Thread: So, I think Christians are stupid.

This whole thread seems to have gone where it would predictably go - into the eternal theist vs. atheist debate. People have debated this for thousands of years and never gotten anywhere. I wonder what the chances are we will solve the question here and now.

At the risk of changing the subject, I wonder if it can be proven one way or the other. Someone posted earlier with the argument that being able to prove God's existence would be bringing God down to the level of creation (or something to that effect). I debate this in my own mind quite often. Can we prove the existence through natural means of someone who lies outside of the natural realm? Sometimes I think yes, and sometimes I think no.

Either way, it seems to me that there are cases in life in which we are forced to make decisions without sufficient facts. This is when we have to act on faith. Two doctors may give you separate opinions, and you have to choose between them. People thinking about marriage or starting a family have to decide if now is the right time, or if it is better to wait. In extreme situations people have to make life or death decisions on the spot with no time for investigation.

Which makes me think this: we are all going to face death, and we don't seem to have sufficient evidence to prove 100% how we should proceed. What do we do?

Atheist answer: "Nothing. There is no afterlife, and no god. We can't do anything about death, so what we need to do is enjoy this life as much as we can."

Agnostic answer: "Nothing. I can't prove the existence of the afterlife or God, so I won't act in any way in regards to death. I'll just let it happen and hope for the best. Maybe there is an afterlife, and it will be pleasant. Hopefully there really is no Hell. Death may just be nonexistence, so we might as well enjoy this life as much as we can."

Theist answer: "Make a decision based on faith, as we have to do sometimes in life. There may be a God and and afterlife, so I will investigate and see what I can find out. I'll talk to believers, go to church, read the Bible and other books, and try to reach a conclusion. I'll pray to whatever God there may be to give me guidance. Then, I will be able to enjoy life as much as I can, and be set up to enjoy the next as much as I can, too. Heck, if I was wrong all along what difference will it make except to make me rest easier while I was alive and give me a purpose and direction in life?"

To me, not making a decision about eternity because you need to have complete proof that it will be a correct one is like not seeking treatment for a fatal illness because you don't know if it will be successful or not.

Just some thoughts that occurred to me while reading this thread. Does this sound right to anyone else?

once you realize the origins

As long as that answer keeps you satisfied blue, then who am I argue.
Later

Originally Posted by cedward1

This whole thread seems to have gone where it would predictably go - into the eternal theist vs. atheist debate. People have debated this for thousands of years and never gotten anywhere. I wonder what the chances are we will solve the question here and now.

At the risk of changing the subject, I wonder if it can be proven one way or the other. Someone posted earlier with the argument that being able to prove God's existence would be bringing God down to the level of creation (or something to that effect). I debate this in my own mind quite often. Can we prove the existence through natural means of someone who lies outside of the natural realm? Sometimes I think yes, and sometimes I think no.

Either way, it seems to me that there are cases in life in which we are forced to make decisions without sufficient facts. This is when we have to act on faith. Two doctors may give you separate opinions, and you have to choose between them. People thinking about marriage or starting a family have to decide if now is the right time, or if it is better to wait. In extreme situations people have to make life or death decisions on the spot with no time for investigation.

Which makes me think this: we are all going to face death, and we don't seem to have sufficient evidence to prove 100% how we should proceed. What do we do?

Atheist answer: "Nothing. There is no afterlife, and no god. We can't do anything about death, so what we need to do is enjoy this life as much as we can."

Agnostic answer: "Nothing. I can't prove the existence of the afterlife or God, so I won't act in any way in regards to death. I'll just let it happen and hope for the best. Maybe there is an afterlife, and it will be pleasant. Hopefully there really is no Hell. Death may just be nonexistence, so we might as well enjoy this life as much as we can."

Theist answer: "Make a decision based on faith, as we have to do sometimes in life. There may be a God and and afterlife, so I will investigate and see what I can find out. I'll talk to believers, go to church, read the Bible and other books, and try to reach a conclusion. I'll pray to whatever God there may be to give me guidance. Then, I will be able to enjoy life as much as I can, and be set up to enjoy the next as much as I can, too. Heck, if I was wrong all along what difference will it make except to make me rest easier while I was alive and give me a purpose and direction in life?"

