Atheists And The Moon
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-05-2013, 02:36 PM
RE: Atheists And The Moon
(16-05-2013 03:31 PM)cbb2274 Wrote:  
(15-05-2013 09:33 PM)childeye Wrote:  Yes, but you just agreed with me. You imagine god(s) when you imagine no god(s).
These god(s) you imagine are those the so called theists assert which you claim there is not enough evidence to support their existence for. You could not claim there si not enough evidence without imagining them.

I read this reply again and it made me lose the game. Sad

http://www.losethegame.net/

If gods become real every time I imagine them, does that mean I'm a god? Ha ha ha ha. Ha ha ha HA HA HA. BWA HA HA HA HA HA HAAAA! Hobo
Who said they become real when you imagine them?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-05-2013, 02:38 PM
RE: Atheists And The Moon
(16-05-2013 02:55 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  
(16-05-2013 02:14 PM)childeye Wrote:  It's not at all the same thing.

It was only good for those who doubt faith.

Easy tiger. First off, Job wasn't disciplined. As for the Israelites and their enemies, I wasn't there so I couldn't say and neither were you. This could be a metaphor for all we know. It bothers me because he simply could have taken away the computer if that was the issue.

But it shouldn't bother you no matter what happens in any of these circumstances since right and wrong are relative. Your reasoning is therefore a contradiction.

Unlike some atheists, I don't think morality is relative. One way to establish right from wrong is to simply talk to the victims of violent crimes like that one.
Indeed, you are driven by empathy to care what is right and wrong.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-05-2013, 02:44 PM
RE: Atheists And The Moon
(17-05-2013 02:24 PM)kim Wrote:  Religion has demonstrated it's willingness to spread ignorance and destruction.
Religion does not support the progress of humanity or the progress of life on this planet.

Atheism is simply a reaction to religion.
Secular and/or atheist activism is a reaction to the destruction and ignorance which is perpetuated by religion. Drinking Beverage
Well said. The hypocrisy of atheism is not the answer.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-05-2013, 04:13 PM
RE: Atheists And The Moon
(17-05-2013 02:44 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(17-05-2013 02:24 PM)kim Wrote:  Religion has demonstrated it's willingness to spread ignorance and destruction.
Religion does not support the progress of humanity or the progress of life on this planet.

Atheism is simply a reaction to religion.
Secular and/or atheist activism is a reaction to the destruction and ignorance which is perpetuated by religion. Drinking Beverage
Well said. The hypocrisy of atheism is not the answer.

Hypocrisy again? You really don't understand what that word means.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
18-05-2013, 12:02 AM
RE: Atheists And The Moon
(17-05-2013 02:44 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(17-05-2013 02:24 PM)kim Wrote:  Religion has demonstrated it's willingness to spread ignorance and destruction.
Religion does not support the progress of humanity or the progress of life on this planet.

Atheism is simply a reaction to religion.
Secular and/or atheist activism is a reaction to the destruction and ignorance which is perpetuated by religion. Drinking Beverage
Well said. The hypocrisy of atheism is not the answer.

"The hypocrisy of atheism" ?????????????
"the answer." ????????????
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-05-2013, 12:15 AM (This post was last modified: 18-05-2013 12:29 AM by Mark Fulton.)
RE: Atheists And The Moon
(17-05-2013 01:10 PM)PleaseJesus Wrote:  
Quote:Re " the New Testament is one dozen eyewitnesses providing hundreds of pages of written documentary evidence."

What BULLSHIT. Prove it. You can't. NO reputable scholar thinks this

Hi Mark, I see childeye is helping you understand. But please help me understand.

Quote:NO reputable scholar thinks this

That is an absolute worthy of a Sith lord, isn't it? Surely you couldn't possibly mean that ONLY Atheist liberal scholars are reputable? Some religious scholars find the Bible to be more the stuff of fancy than fact, but are you unaware that thousands, even millions, of Jewish and Christian scholars through the centuries, found the Bible to be hundreds of pages of documents with facts in evidence? And even Muslim scholars who say the NT is corrupted somewhat hold that it comes from a true original.

Your statement is one of the most intolerant and belittling statements I've ever heard made about reputable and religious scholars. That isn't what you meant, was it?

You likely meant that you consider, and many mainline scholars consider, that the NT, being hundreds of pages of documents when copied from papyri, scrolls and etc. to modern paper, has hundreds of place names, dates, facts, stories, admonitions and etc. and some falsehoods within.

I'm sure that's what you meant. What you wrote sounded like (dare I invoke Godwin's law here?) Adolf Hitler speaking at a book burning... "We Aryans all KNOW these JEW authors wrote books of lies, all LIES!" [Snarl. Snort.]

No, no, being a reasonable and educated person, you SURELY meant the New Testament has some facts and some prophecies and spiritual teachings you take issue with, too. For example, the historicity of Jesus is a fact:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

Quote: "Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed, and although there is little agreement on the historicity of gospel narratives and their theological assertions of his divinity, biblical scholars AND CLASSICAL HISTORIANS regard theories of his non-existence as effectively REFUTED." - [Emphasis mine]

Read what I wrote....

