Agnostics need to get off the fence - Jesus Camp (2006) Discussion

[–] ShawnaC123 14 years ago

I agree. I feel like many agnostics just say that they're agnostics so that if a Christian asks them, they'll be able to say that and it basically appeases them. Living in the South, a lot of people have negative connotations of atheists, so I feel that this is a way to escape that.

I told my agnostic friend that agnostics are basically p*ssies that won't take a stand and just admit that they're atheists, and even she pretty much agreed with me.

------------------------------------
Here's my signature.

reply

[–] MaGic_sTicK_2004 14 years ago

So basically you're trying to get them to covert by making them feel bad about themselves and at the same time offering them absolution by offering the chance to fully commit to your-sorry, I meant THEY'RE beliefs.

Sound familiar?

If you hate God and are 100% proud of it, NOBODY CARES.

reply

[–] ShawnaC123 14 years ago

I'm not trying to convert anybody. I don't give a crap what she believes in. I just told her how I felt and she admitted that I had a point. If she felt bad, that's her problem. I wouldn't feel bad if someone insulting being an atheist, I'd roll my eyes and move on.

P.S. It's their not they're.

------------------------------------
Here's my signature.

reply

[–] Mex5150 13 years ago

Hi

The point is Agnostics ARE Atheist regardless of what they prefer to be called. If they do not know if god/s are real, they by definition are not believers (theist), they are Atheist.

I think they should be honest about not believing though, it is because of the likes of them (and the 'don't offend anybodies religious beliefs' idiots), that we still have people running about spreading fear and hatred due to a Bronze Age faerie-tale.

-Mex

--

Did you ever notice that people who believe in creationism look really un-evolved?

reply

[–] baran_erik 9 years ago

" I wouldn't feel bad if someone insulting being an atheist, I'd roll my eyes and move on.

P.S. It's their not they're. "

Gotta luuuuv irony.

reply

[–] baran_erik 9 years ago

No, we're not p*ssies, we think more logically than either of you. Atheists DON'T know any more than theists DO know. You both are working on faith: one in a book and one in their thinking. The hubris of the both of you is quite amusing, though.

By the way, your friend doesn't represent all agnostics, you know, so her opinion doesn't really matter.

reply

[–] thechosenme 14 years ago

Atheist who try to convert people are about as annoying as any other kind of evangelical. A lot of atheists/agnostics claim that they don't believe in a faith structure because there is no proof of the faith, so how is it that so many can be so confident in atheism when there is no proof that there isn't a god?

So tired of smug atheists making agnostics seem like we don't have balls because we don't accept the extreme. Just like radicals of any group.

reply

[–] hardtruth 14 years ago

Convert? Evangelizing? I reject the idea of the supernatural on such a basic level I wont even argue with you about it. And I cant push a belief on you because a lack of a belief is not a belief. That is quite literally like handing somebody 'nothing'.

Preaching and evangelizing are religious activities. I reject the entire idea of god as absurd and religion is a delusion. Are you so deluded you have to fit everything into a religious framework?

How can I be so confident? Because it's 2011, the world isn't flat, there are no such things as ghosts, santa claus isn't real and neither are gods, demons, or devils. If you can't see that you're as deluded as any christian.

I don't care if I seem smug to you, to argue is to discuss imaginary things on your level and I would as soon do that as argue with a child about the easter bunny.

The problem is agnostics are still trying to figure out religion within a religious framework. "If there is a god it may not be the way we think it is and people are dumb but that doesn't mean it can't exist". To be an athiest is to realize that even having that conversation is absurd. There isn't even a question as to what is real and isn't. I'm not an athiest because I'm some fallen christian or I don't believe in a god. I'm an athiest because I realize religion, gods, and demons aren't real with the same certainty as realizing gravity pulls objects down, or that dead people aren't really just sleeping.

You might as well argue that the earth is a blue marble on a turtles back, because that is just a ludicrous and proven just as false by science.

You people are all deluded and as I said before you can't argue with delusions, no proof is ever enough and a deluded person is trapped by their own minds fantasies.

I look at you with sincere pity.

Kodack

reply

[–] thechosenme 14 years ago

The reason I put my words in the context of religious framework is because atheists who talk like you remind me so much of Christians who are so certain that they are right. Phrases like "How can I be so confident?" and "I look at you with sincere pity" are the kind I have heard from Evangelicals. I mean, it's a discussion about theism what kind of framework did you expect?

When you say that to even have a conversation about the supernatural is absurd you're being their version of stubborn and ignorant, and I get why, to me the idea of any gods is ridiculous as well. I'm not saying there's any religion that looks even remotely appealing to me, or even remotely rational, it's just that extremism in any form shuts your mind to possibilities and stops you from understanding them properly.

It's the same kind of thinking that kept people refusing to believe the world wasn't flat and gravity wasn't true. I don't care that you don't believe anything, and it seems like you don't care that I don't believe anything; the only problem I have is with people on the far end of the spectrum always trying to suck everyone towards them.

reply

[–] hardtruth 14 years ago

Trying to one up each other, the basic gist of our discussion is that I'm close minded because I don't see the possibility for something to exist and making up your mind about something means you're close minded about it. Am I right?

Isn't saying "x doesn't exist but it could" a way of not making up your mind? I don't think I'm being close minded by taking a stance and making up my mind after 30 years of thinking about it and looking for truth.

