What variety of atheist are you?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
20-08-2011, 06:18 PM
RE: What variety of atheist are you?
(20-08-2011 01:44 PM)BlackEyedGhost Wrote:  Do you believe in Abraham Lincoln? Not everything can be tested using the scientific method. That's why we use the legal-historical method often for things like this.

Well, there is forensic science. A real body could presumably be exhumed that matched the eye-witness descriptions of Lincoln in life, plus bore the wounds as reported of his death. That's quite a lot more than we have on Jesus of Nazareth. But then, we have more measurable physical material on the no-longer-Missing Link (four of them, so far?) than we have on Jesus.
As for the eye-witness reports of God... one tired, dehydrated guy reports a burning bush?

Quote: As for a definition, start with Creator (natural or supernatural) for God and move from there.

Move? Where? By what steps?

Quote: Do all the tests you want, I see no way we weren't created.

Tests on what? How do you test hearsay? I mean, the long-dead people who maybe never have existed can't even take a polygraph. Not compelling.
The fossil evidence pointing to slow development is.

If you pray to anything, you're prey to anything.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Peterkin's post
20-08-2011, 07:04 PM
RE: What variety of atheist are you?
Miltant Atheists, God is not something that can be proven, jesus was a christian myth.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-08-2011, 09:24 PM (This post was last modified: 20-08-2011 09:30 PM by BlackEyedGhost.)
RE: What variety of atheist are you?
(20-08-2011 02:02 PM)Zatamon Wrote:  OK, I will start from there. Give me a definition for 'creator'.

I meant "creator" in the simplest way. Similar to how we would create buildings, technology, and vaccines. I simply meant someone or something that may have created life on Earth as opposed to random biogenesis.
(20-08-2011 03:51 PM)Efrx86 Wrote:  Acknowledging that Abraham Lincoln existed doesn't require magical thinking. Just saying.

Neither does believing in aliens, yet despite that being the most probable naturalist explanation for the origins of life on Earth you don't see many atheists believing in such things.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-08-2011, 09:40 PM
RE: What variety of atheist are you?
(20-08-2011 09:24 PM)BlackEyedGhost Wrote:  Neither does believing in aliens, yet despite that being the most probable naturalist explanation for the origins of life on Earth you don't see many atheists believing in such things.

Ever heard of the Miller-Urey experiment?

The God excuse: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument. "God did it." Anything we can't describe must have come from God. - George Carlin

Whenever I'm asked "What if you're wrong?", I always show the asker this video: http://youtu.be/iClejS8vWjo Screw Pascal's wager.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-08-2011, 09:41 PM
RE: What variety of atheist are you?
@Zatamon With the incredible improbability and likely impossibilty of life forming as well as evolving fast enough to become what we see on Earth today, by Occham's Razor the simplest answer is that there was something that created us. If that's true, then, as you say, whatever created us must either eternally exist, or have been created as well. Eternal is one important attribute of God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-08-2011, 09:53 PM (This post was last modified: 20-08-2011 10:06 PM by DeepThought.)
RE: What variety of atheist are you?
On a side note...

(20-08-2011 01:44 PM)BlackEyedGhost Wrote:  Do you believe in Abraham Lincoln? Not everything can be tested using the scientific method. That's why we use the legal-historical method often for things like this. As for a definition, start with Creator (natural or supernatural) for God and move from there. Do all the tests you want, I see no way we weren't created.

Sounds like someone is sounding pretty sure of himself here.

To me your sounding more like a VenomFangX impersonator every day. Was your curiosity as to "why people choose to not believe in God" an indoctrination attempt from the very beginning?

At least here your saying it more in the way you really think. You should try being more yourself on here, no need to hide who you really are, what your goals are, since it gets pretty obvious as time goes on.

I don't think you'll get anywhere with indoctrination. You have more chance of getting a camel to fit through the eye of a needle. Tongue
Many atheist were once religious. For every atheist you convert to Christianity 10,000,000 Christians with become atheist. (I'm not talking about indoctrinating children here. That doesn't count! I mean educated atheists 18yrs+ who are in their right mind.)
Considering that I despise religion I don't like it's salespeople much.

“Forget Jesus, the stars died so you could be born.” - Lawrence M. Krauss
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DeepThought's post
20-08-2011, 10:03 PM (This post was last modified: 20-08-2011 10:28 PM by BlackEyedGhost.)
RE: What variety of atheist are you?
@Peterkin In that instance, sure there's forensics, but what about someone further back? How about Constantine or Socrates (just chose them randomly)? No forensics for their bodies. Your next argument is from a lack of proof. However, there's many archaelogical finds that uphold the credability of the Gospel accounts and things similar. After that point you just attacked me and I feel no obligation to respond. You also brought up many things I wasn't talking about.
@DeepThought I know no matter what I say people are going to think my purpose is converting people. That's honestly not the case. My purpose is to understand the other side, to bring light to things that many are ignorant of, and to give Christianity back at least some sort of good name since so many are destroying it. My personal theology says that if you love the things that Jesus was, then even if you totally reject Him in name it doesn't matter. It's about who He is, not just who people think He is. So if you see me trying to present the other side as indoctrination, then, yes, that's what I'm doing. Btw, that camel thing made me laugh. Big Grin
(20-08-2011 09:40 PM)Efrx86 Wrote:  Ever heard of the Miller-Urey experiment?

Yup. They didn't have any sort of proof that the earth's early atmosphere was comprised of those chemicals. If you start with inert chemicals like you would find on most planets (nitrogen, carbon-dioxide, etc.), they won't react. Even if you got the aminos like in the experiment, only 20 are used in life forms, so they would need to get isolated somehow from the others. And aminos alone aren't nearly enough to have a life form.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-08-2011, 10:33 PM
RE: What variety of atheist are you?
The gospels can't all be proven credible. They contradict each other. If archeological information is found to prove one more credible, then the others lose credibility. One of the largest differences between the books is descriptions of areas. Which is the main proof you could gain through archeological information.

As far as evidence for Lincoln VS evidence for Jesus, there was a lot of information reported on Lincoln from many sources not even restricted to the US. Many countries have records on Lincoln from the time period he lived. There is information about Jesus, but it's not from his time period, you can try to argue that records weren't kept as often at the time, but the thing is that during the time Jesus is said to have lived there were people keeping incredibly detailed accounts of things which Jesus should have appeared in and did not. The most generous dating still lands the gospels 30 years after he dies. another important thing to remember is that there were a lot more descriptions of the man than the ones you read now. When the canon was created they put down the rest. The gospels each describe a different man, and there were plenty of other conflicting versions of Jesus. What you've accepted as truth is what the church decided to back. In the case of his actual existence there is no telling which account was correct or if it even survived.

I'm not a non believer, I believe in the possibility of anything. I just don't let the actuality of something be determined by a 3rd party.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-08-2011, 10:53 PM
RE: What variety of atheist are you?
(17-08-2011 06:13 PM)BlackEyedGhost Wrote:  Are you a hardcore "there is no God and I will never believe such a thing" atheist?

I'm the only kind of atheist there is, one who is ready and willing to believe given evidence. At this point I don't think I even require compelling or even ample or even sufficient evidence. If there was just any evidence at all I'd reconsider. Until then, well there's this shit I gotta do called trying to maximize my moments 'cause until I see any evidence to the contrary I'm pretty sure they're finite.

As it was in the beginning is now and ever shall be, world without end. Amen.
And I will show you something different from either
Your shadow at morning striding behind you
Or your shadow at evening rising to meet you;
I will show you fear in a handful of dust.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
20-08-2011, 11:08 PM (This post was last modified: 20-08-2011 11:15 PM by BlackEyedGhost.)
RE: What variety of atheist are you?
@LilithPride Slight contradictions like that are often in support of the Gospels being separate accounts of the same events. If people were to write about fake events, they would generally make sure to have the same facts and not contradict at all. Also, many official records of the time were lost in a fire. (wow that sounds stupid without being able to remember details off the top of my head) In any case which accounts were you referring to that should have had Jesus in them? Accounts of Him could easily have been written 30 years later by people who knew Him well. He was only around for like 30 years, so He wouldn't have had as much time as Lincoln. People during that time were mostly illiterate too. As for the other gospels, they were written much later (except likely the gospel of Thomas), so they're much less reliable than the canon.
(20-08-2011 10:53 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  I'm the only kind of atheist there is, one who is ready and willing to believe given evidence. At this point I don't think I even require compelling or even ample or even sufficient evidence. If there was just any evidence at all I'd reconsider. Until then, well there's this shit I gotta do called trying to maximize my moments 'cause until I see any evidence to the contrary I'm pretty sure they're finite.

Have you looked into abiogenesis? There's plenty of evidence for at least a creator there. Btw, what do you mean by "maximize my moments"? Just having fun or more than that?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: