The religion of Athiesm - utterly illogical - utterly evil

  • Thread starter Thread starter prodigalson12
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Actually, I got a pretty good case for both of these. I was watching a meeting about the Ark of the Covenant once, and they claimed to have found the blood of our Savior. The human body is composed of 46 chromosomes. The blood found only had 24. All of them, X chromosomes. Accept for one Y chromosome that is both dominant, and seemingly unatural. When asked who’s blood it was, he responded in tears.
Can you cite any this claim? Right now it’s a unconfirmed claim that someone got from…TV…Can you cite the reference to this and maybe even show the blood test results? I kinda think you can’t…
I know it all seems rediculous.
Yeah, kinda…
But this is what we come up with when we research this kind of suff.
and yet people devote their lives to it and swear blindly on it…
But whatever the case, what you believe is what you believe.
Exactly. 👍
 
Hello Benedictus2, quite the thread we have going here.

If you feel natural is the appropriate word, o.k. fine it is after all your religion not mine.

Mary engaged in unnatural sex. Her deviation from natural sex produced an offspring. Jesus.

Those that deviate from natural sex are…

Personally I would have stayed with illogical, but like I said its your religion not mine.

So I concede. The bible is 100% logic, although I’m not sure how one would logically or naturally feed thousands with a few fish and loaves, but anyway.

Now I will depart,but let me leave you with two points
  1. nowhere in my posts did I say I do not believe in God.
  2. nowhere in my posts did I say I was an atheist.
 
This was a rather well-put argument. And yes, you’re right. The scientific position is (or at least should be) that we can prove neither, therefore neither is fact.

You’re right.

But to say that because I CAN’T prove that “God” DOESN’T exist, he must therefore exist is fallacy. It would be just as fallacious for me to say "you can’t proof “God” exists, therefore he must not exist.

I don’t deal in absolutes, to say that “God” DEFINITELY doesn’t exist would be foolish. I have no proof. And vice versa.

I allow for the possibility that “God” exists, but I regard that possibility as remote.

In my view, if such a powerful cosmic consciousness existed, I would think that it would manifest itself in VERY noticeable ways DAILY. I haven’t noticed any of his, so I regard his existence as a remote possibility.
Yes, i think this is the basis for the argument against God - that is, if He was there, things would be different to how they are now. I can respect that view, but of course would have a different one.

God Bless.
 
Yes, i think this is the basis for the argument against God - that is, if He was there, things would be different to how they are now. I can respect that view, but of course would have a different one.

God Bless.
Thank you, I’m glad that someone knows how to disagree with grace.

🙂
 
Hello Benedictus2, quite the thread we have going here.

If you feel natural is the appropriate word, o.k. fine it is after all your religion not mine.
No it is not my terminology. It is the correct terminology. I strongly suggest you study what “logical” means.
Mary engaged in unnatural sex. Her deviation from natural sex produced an offspring. Jesus.
No the doctrine of the virginal birth does not involve sex. There was no “unnatural sex”.
Those that deviate from natural sex are…
You can only say this because you are 100% ignorant of what this doctrine is. So I suggeststudying it berfore you start posting, if you are going to debate this point .
Personally I would have stayed with illogical, but like I said its your religion not mine.
Your personal preference for “illogical” is a very uin-intelligient prefence. Again a simple googling of what logicality means will go a long way towards increasing your knowledge in this area.

Perhaps get a basic primer on philosophy.
So I concede. The bible is 100% logic, although I’m not sure how one would logically or naturally feed thousands with a few fish and loaves, but anyway.
Here you are being illogical. How did you jump from the virgin birth to the feeding of the multitude.

You get into this trap because of your ignorance of doctrine. Study the basics.

As I keep saying, this is like explaining physics to a two year old. A certain level of spiritual maturity is required.
Now I will depart,but let me leave you with two points
  1. nowhere in my posts did I say I do not believe in God.
Good. You have a starting point then. Keep studying about Him. To know Him is love Him.
  1. nowhere in my posts did I say I was an atheist.
That is excellent. I hope you grow in faith and love of Our Wonderful God. Yes, OUR Wonderful God.
 
As I keep saying, this is like explaining physics to a two year old. A certain level of spiritual maturity is required.
And by spiritual maturity you mean a willingness to blindly believe?

:confused:

Children believe that the boogeyman will get hem if they don’t go to bed on time.

Why?

Because they’ve seen evidence?

No, it’s because someone they trust told them that it is the case.

I would rather call this tendency spiritual immaturity.
 
"Communism was the bloodiest ideology that caused more than 120 million innocent deaths in the 20th century. It was a nightmare which promised equality and justice, but which brought only bloodshed, death, torture and fear. This three-volume documentary displays the terrible savagery of communism and its underlying philosophy. From Marx to Lenin, Stalin, Mao or Pol Pot, discover how the materialist philosophy transforms humans into theorists of violence and masters of cruelty. "
youtube.com/watch?v=io3TuNtnOEM&feature=PlayList&p=DA8E8AD259A5B5E7&index=10
 
Because this post is full of strange prejudice, I’ll pop in my two scents. Another atheists opinion here, MY opinion, not every atheists opinion.
Their form of worship does exist, illogical point.
We can believe in many things, atheism only excludes the belief in gods. For example I believe my family are good people, my keyboard is black, coffee tastes good and Dali is great art. I also believe Madonna (the singer) is way overrated, that Vitamin B is good for vegetarians, and pink and organge don’t match. I just don’t believe in a god. And I believe in some morals too, like don’t muder, steal, lie, attack people who are weaker than you, don’t cheat etc. I don’t do it out of fear for some god, but just because I dont think its okay to do. As for worshipping, I do not worship anyone or anything.
Their model still requires faith, point 2
Whats wrong with holes? You can either say: I don’t know what caused it, so god must have done it. Or you can say you honestly don’t know. Nothing wrong with having not an answer for everything. Holes do not nessecarily mean you have to fill in something like a god. Your answer is god, my answer is I dont know, whats the problem with having a diferent opinion?
There is no real moral base, point 3
I have been raised with morals by my parents, not by god. If god would help christians get better morals, why don’t they have them then? I don’t find a post with this kind of prejudice showing any better morals for example.
The fruits of athiesm, total corrupt exploitation, point 4
Look at the USA, with is lack of public healthcare, its homeless families, its lack of study funds which would enable everyone to study at a university. A very christian country, but where are the christian morals of helping the poor? Holland, the country with freedom in many ways, gives more to the poor helps people, shows more helpfull morals than a christian country like the USA. Every 4 years the dutch vote for those things. And dang… in sweden the social system is even better. With only 3% church visitors! If what you would say was true, west europe would be doing very bad now, sweden would be one big mess, with its loads of atheists and nonbelievers, but thats not whats happening.
They want to blame all people, especially those with religion for their problems, point 5
What good do religious do… thinks… that atheists don’t do? I mean objective stuff here, not praying etc.
They have very limited, ignorant perspectives along their God, science itself, point 6.
Do you have any idea how many christian scientists have been looking for god? Problem in science is, he isn’t found. Something which you cannot measure, which is not falsifiable and testable is not very usefull in science, which is about finding objective results. Doesn’t means loads of people have tried to find god, measure god, find proof for god. They are trying it ever since science existed and still are trying it.
They have complete and total ignorance of Gods word, point 7
Who says we want you to bow down to us? We don’t do gods, we don’t want to be worshipped like gods either. Believe in god like you want to, but have some decencey to show some respect back.
Their agenda is the ultimate evil, point 8
Why on earth do they come here to debate, thinking in their minds that they are saving us and we are going, saving us from exactly what? Others, because they can’t stand people that have faith are entirely here to derrail them, to get them to slip up, and it makes them feel good if they can discourage people from having any kind of faith, any kind of belief that is not perfectly in line with their false religion.,
I came here because there was nonsense posted about Stephen Hawking, and now post because I see this prejudice posted. You say atheists feel good to discourage people, I find that overgeneralisation.There are some atheists here, but the majority of atheists never goes to a christian forum or to christian places to convert people. Why are you posting this prejudice about atheists? Does it makes you feel good to sh1t at atheists?
They are mindless beasts, point 9
Just as an animal only knows about the world around it, that it can observe, and to it, that is all there is, it’s exactly the same with them. If they cannot see it, test it, analyze it, then it’s not real. The animal may not understand photosynthesis, but it knows the plant it is eating is good for it and that is all it needs to know. The atheist reduced mankind to the level of the animals, being no better then them in any way because his, just as the animals world is self contained to it and there is nothing more to it then what they directly experience.
Hmm… I realy think you should visit sweden sometimes. Loads of godless people, but they still have a frontal lobe, to predict, analyze, correct themselves and do a lot of things that animals cannot. They have not turned into one big pile of somdomy and murder. Last time I checked my atheist friends were still friendly helpfull monogamous people and did not turn into an animal fights, animal orgies, murder or whatever beast like. Atheists are very normal people, problem is this kind of prejudice against atheists like in this post.
 
Can you cite any this claim? Right now it’s a unconfirmed claim that someone got from…TV…Can you cite the reference to this and maybe even show the blood test results? I kinda think you can’t…

Yeah, kinda…and yet people devote their lives to it and swear blindly on it… Exactly. 👍
:hmmm:Hey, listen buddy…
We don’t BLINDLY devote ourselves to it. We have reasons for believing what we do. And I diddn’t get this far on just TOUCHY LITTLE FEELINGS!:mad: I suggest you understand the message of Achilles and the Tortoise. Sometimes, a logical arguement can lead to a false conclusion. Here’s some recources.

The video is kinda long, but it’s eight minutes in:

youtube.com/watch?v=b3j-dYj9I5U

As for that Radiation thing, I’d recommend watching these documentories:

youtube.com/watch?v=5Bg9wxYpmv0
youtube.com/watch?v=f_Fic48ajbk
 
And by spiritual maturity you mean a willingness to blindly believe?

:confused:
Not at all. That you equate spiritual maturity with blind belief means you have no clue as to what I am talking about.
So back to my saying about explaining this to two year old. 😃
Children believe that the boogeyman will get hem if they don’t go to bed on time.

Why?

Because they’ve seen evidence?

No, it’s because someone they trust told them that it is the case.

I would rather call this tendency spiritual immaturity.
As above. Because you do not know what spiritual maturity I am talking about.

You are obviouly one of those who only believe what is perceivable with the senses. Limits your apprehension of reality.

You’ve noted your religion as non-specific pagan so obviously you believe in some sort of bogeyman :).

If you had said you are an atheist, then your post would be more credible.
 
"Communism was the bloodiest ideology that caused more than 120 million innocent deaths in the 20th century. It was a nightmare which promised equality and justice, but which brought only bloodshed, death, torture and fear. This three-volume documentary displays the terrible savagery of communism and its underlying philosophy. From Marx to Lenin, Stalin, Mao or Pol Pot, discover how the materialist philosophy transforms humans into theorists of violence and masters of cruelty. "
Too true! A fact that so many seem to overlook. If religion is the opium of the people, it seems communism (which is atheistic) is the arsenic, strychnine, and every other poison combined.
 
Not at all. That you equate spiritual maturity with blind belief means you have no clue as to what I am talking about.
So back to my saying about explaining this to two year old. 😃

I equate your “spiritual maturity” to blind belief because that’s what it is.

The Catholic Church teaches that anything the Pope says is truth, simply because he said it, with no room for debate.

That is blind belief.

You’ve noted your religion as non-specific pagan so obviously you believe in some sort of bogeyman :).

You are in no position to tell me what I believe, sir.

If you had said you are an atheist, then your post would be more credible.
Heh.

That is hopelessly foolish. Not being an atheist makes me unable to argue atheist points?

I am definitely closer to an atheist than a theist, therefore, I gravitate toward atheist arguments.
 
I equate your “spiritual maturity” to blind belief because that’s what it is.
Considering that you seem to know zilch about what we truly believe then you have no clue as to the spiritual maturity that I am talking about.

Blind belief it definitely is not, but again I feel I am explaining to a two year old.
The Catholic Church teaches that anything the Pope says is truth, simply because he said it, with no room for debate.
That is blind belief.
There again you show your cluelessness as to what the Catholic church teaches.
We do not believe something is trut becuase the Pope says it is true.

Perhaps if you are going to tell us what we believe you should do a little bit of research first and find out exactly what we believe then you will not be arguing from ignorance.
You’ve noted your religion as non-specific pagan so obviously you believe in some sort of bogeyman :).

You are in no position to tell me what I believe, sir.
Since you claim you are a non-spefic pagan then you must believe in something. I mean that is what is paganism is all about isn’t it? Otherwise you would say you are an atheist.
Heh.

That is hopelessly foolish. Not being an atheist makes me unable to argue atheist points?
Fair enough. Touche!
I am definitely closer to an atheist than a theist, therefore, I gravitate toward atheist arguments.
There are no midways. Either you are atheist or your not.
 
There again you show your cluelessness as to what the Catholic church teaches.
We do not believe something is trut becuase the Pope says it is true.
Everything I’ve ever read on the subject says that, according to the principle of Apostolic Succession, the Pope is divinely inspired by Christ/God (whatever), and therefore, anything he says about doctrine is infallible, and no Catholic has any right to question it.
Perhaps if you are going to tell us what we believe you should do a little bit of research first and find out exactly what we believe then you will not be arguing from ignorance.
Hmm… If only I had done that…

Oh wait! I totally did!

The article in the Catholic Answers Library on Papal Infallibility.

Complete with quotes from the Vatican and the Bible itself.
 
When chilren are young they assume things by blind faith, namely what their parents tell them. They do this for more things than religion. When a child wants to cross a highway it makes no sense for the kid not to believe the parents saying “that’s dangerous”. Children believe blindly what their parents tell them. As far as people growing up I assume there are good reasons people keep believing and I also know people who keep believing things without evidence, both religious and atheists do not always have proof to believe what they believe or need “proof”. I never have considered religious stories would be more true than others stories as a child, despite a catholic elementary school. Science did not play a role for me to be or not become atheist. (I do like science now)

In holland are many atheists and agnosts. Most people who are atheists here are not into science, are not antitheist, and there are no communist movements here in politics. Most people here do not have science as a reason to be atheist or are very educated in science. They are not communists. My dad is an atheist and he only is is vaguely aware something like big bang was on TV and theres something called evolution. Yet he does not believe there is a god. He simply is not interested in religion. That goes for many people here. Only 19% of the people at least once a month goes to a church here, many people are simply not interested in becoming religious, without hating religion. They are atheists, not antitheists.

What is atheist AND hates religion is called antitheist atheist, but since normal atheists have not much reason to go on forums like these, the majority of atheists you will find here are antitheist. The majority of atheists in the world is not antitheist, but also does not go to forums like these.
 
How would you label people who believe in gods, but also in a natural origin of the universe, i.e. no external creative source?
If people believe in god’s then they believe in gods, so therefore polytheists not atheists. You cannot believe in A and not believe in A at the same time. They are contradictions.
 
Everything I’ve ever read on the subject says that, according to the principle of Apostolic Succession, the Pope is divinely inspired by Christ/God (whatever), and therefore, anything he says about doctrine is infallible, and no Catholic has any right to question it.
Then perhaps you should broaden your reading. That is WAAAAAYYYYYY off the mark.

The doctrine of Papal infallibility does not depend onf Apostolic Succession. It does not say either that the Pope is divinely inspired by Christ.

He is infallible on matters of faith and morals but not on every single subject under the sun.

We say that the Pope together with the college of bishops is infallible because Christ has given the promise to send His Holy Spirit to guide to guide the church into truth and that He will not allow the gates of hell to prevail against His church. We can believe that because we believe Jesus is God and therefore can and does keep promises.

Now for an atheist that will be hard to believe because the very foundation of the belief ( the Christ is God) is not something you would adhere to.

Perhaps you should visit the threads that has to do with papal infallibility so you will not remain ignorant about the matter. Provided that is, that you have an interest in actually being rightly informed on the subject.
 
Oh wait! I totally did!

The article in the Catholic Answers Library on Papal Infallibility.

Complete with quotes from the Vatican and the Bible itself.
Well it seems that you did do your research if you indeed read that article so it is not a matter of lack of research but a failure at comprehension. Your conclusion was waaay off tangent from that article.

I suggest you read it twice more. And if there is anything that does not make sense to you, then post your comments here so we can discuss.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top