Kodack

reply

[–] LeddyBs 14 years ago

Isn't saying "x doesn't exist but it could" a way of not making up your mind?

Nope, it's a way of saying, "Beats me".

Most Agnostics are pro-science and anti-religion. That doesn't mean we're prepared to state unequivocally there is no God. We can't. We don't have the powers required to demonstrate the truth of such a declaration. In science, you don't rule something out until you have evidence that precludes it. That's basic.

Now get the f#ck off your soapbox.

I'm outdoorsy in that I enjoy getting drunk on patios

reply

[–] hardtruth 14 years ago

The point that you along with many agnostics I've talked to don't get is that you're asking the wrong question.

The question isn't "could there be a god" - maybe
The question is "Did man invent gods and demons" and the only reasonable scientific answer to that is "yes".

So if we invented it then it is just another bit of human mythology like holiday characters such as the easter bunny and santa claus, or any of the other number of religions that include god worship.

If you admit the possibility that god exists then you must also admit that the easter bunny, tooth fairy, santa claus, posiedon, zeus, allah, freddy kruger, mickey mouse, cupid, and any of the other number of human mythological figures could also exist.

When you talk about not ruling something out until you have evidence that precludes it, you display a naivety of both logic, science, and common sense that undoes any credibility you might otherwise have had.

Mythologies are unprovable problems. Finding no proof of somethings existence does not prove it doesn't exist. And not finding proof of it is not proof it exists either. Therefore it is unprovable. Using that logic if you can't find proof that cows used to be 100ft tall and breath fire and rule over all men in the time before time, then it's just that you didn't look hard enough.

It's called a logical fallacy and science does not consider lack of proof a proof of possibility. Only idiots, zealots, and morons consider themselves to be right when there is no proof either way. Athiests would be just as stupid and moronic were they not able to prove that religion and religious icons do have a substantial amount of proof pointing to man made origins. Christianity wasn't even the first monotheistic religion with a christ like figure.

Kodack

reply

[–] LeddyBs 14 years ago

First off, your circumlocutory skills are unparalleled. Kudos on that.

Now, let's deal with the singular point you've made (the one that took you 7 paragraphs to make). I'm well aware of the problems involved in proving the falsity of mythologies. Thankfully, I'm not interested in mythologies. You want agnostics to join the atheists in making an affirmative declaration that there is no possibility of a god. We're only willing to argue that there is no evidence for a god. We know that much to be true. And that's all we know to be true.

When atheists like yourself proselytise to us non-converts, you come dangerously close to the sanctimony and self-righteousness of your religious counterparts. That right there is the number 1 reason agnostics like myself distance ourselves from you.

We'll support your efforts to push public policy in a more secular direction, but we ain't going to preach your gospel.

I'm outdoorsy in that I enjoy getting drunk on patios

reply

[–] hardtruth 14 years ago

It sounds like you can't even state your opinion or understand my position without trying to force it into a religious framework. That is one of the problems I have with agnostics, they don't realize how warped their thinking is and they grow uncomfortable with discussions that don't involve religious arguments.

Sometimes it takes seven paragraphs to write the same idea seven different ways to get your point across. Some people don't realize how much their rigid reasoning shoots them in the foot and it can be hard to grasp an idea so contrary to their upbringing and mental framework.

I honestly don't intend to be condescending. As a person I don't think I'm any better than anybody who disagrees with me. The truth is very important to me and I understand if people have their own truth. Ultimately only a person can decide for themselves what they believe. I can only challenge their ideas and they can decide if their ideas held up or not. Peace.

Kodack

reply

[–] positive2 13 years ago

Kodak, I see your points but you're being kind of a d*ck about it. I think what the first person was getting at was your intolerance and your belligerence towards agnostics, who are free to follow their beliefs, even if they are non-committal. To go on the offensive towards agnostics is the mirror reflection of the evangelicals going after the atheists, telling them to wake up, see the truth, or to justify their thinking. This tactic will only create a counter-resistance, the adversarial state we have been dealing with for thousands of years.

Why couldn't your thread be something more like "agnostics, did you think about this and this?" And then make your points. That's what Joseph Campbell did with his teaching. He laid out the facts about myths and pointed to similarities and never told anyone to get off the fence. And both Christians and atheists respected his views.

Haven't you ever experienced something sublime, that you could not name, that was beyond words? For many people the closest word for that experience is God.

As to this movie, it is only one of many examples of people mistreating kids with the intention of helping them. Religion is a big offender in that arena but certainly not the only one.

reply

[–] positive2 13 years ago

I just realized that this thread is several pages long so my point has probably already been made and answered before. I really don't like the imdb thread set-up, which is another thing that I'm sure a bunch of people have already mentioned but it bears repeating.

reply

[–] hardtruth 13 years ago

I am a dick. Dicks make others uncomfortable and challenge peoples ideas in a confrontational way.

What I'm not is someone who expects to change somebody's mind about a personal decision they made. I am however going to challenge their logic, see if they can be critical of their own ideas as well as others.

The only sublime thing I can think of is that there is so much out there that we don't know, so much left to be discovered that we really don't know much. The universe is a big place and there is a lot of room for some very strange and beautiful things, but there is no room for supernatural folklore and hokey god theories.