To me, not making a decision about eternity because you need to have complete proof that it will be a correct one is like not seeking treatment for a fatal illness because you don't know if it will be successful or not.

Just some thoughts that occurred to me while reading this thread. Does this sound right to anyone else?

I call myself atheist and I disagree with your atheist answer.

Just some thoughts that occurred to me while reading this thread. Does this sound right to anyone else?

Ah, the good 'ol afterlife argument. I'm not particularly fond of it, because in most religions, to get into the afterlife, one needs to be good, and to believe in the right god or gods. Assuming there is an afterlife, and that these are the two requirements to get in, then it's just playing the lottery. Hell, maybe only atheists get into heaven because they're fond of logic instead of superstition. The latter requirement is just plain silly. That leaves only the former, which atheists, agnostics, and religious alike can do no problem. Defining "good" is where you start to split hairs. The religious will usually tie being good to some aspect of their religion (i.e. attending church, 10 commandments, blah blah blah). Atheists and agnostics operate under essentially the same code of morality, minus the bullshit superstitious mumbo jumbo. Again, a god that splits hairs that finely sucks, cuz to get into heaven through his route, you need to accept only him and deny some thousands other gods exist.

tl;dr god is a fat bitch if he makes belief a determinate in who goes to where in a hypothetical afterlife.

Originally Posted by Xei

You think we live in the microstructure of the detritus of Barney's suit?

Crazy theist.

The microstructure of Barney's suit is measured in megaparsecs? We really do live in a cyclical universe after all.........

No no, it's just that whenever Barney was on the show, he was really far away. Really, really far.

Greenhavoc;

You ask why the attacks on religion (more to the point; Christianity and Christians)? The answer lies in this generation. Kids who grew up on the internet. The mask of anonymity allows repressed youths to take out their boredom, their loneliness, their secret hopes and their deep fears out upon a faceless mass. Something that is sort of a effigy for their undirected anger and frustration. That being religion; and usually, Christians.

Don't take their resentment, driven with an deep desire to be right and to win...personally. Instead, look past the insults to the meat of the message; these posts are usually based around a valid argument or fact. Use this. Evaluate your own beliefs. Critically analyze yourself and why you think as you do.

Ignore everything else. They're just children.

Dunno if this has been posted but...

YouTube - Crazy Christian Extremist Women

Originally Posted by LucidFlanders

Dunno if this has been posted but...

YouTube - Crazy Christian Extremist Women

What the fuck is wrong with Americans?

I am Canadian so i could not tell you.

Ok, well, I read a lot of this thread, but not all of it, so if I overlap a bit, forgive me.

For starters, let's all agree that there is such a thing as right and wrong. If you tell me there is no such thing, then I guess I'll kill you in the most painful way, and as you lay suffering and dying I'll make you watch me steal all that you own, laugh, and then walk away. I think we both know that would NOT be ok. Therefore, right and wrong DO exist. There IS such a thing as morality. It's only logical to believe so.

Let's also agree that there is such a thing as absolutes. If you tell me all things are relative, then tell me how you know when you're moving or not moving. After all, if all things are relative, the world around you could be in constant motion, and you'd never know if it was you that was moving or everything around you, and there would be no one coherent direction for anything. So absolutes do exist as well. It's logical to believe that as well.

In addition, let's agree that existence exists. If you ask me "how do I know I exist?" I will reply, "Who, pray tell, is asking?" If you still aren't convinced, and you ask how I know the doorknob on the other side of the door exists, I'll walk around to the other side and ask you if you see the doorknob that, from my perspective, and under your assumption, does not exist.

Since these and other popular modern beliefs can be trumped by logic, as I demonstrated in my brief examples, should we not also assume that the correct beliefs (which is simply, that which is absolutely true and factual) can be formed by logic? And logic tells us to look around. And what do we see? We see a world full of limitless wonders that we, boasting the best and brightest scientific methods and technology available, cannot even begin to truly understand. And when scientists say they don't understand something, it usually comes out something like this: "it must have been evolved over millions of years!" Yeah, right. That's what the entry-level scientist thinks, but when you talk to any legitimate scientist that follows a true scientific method, even if they are not Christians they will tell you evolution is illogical and impossible.

