It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Atheism vs. christianty

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
Christians 33.03% (of which Roman Catholics 17.33%, Protestants 5.8%, Orthodox 3.42%, Anglicans 1.23%),


By this type of argument, Catholics win. You protestants are clearly going to hell.




posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 09:34 AM
link   
To be honest i dont like being labelled. i dislike the way people jump at each other because they do not support the same religion.

i admire the people who believe in God. Because you have something someone to believe in!

unfortunately i do not believe in God. I wish i could believe but i dont have that spiritual feeling towards "God".

i believe there is a higher being. But i dont think it is a God.

But i do wish when i grow older i will admitt there is a God and hopefully will believe. But at the moment in time i do not believe.

oni x x

ps: all the people who have been insulted by a person because of your religion, keep your head high and believe! x x



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 10:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by BlackGuardXIII
www.odci.gov...

Christians 33.03% (of which Roman Catholics 17.33%, Protestants 5.8%, Orthodox 3.42%, Anglicans 1.23%), Muslims 20.12%, Hindus 13.34%, Buddhists 5.89%, Sikhs 0.39%, Jews 0.23%, other religions 12.61%, non-religious 12.03%, atheists 2.36% (2004 est.)


And you trust the CIA?!?!?:shk:



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 11:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheCrystalSword
...right questions are is like asking the wind why it blows, or the rivers why they flow...
...proof of something which cannot be proven...
... there is no proof of God, except God itself, which cannot be revealed.
...It is the veil you cannot pull back. If you wish to assume there is nothing, by all means do...

He's really saying he doesnt have a clue.

I guess that gives you no right to doubt another person's basis to judge by.
If another's results is not the same as yours, ofcourse it automatically means that he/she must have a flawed basis or something somewhere went wrong?



Statistically, most of the universe should not exist or happen in any fashion. Long odds, as it were.

Inversion of causes ...
I hate Bayes for this exact reason! DIE DIE BAYES.





Long odds dictate that someone should've at least had some severe lacerations or possibly a broken bone or sprained joint, none of which happened. Scratches from glass and only that. Statistically in the impossible range.

I'm glad they werent hurt. For something to be statistically impossible in no way guarantees the favorable outcome.



God exists where numbers break down. Otherwise, the universe is vastly silly and nonsensical, not even applying to its own rules of statistics.

Wait, God exists where numbers break down: Like at singularities. So a black hole is much less silly and nonsensical than the rest of the universe which tends to follow rules? WHAT?

[edit on 23-1-2006 by I_s_i_s]



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 11:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by raingirl

I don't believe in any god/gods and dont see why I should. Just because others feel the need or have be brought up to believe is neither here nor there. I have found no evidence past or present that implies the existence of deities to be true and also can't think of any reason why these dieties should exist. However, as I am open minded, if any evidence to the contrary emerges then I would believe accordingly. I also believe that there are higher intelligences out there somewhere but would not ascribe them god status but beings with a greater understanding of the way things are than ourselves.


So why do Christians believe? I have to admit that i find a life with no God very meaningless in comparison... I was also brought up in a christian household. So i consider myself a bad example in response to what you've said. But look around you: (1) there are intelligent people who believe, who came to believe, after concluding that they evidence points to it being true, and (2) there is more to believing than simply, *wanting* to believe. I know of a person who says he finds what God calls on you to do as a Christian annoying... he doesn't want to believe, but he can't help it - he just does.

Chrstians believe for a variety of different reasons, some believe because its ingrained in their life, some because they need to believe in something and some because they think thats its better to believe than not. I also come from a religious family, my father is catholic (non practising) and my mother is protestant (practising) and we were made go to church and sunday school for years until we could make up our own minds.
I could also reverse your statement 1) look around you there are a lot of intelligent people who DONT believe or did and now dont due to the conclusions that they have made. As I said I dont see the point or feel the need to believe in god/gods or to be in a religion, I see it as a limiting factor of Humanity like ethics and morals (which stems from religious practices). However I do see some good in its values.
If if wasn't for religion where would we be?


G



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 04:34 PM
link   
If it wasn't for religion we wouldn't have Christmas or Easter. That would really suck.



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by I_s_i_s
He's really saying he doesnt have a clue.

I guess that gives you no right to doubt another person's basis to judge by.
If another's results is not the same as yours, ofcourse it automatically means that he/she must have a flawed basis or something somewhere went wrong?