The most shocking thing about religious discussions is that no matter what evidence to the contrary, people will never change their beliefs because of an argument. Even if the church itself told it's followers "Sorry, we fooled you because there is no god and the bible was a series of folklore stories we tried to pass off as history." I doubt many 'believers' would say "wow, we were wrong". That strikes me as the same kind of blind delusion that a mental patient would suffer.

I have precious little patience for fools.

Kodack

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ComedyFan2010 14 years ago

you have a wrong view of it.

i am an agnostic because while i do not believe in god i think that it is possibility that there is something beyond our ability to understand. in this case it is possible that there is some sort of super power. i am just sure that christian/muslim or any other religion is not true.

and a lot of agnostics see it this way as well

reply

[–] hardtruth 14 years ago

I also believe that we don't have all of the answers. And I am open to the idea that what we don't know is greater than what we do know. The universe is a big place and we are on step 1 of 1,000,000 on our way to enlightenment. But the self realization that we don't know it all doesn't lead me to any religious possibilities because that would be jumping to conclusions.

By way of example lets say that you see a UFO in the sky. It's logical to call it a UFO because it can't be identified. It is not logical to say it's an alien ship though, that is jumping to conclusions. When you don't know what something is it must be an alien, that is a logical fallacy.

The fallacy of many agnostics I know and have spoken with is that something we don't understand must be god. Even saying "might be god" or "could be god" is making a similar mistake in logic.

A god is a human supernatural and religious concept that through history has been used to explain things we didn't understand. Being an athiest is realizing this. Once this is understood it becomes apparent that there cannot be a god, even as strange as the universe is and as little as we know about it, because a god is just a placeholder for what we don't understand. It's a human concept not a scientific or natural one.

Kodack

reply

[–] al666940-3 14 years ago

I wonder: do you believe in aliens (the possibility of intelligent lifeforms that can actually contact us and be contacted/interacted with)?

I bet your answer to that will say more than all your ramblings...

reply

[–] hardtruth 14 years ago

There exists the possibility of life on other planets yes. We know that all you need for life is carbon and liquid water to act as a solvent for biological chemical reactions. Water is one of the most abundant things in the universe and carbon is common throughout the solar system so it is logical to conclude that out of the billions upon billions of stars out there that some of them have planets with liquid water and carbon and it follows that they would likely have life.

This is based on scientific fact based upon finding extremophiles in every corner of the earth, volcanic vents, miles below the surface in mines, in frozen wastelands, life exists everywhere here. Scientists have also performed experiments with methane, CO2, and water. They simulated our early atmosphere, applied lightning which we know to exist on other planets, and the lightning caused the formation of simple amino acids, the building blocks of proteins.

Now whether there is life and it is intelligent I can't say. Our nearest star is proxima centauri and it is over a light year away. So even if a civilization was intelligent, and survived long enough to develop space faring technology without blowing itself to kingdom come, the distances and time involved in a stellar expedition to another solar system make it exceedingly unlikely we have ever been visited by intelligent aliens.

Aliens have landed on the earth before though but it was microscopic bacteria found in martian meteorites.

I base my conclusions on hard science, not on beliefs given to me as a child without proof.

Not what you were expecting as a reply I would imagine. You're not talking to an idiot.

Kodack

reply

[–] al666940-3 14 years ago

"You're not talking to an idiot. "

Who said you were one? Unless you're insecure on the subject why forward such declaration?

"Aliens have landed on the earth before though but it was microscopic bacteria found in martian meteorites.

I base my conclusions on hard science"

A simple google search proves that wrong. Here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_on_Mars

If such conclusions are the result of "hard science" we must be using different definitions of the word...

But at least you didn't go the Carl Sagan route (they don't believe in God but do believe in aliens).

However seems contradictory that you're open to the possibility of aliens but not God. Name one single piece of hard evvidence for the existence of aliens.

There's NONE, nothing but conjectures and theories. There's just as much proof for God than aliens (as in none, but plenty of theories and scenarios).

And using your own logic (if you believe in God you must believe in the Titans and Olympians), then you MUST also be open to the possibility of Predators, face huggers, the Silver Surfer and even Galactus.

If you're willing to believe in their possible existence, seems odd that you demean believers if their beliefs are no more bizarre than yours.

reply

[–] hardtruth 14 years ago

Why are you arguing exogenic science with me? What does that have to do with humans inventing gods?

And yeah, I base my ideas on observations and on published scientific research. NASA had the relevant information on the martian meteorite, if you think you're better at science studies than NASA you can go on right ahead and state your case to them.

http://nssdc.gsfc.nasa.gov/planetary/marslife.html

"Finally, high-resolution scanning electron microscopy has revealed the presence of tiny "ovoids" which may actually be fossil remnants of tiny (20 to 100 nanometer) bacteria. If so, they are 100 times smaller than any bacteria microfossils found on Earth, except for some supposed "nanofossils" recently discovered in very young terrestrial rocks, a finding currently not generally accepted as fossil organisms.

Taken together, the findings are thought to be strong evidence pointing to primitive bacterial life on Mars."

There is nothing contradictory in my statements about religion and my reply to your question about aliens. Gods are mythological figures invented by human culture as a way to explain what we don't understand. I can't make it clearer than that, sorry if you don't get it. And scientific studies all point to the ability for life to exist elsewhere in the universe. There is no evidence we have ever been visited by aliens that I have found.

I would put alien believers in the same category as religious believers and paranormal believers, people that are deluded and cannot be argued with because they cling too strongly to their delusions and make their decisions based on feelings instead of empirical evidence.

Kodack

reply

[–] al666940-3 14 years ago

The sections you yourself quoted don't support your "hard science" conclusions:

"which may actually be fossil remnants "
"a finding currently not generally accepted as fossil organisms."

Call me skeptic, but "may" and "not generally accepted" are not "hard science" proof of alien life form.

Seems like you're just reading what you want to read and not what's actually written.

Plenty of evangelicals and others are guilty of not much more than that.

"And scientific studies all point to the ability for life to exist elsewhere in the universe"

Wrong. The scientific community is actually at odds regarding just how likely life (of any possible kind) is possible to exist outside Earth. There's no consensus of any kind right now.

" There is no evidence we have ever been visited by aliens that I have found."

Then either you have a real short memory or think I do, your own words:
"Aliens have landed on the earth before though but it was microscopic bacteria found in martian meteorites"

That counts as a visit, don't you think?

"people that are deluded and cannot be argued with because they cling too strongly to their delusions and make their decisions based on feelings instead of empirical evidence. "

Then all them scientists who also happen to be believers were all fakes and/or really lucky? Like Einstein, Newton, Von Braun (he only got us to the Moon, no big deal) and others you dismiss as fools.

Sorry but I'll take my chances with any of them any day over a "gravity worshipper" like Hawking (his claime that gravity by itself created the universe is even more illogical than any mythological tale and effectively turns gravity into a god).

See? Atheists can also fall for the most stupid ideas, their IQ notwithstanding. So don't pretend you're any better than any Jesus freak, especially with with that condescending attitude of yours...

reply

[–] hardtruth 14 years ago

Ok you are nitpicking and I feel you need things explained to you. This is why it takes 7 paragraphs for me to make a point, because I have to assume the person arguing back has no common sense.

I don't believe we have been visited by aliens (UFO's intelligent life, you know ALIENS).

The meteorite is the only evidence that alien microbes may have ever been introduced to our planet. It's not something I particularly care about, it's something that has a possibility and I brought it up to demonstrate that if there is/were life on other planets it's not little green men but probably bacteria.

Scientists are in agreement that the building blocks of life exist everywhere in the universe and that with liquid water there is a high chance for life to develop. I'm not arguing aliens with you, I'm talking about what scientific data supports. Science is not about preclusions but about observing.

I'm done talking about aliens with you, it doesn't remotely have anything to do with the original subject of agnostics vs athiests and it's derailing the thread.

I will discuss religions association with science though because it's something that is interesting and on topic.

It is false logic to conlude that a person who has a delusion about one thing, is wrong about everything else. Believers are perfectly normal people, are capable of anything I am, and aren't much different from athiests as people. They have a remnant theology that once served a purpose but is no longer needed and athiest don't. Sure there are unreasonable believers who think the earth is a few thousand years old and that evolution doesn't exist, but they are a fringe. You find crazies in any group, I'm talking mostly of moderate average people.

Sir Issac Newton is in my opinion the most gifted scientist in human history, and he wasn't just a devout christian, he also practiced alchemy. That doesn't make the invention of newtonian physics or calculus any less right though.

Hell the big bang theory was first proposed by Georges Lemaitre, an ordained priest. Gallileo also was a devout believer, and Copernicus, pretty much anyone who was anyone believed in god.

Hell the only reason we even have knowledge of the early scientists like Archimedes and mathematicians like the Pythagoreans is because of the church being used as a repository for books and knowledge and monks spending their lives away copying them by hand.

Please don't think me ignorant of these facts. And don't pre-suppose I think believers are inferior or mentally deficient because I don't. But their religion did not define their science, it was a part of their character. I think we are too quick to try to put people in easily categorized boxes so we can dismiss them. "X is just another crazy muslim." "Y is another one of those bible thumpers" etc. I'm not that kind of person.

I have a lasting interest in uncovering truth and the truth of religion and god worship is that it is a tool to help people deal with a hostile world we have no control over. It is a coping mechanism for being at the whim of nature. Once you realize this and truly set yourself free from religious thinking, you see the world very clearly.

No more talk of aliens okay? I am just as skeptical of ufo believers as I am of ghost believers and all of the other fortean nonsense.

Kodack

reply

[–] al666940-3 14 years ago

"Ok you are nitpicking and I feel you need things explained to you"

I feel the same way about guys like you who need to have religious stuff explained to them.

Plus I'm simply being precise, you're being imprecise.

I'm sure a person who admires science can appreciate precision.

"with liquid water there is a high chance for life to develop"

And yet even in the lab they cannot make the jump from compounds to an actual living organism.

"I'm done talking about aliens with you"

Good, then stop equating belief in God to belief in Hercules and the Furies, deal?

"and he wasn't just a devout christian, he also practiced alchemy"

And Einstein wasted 40 years going for the Unified theory. And John Nash spent his golden years looking for "Harvey". And Hawking, well it's sad enough since he's doing it right now.

"Hell the only reason we even have knowledge of the early scientists like Archimedes and mathematicians like the Pythagoreans is because of the church being used as a repository for books and knowledge and monks spending their lives away copying them by hand."

Yeah, those monks did serve a purpose (you left out the Church was also the only welfare source for the poor). And you left out the Muslims (without their copying every text that passed their hands Aristotle's work would have been lost, just to name one). How did those people became today's crazies beats me (flooding Cyrus's resting place in Iran...)

"Once you realize this and truly set yourself free from religious thinking, you see the world very clearly."

Nietzsche comes to mind (I've read everything he wrote, the syphilis sure must've set in earlier than anyone realized), also Marx. Care to remember what ideologies they preceded? Communism sure hoped to free people from the shackles of religion...

How curious that you did not mention Hawking in your reply. Guess his rant must've really embarrased atheist all over.

reply

[–] hardtruth 14 years ago

Again, none of this has anything to do with my argument and sidetracking the conversation on a tangent doesn't prove a thing.

For purposes of this argument I don't care about life on other planets, or scientific history.

I have stated several times that religion is a crutch, employed by mankind for all of our history as a way to deal with a hostile world we couldn't explain. We invented gods and demons for the same reason we invent holiday figures and fables. It helps people feel better about things they can't control.

Nothing you have stated has undermined this belief. I don't need proof that god doesn't exist because it is plain to see that man invented gods and devils and therefor they are mythological figures not literal ones.

Good day.

Kodack

reply

[–] al666940-3 14 years ago

"Again, none of this has anything to do with my argument and sidetracking "

I just followed your line of thought.

"Nothing you have stated has undermined this belief."

I agree. IT IS A BELIEF (same as mine that God does exist). You just happen to believe the opposite.

"Nothing you have stated has undermined this belief."

Well as any atheist should know, belief systems tend to be "emotioanl"/"irrational" thus impervious to reason, logic, common sense or evidence.

You'll believe whatever you want to believe, anything else be damned. Attempts at converting people by speech/reason are true acts of insanity (by example however is something else).

I bet Hawking can come up with marvellous (although utterly absurd) rationalizations to believe in gravity as the ultimate primer of the universe.

He's the living proof that you can be a genious and still have your head filled full of s$%^. Souring grapes for his many miseries sure doesn't help.

reply

[–] hardtruth 14 years ago

"Well as any atheist should know, belief systems tend to be "emotioanl"/"irrational" thus impervious to reason, logic, common sense or evidence."

You say impervious but I think you mean to say ignorant. Religion isn't some kind of magic shield that keeps the science out.

You are entitled to your opinion but you are not entitled to create facts. The fact is if you trace belief in religion and the supernatural backwards in history you always arrive at people using it to explain what they don't understand. It is a FACT that all religious texts and religious ideas were invented, written by, and spoken by men. It is a man made tool.

You can argue about physics and whatever else you want, I'm sticking to the topic and I believe I've stated my case as concisely as possible. I can write this as many times as it takes for it to sink in.

Kodack

reply

[–] al666940-3 14 years ago

"The fact is if you trace belief in religion and the supernatural backwards in history you always arrive at people using it to explain what they don't understand."

Science started the same way. Remember alchemy and astrology?

I wouldn't count something out just because of its origins, otherwise you may as well discard CPR and hypothermia tyreatments/researchs due to its Nazi origin/research, and the entirety of NASA (Von Braun).

reply

[–] hardtruth 14 years ago

"Science started the same way. Remember alchemy and astrology? "

Thank you for proving my point by admitting both Science and gods and religion are man made.

Of course science was invented by men. That is patently obvious to an elementary school kid. I said gods religions and theology were invented by men and your argument is "So is science".

Oh and this is the good stuff, then you go on to say I shouldn't discount something (religion) just because of it's origins (men).

So to paraphrase you, you are saying I shouldn't discount religious gods just because they were invented by men? THAT IS THE BEST REASON TO DISCOUNT IT!!!

Your argument is incoherent and only proves my point that science and religion are man made. Science never claimed to be created by a divine deity. Religion claims that gods created us and they are divine and we are mortal, all of that is hogwash because men invented gods not the other way around. Gods have no more divinity than any other man made concepts like cartoon characters and other works of fiction.

Kodack

reply

[–] al666940-3 14 years ago

"by admitting both Science and gods and religion are man made."

Getting desperate? I said science started as a religious/superticious practices. It only later found its separate way.

However I can take that statement of yours, and come back with this: as men has perfected science (discarting nonsense and sticking with whatever works), so it has perfected religions (discarting absurd ones and keeping the ones that keep people in their best behaviour).

That negates neither religion nor science. Man didn't invent logic nor math so much as he discovered their principles. Same as religion, men has struggled figuring out what's right and wrong (science can't help you there), and all attempts at arbitrarily define them have crashed and burned (ask Hitler and Stalin, or Bin Laden for that matter).

reply

[–] hardtruth 14 years ago

Science is nothing more than a group of principles that leads to verifiable and repeatable truth. It is a useful tool for explaining what is actually happening around us. It doesn't make pre-suppositions for what might be found. Yet you compare it to religion like they are the same thing.

Religion explains nothing about the world. It is used as a comfort blanket and it is not fact based it is belief based. You are supposed to take their word for it.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

You are twisting logic and trying to claim that religion and science were developed the same and are similar. Then you bring morality into it like it is the same as religion or science and compare it to nazi's.

The only thing common to religion and science is mankind. We also developed the concepts of the truth and lying and by your logic they are the same thing since both were developed by man at the same time.

Your assumption that religions have gotten "better" because people dropped the old gods is incorrect; especially with respect to good behavior. Look at scientology, the mormons, jonestown, and heavens gate. I would say religion has gotten more dangerous and insidious.

All religion is absurd. If the head of your nation told everyone to cut the tips off their penis or the nation would be destroyed and that they should trust him and do so without asking questions, what do you think people would do? Damn right they would want proof, they would be critical of it and wonder if the leader were insane. And a leader is someone people are supposed to have confidence in and trust. So why is it a haggard madman can walk out of the desert and tell people god gave him 2 tablets and commanded him to lead his people and everyone just falls in line and says okay?

You are really reaching here and your argument is ineffective and disingenuous. It also does not undermine my argument which has remained unchanged through all the replies.

Science is skeptical of things, religion is faithful. They could not be any more different.

That being said I'm done arguing with you. Your arguments in your favor are becoming less credible, more manipulative and it is becoming a chore setting you straight every day. I didn't change your mind and I'm completely okay with that. If you were as critical with religion as you are with the facts I don't think we'd be having this conversation. Barring something very different happening, I don't see myself replying to you anymore. Peace
Kodack

reply

[–] MaGic_sTicK_2004 14 years ago

If you were as critical with religion as you are with the facts I don't think we'd be having this conversation.

I'm sorry I just don't get you. You knock the guy for lumping science and religion together to make his point and then demand that they share the same standard? Ever occur to you that to question your faith is to put your faith into question? You should be critical of "the facts" because facts SHOULD hold up to criticism. That's why they are called FACTS.

If you hate God and are 100% proud of it, NOBODY CARES.

reply

[–] hardtruth 14 years ago

I bash him because he keeps going off on tangents with twisted logic as some kind of smokescreen. Some people abide by "when loosing an argument flood your opponent with nonsense to confuse the issue".

I am very critical of facts people give me because people are as often as not misinformed. Even people I think highly of are likely to get bad information from someone and pass it off as fact with no ill intentions. As a skeptic I am always checking facts.

Speaking of smokescreens, being critical of facts has nothing to do with my argument nor does science or aliens or anything else you folks have brought up.

My position is and has always been that religion is a human concept, invented by humans and that in itself proves that gods are mythological concepts not literal and certainly not divine. IE man invented gods therefore gods are not all powerful and divine but insubstantial myths.

Not a single one of you has come up with a decent argument against that. You can talk about science and whatever all day and you are still dancing around the fact you can't overcome my conclusion.

If you can't be critical of human mythology and you don't have a better answer than mine yet you still cling to your beliefs that is your prerogative. I honestly don't care enough about strangers on the internet. The truth is the only thing that matters to me regarding this subject.

If you want to believe in a religious safety blanket at least have the self realization to call a spade a spade and realize you believe in a myth, not an all powerful being.

Kodack

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] baran_erik 9 years ago

The chances that there is intelligent life out there is much better than there being a god.

reply

[–] baran_erik 9 years ago

How do you know that all you need for life is carbon and water? For life as we know it, yes, but is all life in the universe like what we know? More hubris. Is the periodic table complete, or might there be things out there that we just haven't come across yet? After all, we really can't see that far out, now, can we?

As for your certainty that aliens have landed on the Earth:

From NASA.gov -

"A NASA research team of scientists at the Johnson Space Center (JSC), Houston, TX, and at Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA, has found evidence that strongly SUGGESTS primitive life MAY have existed on Mars more than 3.6 billion years ago. " [emphasis mine]

And this evidence isn't bacteria, but is "in the form of microscopic structures resembling fossilized bacteria", or a biomorph.

reply

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] imdazednconfuzd 14 years ago

Kodack, you are funny. You want to force someone to believe as you yourself do. Sound familiar? Everyone is entitled to believe what they want to believe, and to believe is different than to know something. I will make it easy for you, the definition should end all debate........

agnostic

noun
1. a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as god, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.
2. a person who denies or doubts the possibility of ultimate knowledge in some area of study.

Most agnostics feel the same way about this; religious folks, they believe in god therefore they know there is a god. Athiests hold a similar view, they don't believe in god therefore they know there is no god. We (agnostics) say we just don't know. Agnosticism, is not, as you state, a less risky form of atheism, it is an entirely different belief, that is frankly much more scientifically based, as it focuses on the inability to prove or disprove the existence of god.

reply

[–] hardtruth 14 years ago

Yeah you are entitled to your opinions and beliefs but you are NOT entitled to your own facts.

Religious icons are and were pure myth, created by men out of a need for comfort and a sense of purpose in the face of a hostile and unpredictable world. They are man made myths just like the easter bunny. FACT.

Believe whatever you want to believe. I'm calling out agnostics for being just as backwards and stuck thinking of the world in religous contexts as any christian. That is also a fact.

Kodack

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Victorias_Secret 14 years ago

Why should I pretend to know when I dont?

Terry
Your soul and your body are your own, and yours to do with as you wish.

reply

[–] hardtruth 14 years ago

If you don't know it's either a failure of logic or commitment. People that let mythology lead their lives KNOW what they believe. Athiest KNOW what they don't believe.

