Are you an Atheist/Believer?

[Loles]

I'm a BIG BIG SEVEN from your list.

If god exists (IF) must to be drunk or under drug all the times, or must to be an insane cause can see the suffering of innocents, day by day.

Or may be a sadist.

Other way I have to say, if some-one is a big scambag it has never got wrong (accident, cancer, bankruptcy, etc) cause let it ravage and annoy to normally people.

But I respect the Believers, only don't understand them. It's must to be my fault.

Edited January 16, 2014 by Loles

[notmyself]

William 'lying' Craig as he is affectionately known.

He has authored or edited over thirty books, including The Kalam Cosmological Argument

Which has been destroyed to the point that even he refuses to use it any longer.

And? What's your point?

Someone being open about the progress of their thinking over the years and moving forward from their earlier lesser efforts only adds to their credibility IMO.

Rather than simply labeling him a liar, how about citing specific assertions in either of those two videos that you think others might agree are patently false?

PS making statements you think are false is not the same as "lying"

His arguments have repeatedly be shown to be facile and untrue. Do I have to provide links to show Hitler was a bad man?

William 'lying' Craig is not of my making, it is a well known term..... hence.

William 'lying' Craig as he is affectionately known.

?

[RandomSand]

Seems like, for atheists, religion is just something to be argued about.

Ironic as atheists love to proclaim that religion is the cause of conflict.

Edited January 16, 2014 by RandomSand

[notmyself]

Seems like, for atheists, religion is just something to be argued about.

Ironic as atheists love to proclaim that religion is the cause of conflict.

Theists make a claim, I reject that claim. Theists claim that I cannot reject it and I say why the **** should I not be able to reject their claim. They say because it is a sin. I say **** *** because sin is a religious concept and I have no reason to believe it is true. Hence the conflict.

Simple really.

[Edit] Interesting take on it so thank you fellow member.

Edited January 16, 2014 by notmyself

[Rajab Al Zarahni]

Seems like, for atheists, religion is just something to be argued about.

Ironic as atheists love to proclaim that religion is the cause of conflict.

There is nothing wrong with argument. It does not follow that argument has to be hostile or ill mannered. Rather the problem arises when people stop arguing in a measured and tolerant way.

Religious people are frequently engaged in hostilities with each other through dogmatism because dogmatism is the cornerstone of religion. If anyone wants to know about my views or beliefs the I would be pleased to tell them but I won't be angry or disappointed if they want to believe something else or if in the first place they don't want to know.

Religion is without doubt the cause of considerable conflict throughout the world, largely through dogmatism and intolerance of the views of others. The conquest of America, the inquisition and the Crusades are ample evidence of religious intolerance and dogmatism.

[wym]

And? What's your point?

Someone being open about the progress of their thinking over the years and moving forward from their earlier lesser efforts only adds to their credibility IMO.

Rather than simply labeling him a liar, how about citing specific assertions in either of those two videos that you think others might agree are patently false?

PS making statements you think are false is not the same as "lying"

His arguments have repeatedly be shown to be facile and untrue. Do I have to provide links to show Hitler was a bad man?

William 'lying' Craig is not of my making, it is a well known term..... hence.

I hope you don't think that level of argument lends "your side" any credibility at all.

Quite the contrary.

[notmyself]

And? What's your point?

Someone being open about the progress of their thinking over the years and moving forward from their earlier lesser efforts only adds to their credibility IMO.

Rather than simply labeling him a liar, how about citing specific assertions in either of those two videos that you think others might agree are patently false?

PS making statements you think are false is not the same as "lying"

His arguments have repeatedly be shown to be facile and untrue. Do I have to provide links to show Hitler was a bad man?

William 'lying' Craig is not of my making, it is a well known term..... hence.

I hope you don't think that level of argument lends "your side" any credibility at all.

Quite the contrary.

"your side"

Not sure what you mean by this.

[drx13]

An insight into the issue of how so many variables had to come together, (Bill Brysons excellent "AShort History of Nearly Everything is very readable on this), to create our planet and inhabitants is addressed in http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NtMwAUaftSU

This is only touched on at the end of this series, and to us atheists, whose belief system is the only one arrived at by thought and reasoning, may be superfluous, but the whole concept of infinity where some infinities can be greater than others, gives us another exercise for our minds.

BTW there are so many BBC and other sources of "Is there a God....etc" on youtube that we might need a near infinite life span to view them all. Add in all the audiobooks on UseNet then another dimension of infinity.

As the tempo of sectarian i.e. religious slaughter continues I'm reminded of Voltaire's "those who get us to believe in absurdities get us to commit atrocities"

For those who point ot that the irreligious are also capable of mass slaughter, I would like to ask them.."OK, but why must those with the same Gods slaughter each other ?"

