Why are you an atheist?

Rockdad · Post by **Rockdad** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 8:22 pm

helitack wrote:Hmmm...this gets me thinking on something. I am a logical being, mostly. However I cannot in any way shape or form, explain why I love one certain woman over the 2.4 billion others on the planet. Where is the logic in that?

That is because God is in your pants! Yep there is the proof right there it is all very logical.

This proves God is a She! Why else would she want to get your in pants?

Oh wait thinking.....

No wait your Pants must be a church! House of god!

No this proves God is a penis!

God is in my pants too!

But my God wants to get in *her pants?

So heaven must be inside her pants

So I have faith and a belief that heaven is in her pants

Oh shit there goes the Easter bunny...................

*Non specific non denominational female form

Ranger Genius · Post by **Ranger Genius** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 8:41 pm

HughMungus wrote:OK so what if I defined god as (s)he who only created the omniverse (say, via the Big Bang) which operates thereafter under its own natural laws? How would you disprove that?

I think you've missed the point. How would you prove that? And what could you possibly learn by acting under that hypothesis?

Amazing how god keeps retreating to the fringes..the areas we haven't yet got very cohesive scientific information about (like what happened before the big bang). So god created the big bang. Who created god? and who created god's creator? You haven't answered the question you've invented your god to deal with, and in fact you've added more questions, like why?

HughMungus · Post by **HughMungus** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 8:47 pm

Ranger Genius wrote:
HughMungus wrote:OK so what if I defined god as (s)he who only created the omniverse (say, via the Big Bang) which operates thereafter under its own natural laws? How would you disprove that?
I think you've missed the point. How would you prove that? And what could you possibly learn by acting under that hypothesis?

Amazing how god keeps retreating to the fringes..the areas we haven't yet got very cohesive scientific information about (like what happened before the big bang). So god created the big bang. Who created god? and who created god's creator? You haven't answered the question you've invented your god to deal with, and in fact you've added more questions, like why?

How do you prove that *your* definition of god is correct?

Why do you insist that god and science are mututally exclusive? You know that many of the world's leading scientists have been/are devoutly religious, right? Do you think they think that god and science are mutually exclusive?

Who created god? According to your theories, the omniverse has existed infintely. Wouldn't that mean that god could have existed infinitely before the big bang?

Kinetic IV · Post by **Kinetic IV** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 8:57 pm

Of all things I'm sitting here reading this and DHS - The House of God starts playing. Strange.

helitack · Post by **helitack** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 8:59 pm

Funny, a Joan Osborn song about God just started here.

Kinetic IV · Post by **Kinetic IV** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:04 pm

helitack wrote:Funny, a Joan Osborn song about God just started here.

I heard that one earlier. Heli, I still think your quote that I singled out earlier is the best thing on this thread all day long.

helitack · Post by **helitack** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:12 pm

helitack wrote:Let's go back to this statement
helitack wrote:
Who really gives a shit one way or another.

This one?

Kinetic IV · Post by **Kinetic IV** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:18 pm

That was my second choice...the God as a female is what got my attention.

helitack · Post by **helitack** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:19 pm

I also have been thinking about a statement someone made earlier about "not giving a rats ass". That may work in a gifting economy but I seriously doubt, that nobody within an economy that depends on the SALE of rats asses, that this behavior would be tolerated for even a brief time.

helitack · Post by **helitack** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:22 pm

Kinetic IV wrote:That was my second choice...the God as a female is what got my attention.

My logic tells me that if life is created, then it would naturally come from an entity that was/is female.

Rockdad · Post by **Rockdad** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:25 pm

helitack wrote:I also have been thinking about a statement someone made earlier about "not giving a rats ass". That may work in a gifting economy but I seriously doubt, that nobody within an economy that depends on the SALE of rats asses, that this behavior would be tolerated for even a brief time.

Rats asses just add to the methane load on the planet besides we are reaching peak Rats ass on this thread soon there will be no Rat asses to gift! then where will we be?

HughMungus · Post by **HughMungus** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:45 pm

PLEASE NO OFF-TOPIC POSTS YOU ARE VIOLATING THE TOS!!!11

helitack · Post by **helitack** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 9:48 pm

Neener Neener

Ban Me

Rockdad · Post by **Rockdad** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 10:44 pm

HughMungus wrote:Rockdad, what liberty am I surrendering if I give up my DNA?

HughMungus wrote:God damn I need a girlfriend.

It is all starting to make sense now…
Very logical..

Oh Heli would mind collecting the sample?

HughMungus · Post by **HughMungus** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 10:54 pm

Rockdad wrote:
HughMungus wrote:Rockdad, what liberty am I surrendering if I give up my DNA?

HughMungus wrote:God damn I need a girlfriend.
It is all starting to make sense now…
Very logical..

Oh Heli would mind collecting the sample?

I WILL PHOTOGRAPH YOU WITHOUT YOUR CONSENT!!!

Bob · Post by **Bob** » Wed Mar 22, 2006 11:11 pm

Atheism is simply living without theism. You don't have to care about the existence or nonexistence of God to do that.

Ranger Genius · Post by **Ranger Genius** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 12:22 am

god-belief is a thought virus; one of which not even the best-educated have completely rid themselves yet. See: cognitive dissonance. But personally, I don't know a single person with a Doctorate degree (other than one that says "of Divinity,") who is devoutly religious. And I know quite a few.

And once again, you missed the point about mutual exclusivity. What I meant was that belief in proposition A (there is a god) and belief in proposition -A (there is no god) are mutually exclusive. You can't believe both at the same time.

And if the only objection you can raise to there being no god is one of infinite regression, you don't gain anything by positing a god who just "always was."

helitack · Post by **helitack** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 10:27 am

Here is a dialogue in the movie "The Alamo" circa 1960, it always gets me.

The scene-The night before the big battle, men around a fire, contemplating the death they know will come very soon:

Defender #1- What are you think Davy?

Crockett- Not thinkin, just rememberin

Defender #2-Well, I sure done a heap of things I shouldn't have done, seemed urgent at the moment, got myself a heap of sins to answer for, I reckon ol St Pete's gonna slam them pearly gates right smack dab in my face.

Defender #3- There ain't no pearly gates! When your dead, your meat for the worms, that's all there is to it.

Defender #2- You mean you don't believe in no afterlife? No hereafter?

Defender #3- Tales for children, bunkem and bosh!

Defender #4- I say this. I believe, I can never find a way to argue down you that don't believe. But I believe in the Lord God Almighty, all knowing and all forgiving. And I believe that good shall be triumphant in the end, and that evil shall be vanquished. I believe in a hereafter.

Defender #5- Me too. I figure a man's got to believe in those things. So's he wants to believe in the good things about man. About his very own self, the real good things, like Courage, Honesty, and...Love

joel the ornery · Post by **joel the ornery** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 10:45 am

i believe i will have another beer.

Rockdad · Post by **Rockdad** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 11:09 am

helitack wrote:Here is a dialogue in the movie "The Alamo" circa 1960, it always gets me.

The scene-The night before the big battle, men around a fire, contemplating the death they know will come very soon:

Defender #1- What are you think Davy?

Crockett- Not thinkin, just rememberin

Defender #2-Well, I sure done a heap of things I shouldn't have done, seemed urgent at the moment, got myself a heap of sins to answer for, I reckon ol St Pete's gonna slam them pearly gates right smack dab in my face.

Defender #3- There ain't no pearly gates! When your dead, your meat for the worms, that's all there is to it.

Defender #2- You mean you don't believe in no afterlife? No hereafter?

Defender #3- Tales for children, bunkem and bosh!

Defender #4- I say this. I believe, I can never find a way to argue down you that don't believe. But I believe in the Lord God Almighty, all knowing and all forgiving. And I believe that good shall be triumphant in the end, and that evil shall be vanquished. I believe in a hereafter.

Defender #5- Me too. I figure a man's got to believe in those things. So's he wants to believe in the good things about man. About his very own self, the real good things, like Courage, Honesty, and...Love

Actually have a tee shirt from the Alamo around here. What a dump! Like God had forgot it! Just a old building looked like it went thru a war or something? Those Texans are not very logical hanging out there..

HughMungus · Post by **HughMungus** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 12:31 pm

Ranger Genius wrote:god-belief is a thought virus; one of which not even the best-educated have completely rid themselves yet. See: cognitive dissonance. But personally, I don't know a single person with a Doctorate degree (other than one that says "of Divinity,") who is devoutly religious. And I know quite a few.

And once again, you missed the point about mutual exclusivity. What I meant was that belief in proposition A (there is a god) and belief in proposition -A (there is no god) are mutually exclusive. You can't believe both at the same time.

And if the only objection you can raise to there being no god is one of infinite regression, you don't gain anything by positing a god who just "always was."

Yes, you don't because you probably shun those who do believe in god because you have your view of god's nature that you apply to everyone who believes in god. You aren't very open-minded. But if a closed mind helps you prove what you somehow believe, good for you. I know a few Christian fundamentalists who are similarly closed-minded.

I mentioned mutual exclusivity in relation to god vs. science. You seem to think that god and science (or natural laws) can't co-exist. Well, I guess in your narrow view of god's nature they can't.

Regarding infinite regression, you're the one who said that the universe was not created and has "always existed". All I did was take your concept of infinity and apply it to god.

"I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details."

bringer · Post by **bringer** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 12:33 pm

It's like watching a game of whack the weasle.

Rob the Wop · Post by **Rob the Wop** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 1:22 pm

HughMungus wrote:
Ranger Genius wrote:god-belief is a thought virus; one of which not even the best-educated have completely rid themselves yet. See: cognitive dissonance. But personally, I don't know a single person with a Doctorate degree (other than one that says "of Divinity,") who is devoutly religious. And I know quite a few.

And once again, you missed the point about mutual exclusivity. What I meant was that belief in proposition A (there is a god) and belief in proposition -A (there is no god) are mutually exclusive. You can't believe both at the same time.

And if the only objection you can raise to there being no god is one of infinite regression, you don't gain anything by positing a god who just "always was."
Yes, you don't because you probably shun those who do believe in god because you have your view of god's nature that you apply to everyone who believes in god. You aren't very open-minded. But if a closed mind helps you prove what you somehow believe, good for you. I know a few Christian fundamentalists who are similarly closed-minded.

I mentioned mutual exclusivity in relation to god vs. science. You seem to think that god and science (or natural laws) can't co-exist. Well, I guess in your narrow view of god's nature they can't.

Regarding infinite regression, you're the one who said that the universe was not created and has "always existed". All I did was take your concept of infinity and apply it to god.

"I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details."

IE. "open minded" as defined as "only agrees with Hugh's definition".

Ranger Genius · Post by **Ranger Genius** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 2:06 pm

So in your definition, god exists outside of the universe, and has no effect on it. How, exactly, does this differ from nonexistence?

HughMungus · Post by **HughMungus** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 2:10 pm

Rob the Wop wrote:
HughMungus wrote:
Ranger Genius wrote:god-belief is a thought virus; one of which not even the best-educated have completely rid themselves yet. See: cognitive dissonance. But personally, I don't know a single person with a Doctorate degree (other than one that says "of Divinity,") who is devoutly religious. And I know quite a few.

And once again, you missed the point about mutual exclusivity. What I meant was that belief in proposition A (there is a god) and belief in proposition -A (there is no god) are mutually exclusive. You can't believe both at the same time.

And if the only objection you can raise to there being no god is one of infinite regression, you don't gain anything by positing a god who just "always was."
Yes, you don't because you probably shun those who do believe in god because you have your view of god's nature that you apply to everyone who believes in god. You aren't very open-minded. But if a closed mind helps you prove what you somehow believe, good for you. I know a few Christian fundamentalists who are similarly closed-minded.

I mentioned mutual exclusivity in relation to god vs. science. You seem to think that god and science (or natural laws) can't co-exist. Well, I guess in your narrow view of god's nature they can't.

Regarding infinite regression, you're the one who said that the universe was not created and has "always existed". All I did was take your concept of infinity and apply it to god.

"I want to know how God created this world, I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details."
IE. "open minded" as defined as "only agrees with Hugh's definition".

No. Open minded as in "Your definition of god is not everyone else's definition of god."

helitack · Post by **helitack** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 2:12 pm

Dr Mengele was a "scientist"

HughMungus · Post by **HughMungus** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 2:16 pm

Ranger Genius wrote:So in your definition, god exists outside of the universe, and has no effect on it. How, exactly, does this differ from nonexistence?

I'm agnostic so I don't have a definition. But I know that there are people whose definition of god is not your definition of god.

Rob the Wop · Post by **Rob the Wop** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 2:16 pm

helitack wrote:Dr Mengele was a "scientist"

Isn't Isaac Hayes, Tom Cruise, and John Travolta?
Oh wait, that's scientologist, I believe.
Or I don't believe.
Or I don't want to make the choice of whether I believe or don't believe.

helitack · Post by **helitack** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 2:23 pm

The Ayatolla Khomeni was a religious icon

Kinetic IV · Post by **Kinetic IV** » Thu Mar 23, 2006 2:27 pm

(spell check): Ayatollah Khomeini

It's easy to mangle that one.