Only agnostics seem to have a problem making up their mind.

Kodack

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MaGic_sTicK_2004 14 years ago

Those who believe in the existence of at least one god will state at least one of the following things:

God is real.
God is supernatural.
God is a conscious deity.
God existed before the natural laws of physics.
God is eternal.
God is omnipresent.
God is omniscient.
God is omnipotent.
God designed and built everything out of nothing.
God is benign.

Now what evidence or proof do we have on any of the previous statements?

"What is asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof."

Faith is all the "proof" we need. Facts require evidence, beliefs require faith. I don't expect you to believe as I believe, but everyone has to face facts. This is why facts NEED evidence to hold up.

Our universe is highly imperfect and self-destructive, stars constantly die, our sun won't last more than five billion years, more than 99% of all the species that ever existed on Earth are now extinct, natural disasters happen all the time and millions of life forms (including humans) starve.

Does this sound like a universe created by a benevolent eternal omniscient and omnipotent deity?

"Is this what they call intelligent design? What's so intelligent about it?"

Is that how you see your universe? Imperfect? Self-destructive? Everything sucks huh? As if you could do better. Yeah stars die, but stars are born as well. There is order and chaos, life and death, good and evil but there is a balance(such as it is now).

If its too much for you to appreciate the positive things in this life, you could at least be fair and note the good as well as the bad and ugly.

If you hate God and are 100% proud of it, NOBODY CARES.

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MaGic_sTicK_2004 14 years ago

Thank you so much for admitting that theists lack evidence or proof.

You cannot lack what you do not need. Fish do not lack wings. Birds do not lack gills.A belief does not lack evidence; it simply doesn't need it. Facts however do need it because everyone EVERYONE has to accept facts. You do not NEED to accept another person's beliefs.

No. Many things do not suck. But I didn’t say everything sucks, did I?

No, but you imply it by focusing only on the negatives just to make your point.

I would certainly do a better job if I was a “benevolent eternal omniscient and omnipotent deity”.

The fact that you aren't one means you couldn't do better. A fish cannot be a better bird than a bird.

Oh but I DO appreciate the positive things in this life... For example, I appreciate when theists and agnostics turn into atheists after chatting with me.

I said the POSITIVE things in life.

Again, you’re missing the point. I didn’t say there aren’t good things in this universe. What I did say is that a “benevolent eternal omniscient and omnipotent deity” would not build such an imperfect and self-destructive universe as ours.

What a presumptuous thing to say. Who are you to say how a “benevolent eternal omniscient and omnipotent deity” should act? Anyway I don't think you don't think there are good things in this universe. I do think you very ungrateful however. Let's say you are right and this universe is indeed imperfect. Those imperfections would include us would they? (Or being an atheist, do you think you're the only thing God got right? :D hahaha You probably do.) And being an imperfect being, how can you be so sure of you're own judgment? How can you expect anyone else to be as sure? Being the "imperfect", "self-destructive" creature you are?

If you hate God and are 100% proud of it, NOBODY CARES.

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MaGic_sTicK_2004 14 years ago

You completely missed the point of my questions and the point of the whole thread.

Yeah that's an easy way of saying "I rather not respond to you directly".

The point of the OP was that agnostics don’t believe in the existence of gods but aren’t atheists either because they haven’t thought about the actual evidence we have or because they’re too shy or afraid to admit they don’t believe in gods.

Yeah I know. I have interjected my opinion on this several times throught this thread. Im responding to you now.

People who accept things based merely on faith are naive and their beliefs are not based on reason or common sense.

Agreed. It would be illogical to see beliefs as 'fact' as they are faith based. Ill get to that later;

Do you have any problem reading English? Don’t you understand my point? I never claimed to be God.

I dont. I do. I never said you did. You could never be God because you don't have the powers. To even try to comprehend that kind of power is insane. An to think you can actually do better? Are you qualified to hold the title of head of state for every country in the world simultaneously?? How could you ever possibly be qualified to run a universe? Even better than its creator?

“Let’s say you’re right”!? WHAT!? Are you still not sure that this universe is imperfect???? Don’t you know what world you’re living in? Should I point out the tsunami that recently hit Japan? Are you going to make me list all the tragic natural disasters of the last five centuries? And shall I also post a few sites about worldwide starvation and about the extinction of fauna and flora?

Yeah its a wild crazy jungle out there. Nobody promised us "safety" NOT in this life. Nobody promised us "eternity" NOT in this life. NOTHING in this life lasts forever.

As for natural disasters and world starvation. Its funny. We are so smart that we can see how messed up the world is but when its a matter making right we watch and wait for the miracle in the heavens like feckless infants. We cant stop a tsunami but can offer aide. The same with world hunger.

If you hate God and are 100% proud of it, NOBODY CARES.

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] MaGic_sTicK_2004 14 years ago

Actually, that was an easy way of saying “what you wrote deviates from what I previously wrote and from this thread’s subject”. I was talking about evidence and proof and you replied by talking about faith, stating that “faith is all the proof we need” – which is a very absurd thing to say. However, I did respond to you directly: “Faith is not the same thing as proof (…) The point of the OP was that agnostics don’t believe in the existence of gods but aren’t atheists either because they haven’t thought about the actual evidence we have or because they’re too shy or afraid to admit they don’t believe in gods (…)People who accept things based merely on faith are naive and their beliefs are not based on reason or common sense.”

