BF2S Forums Eagal and Atheism - Act 1 - Introduction

Dezerteagal5 wrote:

And when someone tells me something, i ask for proof, facts, evidence. I would think any logical person does? Right?

I hope i've inlightened people a little bit.

No.  This is not enlightenment ... you just haven't yet had the privilege of enlightenment.

You are making the assumption that there is no "evidence" or "experience" with God ... indeed, religion without evidence is merely social control.  However, if you ever get enlightened with some "evidence" or "experience" with God, then perhaps you will understand that there are many, many logical people who are not following social control.  They are following God.

your two stories are slightly different though.

the first story is just something very short with, probably, very few references to it. The story of God and Jesus have been passed through many generations. Have the stories been exaggerated to the point where God is real and Jesus was more than just a man? Yes.
But the fact is that because the story has been going for thousands of years, people believe in it.

I am not religious, and dont really believe in God and Jesus. I believe that there was once a man called Jesus, but the story of him has been passed along link Chinese whispers to the point that nothing about his really happened.

And no, I do not believe there is a teapot orbiting the sun.

Dezerteagal5 wrote:

OrangeHound wrote:

Dezerteagal5 wrote:

And when someone tells me something, i ask for proof, facts, evidence. I would think any logical person does? Right?

I hope i've inlightened people a little bit.

No.  This is not enlightenment ... you just haven't yet had the privilege of enlightenment.

You are making the assumption that there is no "evidence" or "experience" with God ... indeed, religion without evidence is merely social control.  However, if you ever get enlightened with some "evidence" or "experience" with God, then perhaps you will understand that there are many, many logical people who are not following social control.  They are following God.

Yes, your are correct, i am making the assumption that there is no evidence or experience with god. I will actually go as far as saying that is a fact.
So your saying there some evidence of god? By all means, show me!

To be fair, we need people to post the evidence of other religions too. Like the Buddhists who shove knives through their cheeks and arms but don't feel pain, don't bleed and heal without scars.

EVieira wrote:

Dezerteagal5 wrote:

I hope i've inlightened people a little bit.

You're a skeptic, fine. But thats as far as your enlightment of others goes.

So tell me, what do you believe happens to you when you die? Pay real close attention tot he word believe because there is absolutely not one single piece of evidence in any scientific journal that sheds any light on that area. So no matter how skeptic you are, you either believe in some explanation of your choice or you try not to think about it.

For those who choose to believe in some religion to explain things like the afterlife (or the absence of it) its their choice as much as is your to believe in some teapot story, and neither one is more right, more wrong, more intelligent, or more rational in choosing wich to believe.

i think that when you die, you die, and thats it. like a never ending sleep in which you dont dream, you dont think, and you have no awareness of where you are or what your doing. A true definition of "Dead"

I think this because evidence supports it. Thats what changes my belief from yours of heaven.

Last edited by Dezerteagal5 (2007-04-05 09:11:04)

By your rational, we would have never believed that germs existed because we could not see them, touch them, feel them. Maybe all of the tools that are needed to find such proof are not available to us at this point in time much like microscopes were not available to earlier peoples. I think that some cling to atheism because it is easier, I'm sure religious zealots play a part in driving people away as well. I feel Christianity is one perspective out of many to the same end result.

Dezerteagal5 wrote:

OrangeHound wrote:

Dezerteagal5 wrote:

And when someone tells me something, i ask for proof, facts, evidence. I would think any logical person does? Right?

I hope i've inlightened people a little bit.

No.  This is not enlightenment ... you just haven't yet had the privilege of enlightenment.

You are making the assumption that there is no "evidence" or "experience" with God ... indeed, religion without evidence is merely social control.  However, if you ever get enlightened with some "evidence" or "experience" with God, then perhaps you will understand that there are many, many logical people who are not following social control.  They are following God.

Yes, your are correct, i am making the assumption that there is no evidence or experience with god. I will actually go as far as saying that is a fact.
So your saying there is some evidence of god? By all means, show me!

I really think that is his point, there is no proof. All there is is faith.

But, that doesnt bother me. im very religious and im done arguing about it. lol

jsnipy wrote:

By your rational, we would have never believed that germs existed because we could not see them, touch them, feel them. Maybe all of the tools that are needed to find such proof are not available to us at this point in time much like microscopes were not available to earlier peoples. I think that some cling to atheism because it is easier, I'm sure Christian zealots play a part in driving people away as well. I Christianity is one perspective out of many to the same end result.

