before the Bible, we could be worshiping Ziggalydots and Diggalyzots. 😉

Beldaran wrote:I'm not asking anyone to believe in me or anything else. I'm saying they shouldn't believe in anything for which there is no evidence.

As magic believers, you are the ones who think you know the answers to these questions. I am pointing out that these answers are not known.

I am sorry you are all so intellectually small that you must believe in magical invisible friends to feel good about yourselves, but don't accuse me of the intellectual sins you yourselves are commiting.

I am completely correct on this issue because I am arguing that you cannot prove your position scientifically. Unless you can prove your assertion of a god scientifically, you must accept that you are wrong and that I am absolutely correct.

Also, you should all read "The Demon Haunted World" by Carl Sagan. The books that support my position are written by renowned physicists. The books that support your position are written by ancient tribal nomads who believed the sun was controlled by magic, the earth was flat, and that the universe was a dome.

Foo.

I don't really believe in this (but I don't not believe) but it kinda ties into Pineconn's post, my ever so favorite TV sitcom "Red Dwarf" featured a short gag whereupon "experts have found what could be a new and radical page to the bible, allegedly to be inserted before the first page. It says, translated 'All peoples and events contained in the following work are entirely fictitious. Any resemblance to other peoples or works, real or imagined is completely coincidental' Naturaly the church has denounced the page as an utter hoax and disgrace"

This is a bit off topic(and colour maybe), but it's the best place to post this.

What do you get if you cross a drug addict with a Christian?

A Crystal Methodist!

Sorry, that was horrible. You may now resume your intellectual conversation.

Darth Marsden wrote:So what, instead of God I'm supposed to believe in Beldaran? Great! I'm probably gonna become an atheist now. You've killed religion for me. I hope you're proud, you heathenistic bastard. 😉

You don't need Belderan to come to those conclusions. I went through a very similar questioning of my faith when I was about 15. Unfortuniatly, I made the mistake of raising my objections with my Youth Pastor, who then went ouf his way to distort my worldview and line of thinking, and for a time period after that I considered myself a religious person. Once I got to college, however, I was out of my church's youth program and began to see how I had been taken advantage of, and now I carry a bitter resentment of all things religious. Your divorce from religion doesn't have to be on such bad terms, but it's not as uncommon a decision as you might think.

Dechipher wrote:Unfortunately any points that you may have on this issue are undermined by your haughty demeanor and negative dialect.

Foo.

phattonez wrote:Bel is the only person who is allowed to know anything. He is correct in everything, we are worthless scum.🙄

He may be abrasive in what he says, and I personally don't really like how he states himself as absolutely correct, but he also makes many good points. As the saying goes, don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Where I think Bel makes his mistake is trying to absolutely assert his correctness. It's an easily attackable opening, as we've seen in this thread. I sidestep that problem by bringing forth Russell's teapot. I'd write on it, but I'll just paste the two quotes from the wiki article, as I think they speak for themselves. It's a nice way of demonstratining argument from ignorance without going so far as to claim being absolutely correct.

Bertrand Russell wrote:If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.

Richard Dawkins, in his book The God Delusion, writes further

Richard Dawkins wrote:The reason organized religion merits outright hostility is that, unlike belief in Russell's teapot, religion is powerful, influential, tax-exempt and systematically passed on to children too young to defend themselves. Children are not compelled to spend their formative years memorizing loony books about teapots. Government-subsidized schools don't exclude children whose parents prefer the wrong shape of teapot. Teapot-believers don't stone teapot-unbelievers, teapot-apostates, teapot-heretics and teapot-blasphemers to death. Mothers don't warn their sons off marrying teapot-shiksas whose parents believe in three teapots rather than one. People who put the milk in first don't kneecap those who put the tea in first.

Y'know what? I'm gonna tell you a little story I heard somewhere. And just to make it even more interesting, I'm gonna use people from here to illustrate certain characters. Are we all sitting comfortably? Then I'll begin.