No. I am saying that definitionally, a being which can be proven is not all powerful/omniscient/etc. By putting something into a human frame of reference, you diminish it and make it less than it is. Which is why I believe God is beyond mortal ken, because definitionally, it would have to be.



Inversion of causes ...
I hate Bayes for this exact reason! DIE DIE BAYES.


No... If there is a .0000015^205 possibility of something happening and it does, that is in a sense breaking the rules of reality. Something that has a nigh impossible ratio of occurring that happens anyways means that impossible things happen. And on a daily basis, no less. Which is also long odds... things with long odds happening against long odds repeatedly make two tiers of breaking the odds, and I've heard enough from other people to deduce that the impossible is almost a daily contrivance.

Hence, God.



I'm glad they werent hurt. For something to be statistically impossible in no way guarantees the favorable outcome.


Oh, by no means does it. However, the favorable outcome happened... which was the long odds, nobody being severely hurt in that kind of accident. It's a minor example of what I am talking about. No, it doesn't mean the most favorable outcome happens, but when contrived situations occur that logistically should never have happened, it does tend to loan one the belief that there is apparently systems going on we are unaware of. Especially with the frequency of such things happening.




Wait, God exists where numbers break down: Like at singularities. So a black hole is much less silly and nonsensical than the rest of the universe which tends to follow rules? WHAT?


You apparently don't understand what I meant when I said "BREAK DOWN". I was specifically referring to long odds which occur on a regular basis, flying in the face of statistical science as to what should happen.

The Universe is silly, or at the very least scientists are, because they have a firm understanding of the possible and impossible, despite the impossible happening on a daily basis.

Perhaps not the impossible, in a literal view, as much as the highly improbable as to be indistinguishable from impossible.



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 09:29 PM
link   

Chrstians believe for a variety of different reasons, some believe because its ingrained in their life, some because they need to believe in something and some because they think thats its better to believe than not. I also come from a religious family, my father is catholic (non practising) and my mother is protestant (practising) and we were made go to church and sunday school for years until we could make up our own minds.
I could also reverse your statement 1) look around you there are a lot of intelligent people who DONT believe or did and now dont due to the conclusions that they have made. As I said I dont see the point or feel the need to believe in god/gods or to be in a religion, I see it as a limiting factor of Humanity like ethics and morals (which stems from religious practices). However I do see some good in its values.
If if wasn't for religion where would we be?


G


I do actually reverse the statement... to be honest i don't know of that many people who look deep into Christianity and conclude that they do not believe. I would actually be interested in talking to anyone of this nature. I thought I was in a conversation with one such person - but found that although he considered himself agnostic (he had once been a Christian), he still saw Christianity as "the closest to the truth" that he had found... as far as evidence and logic could tell him.

As to the intelligent people who don't believe - I think that a lot of the time they have objections to Christianity which are logically sound - but which have equally sound answers. I don't think i've met enough people to claim to have observed any trend, but of those that i've met who are both intelligent and don't believe in Jesus, I've yet to find someone who is actually well aware of the evidence, historical data, etc.

I also think that just being from a Christian family doesn't mean you're aware of the above... however, i'm happy for you to be a first... if you would care to tell me more about what you know and why you don't believe



posted on Jan, 23 2006 @ 10:33 PM
link   
I've read 3 bibles, attended many different Christian churches, read books about the history of the scriptures, and the evidence of Jesus' life (there is virtually none that dates to his actual lifetime, all of it, save one, is from later times) I am not atheist, I have a strong spiritual background, but it is not Christian. Jesus' message is treasured by me, and his example is inspirational. I see few who call themselves his followers who seem to be even trying to act as he did.
I believe in angels, miracles, the power of prayer, and life after death, but I am not sure if God is real. I believe that Jesus was a real historical figure, but have very different ideas about what his story was. As an example, I cannot see ever letting him take my sins upon himself, even were he to politely request it personally. I'd rather keep them, or if I had to pass them off on someone else, Satan would likely be my pick.



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 12:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheCrystalSword
No... If there is a .0000015^205 possibility of something happening and it does, that is in a sense breaking the rules of reality.


How many trials do you get?



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 01:13 AM
link   
I'm not sure I follow your question, Spamandham.

How many trials do I get?



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 01:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by spamandham

Originally posted by TheCrystalSword
No... If there is a .0000015^205 possibility of something happening and it does, that is in a sense breaking the rules of reality.

How many trials do you get?


You are allowed as many as can be attempted by all the people you have personal contact with, and trust, in your whole lifespan, so 70 to 80 years to hit it. That is precious little time even if you tried as often as you were physically able. But I keep in mind that although the lottery win odds are millions to one, it is one on a daily basis... my experience is that events which have such low probabilities of occuring do indeed, as stated above, happen all the time. I will paste some of my 'really long shot odds' coincidences. One is a baseball hitting me, one a guy I met and read about, one lightning striking, and one a van mileage reading.... those are a good start.

I got hit on the leg with a baseball. It left a round bruise just like times it has happened. This one time though, my brother and I were walking home from the movies, and we climbed a tree to see over the outfield fence to find out the score of a baseball game. It was the bottom of the ninth, and one of us said wouldn't it be neat if he hit it right to us. and then he did, and the game was over. It hit me on the leg because my brother was in front of me and could see it coming, the outfielder didn't, he had lost it in the lights and was backing up to our left and that's where I was looking for it, above him. J. ducked out of the way and it hit me. And the game was over, and we had not been in the tree five minutes.

I was reading a mountaineering book by Joe Simpson, and was about half way through when I volunteered to man a booth at an anti-apec summit conference. Our booth was promoting a free East Timor.
The free Tibet booth next to us had a visit from a tibetan Buddhist monk. I got to meet him. That night I read two pages further in my book, and there he was. His name is Palden Gyatzo or something like that.
What are the odds that he would be in Vancouver Canada, right beside me, and then the same day I would turn the page and see him in the book I was reading?

I used to work with a fellow who's wife died of lung cancer, though she was a nurse who never smoked.
After she passed on, he raised their two daughters as a single dad. It was about a year from her diagnosis until she was gone.
Around a month before she passed on she told him that she was going to send him some kind of a sign.
He is a very honest, family-oriented, devout Catholic, and I honestly cannot see him lying about something this serious.
Then, from her hospital bed a week before she passed on, she told him she knew what the sign would be....lightning.
I have only been to one funeral in my life, and it was scheduled for 1 P.M., one Saturday, at a local Catholic Church.
As we arrived it was pouring rain out, really hard, the sky was completely filled by very thick, very low overcast clouds, and it made midday as dark as if it was dusk.
We sat down, got settled in, and then boom, thunder, and the lights in the church went out for a couple of minutes.
My friend told me that when the thunder struck, he immediately looked at his watch and, by coincidence, it was 1 o'clock on the dot.
After the funeral was over we came out to find there wasn't a cloud in the sky; I looked in every direction.
Everything was soaked and dripping, yet the sun was shining, making the roads reflect a blinding glare.
I know that it comforted the guy I worked with, you should have seen his eyes as he told us about it.
It was after the funeral standing in the parking lot.
He is a quiet guy, so he started by mentioning the lightning, then he said something like, ' ya know what was odd about that....'
and told us about the two talks he'd had with his wife just before she died.
His eyes told me that it was very comforting to him.

On Sept. 13, 2004. I got in my van to go for lunch and the odometer, and trip odometer had a pretty funky mileage showing. 8 7's in a row.
Odometer: 577 777 Trip Odo.: 77.7

Probabilities of those are hard to measure, I would think, but I bet the last one is the most likely one to have the lowest odds. Some of them are stratospheric long shots....



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 07:15 AM
link   
BlackGuard:
Interesting post
You have an interesting ste of beliefs, nothing i've not heard before but interesting nonetheless. Would you care to tell me about the "whys" of your belief?

What are your different ideas about his story? And why do you think they are more valid, or more likely than what it is that the Bible presents to be true?

I've had discussions with people that suggest to me that the historical evidence is good, but not complete enough to leave no doubt that the documents were not tampered with. But that still begs the question of, first, why would they be tampered with; second, who would do that; third, and perhaps most significantly... why do you believe it more likely that they were tampered with, to the point where the key points of the message were distorted, than that they were left intact?

As to passing on your sins to another person... keeping them when someone else had offered to take them for you would be a valiant choice, but if the bible's message is true... too bad mate, the choice is already made


Cheers.... i'd be fascinated to hear your answers



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 08:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by TheCrystalSword
By putting something into a human frame of reference, you diminish it and make it less than it is. Which is why I believe God is beyond mortal ken, because definitionally, it would have to be.


So why do you even bother defining it?


No... If there is a .0000015^205 possibility of something happening and it does, that is in a sense breaking the rules of reality.

