MC Yo Wassup VS Atheism
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-03-2015, 05:27 PM
RE: MC Yo Wassup VS Atheism
(03-03-2015 05:05 PM)Free Wrote:  Welcome to the forum.

I am an atheist, and guess what?

I love my children as much as anyone. I teach them right from wrong according to the very same principles that theists such as yourself have, namely, the Ethic of Reciprocity aka, "The Golden Rule."

I live my life based upon honesty. I believe it is for the greater good that demonstrable truths should always be acknowledged, while beliefs in religions should always be questioned.

Why do I question religious beliefs? Because we have so many different religions, each with different denominations, and each one claiming to be the sole holder of the truth. So how can all the religions, who claim all other religious faiths are false, all be true? Is it not reasonable and honest for me to say, "They cannot all be true?"

So you speak of God. You speak of your beliefs in which you hold to so dearly. It is admirable that you have such resolve in your beliefs, and that you will live your life according to them. It would bring me great pleasure to know that at the end of your life your beliefs proved to be true.

But to critical thinkers such as myself, and others who prefer to employ sound reasoning and intellectual honesty in regards to beliefs such as yours, we have made a decision. We have decided that living our lives according to what can be actually demonstrated to be true via observation is far more honest than living our lives according to unproven beliefs.

You see, no person on this earth has ever proven the existence of a god, angels, or any spiritual realm known as heaven. Yet, we have billions of people from thousands of different religions all believing in some form of a god (Jehovah, Allah, etc) without a single shred of evidence.

A book, such as a Bible, Koran, or any other, does not provide evidence of any such god. If they did, then any book ever written- fiction or otherwise- would also provide evidence of the existence of whatever it is they made a claim to. No, you see, evidence is what can be detected and observed in some way, and no such evidence supporting any kind of god has ever been detected.

Therefore, I personally find it dishonest to believe in something that cannot be demonstrated as being true. How could it be more honest to believe in the god of the bible than it would to believe in any character written in any work of fiction? I mean seriously, neither one has any more evidence for their existence than the other, so don't you think that if I claimed that- for example- Peter Pan was a god that I just might be a little dishonest?

No, we here are atheists. We are atheists because we are being honest with ourselves, and have refused to accept unproven claims based upon faith based religious ideologies. We are atheists because we love our children and families enough to not subject them to beliefs that historically have demonstrated themselves to be the greatest threat ever known to humankind.

We are atheists because we value the truth.

Thanks for the welcome. . I dont doubt you are a good person brother most of us are. You are right there are many faiths and they cant all be true and maybe none of them are but we just dont know one of the might be true. I am Jewish but I do not know if my religion is the true one so I do not follow any principles of any religion but I do feel because of things I experienced on planet earth like sunsets, oceans, hell even orgasms its all just too perfect and too complex not just the logic of it all but the emotion and feeling of contemplating the beautiful chaotic universe that birthed us. I do agree critical thinking for all material world purposes is necessary and is the reason for the success of humanity but theology is not part of our realm. Really love the reply but I will leave you with this food for thought, would it not be more dishonest to admit we know for sure something isnt true when we dont?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-03-2015, 05:30 PM
RE: MC Yo Wassup VS Atheism
(03-03-2015 05:06 PM)mcyowassup Wrote:  I hear you brother thanks for the reply. I am confused by what is an agnostic, atheist I thought they are different opposing beliefs. Also I dont think saying "no god exists" is easier to justify I think that its easier to justify seeing our world and universe that there is indeed most likely some sort of higher power but ultimately even though the chances lean massively towards there indeed is a "god' and I feel deep down there must be, I never the less humbly admit that I am not smart enough to know for sure and am willing to admit there is a very slight chance there is not one.

Sounds like you're agnostic theist. Believe in god, but don't claim knowledge of a god's existence.

Also, it was said that due to the scientifically explainable and predoctable, natural causes behind the complexity of the cosmos, it seems more likely that a god doesn't exist.

Your follow up was basically "complexity, there for god!" Even though it was already pointed out that everything we examine follows natural laws. There has been no evidence of any outside influence on these physics at work... So that rules out miracles; god doesn't appear to actually intervene, ever. Design is also out the window when you examine the really poorly designed parts of life (giraffe vocal chords and such.)

If you believe that God started the universe and doesn't currently interact with it, or that god IS the universe and it's workings... Well then he's either an unprovable fable or a mislabeled universe. In either case he's not a personal god, and in the latter, he doesn't even have intent or personality.

Also, if god made the universe and doesn't interact with it, he needn't be omnipotent or omniscient. He could be a grunt that works on a universe assembly line... A nobody.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like WeAreTheCosmos's post
03-03-2015, 05:31 PM (This post was last modified: 03-03-2015 05:37 PM by pablo.)
RE: MC Yo Wassup VS Atheism
(03-03-2015 04:47 PM)mcyowassup Wrote:  
(03-03-2015 04:43 PM)TheStraightener Wrote:  Is there any evidence in that link?

Bro you totally missed the point of the video and my claim. I claim Not to know because its too complex so no there is no evidence because if I had evidence of ignorance what logical sense would that make. I just want Atheists to not to stress so much that they know for sure there isnt a higher power just claim you dont know and its okay not to. Does this clear up my perspective?

You don't know what atheism is.
I have a feeling that's not all.

This smells very sock-y.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-03-2015, 05:31 PM (This post was last modified: 03-03-2015 05:42 PM by unfogged.)
RE: MC Yo Wassup VS Atheism
(03-03-2015 05:06 PM)mcyowassup Wrote:  I hear you brother thanks for the reply. I am confused by what is an agnostic, atheist I thought they are different opposing beliefs.

There are different definitions. The most useful ones I have found divide the issue into two questions: "What do you believe?" and "What do you know?"

Theism/Atheism addresses the first question. Theists believe that there is a god while atheists do not believe any claims of a god existing.

Gnostic/Agnostic addresses the second question. Gnostics are certain of their position while agnostics do not claim knowledge.

Gnostic Theist: there is undoubtedly a god
Agnostic Theist: I believe there is a god, I can't prove it
Agnostic Atheist: I don't believe any claims of gods existing, I can't prove none do
Gnostic Atheist: there definitely are no gods

It gets hairy when you get into Buddhists and others with "spiritual" beliefs but no actual "god" but, in general, those 4 categories capture the spectrum.

Quote: Also I dont think saying "no god exists" is easier to justify I think that its easier to justify seeing our world and universe that there is indeed most likely some sort of higher power but ultimately even though the chances lean massively towards there indeed is a "god' and I feel deep down there must be, I never the less humbly admit that I am not smart enough to know for sure and am willing to admit there is a very slight chance there is not one.

I don't understand how the universe came to be either but saying "probably a god" doesn't actually answer the question because there's no good definition or understanding for what "god" is. All it does is replace "I don't know" with a three-letter word that means essentially the same thing. There are many things that I don't understand but that doesn't make "god" a meaningful answer.

Until we find positive evidence FOR a god I can't find any reason to believe that there is one. History and science has shown that to be an unneeded option far too often to think it is the most likely option for questions that are still unanswered.

Atheism: it's not just for communists any more!
America July 4 1776 - November 8 2016 RIP
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-03-2015, 05:36 PM
RE: MC Yo Wassup VS Atheism
Hello! Big Grin

Welcome to the forum. Smile

So, first up, this bit right here.

(03-03-2015 05:17 PM)mcyowassup Wrote:  ....... but also yo can't disprove that there was not a Moses.....

I'm sure goodwithoutgod will be along shortly to provide a wide range of links/information of the myth that is Moses. Meanwhile, let me share this link. Big Grin

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Exw94kq6cHo






(03-03-2015 05:17 PM)mcyowassup Wrote:  .... and he did not talk to god through a burning bush etc.

Um... except that people who talk to inanimate object (Even one's on fire) are not seen today as, well, rational.

Now... about the possibility of an inanimate object talking back? That's a whole different kettle of fish.

(03-03-2015 05:17 PM)mcyowassup Wrote:  You were not there and it is in the realm of possibility

Smile As for the fact that neither was yourself nor any other reliable reporters/witnesses other than those as stated singularly within the pages of a certain book. An inamitate object.... on fire... talking? Yes, that is completely outside the realm of possibilty. As is a talking serpent. Snakes can't talk. They don't have the equipment to do so (Outside of Disney films)

(03-03-2015 05:17 PM)mcyowassup Wrote:  ..... and it is not blind faith that makes people believe it but 1000s of years of oral tradition that has shaped their lives and I think that needs to be something that is kept in that context and respected.

That... would seem to be nothing more than blind faith. Believing i the things one's parents/grandparents etc say with out actually investigating the information about what they are saying. Consider

(03-03-2015 05:17 PM)mcyowassup Wrote:  Also I can't rule out Zeus and Athena I'll admit.

Or our tentacly elder-god Cthulhu wither. Yes

(03-03-2015 05:17 PM)mcyowassup Wrote:  Even though you were a bit rude at the end I love you bro and one day you to will learn to humbly admit when you don't know.

*Hugz all 'round* Big Grin

Myself? I'm quite happy to admit that there are, indeed, a great many things I don't know and that people smarter/better educated than myelf do know.

The only way to know more is top seek out and read/interact with others etc to learn.

Much cheers to all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like Peebothuhul's post
03-03-2015, 05:55 PM (This post was last modified: 03-03-2015 06:27 PM by goodwithoutgod.)
RE: MC Yo Wassup VS Atheism
(03-03-2015 05:17 PM)mcyowassup Wrote:  
(03-03-2015 05:01 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  Not really no.

Few atheists claim 100% there isn't the distinct, highly improbable, uber rare chance of a creative force somewhere. We can, or at least I do often, claim that the anthropocentric, abrahamic myth based christian god is non-existent because the basis of that belief is a fictional book called the bible, which can be eviscerated once one removes the plethora of pseudepigrapha, interpolations, parables and allegorical writings. So if the knowledge of this god is based on a fictional book, there exists zero empirical evidence for such god, and it requires abject blind faith to believe in this god, then yes, i think I can say, that particular god doesn't exist. Can I disprove it? The bible yes, god No, but neither can I disprove Thor, Zeus or Athena 100%, there is always *rolls eyes* the possibility. Perhaps it is the great pumpkin who created life, by smearing pumpkin pie on bigfoots ass while fucking a fairy......can't "disprove" that either.

Does that clear up my perspective?

I am not claiming I know that this "force/god" is the Abrahamic one it could be anything really and maybe as you say nothing at all but also yo can't disprove that there was not a moses and he did not talk to god through a burning bush etc. you were not there and it is in the realm of possibility and it is not blind faith that makes people believe it but 1000s of years of oral tradition that has shaped their lives and I think that needs to be something that is kept in that context and respected. Also I cant rule out zeus and athena Ill admit. Even though you were a bit rude at the end I love you bro and one day you to will learn to humbly admit when you dont know.

My apologies, I didn't mean to come across too harshly, and we don't even really know what you are about yet. However...

I concur, there "could" be a creative force, unlikely, but anything is possible, even if highly improbable.

How much do you know about Moses? Do you have some citations I am not aware of? Please provide...in the meantime, here is a small nugget of info on "moses".

The existence of Moses as well as the veracity of the Exodus story are disputed among archaeologists and Egyptologists, with experts in the field of biblical criticism citing logical inconsistencies, new archaeological evidence, historical evidence, and related origin myths in Canaanite culture.

When you analyze the Pentateuch, you will find doublets and triplets. These are pairs of stories which occur in two separate locations in the text. The doublets generally do not agree fully; there are usually minor differences between the stories. R.E. Friedman, in his 1997 book "Who Wrote the Bible?" lists a number of them:

Two creation stories in Genesis.
Two descriptions of the Abrahamic covenant.
Two stories of the naming of Isaac.
Two instances where Abraham deceived a king by introducing his wife Sarah as his sister.
Two stories of Jacob traveling to Mesopotamia
Two stories of a revelation at Beth-el to Jacob.
Two accounts of God changing Jacob's name to Israel
Two instances where Moses extracted water from two different rocks at two different locations called Meribah.

These doublets appeared to contradict each other. In most cases, one referred to God as Yahweh while the other used the term Elohim.

Theologians reason that a much more logical explanation is that the books were written by multiple authors who lived long after the events described. That would have allowed the oral tradition to be passed from generation to generation in different areas of the land so that they had a chance to deviate from each other before being written down.

Both Judaism and Christianity assumed that the Pentateuch -- the first five books of the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) were written by Moses, as the Bible itself states. However, in recent centuries, alternative authorship has been proposed. The documentary hypothesis is now accepted by essentially all mainline and liberal theologians.

- 11th Century CE: Isaac ibn Yashush suggested that the list of the Edomite kings in Genesis 36 was added by an unknown person after Moses died. For this assertion, he became known as "Isaac the Blunderer." 1

- 15th Century: Bishop Tostatus suggested that certain passages were written by one of the prophets, not by Moses.

- 16th Century: Andreas van Maes suggested that an editor added additional material to some of Moses' writings.

- 17th Century: Thomas Hobbes prepared a collection of passages that seemed to negate Moses' authorship.

- 18th Century: Three investigators (Witter, Astruc and Eichhorn) independently concluded that doublets in the Torah were written by two different authors. A doublet is a story that is described twice.

- 19th Century: Scholars noticed that there were a few triplets in the Torah. This indicated that a third author was involved. Then, they determined that the book of Deuteronomy was written in a different language style from the remaining 4 books in the Pentateuch. Finally, by the end of the 19th Century, liberal scholars reached a consensus that 4 authors and one redactor (editor) had been actively involved in the writing of the Pentateuch.

- 20th Century: Academics have continued to refine the Documentary Hypothesis by identifying which verses (and parts of verses) were authored by the various writers. They have also attempted to uncover the names of the authors. In 1943, Pope Pius XII issued an encyclical Divino Afflante Spiritu in which he urged academics to study the sources of Biblical texts. Recent archaeological discoveries and new linguistic analysis tools have facilitated the research into the hypothesis.

Belief in the documentary hypothesis was triggered by a number of factors, such as:

- Anachronisms, like the list of the Edomite kings;

- Duplicate and triplicate passages

- Various passages portrayed God in different ways;

- The flood story appears to involve the meshing of two separate stories;

- The belief, centuries ago, by archaeologists and linguists that writing among the ancient Hebrews only developed after the events portrayed in the Pentateuch. Thus, Moses would have been incapable of writing the first five books of the Hebrew Scriptures.

These factors led theologians to the conclusion that the Pentateuch is a hybrid document which was written well after Moses' death, and much later than the events portrayed. The authors and redactors are unknown, and are commonly referred to as authors J (Jahwist or Yahwist), E (Elohist or Elohim), P (Priestly) and D (Deuteronomist).

The Exodus is the founding myth of Israel; its message is that the Israelites were delivered from slavery by Yahweh and therefore belong to him through the Mosaic covenant. It tells of the enslavement of the Israelites in Egypt following the death of Joseph, their departure under the leadership of Moses, the revelations at Sinai, and their wanderings in the wilderness up to the borders of Canaan. The archeological evidence does not support the story told in the Book of Exodus and most archaeologists have abandoned the investigation of Moses and the Exodus as "a fruitless pursuit". The opinion of the overwhelming majority of modern biblical scholars is that the Pentateuch was shaped into its final form in the post-Exilic period, although the traditions behind it are older and can be traced in the writings of the 8th century BCE prophets.

I could go on to great length, but that will give you a bit to contemplate. You see, when people accept information simply because it has been around for a long time, it makes it easy to just assume it must be true. The christians have been at this for 2,000 years, modifying, adding, removing scriptures, and polishing their tap dancing apologist act to try to explain the unexplainable. A lot of information has come out lately due to examinations of the information, and the attempt to validate them...we know now things like...moses didn't exist, neither did noah, the exodus didnt happen either...fact. These aren't opinions, these are validated facts. Stick around, the learning is available for all.

"I was not there" is one of the worse ways to discuss knowledge, evidence or the lack thereof. I didn't need to be there, we can establish quite well things didn't happen, like the great mythical global flood...or the earth going dark and corpses bursting out of their graves upon jesus's death.....go ahead, ask me how we know these things Yes

I love you bro, as a fellow human being you deserve to learn the truth. Remember, simply because we don't have all of the answers to life, and we may never learn all of the answers to life, there is no reason to posit fabricated fairy tales as the answer simply because we WANT AN ANSWER.

Thumbsup

"Belief is so often the death of reason" - Qyburn, Game of Thrones

"The Christian community continues to exist because the conclusions of the critical study of the Bible are largely withheld from them." -Hans Conzelmann (1915-1989)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like goodwithoutgod's post
03-03-2015, 06:07 PM
RE: MC Yo Wassup VS Atheism
"I don't know" is fine.

"I don't know therefore God" is silly.

"I know God and he wants this and so you should do that and live like this and believe like me" is dangerous and a lie.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Fodder_From_The_Truth's post
03-03-2015, 06:10 PM (This post was last modified: 03-03-2015 06:20 PM by Free Thought.)
RE: MC Yo Wassup VS Atheism
(03-03-2015 05:17 PM)mcyowassup Wrote:  
(03-03-2015 05:01 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  Not really no.

Few atheists claim 100% there isn't the distinct, highly improbable, uber rare chance of a creative force somewhere. We can, or at least I do often, claim that the anthropocentric, abrahamic myth based christian god is non-existent because the basis of that belief is a fictional book called the bible, which can be eviscerated once one removes the plethora of pseudepigrapha, interpolations, parables and allegorical writings. So if the knowledge of this god is based on a fictional book, there exists zero empirical evidence for such god, and it requires abject blind faith to believe in this god, then yes, i think I can say, that particular god doesn't exist. Can I disprove it? The bible yes, god No, but neither can I disprove Thor, Zeus or Athena 100%, there is always *rolls eyes* the possibility. Perhaps it is the great pumpkin who created life, by smearing pumpkin pie on bigfoots ass while fucking a fairy......can't "disprove" that either.

Does that clear up my perspective?

I am not claiming I know that this "force/god" is the Abrahamic one it could be anything really and maybe as you say nothing at all but also yo can't disprove that there was not a moses and he did not talk to god through a burning bush etc. you were not there and it is in the realm of possibility and it is not blind faith that makes people believe it but 1000s of years of oral tradition that has shaped their lives and I think that needs to be something that is kept in that context and respected. Also I cant rule out zeus and athena Ill admit. Even though you were a bit rude at the end I love you bro and one day you to will learn to humbly admit when you dont know.

Okay, first of all, I think we may need to do some clarification on the burden of proof. In short, it dictates that the Onus rests on those who are making the affirmative claim; those who claim the existence of biblical characters a la Moses, Noah and whomever else are the ones who must meet the burden.
Those on the negative side are required only to answer to the presented evidence: it is not the job of the negative party (or anybody for that matter) to prove the negative itself, merely to establish the lack of sufficient evidence for the affirmative claim.

That said, the evidence for characters like Moses is at best comprised of circumstantial connections and at worst flimsy, biblically based assertion. I'm sure I need not tell you why that last one is so flimsy.
I write this with the disclaimer that I'm not a historian or archaeologist and am just passing on what I've been made aware of.

To continue, there is a considerable lack of evidence for many of the tales surrounding central characters as well, on with Moses; we can be sure the Exodus, for instance, didn't happen due to the total lack of any evidence for the event. Much the same can be said of things like Noah's flood which certainly didn't happen as purported either, and for the biblical narrative of creation, which is known is wrong due to it being contradicted by modern findings in evolutionary chronology and the basic laws of physics, not to mention internal contradictions in the tale itself.

You're right in that 'we weren't there', but through evidence that was left behind and from the accounts of those at the time, we can reasonably establish the reality of things.

The people closely associated with the namesake of female canines are suffering from a nondescript form of lunacy.
"Anti-environmentalism is like standing in front of a forest and going 'quick kill them they're coming right for us!'" - Jake Farr-Wharton, The Imaginary Friend Show.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Free Thought's post
03-03-2015, 06:18 PM
RE: MC Yo Wassup VS Atheism
So should you believe anything just cause you can't disprove it?

Brushing aside the absurd or illogical is done with all subjects but religion.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Fodder_From_The_Truth's post
03-03-2015, 06:19 PM
RE: MC Yo Wassup VS Atheism
(03-03-2015 05:08 PM)TheStraightener Wrote:  
(03-03-2015 04:20 PM)mcyowassup Wrote:  I am MC Yo Wassup. I am a 54 y/o rapper from Tucson Arizona. I have been on youtube for three years now and have mostly stayed in the hip hop community. However recently I made my first video concerning the debate that the atheists waste peoples time with. I dont claim to know anything but neither should you claim you know.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nrPEeq9d_TA

I would like to see what the Atheist community here has to say now that I presented this argument to you all. Does this change anyones mind?

SHOUT OUT SETH LOVE YOU BROTHER but you gotta get humbler yo, its okay to no know.



You've got nothing different to say than any other theist. I don't know why you think you will have any more influence than anyone else who has tried.

I just feel like I was making a valid and important point to know when not to know.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: