So atheists, what if you are wrong

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Leahn

Exactly right.
It's some dictator, helicopter parent who hovers all the time and keeps score.

News flash: WE ARE NOT LITTLE CHILDREN. None of us posting on this thread, or this forum, or this site are little children....
some of you like to imagine that, I guess -

I raised two kids. Now in their 20s. I never threatened them with hell, or held their feet to a fire, or blamed them for all the mistakes they made. Some parents do, though.

Interestingly enough, while any human being (even atheists) can promptly recognize that a parent doing this to their children would be tyranny and abuse, they also claim that God NOT doing it is somehow also tyranny and abuse.

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: notmyrealname

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: notmyrealname
We F'ing die and never have to hear from you morons again!

WOW. That doesn't sound like the idea of any religion to me. Nor the ideas of a nice human being.

Oh, I am so sorry not to fit perfectly into the shape that you have determined all humans to fit into. Possibly, I do not meet your standards of what a supposedly nice human being is….

Sue me.

"We F'ing die and never have to hear from you morons again!"

WHAT religious or faithful person would say this? Would the Pope say this? Would any priest or pastor or minister you know just come out and SAY that? So, ya, I don't think a nice person would say that or think that. It's absolutely horrendous.

WHAT religious or faithful person needs to care about what I think about myself?! I do not need or desire someone else praying congregating or otherwise based upon how I think. Stop trying to save me and follow you own short-sighted religious doctrine. The hypocrisy of the devout organized religious people is amazing! Just worry about yourself and your personal relationship with your God and leave the people that duo not agree with you OUT OF YOUR Purview.

You are not offending or saving me to conserve your energy and ignore me….

I have nothing against you personally, however you have chosen to judge me as if you were better than I based upon one thing I have written; how many sins does that count for? Cant you follow your own faith and leave people like me alone?

a reply to: Leahn

Then the ultimate question would be, why won't God heal amputees?

a reply to: borntowatch

We're not. Simply put, we can't be wrong. The bible has been ousted as a farce. The Romans wrote the new testament, the old testament is clearly written by man given how oppressive and awkwardly specific god is in it. Christianity borrows so heavily from Ancient Egyptian pagan traditions and beliefs it's unbearable; it's sun worship rehashed with new names and places.

There is no god. You are inherently wrong because you are putting faith in man-made fairy tales. This is not to say that religion is bad, as it pushes many strong ethical and moral values on the intellectual cripples who imbibe in it.

So, religious morons, what if YOU'RE wrong? There shouldn't even be a what if in that statement. You ARE wrong. You can educate yourself or writhe in ignorance, praying to nothing. Your call. The resources are available. Your brain is capable. Take the leap.

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: Leahn

I disagree. It is an argument from logic, reason, and available 'evidence.' Common sense.

But even if it does fit your 'argumentum' category, so what? Does that automatically make Pascal "right"?
No. It doesn't. Nope!

At least Russell was man enough to take a stand based on SOUND REASONING.

An Argument from Incredulity is a known fallacy. It is, by definition, the opposite of something based on 'sound reasoning'. It is, by definition, not an argument from logic, reason, and available evidence. But, as I said, you are free to agree with him.

You are not, however, free to claim that his arguments are, somehow, sound logic. Repeatedly doing so, as you have done, speaks more about your (lack of) skill at logic than any other argument I might have raised, which is why I didn't bother. There was no need to. Your argument was self-defeating.

I made no claims about Pascal whatsoever. I see no reason why you would introduce anything about it on your reply.

a reply to: borntowatch

Perhaps you should have included relevant proof in your post?
e.g. verses or something that may increase belief that there maybe God.
Something like what created the Big Bang theory. basically 2 things hit each other then boom but how did those 2 things come if there was nothing before?

personally I feel it's hard to blame people on becoming Athiests when technically there is only 1 true reigion and some of its content made be lied about. When this happens they will doubt. Blindly following something is wrong which in a way make atheists better than those who follow blindly.

