|
Porn causes atheism? (pg. 7)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| RickyM |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lightspeed
How is what I said dumb? It was proven by a creation scientist already that more "faith" is needed to believe in Evolution then it does in creation.
Its funny how you athiests can defend the idea that a secular scientist (a normal human being) can tell us that the world is billions of years old? How can he do this? Does he have supernatual powers?
Have you guys heard of the polarnium halos law? How about intelligent design? Like I said the mechanics of all matter work like mini factories, DESIGNED FACTORIES.
Plus theres more evidence that Jesus lived then there is that Cesar ever existed at all. |
You're beyond help mate. I'm not even going to bother, it would just be a waste of ing time. |
|
|
| Lightspeed |
| quote: | Originally posted by RickyM
You're beyond help mate. I'm not even going to bother, it would just be a waste of ing time. |
No, please enlighten me with ur secular humanist bullshyt. |
|
|
| elFreak |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lightspeed
No, please enlighten me with ur secular humanist bullshyt. |
please back up your previous statement declaring "proof".
i also take instructions from burning bushes to be fair though. |
|
|
| RickyM |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lightspeed
No, please enlighten me with ur secular humanist bullshyt. |
I've already told you it would be a waste of time. Your mind will clearly be closed to anything I have to say. |
|
|
| Rose |
| quote: | Originally posted by elFreak
please back up your previous statement declaring "proof".
i also take instructions from burning bushes to be fair though. |
:stongue:
pwn. |
|
|
| Rostros |
| Porn causes your hard drive to get to full , thats my only concern... |
|
|
| pkcRAISTLIN |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
FYI, I view the assertive atheist position and the assertive theist position as being equally illogical as both are inferences made from insufficient or imperfect evidence. |
i disagree, basically along these lines
| quote: |
Common atheist responses to this argument include that unproven religious propositions deserve as much disbelief as all other unproven propositions, and that the unprovability of a god's existence does not imply equal probability of either possibility. |
I would also point out that the strong atheist's position begins and ends with one statement: there is no god, whereas "there is a god" is merely the first of many many unprovable statements from the theist.
Since the theist claims far more knowledge or belief than the atheist, I don’t see how they can be classified as equally illogical.
| quote: | Originally posted by Lightspeed the dunce
How is what I said dumb? It was proven by a creation scientist already that more "faith" is needed to believe in Evolution then it does in creation.
Its funny how you athiests can defend the idea that a secular scientist (a normal human being) can tell us that the world is billions of years old? How can he do this? Does he have supernatual powers?
Have you guys heard of the polarnium halos law? How about intelligent design? Like I said the mechanics of all matter work like mini factories, DESIGNED FACTORIES.
Plus theres more evidence that Jesus lived then there is that Cesar ever existed at all. |
oh, and look what we have here
| quote: |
Evidence that Confirms the Existence of Caesar is Legion
– in stark contrast to the utter dearth of evidence for Jesus!
Unlike the mythical Jesus Christ, we know what Caesar looked like and we have a complete history of his life. In turn, general, orator, historian, statesman and lawgiver. We have words written by Caesar himself and words written by both his friends and his enemies. Artifacts confirm his life and death, as do his successors. Caesar established a style of government – and a calendar – which endured for centuries. |
there's plenty more here:
http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/exist.html
anyone that thinks there's more evidence of jesus than caesar has serious confirmation bias issues. see a doctor. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
I would also point out that the strong atheist's position begins and ends with one statement: there is no god, whereas "there is a god" is merely the first of many many unprovable statements from the theist.
Since the theist claims far more knowledge or belief than the atheist, I don’t see how they can be classified as equally illogical.
|
Sorry but you're not correct here... sure the "strong" atheist position (note; I see what you would call strong atheist as the only atheist position... but let's not get into that) begins and ends with the statement "there is no god(s);" however, the theist position begins and ends with "there is a god." Both will likely go on to express other beliefs or positions; however, all of these are beyond the simple monikers of atheist or theist... usually they are positions of secularist or religious (insert religion of choice). I find both the positive assertion that there is a god and the positive assertion that there is no god to be equally illogical because both are entirely beyond our scope of knowledge... now if one were to take the position that there is an incredibly low probability of there being a god or that they have sufficient reasons to believe their is a god then I think those are positions that can be reasonably defended (although I admit the former is more easily defended then the latter); however, taking an absolute position on something that we cannot know is pure folly. |
|
|
| Fledz |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
however, taking an absolute position on something that we cannot know is pure folly. |
Amen. That's what I keep saying to people. Taking an absolute stance when it comes to religion is stupid and completely irrational. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lightspeed
How is what I said dumb? It was proven by a creation scientist already that more "faith" is needed to believe in Evolution then it does in creation. |
Exactly how does one prove or even quantify the amount of "faith" one requires to believe in anything; especially given that believe in anything largely relies on ones knowledge, frame of reference, socialization, and personal experience... which will be different for every single person?
| quote: | | Its funny how you athiests can defend the idea that a secular scientist (a normal human being) can tell us that the world is billions of years old? How can he do this? Does he have supernatual powers? |
First and foremost... there is no such thing as a secular or non-secular scientist... science has zero interest in matters of the supernatural as these things are beyond the scope of science. If any person espouses any position on matters of religion/god/spirituality then they are no longer espousing a scientific position (regardless of whether or not they use seemingly scientific means or data to support their inferences/conclusions).
| quote: | | Plus theres more evidence that Jesus lived then there is that Cesar ever existed at all. |
Seriously... you're seriously going to take this position? Please advise, what evidence is there that Jesus of Nazareth ever existed (outside of the synoptic Gospels, gnostic Gospels, and other codex written with a distinctly religious bent)? Don't get me wrong, I fully believe that Jesus existed; however, there is simply no unbiased evidence to confirm this... which is not surprising as if he existed he was nothing more then a general labourer in an insignificant part of the Roman Empire until such time as he began his ministry... which would have been small and largely viewed as marginal during the time in which it was actually happening. To even consider the idea that a joe-average that went on to lead a fringe religious movement within a minority religion in an insignificant and relatively unimportant corner of the Roman Empire some how managed in 33 years to leave more tangible and credible evidence for his existence then did the man who rose to lead the Roman Republic then consolidate power unto himself thereby forming the Roman Empire (arguably the most powerful/influential political entity that ever existed) is sheer lunacy. |
|
|
| RickyM |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
Sorry but you're not correct here... sure the "strong" atheist position (note; I see what you would call strong atheist as the only atheist position... but let's not get into that) begins and ends with the statement "there is no god(s);" however, the theist position begins and ends with "there is a god." Both will likely go on to express other beliefs or positions; however, all of these are beyond the simple monikers of atheist or theist... usually they are positions of secularist or religious (insert religion of choice). |
Your definition of theism sounds more like deism. Theism is more specific about the nature of god than deism, which is why I don't think think both positions ('strong' atheism / theism) are equally illogical.
Not that I'm a strong atheist by any means. |
|
|
| Silky Johnson |
| If porn causes atheism, why do I cry out "OH GOD OH GOD!" every time I orgasm?? |
|
|
|
|
