Atheists are right...

a reply to: dfnj2015

Nah I'm a hard polytheist, I do not do soft polytheism, which is what you advocated

a reply to: dfnj2015

I think you misunderstand the theist when they speak of needing God for morality. They are not saying you need God to be moral, but rather you need God for morality to be anything more than a mere illusion of the mind. So if you believe there are truly Good and truly Evil actions, you should believe in God because:

If God does not exist, objective moral values and duties do not exist
Objective moral values and duties do exist
Therefore God exist

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Lol.
Don't be so silly x

originally posted by: coomba98
Seems some people need a rehash on this thead and the definitions of words such as:

Theist
Atheist

Gnostic
Agnostic


People should understand the true meaning of these words.

Coomba98

Damn dog, you only exist to point out others alleged errors and to try and make yourself feel smart.

Read a book.

a reply to: Padawan SethTsaddik

Padawan,

Just trying to educate people in the correct definitions, as they are using the words wrong.

Whats wrong with that? You do it but when you do ITS WRONG!

ohh and i am reading a book at the moment Padawan. Its Brandon Sandersons 'Arcanum Unbounded'.

Im the type of person who is always reading a book. So many good stories out there you should try it youngling.

Master Coomba

a reply to: Padawan SethTsaddik

Padawan,

I know your trying to bait me so consider the bate taken and devoured. Num nums. 😎

Master Coomba

I would not say that atheists are right.

If there is no force of creation called God, whatever God is, we would not exist.

The most absurd part of atheism is it requires believing life is random, unexplainable and meaningless with no intelligent cause.

a reply to: grainofsand

don't be so dismissive. If those two premises are true the conclusion is true.

originally posted by: Padawan SethTsaddik


I would not say that atheists are right.

If there is no force of creation called God, whatever God is, we would not exist.

The most absurd part of atheism is it requires believing life is random, unexplainable and meaningless with no intelligent cause.

Padawan, bait taken again. Num nums.

First part of your post is an ignorance fallacy.

The last part is just plain wrong. You dont understand atheism. All it is is a non belief in god or gods. Nothing more!

Heres some education Padawan, watch the video in this thread which will clear things up youngling.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Master Coomba

a reply to: SethTsaddik

So just because you say something is so, then it must be? What is your evidence that there would be no life with out Deity? Oh and no I am not an atheist

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: Padawan SethTsaddik

So just because you say something is so, then it must be? What is your evidence that there would be no life with out Deity? Oh and no I am not an atheist

Noinden,

Thats Padawans ignorance fallacy persona showing right there.

I dont know, therefore god.

Absolutely asinine.

Coomba98

a reply to: coomba98

Well its ok if you go "I don't know, there fore I feel it is Deity", as feelings are subjective. Its when they take it to the objective, yet call things with physical proof a belief, it gets asinine

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: dfnj2015
People behave morally without religion then why is religion even necessary? Much of what is in the Bible seems like made up fairy tales with no modern day evidence supporting it. So are atheists right? Since there's no evidence for God's existence and people who don't go to church behave just a moral as those who do go to church whats the point of believing in God?

you do realize that the abrahamic religions are not the only ones right? there are many gods other than the one referenced in the bible. its weird that islam and christianity are the only ones regularly talked about on this forum. Odin and Shiva and quetzlcotl and Zeus and cernunnos and lugh and hotep (just to name a few) deserve acknowledgment too.

Well at the very least we could talk about Buddhism and other Eastern religions as opposed to more Western religions that tend to view god(s) as humans with super powers.

originally posted by: Noinden
a reply to: coomba98

Well its ok if you go "I don't know, there fore I feel it is Deity", as feelings are subjective. Its when they take it to the objective, yet call things with physical proof a belief, it gets asinine

Noinden

I still think its an ignorance fallacy, regardless of if its subjective or objective.

Coomba98

a reply to: coomba98

Humans are ignorant for the most part. Being honest is more important in my opinion. If you state something as a belief then that lets people know you know it is subjective. If you state it as fact, then you punk up the evidence

a reply to: coomba98

Humans are ignorant for the most part. Being honest is more important in my opinion. If you state something as a belief then that lets people know you know it is subjective. If you state it as fact, then you punk up the evidence

a reply to: Noinden

Noinden

I agree with everything you said in the above post.

Do you agree with the following two points:

1. Subjective without proof = being dishonest with ones self.
2. Objective without proof = being dishonest with ones self and others.

Coomba98

a reply to: coomba98

Well you can't have objective with out proof really. Objective relies on the facts. You can not really have subjective with proof (it would then be objective).

So I agree with the sentiment, if not how you wrote it.

I remind you and others I'm a spiritual individual, I just happen to also be a scientist. I don't mix the two

a reply to: Noinden

Noinden

Yeah i know your a theist, Pantheism isnt?

Either way its all good we can still get along.

I do with goodmen Chester John, Akragon, chr0naut and others.

Coomba98

a reply to: coomba98

Its not about getting along, I was using it as an illustration that one can have a spiritual path, yet do science One can be a creationist and do pseudoscience I am sure.