Oncer upon a time, there was an entire race of people who fervently believed that God was standing right behind them, guiding them through life. No-one else could see this God except the person he was standing behind, but there was a snag. At the very heart of their religion, people believed that if they turned around and looked at this God, they would be denied entry into heaven and the eternal paradise that would come with it.

And so the people went for all of their days, believing that God was watching over their shoulder but being totally afraid to check. Until one day, when Beldaran, in one of his many arguments against the race's religion, could stand it no longer, and looked over his shoulder.

And found no-one.

Convinced that this proved his point, he began spreading the word - there was no God over your shoulder, there was no eternal afterlife. And, slowly but surely, people started to see if it was true. They started looking over their shoulders, and found that God wasn't there. Until eventually there was only one man left who believed that God truly was there. And, unable to face the sheer pressure of those who believed otherwise, he took his own life.

When he woke up, he found that he was in Heaven.

Now boys and girls, what have we learned?

Darth Marsden wrote:
Now boys and girls, what have we learned?

*edit*AlexMax I just saw your post, and it made me think of something I can maybe illustrate my point with.

There are some athiests, like you, that though I stand in disagreement with on the point of God's existence I can recognize your arguments are based on solid philosophical ground. You seem to have chosen atheism as the result of your life experiences, and though my religion tells me you are wrong my heart and mind tell me you've made the choice that seemed most rational to you at the time. You only really poke your head into religion threads when it seems like things are getting kind of crazy and it's always something intelligent you have to add.

There are others, like Beldaran, who seem to have chosen atheism because it gives them a chance to feel superior to others. So far the only supporting points he has provided rely on either "common knowledge" (that sometimes turns out to be wrong!), "books I read one time", or "you just aren't intelligent enough to understand". Some religions provide a sense of superiority, but I believe no other but atheism can allow and even support one's sense of self-worth so far that one feels like people should be honored that one even deigned to stroke one's e-cock in front of them.

What's fairly interesting to me is that religions display these characteristics too, and so far I believe no one has responded in negation to my belief that athiesm can display all of the negative characteristics of an organized religion and when it does it is every bit as evil as historical atrocities committed in the name of a religion. So far by the time I've attempted to support this point, Beldaran has advanced past his first post and only replies with "I'm right, you're wrong. Deal with it."

What's sad is I think the first kind of atheist can be the source of really stimulating philosophical discussion, while the second is too busy patting himself on the back to ponder life's mysteries.

I'm confused... so he killed himself and went to Heaven... But isn't it a sin to commit suicide? Or did he get the golden ticket since he killed himself because he was the only one who believed and he was too afraid to kick it with those who didn't?

Aegix Drakan wrote:
Science can't DISPROVE God's existence any more than it CAN.

It can sure as hell disprove the majority of the bible, especially the more common stories that are taught growing up (adam and eve & noah and the ark).

Moo, get your ass in IRC. Now bitch.

I skimmed over this, so shoot me if what I say sounds.... inaccurate.

Basically, no matter how much we debate, argue, and discuss, it will allways be a matter of Science proving something, and Religion lashing out against it, and also a matter of "Interpretation". If god didn't make the earth and space in 7 24-hour days, why didn't the writers of the bible jutst say that? @_@.

Will edit post, I gotta go.

We can argue for the rest of our lives... No one will really know until they die. You can't say that a higher being does or doesn't exist when no one can prove nor disprove it. You can't say Adam & Eve, or Noah and the Ark, the parting of the Red Sea, etc. is or isn't real because none of us were there. To continuously argue over what's real and isn't is really just pointless because at the end of all our arguements, regardless of who believes in what... No one knows for sure.

Saying Adam and Eve and the Noah's Ark story were true is saying that our (and all animals) whole existence comes from incest.

Do I doubt something happened? Not at all. I bet there was a flood, but not nearly has big as described. The bible is writen by man based on stories passed down through multiple generations. Everytime it passed hands it was exaggerated more and more.