Lol don't 'straw-man' me me and it useless to insult me just because you don't like where I take this argument. I give you that lee-way and I expect the same courtesy.

We don't just "accept things". ONLY our beliefs are faith based. WE CAN separate our faith from fact. It's people like YOU that seem to have a hard time doing that...

So you respond by writing something completely ridiculous which has absolutely nothing to do with my previous post? Wow, that makes sense…

Lovely...

Then what is your problem? What is that you don’t understand? Is it so hard to understand that there’s no evidence or proof of God’s existence?

MY faith is all the "evidence" that I require. Why is THAT so hard to understand?

Yeah, but the whole point was “ IF I was God ” – see the word “ if ” right there?

*Sigh*...

If you think that then you lack the ability to even try to understand how this universe works.

...I fail to see how the two are mutually inclusive. So, by simply studying the Mona Lisa I can claim to know the inner workings of Leonardo da Vinci in intimate detail?

Well it’s pretty obvious that an all-knowing and all-powerful eternal god could do better…

LOl well it isn't all that obvious to me because I have never been all knowing or powerful. Nor did I have a few these "gods" over by the house for tea to you know, set me straight on how deities should carry themselves...

If I was an all-powerful and all-knowing eternal god then, yes, I would certainly be qualified to hold the title of “head of state for every country in the world”.

As I wrote, “if I was a benevolent eternal omniscient and omnipotent deity I would’ve built a less imperfect and less self-destructive universe.” – If you can’t understand what I just wrote then you’re not qualified to debate anything on the basis of logical argumentation.

Ah, I got you now. So basically you're saying If you had all of God's powers, you would do a far better job than God. No that's not quite it. Your point is that God cant exist because God made such a mess of things God couldn't possibly be a real "god". How very interesting. Well there is a great deal of pressure on our God.

First God's word is absolute. There's no going back when you say you're gonna do something. What you create, you create. What you destroy, you destroy. If you promised never to resurrect any living thing that died you "cant" no matter how much you want that thing to live.

If you say you love your creations so much that you allow them free will and the chance to CHOOSE to believe in you, you abide by that not matter how much your creation suffer without your direct influence. Much like parents letting their children grow up. You made them strong enough to overcome such adversities.

You become a slave to your own law and will. Why? Who's knows? Only God knows why God would restrict God's own power. But I'm betting its for the best.

“when its a matter making right we watch and wait for the miracle in the heavens like feckless infants.”? Hey, you just described most of the members of the abrahamic religions! Thank you so much! You see, while theists try to rely on gods (something which doesn’t exist), other people actually rely on things which are real.

No. If you're a believer, you KNOW that God has done more than enough miracles. Its the "other people" that seem quite hungry for more. What? Does Jesus have to die again, reborn again, then die again and re-reborn for adequate proof? Either believe of don't.

By the way, since you criticized my “judgement”, I would like to know your answer to these questions:

1- How can you be so sure of your own judgement towards the god Zeus or the god Ra?

2- How can you be so sure that Santa and the Tooth Fairy aren’t real?

3- If I tell you that there are magical fairies living on another planet without presenting any evidence or proof, will you accept my claim as truth?

Belief starts by choice. I believe In my God because CHOOSE to. This belief is founded by faith. I do not choose to follow greek or egytian gods, or santa, or the tooth fairy, or ANY fairy. I choose my God.

4- You theists claim at least one of the following things:

God is real.
God is supernatural.
God is a conscious deity.
God existed before the natural laws of physics.
God is eternal.
God is omnipresent.
God is omniscient.
God is omnipotent.
God designed and built everything out of nothing.
God is benign.

Considering that there’s absolutely no evidence or proof for any of the previous statements, what makes you theists be so sure of (any of) the previous claims?

Faith. Seriously here's the most realist answer you're gonna get to that question. We choose to believe in the notion of something better than ourselves.

If you hate God and are 100% proud of it, NOBODY CARES.

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] quirkyrecords 14 years ago

well thats just not true in my case.

i am agnostic and i am pretty sure there isnt a god. but i am not afraid to say there isnt one in case there is, i am just open minded enough to say that no one can 100% sure there isnt. until i see proof (you know proof right?) either way i couldnt put my money in each camp. but frankly i would be, if possible, 99.99999% atheist.

i have no problem in people believing in god, its your right, but when you start preaching to others, converting children like in the film (100% child abuse by the way) and using it as an excuse for war and destruction around the world that is when i have a problem.

thats your opinion on agnostics, and frankly i dont think you actually know what it means. it doesnt mean undecided, by definition we have decided and its a stance on not really being able to know.

and to say that believing in god would benefit me is arogant. i am happier believing that when i die nothing happens and i simply wont exist any more than waste me life like the people in the film.

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3136037

reply

[–] hardtruth 14 years ago

Let me ask you this, how do you feel about cults and forced indoctrination? Because these people aren't just god worshipers, they are a cult every bit as bad as any coven of witches.

Kodack

reply

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] hardtruth 14 years ago

People who have nothing to say don't say enough to piss anybody off. You're probably a kid who learned about this stuff watching veggietales. Shhh junior the adults are talking.

Kodack

reply