On a personal note I was "educated" as a Catholic and as early as 10 years old saw how ridiculous the whole concept was, I was not abused by the priest but he would pursue me into my teens and ask, "Do you want to go to Hell with all these heathens?" waving a dismissive hand in the direction mankind in general.

Edited January 16, 2014 by drx13

[drx13]

quote "Religion is without doubt the cause of considerable conflict throughout the world"

The greatest understatement ever made on TV ?

[notmyself]

and to us atheists, whose belief system is the only one arrived at by thought and reasoning

Atheism is a position with regard to a single claim and not a belief system or world view.

Edited January 16, 2014 by notmyself

[greytown]

On a personal note I was "educated" as a Catholic and as early as 10 years old saw how ridiculous the whole concept was

Awesome. Must be amazing to be this wise. Surely you must have published some sort of pamphlet by age 11 exposing the whole religious thing as a scam aimed at manipulating the feeble minded? Good thing you saw right through it!

[Ulysses G.]

and to us atheists, whose belief system is the only one arrived at by thought and reasoning

Au contraire. Anyone who takes a good look at the universe while using thought and reasoning, could easily come to the conclusion that it did not happen by accident - that someone or something planned it.

[sirineou]

and to us atheists, whose belief system is the only one arrived at by thought and reasoning

Au contraire. Anyone who takes a good look at the universe while using thought and reasoning, could easily come to the conclusion that it did not happen by accident - that someone or something planned it.

That is, wonderful.!!

Yet 733 posts later and we still wait for some of that "reasoning" that led to the conclusion that "someone or something planned it "

oh wait . sorry I forgot, "some one or something" wrote a book a few thousands of years ago that told us so.

[thailiketoo]

and to us atheists, whose belief system is the only one arrived at by thought and reasoning

Au contraire. Anyone who takes a good look at the universe while using thought and reasoning, could easily come to the conclusion that it did not happen by accident - that someone or something planned it.

That is, wonderful.!!

Yet 733 posts later and we still wait for some of that "reasoning" that led to the conclusion that "someone or something planned it "

oh wait . sorry I forgot, "some one or something" wrote a book a few thousands of years ago that told us so.

I went to a course taught by a very bright Jesuit professor. He said that everything must have a cause. According to this line of reasoning, a first cause is logically necessary, since an infinite chain of causes leaves everything without a cause. This first cause is assumed to be God. I disagreed. I see no reason why an infinite chain is not just as logical.

[Ulysses G.]

oh wait . sorry I forgot, "some one or something" wrote a book a few thousands of years ago that told us so.

Poppycock. Mankind figured out that someone or something probably planned it, long before that book was ever written.

Edited January 17, 2014 by Ulysses G.

[sirineou]

oh wait . sorry I forgot, "some one or something" wrote a book a few thousands of years ago that told us so.

Poppycock. Mankind figured out that someone or something probably planned it, long before that book was ever written.

not figure out . I would say imagined,

When a tsunami hit , it was Poseidon, but now we know better, When a volcano exploded, it was Hifestus but now we know better

When god told Abraham to kill his son we called him a prophet, when god told Deanna Laney to kill her two sons in Texas a few years ago. we called her insane and put her away.

[Dimpys Dad]

and to us atheists, whose belief system is the only one arrived at by thought and reasoning

Au contraire. Anyone who takes a good look at the universe while using thought and reasoning, could easily come to the conclusion that it did not happen by accident - that someone or something planned it.

That is, wonderful.!!

Yet 733 posts later and we still wait for some of that "reasoning" that led to the conclusion that "someone or something planned it "

oh wait . sorry I forgot, "some one or something" wrote a book a few thousands of years ago that told us so.

There are many believers in God who are quite capable of constructive reasoning, just like many atheists. Too often though, the arguments between them degenerate into insults which serve no useful purpose in the quest for the truth, which I will presume, atheists are seeking just like believers.

The growing and convincing movement called Intelligent Design has analyzed nature through scientific method and, yes, reasoning in order to find, discover or explain, however one wishes to characterize it, the existence of a Higher Intelligence that created or caused to be created the seen world. Intelligent Design theorists and scientists use empirical methods to investigate nature from the standpoint that it was designed rather than being the result of a happy accident resulting from a cataclysmic event and lots and lots of time.

There are arguments for and against Intelligent Design. But it does no good to either side, if one is actually wanting the truth, to shut out the other. If you truly want some reasoning that leads to a conclusion that "someone or something planned it", you should have no issues with a little reading on the subject. This link below is not intended as final proof of the existence of God or even to convince you in any way that there is. I am offering it because you insinuate that believers are irrational and unreasoning which is bigoted.