Glitch wrote:Saying Adam and Eve and the Noah's Ark story were true is saying that our (and all animals) whole existence comes from incest.

It happens in other cultures all the time.

Personally, I'm more comfortable thinking that we came about by the "Adam & Eve" theory, rather than the Evolution theory... Because really, who wants to think that we used to be monkeys?

That also raises another question. If we supposedly evolved from apes, then why are there still apes alive? Or was this a specific breed of ape that only existed in the stone age or whenever it happend...? Correct me if I'm wrong, but generally when something evolves from something else... doesn't that "something else" just... disappear?

Every story in the Bible up to the Tower of Babel is just, I forgot the word for it, but it's not real. Any Biblical scholar will tell you that. So disprove those stories, it really doesn't matter.

In recent times, majoras_wrath, religion has not lashed out against science. There are many religious people who believe in evolution and there was even a pope who supported the big bang. Personally, I think the big bang is a load, but everyone can make up their own minds.

Would the word be 'fictional'? 'Exaggerated'? 'Bollocks'?

I may be remembering the end of that story slightly - the guy may have been killed in an accident rather then committing suicide. It's been a while since I heard it.
The point I was trying to make was that by disbelieving the notion of Heaven, the people killed any chance they may have had of getting into it. Whether the guy killed himself or got hit by a truck, he still got into Heaven because he believed in it. Sometimes a little faith doesn't hurt.

Evolution is something I believe in, mostly because there's a hell of a lot of evidence for it, but also because it makes sense. We adapted to suit our environment. We've stopped doing that recently, thanks to technology. We don't change to suit the environment, we change the environment to suit us. I think that's a little wrong, and entirely off topic. But anyway.

moocow: Apes still exist because there is still a place for them. In the jungles and so on. If, as you say, one race disappears when it evolves into another, we'd have nowhere near as many species as we do at present. Just because one creatures evolves from another doesn't mean there isn't still a use for the original.

...and now I'm thinking about what we might evolve into. Homo Sapiens... what could we become. I'm hoping Homo Superior, 'cause if I could develop healing powers, that'd be so awesome.

Awww man, Darth Marsden, you totally stole that story from that crazy-ass dream I had. Except for the ending, that was new. Anyway, I would like to point out that the Bible is not the source of religious information, and I find it a logical fallacy to disprove religion by tearing the Bible apart. I mean, isn't that just a straw man argument? Heck, some religions don't even have religious texts, it's all about what you feel to be true.

Really, I think the problem is that people don't understand the point of religion. You make some argument about fundamentalist Christianity, claim that's true of all religion, and say "See, I'm right." Another straw man argument. I mean Beldaran here sits and belittles religion, all the while missing the point that he has his own religion, too, though he may not see it that way. Religion (or spirituality, I guess) is far more about how you live your life than God and sin and heaven and hell and all that jazz. Many people use these notions to define how they live their lives, but that doesn't mean that there's nothign else to religion.

I don't feel superior to you guys. It's just that you think the universe was created by an invisible magic being that cares about you. This logic is embarassingly sad and unsupported by scientific evidence.

If this makes you feel inferior to me, then too bad. I would rather everyone was better, more intelligent, and more informed than I was. The world would be a lot better place. Unfortunately the earth is ruled by people who still cling to their tribal magic beliefs.

Also, I think religion is disgusting and evil, and I do think that anyone who believes in god is a mindless, drivelling pawn of a powerful virus; a form of intellectual software that downloads itself into susceptible hosts and destroys their lives and the society they live in. So yes, if you believe in god I find you an abhorrent intellectual wretch and I laugh with sadness and derision at the deplorable state of your mind. I also fear and distrust anyone who believes in god.

Fortunately, you can still be saved by the gospel of rational, obejctive thinking and a natural view of the world. Repent now ye mental sinners, and be saved from your own delusions. [the church organ strikes a chord and several congregation members faint]

Selfish tangent question.