What are your "rules of reality?" I know you're not talking about the mathematical rules this universe runs by cuz improbable events in no way break any mathematical rules.



Something that has a nigh impossible ratio of occurring that happens anyways means that impossible things happen. And on a daily basis, no less.

Oh boy.
I feel this pain every friggin waking day of my working life!
You do understand the difference between improbable and impossible right? Let me give you a little example in probability 101.

Say you have a die.
The chances of it landing on six 1000 times in a row has a probability of 1/(6^1000). Improbable.

The chances of it landing on a zero 1000 times in a row: Impossible.

Let me give you a few examples of impossible: walking on water, you growing wings, etc etc.


Which is also long odds... things with long odds happening against long odds repeatedly make two tiers of breaking the odds, and I've heard enough from other people to deduce that the impossible is almost a daily contrivance.



Prob. 101 again. Two unlikely events happening in a row do not tier up man(wrt to your definitions). They're independent of each other and will in no way effect each other no matter how you see it.

Again. Impossible doesnt happen. If it happened then its just a possible event all along.



...
Hence, God.

So if you fall from the empire state building and land on a needle right in the eye ( what are the odds ha!) then according to you, that proves god's existence?



...when contrived situations occur that logistically should never have happened, it does tend to loan one the belief that there is apparently systems going on we are unaware of.


They are not "contrived" situations first of all. If you start with wrong assumptions its only going to lead you back to your flawed assumption.


Especially with the frequency of such things happening.

Frequency doesnt do jack, they're independent events!


You apparently don't understand what I meant when I said "BREAK DOWN". I was specifically referring to long odds which occur on a regular basis, flying in the face of statistical science as to what should happen.

Its not flying in the face of any science. See above.


The Universe is silly, or at the very least scientists are, because they have a firm understanding of the possible and impossible, despite the impossible happening on a daily basis.

So now scientists are silly? Ok I shouldve known that was coming.


Perhaps not the impossible, in a literal view, as much as the highly improbable as to be indistinguishable from impossible.

Which is it?



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 04:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by raingirl
BlackGuard:
Interesting post
You have an interesting ste of beliefs, nothing i've not heard before but interesting nonetheless. Would you care to tell me about the "whys" of your belief?


Why? Cuz it makes the most sense from my point of view, considering my life experiences, studies, and my speculations as to what those things mean? Above are some of the specific reasons. My other personal spiritual experiences are a major part of it.



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 04:11 PM
link   
" 'quote: Especially with the frequency of such things happening. '

Frequency doesnt do jack, they're independent events! ' isis

I agree, in theory, but not in practice. Sure, they are unrelated. But, after the millionth one, the 'one off', merely anecdotal evidence, response from scientists gets a bit tired in my view.
If there are a million events, though unrelated as they surely are, that is worth noting.
Like NDE's, UFO sightings, hauntings, and seeing the future, each time it is reported the easy out is to classify it as a 'unsubstantiated' single piece of anecdotal evidence. After 8 million plus NDE reports, how can that be a valid and credible method of disproving and then dismissing the phenomenon?



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by I_s_i_s
So why do you even bother defining it?
[]/quote

I'm not defining God. I am explaining why I believe in a creator, which has far more scientific basis than some other reasons.



What are your "rules of reality?" I know you're not talking about the mathematical rules this universe runs by cuz improbable events in no way break any mathematical rules.


If you are asking me about MY rules for reality, I have none. I think all of reality is mutable to the observer and non-static in complex systems.

And knowing some people with Math degrees, there is such a term as "Statistical Impossibility". It's when a number is so ludicrously small that it may as well be indistinguishable from zero.

Oh, and by the way, there are no impossibilities, only high improbabilities.



Oh boy.
I feel this pain every friggin waking day of my working life!
You do understand the difference between improbable and impossible right? Let me give you a little example in probability 101.


I am having doubts as to your educational level, as Stephen Hawking himself stated Chthulu could very well come out of a black hole in a reversal of his view that nothing escaped the gravity well. Granted, he was using a ludicrous concept at the time, but you should read "A STEP FURTHER OUT". It was published in the 80's, but has some rather great thoughts on the matter in the Black Holes chapter.



Say you have a die.
The chances of it landing on six 1000 times in a row has a probability of 1/(6^1000). Improbable.

The chances of it landing on a zero 1000 times in a row: Impossible.