Actually that's what did happen, no one did believe in germs, and when the first indications were found most thought those who said so were as mad as someone believing in the teapot above. But slowly by the process of science it was proved to the point that now almost everyone believes in them and evidence, reason, cause-and-effect can all be easily found and demonstrated.

and how can you cling onto atheism - let a lone it be easier? this is just a religious put-down. Being an Atheist means you just don't believe there is a God.... to 'cling' suggests either doubt and that would make you agnostic, or believing in God but not liking the rules but that makes you a theist just not belonging to a religion.

Topal63 put forward a lot of good points about this here:
http://forums.bf2s.com/viewtopic.php?id=64998&p=7
It was a fun debate :-P

KylieTastic wrote:

jsnipy wrote:

By your rational, we would have never believed that germs existed because we could not see them, touch them, feel them. Maybe all of the tools that are needed to find such proof are not available to us at this point in time much like microscopes were not available to earlier peoples. I think that some cling to atheism because it is easier, I'm sure Christian zealots play a part in driving people away as well. I Christianity is one perspective out of many to the same end result.

Actually that's what did happen, no one did believe in germs, and when the first indications were found most thought those who said so were as mad as someone believing in the teapot above. But slowly by the process of science it was proved to the point that now almost everyone believes in them and evidence, reason, cause-and-effect can all be easily found and demonstrated.

and how can you cling onto atheism - let a lone it be easier? this is just a religious put-down. Being an Atheist means you just don't believe there is a God.... to 'cling' suggests either doubt and that would make you agnostic, or believing in God but not liking the rules but that makes you a theist just not belonging to a religion.

So maybe i should create my own group of people who think

1. God is absolutly fake
2. Religion should be removed from society and it will better the world if it is.

I call us... Umm....

logicists
(Lodge - i (like thin) - Sists)
Base word Logic.

Any better names?

Last edited by Dezerteagal5 (2007-04-05 09:27:17)

I am a Christian.  I will not speak for other religions, but I will say this:

The existance of the man, Jesus of Nazareth, is as close to fact as anything else in our history books.  Hundreds of people close to his life, many of which were eyewitnesses to his life, wrote of him.

This does not prove that he is the Son of God.  However, if not, he was a con man the likes of which we have seldom seen.

The vast majority of people on earth, including myself, have felt the influence of God in their lives.  According to a poll my brother cited me, about 80% of the earths population has said they have directly felt God's influence.  (yes, I know this is a hearsay poll, and I have no proof of it, but I am not trying to prove God's existance with this post anyways.  However, for what its worth, wikipedia has similar polls posted.)

Snipy is completely right.  To suggest that something does not exist because we can not prove it is there is ridiculous.  Most of what we hold as fact in science is actually "theory."  If you can get 80% of the earth's population to suggest that they have felt the influence of a teapot in space, I might lend some credibility to your argument.

Your beloved scientists can not explain things as simple as the walls of Jericho, but any evidence that is not easily explained by the science they understand, or that doesnt fit what they want to prove is brushed aside.

You Atheists pretend that us believers are close minded and gullible, but your post comparing God to a teapot shows how simple minded and ridiculous you are.

EVieira wrote:

You have every right to believe in that, and, who knows, you may be right. But you have just as much proof of this as of your teapot story. Just as any Christiand, Muslim, Budhist, whatever has of what they believe in.

I think the point is not about proof (that's the problem with religious arguments after all)

The point of the OP was that unless you are raised being told that God exists (which by the fact kids a duped to believe in Santa and the tooth-fairy can be seen to be a factor), or you have some other thing happen in your life to cause you to start to believe.... that many religious come across as a story (that without the belief to start with) sound very iffy, and thus why should a non-believer believe in the Bible etc any more than the teacup?

Dezerteagal5 wrote:

OrangeHound wrote:

Dezerteagal5 wrote:

And when someone tells me something, i ask for proof, facts, evidence. I would think any logical person does? Right?

I hope i've inlightened people a little bit.

No.  This is not enlightenment ... you just haven't yet had the privilege of enlightenment.

You are making the assumption that there is no "evidence" or "experience" with God ... indeed, religion without evidence is merely social control.  However, if you ever get enlightened with some "evidence" or "experience" with God, then perhaps you will understand that there are many, many logical people who are not following social control.  They are following God.

Yes, your are correct, i am making the assumption that there is no evidence or experience with god. I will actually go as far as saying that is a fact.
So your saying there is some evidence of god? By all means, show me!

I can understand that you are likely confused about the source of the evidence, because "religious" people are always going around trying to put forth evidence.

I am not the source of the evidence nor can I communicate an evidence that would be convincing, God is the source of the convincing evidence.

You appear to not want God or need God.  But, should you ever get to the point of George Bailey on the bridge (see "Its a Wonderful Life") where you actually need or want God ... then perhaps you might finally get some evidence.

There is evidence - huge and convincing evidence - but you gotta be open to receiving it.