If you are not interested and have absolute conclusive evidence there is no God, then this will be of no use to you but for those out there who are willing to read a bit and hopefully expand ones perspective here is an interesting read:

Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy - Design Arguments for the existence of God - http://www.iep.utm.edu/design/

Complexity in itself does not prove design. But design does require intelligence.

[thailiketoo]

and to us atheists, whose belief system is the only one arrived at by thought and reasoning

Au contraire. Anyone who takes a good look at the universe while using thought and reasoning, could easily come to the conclusion that it did not happen by accident - that someone or something planned it.

That is, wonderful.!!

Yet 733 posts later and we still wait for some of that "reasoning" that led to the conclusion that "someone or something planned it "

oh wait . sorry I forgot, "some one or something" wrote a book a few thousands of years ago that told us so.

There are many believers in God who are quite capable of constructive reasoning, just like many atheists. Too often though, the arguments between them degenerate into insults which serve no useful purpose in the quest for the truth, which I will presume, atheists are seeking just like believers.

The growing and convincing movement called Intelligent Design has analyzed nature through scientific method and, yes, reasoning in order to find, discover or explain, however one wishes to characterize it, the existence of a Higher Intelligence that created or caused to be created the seen world. Intelligent Design theorists and scientists use empirical methods to investigate nature from the standpoint that it was designed rather than being the result of a happy accident resulting from a cataclysmic event and lots and lots of time.

There are arguments for and against Intelligent Design. But it does no good to either side, if one is actually wanting the truth, to shut out the other. If you truly want some reasoning that leads to a conclusion that "someone or something planned it", you should have no issues with a little reading on the subject. This link below is not intended as final proof of the existence of God or even to convince you in any way that there is. I am offering it because you insinuate that believers are irrational and unreasoning which is bigoted.

If you are not interested and have absolute conclusive evidence there is no God, then this will be of no use to you but for those out there who are willing to read a bit and hopefully expand ones perspective here is an interesting read:

Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy - Design Arguments for the existence of God - http://www.iep.utm.edu/design/

Complexity in itself does not prove design. But design does require intelligence.

You wrote, "design does require intellegence." A snowflake is complicated and also 100% natural and random in design. So why does design require intelligence?

[Dimpys Dad]

You wrote, "design does require intellegence." A snowflake is complicated and also 100% natural and random in design. So why does design require intelligence?

Since atheists do not believe there is a designer, perhaps I should have said, "But if it is designed, the design does require intelligence".

Correct, snowflakes, like everything else in nature, are very complex, natural and random, no two alike. But look at each one's symmetry. Does that not look like a "design"?

[sirineou]

There are many believers in God who are quite capable of constructive reasoning, just like many atheists. Too often though, the arguments between them degenerate into insults which serve no useful purpose in the quest for the truth, which I will presume, atheists are seeking just like believers.

No such deterioration in this thread, or any of the debates I have being involved in, though some christians frustrated after having all their arguments defeated have told me that I will burn in hell.

But on the whole I think this thread has being pretty civil.

This Is a seminar by Neil De Grasse on the subject of intelligent design , It is very thoughtful, and treats the subject with respect. I hope you watch it.

regardless of whether you agree or not I promise you you will not be disappointed, dont be put off by the title, this is something the person who posted this wrote.

[Dimpys Dad]

There are many believers in God who are quite capable of constructive reasoning, just like many atheists. Too often though, the arguments between them degenerate into insults which serve no useful purpose in the quest for the truth, which I will presume, atheists are seeking just like believers.

No such deterioration in this thread, or any of the debates I have being involved in, though some christians frustrated after having all their arguments defeated have told me that I will burn in hell.

But on the whole I think this thread has being pretty civil.

This Is a seminar by Neil De Grasse on the subject of intelligent design , It is very thoughtful, and treats the subject with respect. I hope you watch it.

regardless of whether you agree or not I promise you you will not be disappointed, dont be put off by the title, this is something the person who posted this wrote.

Ok, I agree that the discussions have been civil but not without snide comments that are nothing but thinly veiled insults, but better than outright insults, I must say. And as a believer who respects others because they are made in the image of God just as I am, I am frustrated by those who resort to dismissives such as you refer to above. I laugh sometimes when a discussion reaches a point where there is no sense in continuing, when the last words are something like "you're an idiot" or "you will burn in hell". But the subject of this thread is obviously compelling. So much that it always generates vigorous discussion. Why is that, I wonder?

