Log In · Register

 

Debate Rules

Here are the general forum rules that you must follow before you start any debate topics. Please make sure you've read and followed all directions.

Debate.

Does Evolution Require Atheism?
Tung
post Mar 10 2008, 04:07 PM
Post #1


٩(͡๏̯͡๏)۶
********

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 14,309
Joined: Nov 2004
Member No: 65,593



Well does it? Most religious people and hardcore scientists today are often incline to believe that atheism and evolution are rigorously intertwined. According to the majority (us), we are thought to believe that if one is to accept evolution as the explanation for life on Earth, it usually leads that person to become an atheist.

The problem I have with this assumption is that I don’t agree with it. Contrary to popular belief, evolution actually doesn’t explain anything about the origins of the universe, the world, or life in general. You can say Evolution is more of an explanation on the development of life.

I personally believe a person can accept evolution as an explanation for the advancement of life, and the diversity, while still being able to believe that the Earth and life were first caused by God. Therefore, there’s no reason why a person can’t be a theist and at the same time accept the theory of evolution.

Thoughts?
 
4 Pages V   1 2 3 > »   
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 99)
brooklyneast05
post Mar 10 2008, 04:10 PM
Post #2


I'm Jc
********

Group: Mentor
Posts: 13,619
Joined: Jul 2006
Member No: 437,556



no. it doesn't require atheism.
 
misoshiru
post Mar 10 2008, 04:16 PM
Post #3


yan lin♥
********

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 14,129
Joined: Apr 2004
Member No: 13,627



No. I believe in evolution, but I'm not atheist, just agnostic.


Of course, the ones who say that evolution and atheism are rigorously entwined are religious hardliners.
 
*Steven*
post Mar 10 2008, 04:17 PM
Post #4





Guest






Do you believe in magiccccccccc it's here at MOODY GARDENS!
 
monster
post Mar 10 2008, 04:53 PM
Post #5


Senior Member
******

Group: Banned
Posts: 1,039
Joined: Apr 2004
Member No: 11,810



no.

-edit

tung, im ranting here.

why is it that you're coming off as a 'hey, i go to college so i know more about you. i can insult God all i want now because i am a biology major and that makes me smarter than all of you. ' ?

honestly, tung. it's called arrogance. you have it. quit being a dick.

and for those of you who say evolution and atheism are not entwined are ignorant. evolution is now the marching banner on which atheism marches to.

ALSO, when evolution tells me that everything i do is subconcious, and even doing things such things as skipping in line is some sort of subconcious way for me to try to get ahead of the gene-battle?

that says a lot. that tells me something about how evolution speaks about life.

tung, if you are starting bio 1, don't come across as some dick with some bits of knowledge. i've read your topics in here, they don't come off as intelligent. in fact, all you do is have a ' f**k you ' demeanor while successfully avoiding the actual debate/question.
 
pandora
post Mar 10 2008, 05:46 PM
Post #6


i did your boyfriend
*******

Group: Official Designer
Posts: 3,335
Joined: Feb 2004
Member No: 4,071



evolution does not require atheism. as a christian you could argue that god is the reason evolution exists. i dont know why you wouldn't believe that, as a christian.

podo, try to stay on topic.
 
pandora
post Mar 10 2008, 05:48 PM
Post #7


i did your boyfriend
*******

Group: Official Designer
Posts: 3,335
Joined: Feb 2004
Member No: 4,071



http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/evo/...o_relig_ath.htm
 
illriginal
post Mar 10 2008, 06:13 PM
Post #8


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 6,349
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 455,274



Evolution is evolution... whether a religious or non-religious person believes it or not.
 
superstitious
post Mar 10 2008, 06:24 PM
Post #9


Tick tock, Bill
*******

Group: Administrator
Posts: 8,764
Joined: Dec 2005
Member No: 333,948



I believe the question is whether or not one can believe in both evolution AND God (religion). At least that would be my interpretation.