Basically, logic tells us that there is a Creator that designed the world and everything in it. But since that is the case, logic also tells us that things weren't always as they are now (i.e. messed up and decaying and all that) because that would make God--the Creator--a failure, which doesn't fit with other things we must believe to be true due to logical conclusions. So we've nailed down that God exists, He made the world, and although it is messed up, it's not His fault that it is so. Then who's left to cause all the trouble? You guessed it. Humanity. Right from the start, people thought they'd be fine without God and by going their own way through life, and this led them to do things that are (drumroll please) wrong/disobedient, and that had serious consequences upon the world.

All this we can determine just from observation combined with logical thinking. And guess what? If you pick up the Bible and read the first few chapters, you'll find it to agree 100% with all of this.

My point is, the Bible can be validated through real-life proofs in many, many ways (only one of them did I take the time to go through). Therefore, logically, we must believe it all to be 100% true and correct, kind of like how we believe a book on World War II (or some other historical topic) to be correct because of real-life validation (although it is different with the Bible, since it wasn't written via biased ideas of men).

And this is coming from a guy who wasn't "just always a Christian", so it isn't that it was just "hard for me to let go of my faith" as some have suggested earlier in this thread. If you really test the Bible (which is scientific, is it not?) you WILL find it to be true. Always. Fight it all you want, but sooner or later you'll have to realize that things are a certain way, and you can't change it by pretending life works some other way, so you might as well realize it and accept it while you're still alive instead of waiting until you're dead to find the truth out the hard way and wish you'd lived differently because of it.



NOTE: BECAUSE I DO NOT WISH TO CREATE A PROLONGED ARGUMENT, I WILL NOT POST AGAIN IN THIS THREAD. IF YOU WANT TO TALK TO ME MORE, SEND ME A PM AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO RESPOND.

Originally Posted by LiveInTheDream

Ok, well, I read a lot of this thread, but not all of it, so if I overlap a bit, forgive me.

For starters, let's all agree that there is such a thing as right and wrong. If you tell me there is no such thing, then I guess I'll kill you in the most painful way, and as you lay suffering and dying I'll make you watch me steal all that you own, laugh, and then walk away. I think we both know that would NOT be ok. Therefore, right and wrong DO exist. There IS such a thing as morality. It's only logical to believe so.

Let's also agree that there is such a thing as absolutes. If you tell me all things are relative, then tell me how you know when you're moving or not moving. After all, if all things are relative, the world around you could be in constant motion, and you'd never know if it was you that was moving or everything around you, and there would be no one coherent direction for anything. So absolutes do exist as well. It's logical to believe that as well.

In addition, let's agree that existence exists. If you ask me "how do I know I exist?" I will reply, "Who, pray tell, is asking?" If you still aren't convinced, and you ask how I know the doorknob on the other side of the door exists, I'll walk around to the other side and ask you if you see the doorknob that, from my perspective, and under your assumption, does not exist.

Since these and other popular modern beliefs can be trumped by logic, as I demonstrated in my brief examples, should we not also assume that the correct beliefs (which is simply, that which is absolutely true and factual) can be formed by logic? And logic tells us to look around. And what do we see? We see a world full of limitless wonders that we, boasting the best and brightest scientific methods and technology available, cannot even begin to truly understand. And when scientists say they don't understand something, it usually comes out something like this: "it must have been evolved over millions of years!" Yeah, right. That's what the entry-level scientist thinks, but when you talk to any legitimate scientist that follows a true scientific method, even if they are not Christians they will tell you evolution is illogical and impossible.

Basically, logic tells us that there is a Creator that designed the world and everything in it. But since that is the case, logic also tells us that things weren't always as they are now (i.e. messed up and decaying and all that) because that would make God--the Creator--a failure, which doesn't fit with other things we must believe to be true due to logical conclusions. So we've nailed down that God exists, He made the world, and although it is messed up, it's not His fault that it is so. Then who's left to cause all the trouble? You guessed it. Humanity. Right from the start, people thought they'd be fine without God and by going their own way through life, and this led them to do things that are (drumroll please) wrong/disobedient, and that had serious consequences upon the world.