"no reputable scholar thinks that...the New Testament is one dozen eyewitnesses providing hundreds of pages of written documentary evidence."

I said nothing more than that. I stand by my statement. If you wish to disagree with me state your case. If you want to debate me, I'm here. If childeye would like to help me (and viewers) understand the world he (or she) can join in. Two versus one doesn't faze me.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-05-2013, 12:56 AM (This post was last modified: 18-05-2013 06:52 AM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Atheists And The Moon
The gospels are not "documentary evidence", of any kind. They are faith scrolls/documents, written for proclamation during worship events, to remind Christians what they already believed. They are in no way "historical". The concept of "history" as "fact" and "accurate" did not exist in Hebrew culture at that time. Clearly there are parts of all of them that were invented, (such as the birth narratives), the genealogies, which have impossible to reconcile numbers of generations, and the trial, which is completely different, in each gospel. The death isn't even on the same day, or the same time. All the other mythological/allegorical events surrounding the resurrection, (the rising from the dead of all the other zombies), the torn curtain in the Holy of Holies in the temple, about which NOT ONE Jewish historian ever once said anything, and the earthquakes, (all the others of which were meticulously documented), were made up. THAT is not "documentary" anything. It's an attempt to create a narrative.

Pleasy is REALLY drunk on the cool-aide.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Bucky Ball's post
18-05-2013, 01:38 AM
RE: Atheists And The Moon
What Bucky said.

How 'bout a tag team debate? Bucky and me vs pleasey and childeye.

I'll fire a volley so see if they've any fighting spirit...

Eyewitness Accounts?
“It is certain that the New Testament was not written by Christ himself, nor by his apostles, but a long while after them, by some unknown persons, who, lest they should not be credited when they wrote of affairs they were little acquainted with, affixed to their works the names of the apostles, or of such as were supposed to have been their companions, asserting that what they had written themselves was written according to these persons to whom they ascribed it.”

St. Faustus (c. 490 CE,). (http://books.google.com.au/books?id=O00z...n+that+the ).

Most Christians have been told that direct witnesses of Jesus’ life wrote the four Gospels. This is undoubtedly not true. I can save the reader who wants to know the truth about this a lot of time and frustration. The bottom line is: we don’t know for sure who wrote the Gospels, but the authors weren’t the companions of Jesus, and had never met him or anyone who had known him.

Even the conservative Catholic Encyclopedia states,
“It thus appears that the present titles of the Gospels are not traceable to the Evangelists themselves.” They use the word “evangelist” to avoid “apostle” or “disciple.” They are effectively (and correctly) admitting that the titles of the Gospels, Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, are “not traceable” to Jesus’ apostles. If there was even the slightest bit of good evidence that any of the Gospel authors knew Jesus, or someone who knew Jesus, the Catholic Encyclopedia would make a big deal of it. They don’t because there isn’t. Yet in nearly every church around the world it’s implied these apostles were the authors.

One only needs to leaf through any of the Gospels to realize they weren’t written by eyewitnesses, or by anyone who interrogated eyewitnesses. There are no interviews of Jesus, or his disciples, or of any of the characters in the action. Nowhere do we read a phrase such as
“I, Matthew/Mark/Luke/John saw this or heard that” or
“I was present when” this or that happened, or
“I talked to …who told me… so I asked him...” Everything is written as pure narrative. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_tMTNJzRpXs).

Most modern preachers aren’t inquisitive or honest enough about the source of the dogma they promote.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Mark Fulton's post
18-05-2013, 03:09 PM
RE: Atheists And The Moon
(17-05-2013 02:38 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(16-05-2013 02:55 PM)fstratzero Wrote:  Unlike some atheists, I don't think morality is relative. One way to establish right from wrong is to simply talk to the victims of violent crimes like that one.
Indeed, you are driven by empathy to care what is right and wrong.

Mirror Neurons, 'nuff said.




Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
18-05-2013, 03:15 PM
RE: Atheists And The Moon
(17-05-2013 02:44 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(17-05-2013 02:24 PM)kim Wrote:  Religion has demonstrated it's willingness to spread ignorance and destruction.
Religion does not support the progress of humanity or the progress of life on this planet.

Atheism is simply a reaction to religion.
Secular and/or atheist activism is a reaction to the destruction and ignorance which is perpetuated by religion. Drinking Beverage
Well said. The hypocrisy of atheism is not the answer.

The reason why getting atheists together was compaired to herding cats, was because every atheist may have come to reject god/gods, but has very different ideas on everything else.

View on morals, meanings, philosophies, politics etc... You name it each atheist has a different view on it.

With that being said. The only thing that brings us together is the conclusion that there isn't enough evidence to believe. Anything else you try to attach to atheism is merely something in your imagination.

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like fstratzero's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: