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.

 

Public Atheist Monument Across from 10 Commandments

page: 14
24
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by ElohimJD
 


Whatever makes you feel better about yourself. Just remember - faith doesn't fill an empty stomach.


Whatever makes you feel logical and intellectual about yourself. Just remember - man does not live on bread alone, but by every word (logos) of the Eternal.

God Bless,




posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 03:02 PM
link   
reply to post by ElohimJD
 



Whatever makes you feel logical and intellectual about yourself. Just remember - man does not live on bread alone, but by every word (logos) of the Eternal.


According to whom? Because apparently, by their standards, I'm a miracle. Or maybe being an atheist gives me magical powers enabling me to survive without the sustenance of Bedouin myths.
edit on 5-6-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 03:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Bob Sholtz
 





Then explain to me two things: 1) How do the established scientific principles of this universe as we know it concretely proof that there must be a deity in existence?
it is interesting that my scientific reasons for believing something beyond the universe had a hand in it's creation is the only point you did not address.


That would imply the universe is not, in fact, infinite. This would then require evidence on your part giving me adequate reason to believe that not only is the universe finite, but you have adequate reason to know what lies beyond its borders. How is it you know something our lavishly funded scientists do not?

That's why I did not address that possibility.




2) What qualifies you as an expert on the subject, considering the most renowned scientific research facilities in the world cannot say for a fact that there is a deity?
the first bit of this sentence is a logical fallacy of the ad hominem variety, the second fallacy is an argument from ignorance.


So every time I ask anyone for a reason to believe they know anything about a subject beyond what they believe themselves to know, it's an ad hominem attack? Or maybe it's just a screening process intended to weed out the armchair experts from the real deal. So far, the results are not encouraging.

It's not an argument from ignorance. It's an observation that you apparently know something they do not. Which is interesting on an even deeper level because apparently, they aren't earning the good money we give them to come up with an answer that's so obvious, a less educated and less trained person can solidly prove it.

Oh, wait....you can't. We have more evidence and testimony for extraterrestrial life than we do for your god.




The observable scientific principles of my "delusion" match precisely with the observable scientific principles of your "delusion", suggesting that we share the same delusion.

in my thought experiment there is no "we", only you. obviously a product of your delusion would fit within the parameters of your delusion.


Which means that your argument is rendered invalid as an aspect of this delusion. So why should I pay any attention to what you have to say? Maybe what you're suggesting right now is a ruse intended to further convince myself of the belief that I am not delusional when, in fact, I am delusional.

Either way, what you say cannot be trusted unless I am not delusional. Do I trust you and your existence? Or should I not? Is this conversation even worth continuing, since I am possibly delusional and you are possibly an aspect of that delusional state? Who's to say that you're not the one who is delusional?

We can play this game all day, all night, and all day again. The fact is, neither of us can know if we are delusional, so it's more productive to assume that neither of us are delusional. Unless you want to insist upon carrying that train of thought forward and force the termination of this discussion.


the end result is that you will have to accept that you cannot prove whether this is real or a personal delusion. you take it on blind faith, no evidence supports either assumption, an act you criticize theists for. i do not mean this as an insult in any way, i'm just pointing out how you consider this acceptable when the question of whether this is a delusion is brought up, but unacceptable when the question of a god is brought up. i've already given a few of my reasons for believing in a god/higher power/prime mover, those reasons include, but are not limited to, a lack of known physics properties to explain the universe's existence without intervention.


You still have no evidence other than your desire to believe and your conditioning to continue doing so. Your single most initially effective argument - "you could be delusional" - is easily reversible and therefore ineffective in that you could be hallucinating this entire conversation as a result of your self-doubt. You might not believe it is so, but can you prove it is not so?

I suggest we drop the delusional argument because we both have the same reasons for believing that this is not a delusion. Which puts us right back where we started, as stated before. There's more reasons not to believe in a god, partially due to previous pathetic efforts to build an argument in favor of a god, than there are to believe in a ruling higher power.

All in all, your greatest excuse is that you choose to believe, not that you have to. You choose to believe because you don't have a better answer. Belief out of ignorance is no better than argument out of ignorance.
edit on 5-6-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 



That would imply the universe is not, in fact, infinite. This would then require evidence on your part giving me adequate reason to believe that not only is the universe finite, but you have adequate reason to know what lies beyond its borders. How is it you know something our lavishly funded scientists do not?

no, it is not. an infinite quantity cannot exist inside time. the actual size of the universe has been theoretically measured using what we know of its expansion rate, it's age is also known to a high degree of accuracy. i'm rather surprised that you evidently did not know this. some people claim it is infinite in size, but this is not congruent with entropy or other known principles. i suppose i could link you something about entropy, it's a confirmed scientific fact falling under thermodynamics.