Otherwise, I am not able at right at this time to view the video but promise to watch it at my soonest opportunity. Thank you for the link.

[Chainsaw]

I'm a definite seven.

I've no problem with anyone believing in whatever deity they want/choose.

It's when it comes to believers indoctrinating/brainwashing their children into holding the same beliefs that I strongly disagree.

Kids should be left to make their own decision on what to believe when they are old enough to understand the concept and are aware of all the different religions.

Bending a child's mind is child abuse!

[StreetCowboy]

I'm a definite seven.

I've no problem with anyone believing in whatever deity they want/choose.

It's when it comes to believers indoctrinating/brainwashing their children into holding the same beliefs that I strongly disagree.

Kids should be left to make their own decision on what to believe when they are old enough to understand the concept and are aware of all the different religions.

Bending a child's mind is child abuse!

We don't take the same approach with map-reading. I don't think that guiding children to the best of our abilities is child abuse.

SC

[RandomSand]

How can anyone say they know that there isn't a god ?

If two people came up to me, the first is 100% sure of god, and the second 100% sure of no god, I'd say the believer was logically more likely to be correct than the other.

Really the question in the OP isn't very good. "God" refers to a personable individual or entity. However; many of the believers in this thread have alluded to a non-deistic belief system.

Edited January 17, 2014 by RandomSand

[cashpower]

as a committed scientologist (operating thetan level 7) i sometimes wonder at the bizarre religions other people follow. Of course they are complete nonsense but i try to stay polite and understanding

[thailiketoo]

How can anyone say they know that there isn't a god ?

If two people came up to me, the first is 100% sure of god, and the second 100% sure of no god, I'd say the believer was logically more likely to be correct than the other.

Really the question in the OP isn't very good. "God" refers to a personable individual or entity. However; many of the believers in this thread have alluded to a non-deistic belief system.

If I walked up to you and pointed to the sky and said there is not an blimp flying overhead and we both looked up and confirmed that fact would I still have to prove something that is not there? In other words, would you say well there may be a blimp overhead the fact that I don't see one may mean that the blimp is invisible?

Edited January 17, 2014 by thailiketoo

[Chainsaw]

I'm a definite seven.

I've no problem with anyone believing in whatever deity they want/choose.

It's when it comes to believers indoctrinating/brainwashing their children into holding the same beliefs that I strongly disagree.

Kids should be left to make their own decision on what to believe when they are old enough to understand the concept and are aware of all the different religions.

Bending a child's mind is child abuse!

We don't take the same approach with map-reading. I don't think that guiding children to the best of our abilities is child abuse.

SC

But what if it was an invisible map with NO evidence that it actually existed at all? Would you 'guide' the child to believe that it did exist just because YOU believed it?

Equating blind faith to map-reading is ridiculous.

[RandomSand]

How can anyone say they know that there isn't a god ?

If two people came up to me, the first is 100% sure of god, and the second 100% sure of no god, I'd say the believer was logically more likely to be correct than the other.

Really the question in the OP isn't very good. "God" refers to a personable individual or entity. However; many of the believers in this thread have alluded to a non-deistic belief system.

If I walked up to you and pointed to the sky and said there is not an blimp flying overhead and we both looked up and confirmed that fact would I still have to prove something that is not there? In other words, would you say well there may be a blimp overhead the fact that I don't see one may mean that the blimp is invisible?

Nice try.

If I said to a child there's electromagnetic waves in the sky, and the child wouldn't believe me because it wasn't viable to the naked eye; the child might consider me some kind of hysterical fruitcake might they?

[Rajab Al Zarahni]

as a committed scientologist (operating thetan level 7) i sometimes wonder at the bizarre religions other people follow. Of course they are complete nonsense but i try to stay polite and understanding

Whats a thetan ?

[thailiketoo]

How can anyone say they know that there isn't a god ?

If two people came up to me, the first is 100% sure of god, and the second 100% sure of no god, I'd say the believer was logically more likely to be correct than the other.

Really the question in the OP isn't very good. "God" refers to a personable individual or entity. However; many of the believers in this thread have alluded to a non-deistic belief system.

If I walked up to you and pointed to the sky and said there is not an blimp flying overhead and we both looked up and confirmed that fact would I still have to prove something that is not there? In other words, would you say well there may be a blimp overhead the fact that I don't see one may mean that the blimp is invisible?

Nice try.

If I said to a child there's electromagnetic waves in the sky, and the child wouldn't believe me because it wasn't viable to the naked eye; the child might consider me some kind of hysterical fruitcake might they?

Nice try. Electromagnetic waves are visible with a meter. You expect me to prove the nonexistence of something.