I've seen only the most conservative, or as some might say fanatical Christians in most of my experiences. My parents utterly believe every last thing in the bible is true but somehow some of it "doesn't apply" and because it's all god's plan it's okie-dokie (I have trouble stomaching the old testament that way, and seriously question to myself whether they've actually read the monstrous thing). They say if you don't believe and get saved, you're pretty much screwed.

What I'm wondering is, though, do most Christians thinks Agnostics are just as bad as Atheists? For being unsure when "the answers are apparent" for me if I'd listen, does that mean I'll be going to hell purely on that basis?

Of course, I'm also a lot of other things that the bible and some people say are hell-worthy. I'm in love with a semi-wiccan (Sarria, formerly known as Skeeve22 and KingArthur here, for those who don't know what I'm talking about- but you probably still don't given how many years it's been since she was at AGN XD) whose body is currently the same sex as mine (and we both want to defile our holy temples with all that sex change rubbish), I say parts of God's word seem evil to me (the old testament), and I've even worked on the sabbath day, eaten pork, and shaved the hair on the sides of my face.

But I'm just curious, since the main debate here has been christianity versus atheism, what people think about agnostics and agnosticism in general.

In my own perspective, which can be quite blinding, I think agnosticism is pretty unintrusive, the closest thing to a compromise that exists, and for me it seems the easiest, most honest outlook, because I really don't feel like I can answer unprovable questions (but by no means do I assume I'm right and that I definitely can't answer them- and the same lack of assumption applies to everyone else, of course). But of course, religion is one of those places where a compromise is often considered.... compromising. So I'm not too sure what other people at large think about it.

Beldaran wrote:Also, I think religion is disgusting and evil, and I do think that anyone who believes in god is a mindless, drivelling pawn of a powerful virus; a form of intellectual software that downloads itself into susceptible hosts and destroys their lives and the society they live in. So yes, if you believe in god I find you an abhorrent intellectual wretch and I laugh with sadness and derision at the deplorable state of your mind. I also fear and distrust anyone who believes in god.

I do think that anyone who believes in god is a mindless, drivelling pawn of a powerful virus

So, Beldaran, what great sin have agnostics committed? You seem to despise anyone with an open mind just as much as you despise religion. And honestly, you seem far more close-minded than most religious people I know. Most people I know will at the very least tolerate other belief systems, but you won't even concede that much. Is that your point, to show the ridiculousness of such close-minded people? 'Cause I get it if it is.

Amaster42 wrote:More on topic, why do we keep having these threads?

This is a weird thing to say, but I think in my case, it might be part of a strange form of something I deem narcissism that I have. That is, I seem to looooooooooove stating my opinions and expressing my identity and soforth and so on. This worries me because it seems selfish and, well, narcissistic. I think I do it because so far, I've never really been able to express such things in real life (which will change drastically when I move out of this place, which incidentally I have plans to do very, very, very soon).

But give me an opportunity to talk about agnosticisim, or transsexuality, or prejudice, or the old testament, or Gene Roddenberry's Andromeda (it's initial greatness followed by it's horrific and violent decline into retardedness), or to compare the different titles of the Zelda series (or jut to complain about Majora's Mask), or whatever I have opinions on, and I'll yap. I love to yap about such things. And I love especially to express my identity and the things I consider important parts of it, almost all of which I have to hide.

That's just me.

phattonez wrote:So I'm a retard because I disagree with you? Doesn't that make you proud? Take a look at the smaller quote in my sig and tell me what you think about it.