Unless you happen to have a zero on one face of the die. And honestly, it's a bad example. Even without a zero, there is an infinitesmal chance that for whatever reason, it lands on an EDGE. Even assuming a perfectly flat surface.



Let me give you a few examples of impossible: walking on water, you growing wings, etc etc.


You don't know very much, do you? Walking on water isn't impossible, provided you don't break the surface tension. It is just highly improbable. If one could distribute their weight across a greater surface area of the water, you can walk on it. Either that, or if you could actually reach a velocity that didn't require the above, but that would be more super-running on water than walking.

As for growing wings, not a statistical impossibility. Provided the correct genetic engineering techniques, I imagine it comes into the realm of feasible.



Prob. 101 again. Two unlikely events happening in a row do not tier up man(wrt to your definitions). They're independent of each other and will in no way effect each other no matter how you see it.


I again must feel you've never taken a statistics course in anything. Unlikely events stack and multiply together based off of the percentage of those two events interacting on a mutual basis. This usually reduces the number to an absurd, indestinguishable from zero number. If you pile on multiple events, the number is infinitesmally small. Still possible, but it is also mathematically possible that monkeys could quantum tunnel from africa and arrive out of your posterior in a high velocity manner.



Again. Impossible doesnt happen. If it happened then its just a possible event all along.


Likely a good thing I don't ascede to the existence of such a concept.



So if you fall from the empire state building and land on a needle right in the eye ( what are the odds ha!) then according to you, that proves god's existence?


Possibly yes, it isn't limited to good things. However, in the case you describe, I would say that the situation isn't improbable enough to be attributed to God.



They are not "contrived" situations first of all. If you start with wrong assumptions its only going to lead you back to your flawed assumption.


Contrived they are, in the sense that it is contrived to think that all such small numbers align together at the same point in time to occur in one unified event. The probability of any two such events occuring making the number smaller, and every additional unlikely event making the number smaller still.



Frequency doesnt do jack, they're independent events!


Well, maybe to you the frequency of things matters worth pot metal. However, I ascribe to believe that the numbers are the important factor.

I don't recall seeing where I told you that you had to believe as I did.



Its not flying in the face of any science. See above.


Uhm, it flies in the face of STATISTICAL science. Statistics is a science.



So now scientists are silly? Ok I shouldve known that was coming.


Anyone who claims to know something is silly, and has a statistically high probability of being wrong somewhere along the line. It's also a high probability that they'll never notice because they feel as if they know something.

That goes for anyone and everyone.



Which is it?


It is exactly as I just said.



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 04:49 PM
link   
Odds are just that, and more often than it seems it should happen, events occur that are wildly improbable.
If you were the stewardess who fell from 30 000 feet inside the tail section of a plane that had blown up, and you were conscious, what chance of surviving would you give yourself? But that has happened.
If I said I bet my friend can do a chin up using just one baby finger, most would take the bet. Its maybe a million to one odds. But I would win, knowing beforehand that this one person could do it.
Also, theoretical probability, and practical probability can differ.
Like the odds a coin will come up heads. If it came up heads 10 times in a row, you would be pretty surprised if it came up heads again, due to human nature. But, the odds are still 50/50, as always.



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 08:21 PM
link   
Here's the thang. Atheists aren't really against anything other than things like gratuitous violence againsr innocent people, theft, abuse and totalitarianism.
Christians, on the other hand are against almost everything except their own particular version of the christian sect. They are against everything from other religions to copulating standing up because any Baptist can tell Ya, doing that is way too much like dancing.
So don't malign atheists by suggesting they are "against" religion. They simply don't accept the assumption that metaphysics drempt up over history is anything other than....metaphysics drempt up over history.
The pathetic attempt by fundamentalists to polute science, which few of them understand, to, by some giant leep of misassumption, support the fantasy of creationism reborn as ID is laughable and since the current administration has no working knowledfge of or respect for our Constitution, downright frightening.
skep



posted on Jan, 24 2006 @ 08:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by skep
Atheists aren't really against anything other than things like gratuitous violence againsr innocent people, theft, abuse and totalitarianism.
They simply don't accept the assumption that metaphysics drempt up over history is anything other than....metaphysics drempt up over history.
skep


Not my experience of the atheist creed. They are no less violent, thieving, abusive, etc. than any group. And metaphysics may not be part of your life, but some people have direct experience which negates any need to refer to history in order to believe.
Assumption is not an exclusive trait of theists. Atheists often assume they are right and theists are wrong, without question.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join