All this we can determine just from observation combined with logical thinking. And guess what? If you pick up the Bible and read the first few chapters, you'll find it to agree 100% with all of this.

My point is, the Bible can be validated through real-life proofs in many, many ways (only one of them did I take the time to go through). Therefore, logically, we must believe it all to be 100% true and correct, kind of like how we believe a book on World War II (or some other historical topic) to be correct because of real-life validation (although it is different with the Bible, since it wasn't written via biased ideas of men).

And this is coming from a guy who wasn't "just always a Christian", so it isn't that it was just "hard for me to let go of my faith" as some have suggested earlier in this thread. If you really test the Bible (which is scientific, is it not?) you WILL find it to be true. Always. Fight it all you want, but sooner or later you'll have to realize that things are a certain way, and you can't change it by pretending life works some other way, so you might as well realize it and accept it while you're still alive instead of waiting until you're dead to find the truth out the hard way and wish you'd lived differently because of it.



NOTE: BECAUSE I DO NOT WISH TO CREATE A PROLONGED ARGUMENT, I WILL NOT POST AGAIN IN THIS THREAD. IF YOU WANT TO TALK TO ME MORE, SEND ME A PM AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO RESPOND.

oh man

oh

oh

oh man.

man.

dreamviews r/s forum is not going to be happy with this post.

The whole, fatal misconception of most religions and spiritual doctrines is that "God" is an external entity.
God is merely a methafor for Being; The unmanifested, formless life that underlies all of existance.

And the only entree point into this state of consciousness is within ourselves.
"zen", "the peace of God", "Being" or however you name it, is currently being sought by millions of people outside of themselves; where they will never find it.

Instead they have created a mental image of God/Being/Zen. This mental image is an illusion and most religious scriptures are FULL of this illusion.
These doctrines keep people in cycles of fear, polarity and insanity, subsequently leading to conflict, violence and destruction.


I really recommend the teachings of Eckhart Tolle: "The Power of Now" and "A New Earth" have cleared many things up for me concerning the old religions and other such collective insanity.
Understanding this has helped me to transcend it and it brought me inner peace. May it bring inner peace to you too.

Originally Posted by Grod

oh man

oh

oh

oh man.

man.

dreamviews r/s forum is not going to be happy with this post.

Someone is probably typing a rebuttal this very instance.

Originally Posted by SKA

The whole, fatal misconception of most religions and spiritual doctrines is that "God" is an external entity.
God is merely a methafor for Being; The unmanifested, formless life that underlies all of existance.

And the only entree point into this state of consciousness is within ourselves.

I agree with the rest of your post, but maybe you can elaborate on this for me.

Unless I've misinterpreted you, you're saying something like the "we/humanity are our own gods" idealogue?

While that thought always seemed plausible to me, why not go one step further and remove the being/god/energy part? I guess what I'm asking is, maybe you could describe what you mean by this. I'm not trying to be facetious, I'm curious at what you're getting at.

I've practiced zen buddhism for most of my life, and while meditation is of course great, I've never thought there was more than ourselves out there. I've always been a secular practitioner, maybe slightly 'spiritual' but not in a defined way, I hesitate even using that word.

Anyway, if you could please elaborate on what you mean I'd like that verymuch.

Originally Posted by LiveInTheDream

Ok, well, I read a lot of this thread, but not all of it, so if I overlap a bit, forgive me.

For starters, let's all agree that there is such a thing as right and wrong. If you tell me there is no such thing, then I guess I'll kill you in the most painful way, and as you lay suffering and dying I'll make you watch me steal all that you own, laugh, and then walk away. I think we both know that would NOT be ok. Therefore, right and wrong DO exist. There IS such a thing as morality. It's only logical to believe so.

Let's also agree that there is such a thing as absolutes. If you tell me all things are relative, then tell me how you know when you're moving or not moving. After all, if all things are relative, the world around you could be in constant motion, and you'd never know if it was you that was moving or everything around you, and there would be no one coherent direction for anything. So absolutes do exist as well. It's logical to believe that as well.