Entropy is a measure of the number of specific ways in which a system may be arranged, often taken to be a measure of disorder. The entropy of an isolated system never decreases, because isolated systems spontaneously evolve towards thermodynamic equilibrium, which is the state of maximum entropy.

en.wikipedia.org...


The universe is about 14 billion years old

io9.com...


So every time I ask anyone for a reason to believe they know anything about a subject beyond what they believe themselves to know, it's an ad hominem attack?

you implied that credentials affect what is true. ad hominem is often used on these boards to mean "a personal insult", but it's more often seen in the form that you posed.


Ad hominem is Latin for "to the man." The ad hominem fallacy occurs when one asserts that somebody's claim is wrong because of something about the person making the claim.

skepdic.com...


It's not an argument from ignorance. It's an observation that you apparently know something they do not.

an argument from ignorance asserts: there is no evidence for "x", therefore "y" OR there is no evidence against "x", therefore "x".


Which is interesting on an even deeper level because apparently, they aren't earning the good money we give them to come up with an answer that's so obvious, a less educated and less trained person can solidly prove it.

more fallacies...assuming pay has anything to do with it (which is exactly why hawking was right about black holes, oh wait...he was wrong, yet he fits all your criteria that someone must fulfill to be right), then a repeat of the same ad hominem.


We can play this game all day, all night, and all day again. The fact is, neither of us can know if we are delusional

my point all along.


so it's more productive to assume that neither of us are delusional.

more productive? debatable, since if this is your delusion you are not making any progress, but the important question is whether the assumption has any evidence to demonstrate that it is true. it doesn't.

reason needs evidence or facts, and you have none that are beyond question, yet you choose to believe that you aren't delusional, as do i. blind faith, no evidence.


You still have no evidence other than your desire to believe and your conditioning to continue doing so.

i had assumed that you would know what entropy entailed, or that the size of the universe has been theoretically measured using what we know. your lack of knowledge on the subject does not invalidate my points. (again, i do not intend to be insulting in any way.)


There's more reasons not to believe in a god, partially due to previous pathetic efforts to build an argument in favor of a god, than there are to believe in a ruling higher power.

you have failed to list a single reason, or to address my points. you say "partially due", but in reality you mean "wholly due". it still isn't true, and it is another argument from ignorance.


You choose to believe because you don't have a better answer.

listen to what you're saying! should i choose to believe a less likely answer? are you seriously saying my beliefs are wrong because i can't come up with a better answer that fits the evidence?


Belief out of ignorance is no better than argument out of ignorance.

i listed my reasons. you chose not to address them.



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Bob Sholtz
 


I'm done discussing this with you. We're not getting anywhere, and honestly, I'm swiftly losing interest in what you have to say because you're spending more time trying to call technicalities on my points than actually making any points of your own. A common tactic on the forums.

Bye.
edit on 5-6-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by Bob Sholtz
 


If the universe is finite, which it may be, wouldn't that mean that there could be infinite universes? Also, how does a finite universe indicate a god, or assume that god is the creator of universes. If there IS a god, couldn't there be infinite gods as well?



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 



If the universe is finite, which it may be, wouldn't that mean that there could be infinite universes? Also, how does a finite universe indicate a god, or assume that god is the creator of universes. If there IS a god, couldn't there be infinite gods as well?

yes. there could be other universes, personally i believe there are. the concept of "infinite" however does not mean that every possibility exists in some alternate universe. i believe them to be wholly separate "bubbles" floating in a higher dimensional matrix (similar to how a piece of paper can have an infinite number of parallel lines drawn on it). if they exist, i don't see how they would have a link to our universe to rule out which possibilities have already been taken, and infinity minus any number (representing distinct possibilities) is still infinity.

by definition a finite universe had a beginning. it didn't always exist. so what prompted it's existence? if one posits that it began as the result of other universes interacting, then where did those universes come from? to interact they would have to be finite.

my reasoning is based on establishing that our universe is most likely the product of some higher power, and there certainly could exist other beings of power outside of time, but one god is the most likely. it would cause contradictions to have multiple all-powerful beings ever existing.



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 04:27 PM
link   
It always stuns me what an infantile mind these people have. "You built your monument, so I get to build mine too!".
As if the Ten Commandments werent a universal code that is also acknowledged by the non-religious (or does any atheist seriously disagree with "Thou shalt not kill").



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 04:27 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 



I'm done discussing this with you. We're not getting anywhere, and honestly, I'm swiftly losing interest in what you have to say because you're spending more time trying to call technicalities on my points than actually making any points of your own. A common tactic on the forums. Bye.

i disagree, but i will not gloat.



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 04:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


And yet the religious take credit for it.



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 04:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


I absolutely am offended by the 10 Commandments. I'm offended by a deity that commands me to worship him or die. I'm offended by the hypocrisy of "Thou Shalt Not Kill" and what actually ensues afterwards. I'm insulted that women are considered property, and that property rights are defined at all in these "ultimate truths."

I could go on and on, but I actually did a thread on my grievances against the 10 Commandments, The 10 Commandments are Unnecessary, Irrelevant and Immoral



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 04:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by windword
I absolutely am offended by the 10 Commandments.


If you're that easily offended, life is not going to be easy.



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 04:36 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


"Thou shalt not steal"

"Thou shalt honor thy father"

"Thou shalt not kill"

These are unnecessary and immoral?



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by windword
I'm insulted that women are considered property,


Relax buddy, no such thing is implied in the 10 Commandments.



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 04:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Bob Sholtz
 


I can envision a universe that didn't have a beginning, but is eternally becoming. It's constantly changing, but it doesn't have to have a beginning any more than "god" does. Whether the universe began at once or was a creation of some other purposely willful being that created it from nothing aren't the only two possibilities, in my opinion.




my reasoning is based on establishing that our universe is most likely the product of some higher power, and there certainly could exist other beings of power outside of time, but one god is the most likely. it would cause contradictions to have multiple all-powerful beings ever existing.


I don't see that logic at all. If one god exists, in all probability, multiple gods exist. The fact that many superstructures exist with a galaxy doesn't contradict the power of the others.



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 



I absolutely am offended by the 10 Commandments. I'm offended by a deity that commands me to worship him or die. I'm offended by the hypocrisy of "Thou Shalt Not Kill" and what actually ensues afterwards. I'm insulted that women are considered property, and that property rights are defined at all in these "ultimate truths." I could go on and on, but I actually did a thread on my grievances against the 10 Commandments, The 10 Commandments are Unnecessary, Irrelevant and Immoral

your take is interesting, though i don't see anything about women being property. god knew that he was choosing imperfect people, and that a drastic societal change such as "women should rule over the men" wouldn't have worked. instead (obviously this is all reasoned speculation) he wanted to save as many as possible, so he gave them base guidelines that he would not tolerate.

the whole point of giving humans free will is that love means more from creatures that can choose to love, or choose to hate. i see it as analogous to the parent-child relationship, except a greater gap between the two.



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 04:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by windword
 


"Thou shalt not steal"

"Thou shalt honor thy father"

"Thou shalt not kill"

These are unnecessary and immoral?


Yes. Unnecessary, immoral, shortsighted, pragmatic, outdated, hypocritical and irrelevant.




posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


Obviously not. There's all sorts of stealing and killing and adultery and all that bad nasty stuff going around these days, so apparently some people didn't get the memo. Outdated? Nu uh. Irrelevant? Hardly. Unnecessary? Ha. That's a laugh.

While I don't approve of religion taking credit for the invention of the 10 commandments, I think they are entirely necessary, relevant, and useful. That video just fleshes it out with some of the context and contradictions that go along with. I'm talking about the commandments by themselves. No additional notes or exceptions added.
edit on 5-6-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 04:56 PM
link   
reply to post by windword
 



I can envision a universe that didn't have a beginning, but is eternally becoming. It's constantly changing, but it doesn't have to have a beginning any more than "god" does.

this does not reflect what we see and know. an infinite quantity cannot exist inside time.


I don't see that logic at all. If one god exists, in all probability, multiple gods exist. The fact that many superstructures exist with a galaxy doesn't contradict the power of the others

if multiple gods DID exist outside of time, they would have to be perfectly parallel. outside time, a being simply would be. all their characteristics would exist. how could one all powerful, all knowing individual being exist with a different all powerful, all knowing individual? any deviation of character would create a conflict, and conflicts presuppose change, which requires time.

superstructures are not mutually exclusive because they are not infinite. can superstructures occupy the same space at the same time? (i'm talking classical mechanics, matter consisting of fermions) no. if a superstructure took up all the space that there was, could another exist? no. the same condition would apply with god, although it has less to do with physical extension.



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 05:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Bob Sholtz
 



Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbor’s.


Houses, wives, servants, oxen and asses, and what ever stuff that your neighbor has that you "covet" is referring to ownership and property.

Compare the 10 Commandments, plus the 619 or so additional commandments, to these given to Noah and his children:


Genesis 9
And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.
2 And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered.
3 Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.
4 But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.
5 And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man.
6 Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.
7 And you, be ye fruitful, and multiply; bring forth abundantly in the earth, and multiply therein.
8 And God spake unto Noah, and to his sons with him, saying,
9 And I, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after you;
------------------------------
12 And God said, This is the token of the covenant which I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for perpetual generations:



new topics

top topics



 
24
<< 11  12  13    15  16  17 >>

log in

join