Going back to your question- Well of course it would suck for them if they were wrong, just like it would suck for anyone else

originally posted by: mymymy
a reply to: Leahn

Then the ultimate question would be, why won't God heal amputees?

Back at you. Why would he? It seems that you assume that He should.

a reply to: Leahn

because he cures so many ailments in the world that we can't see. Tumors disappearing, cancer into remission etc., people go on everyday about how God works miracles, why doesn't he do one we can actually see?

originally posted by: DestroyDestroyDestroy
a reply to: borntowatch

We're not. Simply put, we can't be wrong. The bible has been ousted as a farce. The Romans wrote the new testament, the old testament is clearly written by man given how oppressive and awkwardly specific god is in it. Christianity borrows so heavily from Ancient Egyptian pagan traditions and beliefs it's unbearable; it's sun worship rehashed with new names and places.

The Bible was not, and has never been ousted as a farce. If anything, the guy who claimed it was himself ousted as a farce, and the multiple times such claims have appeared on ATS have always been promptly debunked. The same can be said about your latter argument. Knowing it, however, will never stop you from repeating this lie over and over.

There is no god. You are inherently wrong because you are putting faith in man-made fairy tales. This is not to say that religion is bad, as it pushes many strong ethical and moral values on the intellectual cripples who imbibe in it.

Even if Christianisty is false, and the Christian God does not exist, it speaks nothing of the existence of God. In fact, even if every single religion that has existed, exists and will exist in the whole story of mankind is wrong, it means absolutely nothing wrt the existence of God Himself, as the existence of anything, natural or supernatural, is not contingent upon someone's belief on it.

So, religious morons, what if YOU'RE wrong? There shouldn't even be a what if in that statement. You ARE wrong. You can educate yourself or writhe in ignorance, praying to nothing. Your call. The resources are available. Your brain is capable. Take the leap.

If I am wrong, then I led a pious, happy and satisfying life about which I will regret nothing.

originally posted by: Leahn

originally posted by: Hushabye
The thing with atheists, is that if we're shown proof of something, we'll believe it.

Religion has been proving itself a detriment to society for thousands of years...yet the religious cling regardless.

No, you wouldn't. Richard Dawkins declared that if God appeared in front of him, revealing Himself, he would dismiss it as he being delusional, instead. At least, he was candid and sincere about it.

And as for your latter statement, you are free to attempt to prove it, which you won't, since it is not even remotely true.

Could you explain how exactly not believing there is enough evidence to show that any creator entity exists at all, let alone the specific Christian version of he/she/it, means that I cede all authority to speak for myself to Richard Dawkins? And you're ranting and raving about fallacies? impressive degree of cognitive dissonance you've got there.

and now that I've seen this gem above...

originally posted by: Leahn

If I am wrong, then I led a pious, happy and satisfying life about which I will regret nothing.

Is the implication here that being an Atheist or Agnostic supersedes being a good, kind or just person, even following the tenets of the teachings attributed to Jesus? I just don't see much evidence for his actual existence let alone his status as a demi-god but I think his message is one of beauty and a great way to live your life. I just find it sad that so many of his supposed followers seem to be living contradictorily to those teachings they supposedly revere so much despite their innate superiority complexes(in many but not all).

originally posted by: mymymy
a reply to: Leahn

because he cures so many ailments in the world that we can't see. Tumors disappearing, cancer into remission etc., people go on everyday about how God works miracles, why doesn't he do one we can actually see?

And, for some reason, tumors disappearing, cancers going into remission, and whatever else is included in your 'etc' is something you believe we can 'see' exactly because...?

So atheists, what if you are wrong

a reply to: borntowatch

It doesn't matter one bit. No soul will ever be judged by anyone or anything - except itself. That's the deal. You will have to account for your actions, to yourself. Do as you please and please as you do, the world is here specifically for you. It's that simple.

a reply to: Leahn

Doesn't it seem just a bit arrogant to claim to know the mind of GOD.
If there is such a thing as SIN, that's one of the biggest!!

And don't give me that Biblical cliche.

originally posted by: peter vlar
Could you explain how exactly not believing there is enough evidence to show that any creator entity exists at all, let alone the specific Christian version of he/she/it, means that I cede all authority to speak for myself to Richard Dawkins? And you're ranting and raving about fallacies? impressive degree of cognitive dissonance you've got there.

Because your post speaks for itself. You said that if you saw evidence, you would change your opinions. Yet, your post says that you do not believe that there is enough evidence which means that you have already admitted, albeit unknowingly, that you understand that there is evidence for the existence of a creator entity. You simply dismissed it as being 'not enough'. Atheists like to state that 'extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence' which simply is a way of preemptively dismissing any and all evidence that could possibly be presented, as what exactly constitutes 'extraordinary evidence' is never trully defined.

So, no, you wouldn't believe evidence if it was shown to you. You would dismiss it. As I said, at least Dawkins was candid and sincere about it, which I can respect.

originally posted by: olaru12
a reply to: Leahn

Doesn't it seem just a bit arrogant to claim to know the mind of GOD.
If there is such a thing as SIN, that's one of the biggest!!

And don't give me that Biblical cliche.

And when did I do such?

a reply to: Leahn

What the hell are you talking about? I said people attribute cancer going into remission, tumors disappearing, (then the etc.), and THEN asked, why can't he cure or perform a miracle we can see?, like giving an amputee their missing limb back! You know, visually verify and not pass off as anything other than a miracle? Are ALL people missing a limb heathens and not worthy of a miracle?

Why is there no stories in the bible of God giving people missing limbs back? Out of all the "miracles" God could perform, giving someone back a lost arm or leg is one I think would get everybody on board and then he could stop all this nonsense of sending us to hell, or punishing us (you know, like a God of eternal love would do?)

originally posted by: Leahn

originally posted by: olaru12
a reply to: Leahn

Doesn't it seem just a bit arrogant to claim to know the mind of GOD.
If there is such a thing as SIN, that's one of the biggest!!

And don't give me that Biblical cliche.

And when did I do such?

Well in this thread you seem to have taken on the responsibility of being his representative. How did you get that position?

originally posted by: peter vlar
Is the implication here that being an Atheist or Agnostic supersedes being a good, kind or just person, even following the tenets of the teachings attributed to Jesus? I just don't see much evidence for his actual existence let alone his status as a demi-god but I think his message is one of beauty and a great way to live your life. I just find it sad that so many of his supposed followers seem to be living contradictorily to those teachings they supposedly revere so much despite their innate superiority complexes(in many but not all).

There are no implications in my post. You asked what if I am wrong. I replied. That's all.

originally posted by: mymymy
a reply to: Leahn
What the hell are you talking about? I said people attribute cancer going into remission, tumors disappearing, (then the etc.), and THEN asked, why can't he cure or perform a miracle we can see?, like giving an amputee their missing limb back! You know, visually verify and not pass off as anything other than a miracle? Are ALL people missing a limb heathens and not worthy of a miracle?

Why is there no stories in the bible of God giving people missing limbs back? Out of all the "miracles" God could perform, giving someone back a lost arm or leg is one I think would get everybody on board and then he could stop all this nonsense of sending us to hell, or punishing us (you know, like a God of eternal love would do?)

Correct if I am wrong. Your point is that "People claim that certain things happened by miracle, but none of such miracles are of the kind that cannot be attributed to something else. Giving someone's limb back is a kind of miracle that you believe that can be safetly said to be not possible, except by miracle, and therefore would settle the question."

Is that your point?

originally posted by: olaru12
Well in this thread you seem to have taken on the responsibility of being his representative. How did you get that position?

I did nothing of such. I simply abhor lies and fallacies and I point them out when I see.

a reply to: Leahn

You know what, YOU are why people rail on religious people on this site. You act like you can't comprehend a simple question.

If there is a biblical God, WHY HAS HE NEVER GIVEN SOMEONE A MISSING LIMB BACK? WHY HAS HE NEVER PERFORMED A "MIRACLE" THAT CAN BE VISUALLY SEEN OR PROVEN?

Is that simple enough for you?