In addition, let's agree that existence exists. If you ask me "how do I know I exist?" I will reply, "Who, pray tell, is asking?" If you still aren't convinced, and you ask how I know the doorknob on the other side of the door exists, I'll walk around to the other side and ask you if you see the doorknob that, from my perspective, and under your assumption, does not exist.

Since these and other popular modern beliefs can be trumped by logic, as I demonstrated in my brief examples, should we not also assume that the correct beliefs (which is simply, that which is absolutely true and factual) can be formed by logic? And logic tells us to look around. And what do we see? We see a world full of limitless wonders that we, boasting the best and brightest scientific methods and technology available, cannot even begin to truly understand. And when scientists say they don't understand something, it usually comes out something like this: "it must have been evolved over millions of years!" Yeah, right. That's what the entry-level scientist thinks, but when you talk to any legitimate scientist that follows a true scientific method, even if they are not Christians they will tell you evolution is illogical and impossible.

Basically, logic tells us that there is a Creator that designed the world and everything in it. But since that is the case, logic also tells us that things weren't always as they are now (i.e. messed up and decaying and all that) because that would make God--the Creator--a failure, which doesn't fit with other things we must believe to be true due to logical conclusions. So we've nailed down that God exists, He made the world, and although it is messed up, it's not His fault that it is so. Then who's left to cause all the trouble? You guessed it. Humanity. Right from the start, people thought they'd be fine without God and by going their own way through life, and this led them to do things that are (drumroll please) wrong/disobedient, and that had serious consequences upon the world.

All this we can determine just from observation combined with logical thinking. And guess what? If you pick up the Bible and read the first few chapters, you'll find it to agree 100% with all of this.

My point is, the Bible can be validated through real-life proofs in many, many ways (only one of them did I take the time to go through). Therefore, logically, we must believe it all to be 100% true and correct, kind of like how we believe a book on World War II (or some other historical topic) to be correct because of real-life validation (although it is different with the Bible, since it wasn't written via biased ideas of men).

And this is coming from a guy who wasn't "just always a Christian", so it isn't that it was just "hard for me to let go of my faith" as some have suggested earlier in this thread. If you really test the Bible (which is scientific, is it not?) you WILL find it to be true. Always. Fight it all you want, but sooner or later you'll have to realize that things are a certain way, and you can't change it by pretending life works some other way, so you might as well realize it and accept it while you're still alive instead of waiting until you're dead to find the truth out the hard way and wish you'd lived differently because of it.



NOTE: BECAUSE I DO NOT WISH TO CREATE A PROLONGED ARGUMENT, I WILL NOT POST AGAIN IN THIS THREAD. IF YOU WANT TO TALK TO ME MORE, SEND ME A PM AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO RESPOND.

I might reply to this in more depth tomorrow since I'm short on time, but there are a few glaring points that are far beyond ridiculous.

There IS such a thing as morality. It's only logical to believe so.

It's far more likely that the concept of morality was practiced through our more instinctual ancestors, and when humans evolved a higher brain, the concept because a sort of established way of living life. Oddly enough we've observed "moral" behavior in many lesser animals. Far more likely than what the sort of morality a dusty old book filled with genocidal imaginary friends dictates.

And when scientists say they don't understand something, it usually comes out something like this: "it must have been evolved over millions of years!" Yeah, right. That's what the entry-level scientist thinks, but when you talk to any legitimate scientist that follows a true scientific method, even if they are not Christians they will tell you evolution is illogical and impossible.

What? Why do I keep seeing this completely nonsensical claim that scientists don't think Evolution is a fact of science? What are your sources? Or did you just take what you read on answersingenesis.org and accept it?

Basically, logic tells us that there is a Creator that designed the world and everything in it. But since that is the case, logic also tells us that things weren't always as they are now (i.e. messed up and decaying and all that) because that would make God--the Creator--a failure, which doesn't fit with other things we must believe to be true due to logical conclusions. So we've nailed down that God exists, He made the world, and although it is messed up, it's not His fault that it is so. Then who's left to cause all the trouble? You guessed it. Humanity. Right from the start, people thought they'd be fine without God and by going their own way through life, and this led them to do things that are (drumroll please) wrong/disobedient, and that had serious consequences upon the world.

