Atheists don't "know" there is no God.....

originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
a reply to: BlueMule

As an avid cactus grower and experimenter of plants I should tell you I am no stranger to ingesting that approach. It has not garnered me any affirmation of the metaphysical claims of any one particular religion. More just left me with greater awareness of an interconnectedness with the Universe.

Well then, you're no stranger to the Divine. Tat tvam asi. Uhh, do you call yourself an atheist?

Are you concerned with verifying the claims of a particular religion? Why? World religion and myth is the hundreds of lies that compose one truth.

The rationale for disbelief in the existence of god(s) will vary among atheists.... as would their reasoning in disbelieving in the paranormal or UFO contactees [if they in fact disbelieve].

How would you know? You're an imposter in the house of atheism. Heck you even fool yourself.

👣

a reply to: BlueMule

Uhh, do you call yourself an atheist?

I identify more as an antitheist. I feel atheist is appropriate for my position as well only because the ‘god’ concept is a very undefined thing when you strip away religious descriptions. So if I discussed what I might believe in there wouldn’t really be any reason to call that thing ‘god’ since the term wouldn’t hold much meaning.

Are you concerned with verifying the claims of a particular religion?

I’m concerned with religion in general. Evaluating their merit, or lack thereof, is consequential to me.

How would you know?

How would I know the rationale for disbelief varies amongst atheists? They share it in threads, and I have seen differing reasoning. Why wouldn’t there be differences when there are obviously differences in disbelief towards other things.Why would the position on god’s existence be an exception?

You're an imposter in the house of atheism. Heck you even fool yourself.

Please tell me more about myself.

a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

Sure, I'll tell you more about you. You're overly concerned with concepts, definitions, terms. You mistakenly think of religion in terms of true and false. Do you think of poetry that way too? Your entire approach is wrong. That's why you can't see what's right under your nose.

If it wasn't so sad, I would laugh.

You need the whack! that startles one back to the true self, the heart-center.

👣

a reply to: BlueMule



Are you hostile towards me because I have on more than one occasion addressed all the issues inherent to your comparative religion / religious pluralism stance? I assume so.

Yes I 'mistakingly' think of religion in terms of true and false. Guilty.

a reply to: Lucid Lunacy

I'm hostile toward you because I don't like seeing people so close and yet so far. It hurts.

You can tell yourself you've addressed all the issues inherent in my approach, as you understand it. But it's just another lie you're telling yourself.

I think you're scared. So you hide behind dead-end approaches that you know, deep down, will lead you away from union.

You aren't doing yourself any favors. And you aren't in a position to speak for atheists. You're a cowering Gnostic in denial, crouching among atheists.

👣

a reply to: Entreri06

First, I think it's quite presumptive to decide that science is the antithesis of theism. Perhaps the "science" you choose to accept might, in it's limited view, seem to oppose theism, but that's rather closed-minded and counter-intuitive where scientific philosophy is concerned.

Also, the idea of a "computer program" or a "big bang" are merely theories, both of which being rather silly in my mind. Your verbiage seems to indicate that you're taking the Big Bang Theory to be fact, as many do in today's world. Here's an interesting adjustment to the involved scientific basis that predicts that theory false:

phys.org...

As I see it, there is one major pertinent differences in how atheists and theists approach science. Atheists, generally, approach it with the assumption that there is no God. Theists, generally, approach it with the assumption that there is a God. Your whole post seems rather condescending toward theists, self-righteous, and narrow-minded.

I know there's no god that listens to you, or answers your prayers, or overlooks what happens in the world. Because that's just ridiculous.

originally posted by: faazshift
a reply to: Entreri06

First, I think it's quite presumptive to decide that science is the antithesis of theism. Perhaps the "science" you choose to accept might, in it's limited view, seem to oppose theism, but that's rather closed-minded and counter-intuitive where scientific philosophy is concerned.

Also, the idea of a "computer program" or a "big bang" are merely theories, both of which being rather silly in my mind. Your verbiage seems to indicate that you're taking the Big Bang Theory to be fact, as many do in today's world. Here's an interesting adjustment to the involved scientific basis that predicts that theory false:

phys.org...

As I see it, there is one major pertinent differences in how atheists and theists approach science. Atheists, generally, approach it with the assumption that there is no God. Theists, generally, approach it with the assumption that there is a God. Your whole post seems rather condescending toward theists, self-righteous, and narrow-minded.

Christianity in modern times is horribly anti science, because science must have it "wrong the bible says things happened differently". If your talking about agnostics that's really not a religion either.


Most of the Big Bang is a provin fact. Some of the first couple minutes aren't proven yet, but the massive explosion hydrogen that lead to mega stars, which exploded and lead to all the elements we have today is proven. We can look back in time and watch galaxies and solar systems in various stages along the way.

Science is the anti of anything that ignores evidence and believes the myths of Bronze Age goat herders over scientific findings.

The "matrix" and "LHC" were far fetched examples, but at least they could be scientifically possible. Where nothing in the bible can be and nothing in archeology backs it either. I'm not saying theism is the anti to science... Theism says science is all a conspiracy by the devil to discredit Jesus.


Atheists don't make theists look bad, they do a good enough jod by them selves... Aka ken hamm...

originally posted by: Entreri06

Christianity in modern times is horribly anti science, because science must have it "wrong the bible says things happened differently".

The mainstream Christianity of the man-on-the-street is too literalist for my taste. But who cares about the mainstream? The cutting-edge of religion is what matters.

There is no conflict between mysticism and science. But there IS a conflict between the science of 2000 AD and the 'science' of 1000 AD.

The "matrix" and "LHC" were far fetched examples, but at least they could be scientifically possible. Where nothing in the bible can be and nothing in archeology backs it either. I'm not saying theism is the anti to science... Theism says science is all a conspiracy by the devil to discredit Jesus.

The Matrix? That movie was pure mystical metaphor.

Atheists just don't know how to read movies. Or sacred texts. But neither do theists. So you're all in the same ship 0f fools. Oblivious to the esoteric subtext. It makes me want to smack you all upside your heads.

👣

originally posted by: BlueMule
a reply to: Lucid Lunacy


You need the whack! that startles one back to the true self, the heart-center.

Like this?....

a reply to: Prezbo369

Not exactly what I had in mind... 😕



👣

originally posted by: BlueMule



The Matrix? That movie was pure mystical metaphor.



Atheists just don't know how to read movies. Or sacred texts. But neither do theists. So you're all in the same ship 0f fools. Oblivious to the esoteric subtext. It makes me want to smack you all upside your heads.

LOL - funny, but true.

originally posted by: BlueMule
a reply to: Prezbo369

Not exactly what I had in mind... 😕

👣

Are you sure? you keep talking about smacking or slapping people that don't have beliefs....seems eerily similar.

a reply to: Prezbo369

Yes, I'm sure. I'm qualified to slap or smack a dumbass theist or atheist upside their stupid head. But I'm not qualified to administer the whack! that blows your mind and shakes you to the core.

👣

originally posted by: BlueMule
a reply to: Prezbo369

Yes, I'm sure. I'm qualified to slap or smack a dumbass theist or atheist upside their stupid head.

You think you're able to slap anyone you want? because you know there isn't anyone outside of atheists and theists....

But I'm not qualified to administer the whack! that blows your mind and shakes you to the core.

Is that a Jesus slap?.....like a punch to the chest?

originally posted by: Prezbo369

originally posted by: BlueMule
a reply to: Prezbo369

Yes, I'm sure. I'm qualified to slap or smack a dumbass theist or atheist upside their stupid head.

You think you're able to slap anyone you want? because you know there isn't anyone outside of atheists and theists....

Well, in that case, as the world's only liminal betweener who dwells in the cloud of unknowing, I get to slap anyone I want.

Is that a Jesus slap?.....like a punch to the chest?

You can think of a punch to the chest as a crude metaphor, if you must.

👣

originally posted by: BlueMule

Well, in that case, as the world's only liminal betweener who dwells in the cloud of unknowing, I get to slap anyone I want.

This issue is about belief, not knowledge.

You can think of a punch to the chest as a crude metaphor, if you must.

It was one of jesus's own doing the punching, in his name ofc. Is that how christianity works? slaps, smacks and punches?

a reply to: Prezbo369

Wow, you really do think everyone fits in your little black-and-white world, eh? This is the part where I would smack you upside your head if you were here.

👣

originally posted by: BlueMule
a reply to: Prezbo369

Wow, you really do think everyone fits in your little black-and-white world, eh? This is the part where I would smack you upside your head if you were here.

👣

Instead of waving your hands and talking about how you'd like to hit me, how about you attempt to explain why you think I'm in error?....

a reply to: Prezbo369

I'm not actually waving my hands around, but your ninja avatar sure is, Kingslayer.

Trying to force-fit everyone into a cramped black-and-white conceptual box is much worse than smacking idiots upside their head.

As for explaining your error, that's not my job. Why don't you sign up for a religious studies class at your closest University.

👣