The problem Bel has with religious opinions is equivilence. To him, the answer is so blindingly obvious, that we should live our lives based on what we can actually see and understand. After all, we can see, understand and most importantly verify it. On the other hand, you have religion, which has a couple of holy books that was written by humans thousands of years ago, some 'biblical scholars', all of whom have their own interpertation of the holy text, and they're all supposed to be right. And what's more, science is held to far stricter standards than religion, with science you have to verify verify verify and even a minor discrepancy can destroy it. Religious views, on the other hand, are given a free pass, if someone wants to beleive in something, they are supported, even when such beleifs directly contradict the world around them or are exceedingly unlikely). And if there's a contradiction? Oh, must be the devils work, or we didn't really mean what we said.

That's not intellectually fair in the least. Therefore, Bel thinks that not all opinions are created equal. And to be honest, so do I, because without standards, there is no theoretical end to the number of viewpoints you can come up with to further muddy the waters. Think and talk about them them all you ilke, but why should you expect everyone to simply respect them at face value? Bel has defended his viewpoints, and all you do is go "Oh well you're a big meanie, we have things called OPINIONS 🙄" as if that was a satisfactory rebuttle to anything at all. Come on, man, you can do better than that.

Amaster42 wrote:And yet you don't consider that below you? Wow, Bel, you must have horrible self esteem.

Or maybe he's not the asshole you people are making him out to be.

More on topic, why do we keep having these threads? The only reason is that they're kinds fun, as not here or in the real world will Religion ever convince Science and vice versa The entire argument is pointless, as we never get anywhere. Re-reading this thread, no-one has changed their viewpoint in the couse of things.

D.M. had a very valid "questioning his religion" post that spiraled into religious debate. If this was a normal religious debate thread, then I would wholeheartedly agree with you, this sort of thing has been tred over time and time again, but there have been some good advice mixed in with the bickering back and forth.

I don't think any of you are below me... just like I don't think people with AIDS are below me. I just think they are sick and unfortunate.

Thanks Alexmax. 😊

I think these threads are good for AGN, because they inspire intelligent thought and self-doubt, two things that help individuals grow (as opposed to the "I stole Pineconn's avatar" threads.)

Belderan, I don't understand your extreme point of view. I understand how you can believe that there is nothing out there and that the only things that are real are what can be proven by science. I totally understand that, it makes sense. However, what I don't understand is how you can possibly say that there isn't a higher power (I'm talking about a generic being, not specific religions.) You seem to have built your philosophy on a fallacy (that because the Bible and other holy texts are so ridiculous and because the actions of some religious people are ridiculous that there is no way any kind of higher being can exist.) True, you can't see it or scientifically prove it, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I guess I just don't understand how you be so presumptuous to think that you can possibly ever prove that a higher power doesn't exist.

For the record, I don't hold any beliefs, so please don't respond with "If you want to believe in magic and faeries, then by all means do so while I believe in cold, hard, scientific fact (regardless of the fact that at any moment it can be disproved or changed.)"

AlexMax wrote:Bel has defended his viewpoints, and all you do is go "Oh well you're a big meanie, we have things called OPINIONS 🙄"

You speak of intellectual fairness and support the views of a person who refuses to clarify his viewpoints beyond stating that they are better than ours?

Dechipher wrote: I don't understand is how you can possibly say that there isn't a higher power (I'm talking about a generic being, not specific religions.)

I doubt the existence of a higher power for precisely the same reason you doubt the accuracy of astrology. No evidence. If I ever see evidence that is testable and observable, I will completely change my mind. Until then, there is no evidence whatsoever to look beyond the natural world for explanations. For thousands of years people have come up with supernatural explanations for natural phenomenon and time and time again science has provided natural explanations and time and time again the mystics have moved the god-line back, claming another unassailable frontier of mysticism. I think that line is imaginary and I think that because of the towering mountain of scientific data that supports the notion of a natural universe, and the invisible nothing that repsents the sum total evidence that suggests a pervading magic power.

Atma, I have not misused a single fact whatsoever. The only facts I have quoted at all came from literature by Carl Sagan. If you want to argue with his works, then go take it up with his bibliography.

For someone whose religion is based on the bible, possibly the most idiotic book ever written, you certainly are picky about factual accuracy.