All you said was "logic tells us that a Creator designed the world and everything in it....Now that we've established that God exists..." What is this alleged logic? If you wrote that in a paper you'd be marked down for not citing your sources.

If you really test the Bible (which is scientific, is it not?) you WILL find it to be true.

Brb, gonna go kill some homosexuals. Then I'm gonna kill myself by building a time machine and drown myself in Noah's flood for being a non-believer. Oh wait, it never happened.

Originally Posted by LiveInTheDream

Let's also agree that there is such a thing as absolutes. If you tell me all things are relative, then tell me how you know when you're moving or not moving. After all, if all things are relative, the world around you could be in constant motion, and you'd never know if it was you that was moving or everything around you, and there would be no one coherent direction for anything. So absolutes do exist as well. It's logical to believe that as well.

Did your school have a science class? If so, were you awake for it? The world I live on is constantly in motion. I am moving with it, so relative to it I appear stationary. Other things which are on this world may move at different directions and speeds relative to the motion of that world. In practical terms, they appear to be moving if we consider the Earth to be "stationary." Of course we know it rotates pretty fast and is cruising through space around the sun, but we could be said to be stationary because our speed and direction relative to it are identical.

Finish grade 5 and try again.

Originally Posted by greenhavoc

Spoiler for Silly nonbelievers:

I do know why, but unlike you I just don't have the heart to point out the fallacy of your whole existence, morons.

Spoiler for Punchline:

I'm sorry to hear you're so heartless.

Spoiler for Alternate Punchline:

Either that or you don't have the brains.

I still want a Christian to answer me if the billion Hindus on this planet who believe in eight-legged elephant gods are wrong or crazy.

Another point: When you look at all of the religions and gods people have believed in throughout human history, and how almost 100% of the people who live today don't believe in those religions and gods of antiquity, the current gods and religions don't seem that special, or revelatory.

Whenever one looks around and sees people believing in all of these religions, they should say: "this too shall pass."

The difference is people throughout time believe that they alone are different and special.

Does the atheist community ever meet up somewhere and share similar thoughts on life, religion and the here after - Maybe even a website? If so, do they all agree on the specifics or is it more along the lines of a general understanding; a community goal even? Can someone tell me the difference between this and religion?

Never mind, my heathen cousin has just explained that religion has gods where as atheism is its own god.

Originally Posted by greenhavoc

Does the atheist community ever meet up somewhere and share similar thoughts on life, religion and the here after - Maybe even a website? If so, do they all agree on the specifics or is it more along the lines of a general understanding; a community goal even? Can someone tell me the difference between this and religion?

Never mind, my heathen cousin has just explained that religion has gods where as atheism is its own god.

Atheism is a null position. It has no rituals, no gods, or anything. It is simply a lack of belief in a creator. I'm not sure what "atheism is its own god" even means.

There are indeed various atheist organizations, meet-up groups, communities, etc. The difference is that most of them appear to be discussions only or a means to decrease the influence of religion. I think I was watching a conversation between Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, and Christopher Hitchens (entitled "The Four Horsemen," amusingly enough) and they said the main reason why Atheists have these organizations and groups is due to the fact that it is in the interests of their well-being. If religion was not so loud and influential, and capable of exposing people into serious harm, Atheists would not be so adamant about putting religion in its place.

Edit - Or it may have been in Sam Harris' book The End of Faith.

Edit #2 - OR it may have been in one of Stefan Molyneux's videos...Possibly the one Mario posted in this thread.

Originally Posted by Spartiate

Originally Posted by Xaqaria

Originally Posted by Spartiate

How convenient...

For who?

really

Haha. There's nothing more 'convenient' than the truth. You don't have much of an argument there anyway. Even when Dawkins says things like 'but isn't that too easy' (paraphrased), it just re-emphasizes the childishness of atheism to me.

The "isn't that too easy" type argument is a criticism of the intellectual bankruptcy of saying "god dunnit" instead of just saying "we don't know YET how this works."

Edit to add: How is the modern "god dunnit" gambit any different from not knowing what's going on way out there in the ocean and just saying "Oh, Poseidon dunnit" when there's a storm?