Of course evolution is evolution. blink.gif
 
illriginal
post Mar 10 2008, 06:28 PM
Post #10


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 6,349
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 455,274



QUOTE(superstitious @ Mar 10 2008, 07:24 PM) *
I believe the question is whether or not one can believe in both evolution AND God (religion). At least that would be my interpretation.

Of course evolution is evolution. blink.gif



Ya I'd find it quite laughable if someone religious or not religious believed there was no such thing as evolution.
 
kryogenix
post Mar 10 2008, 07:06 PM
Post #11


Sarcastic Mr. Know-It-All
******

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 2,089
Joined: Dec 2003
Member No: 29



I believe in evolution.
 
EddieV
post Mar 10 2008, 07:32 PM
Post #12


cB Assassin
********

Group: Official Member
Posts: 10,147
Joined: Mar 2004
Member No: 7,672



If one believes in evolution, one can't believe in Adam and Eve?
 
Tung
post Mar 10 2008, 07:54 PM
Post #13


٩(͡๏̯͡๏)۶
********

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 14,309
Joined: Nov 2004
Member No: 65,593



Wow whoa there okay podo. I'm a dick, and so are you for apparently blasting me out of no apparent reason. Yeah I'm arrogant, refer to sig. What exactly does my personality have to do with this debate (yes using the personality game like how it was used in mod perf). Honestly, I never claimed to be some kind of elitist just because I'm a Bio major. In fact, in the other religious topics, I was merely stating my opinions about what I thought about religion. /endofftopic

Anyways, Eddie can you go more in depth at what you are trying to convey?
 
*yrrnotelekktric*
post Mar 10 2008, 08:00 PM
Post #14





Guest






no, evolution doesnt require atheism.
 
*Steven*
post Mar 10 2008, 08:17 PM
Post #15





Guest






QUOTE(kryogenix @ Mar 10 2008, 07:06 PM) *
I believe in evolution.

blasphemer
 
EddieV
post Mar 10 2008, 08:38 PM
Post #16


cB Assassin
********

Group: Official Member
Posts: 10,147
Joined: Mar 2004
Member No: 7,672



QUOTE(tungmyBANANA @ Mar 10 2008, 08:54 PM) *
Anyways, Eddie can you go more in depth at what you are trying to convey?


Well Atheism doesn't necessarily mean Christianity, however, for a Christian to believe in Evolution, it contradicts the theory that God made man in the way that it was described in the bible. Also it was stated in science that Dinosaurs lived before man. Yet God created Earth in 7 days. Though dinosaur's and man's years are way farther apart by millions of years. There's a lot of things I can sorta bring up.

 
brooklyneast05
post Mar 10 2008, 08:40 PM
Post #17


I'm Jc
********

Group: Mentor
Posts: 13,619
Joined: Jul 2006
Member No: 437,556



i think it would just depend on how literal you choose to take genesis. 7 days could be 7 billion years if someone wanted to try to interpret it that way you know. but yeah i get what you're saying.
 
EddieV
post Mar 10 2008, 08:42 PM
Post #18


cB Assassin
********

Group: Official Member
Posts: 10,147
Joined: Mar 2004
Member No: 7,672



QUOTE(brooklyneast05 @ Mar 10 2008, 09:40 PM) *
i think it would just depend on how literal you choose to take genesis. 7 days could be 7 billion years if someone wanted to try to interpret it that way you know. but yeah i get what you're saying.


I don't take the Gospel, Quran, or Torah "totally" literal, however I go by what I've read in a sense that it could be literal.
 
Tung
post Mar 11 2008, 06:50 PM
Post #19


٩(͡๏̯͡๏)۶
********

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 14,309
Joined: Nov 2004
Member No: 65,593



QUOTE(Sulfur @ Mar 10 2008, 06:38 PM) *
Well Atheism doesn't necessarily mean Christianity.


Of course it doesn't. Christianity isn't the only religion out there.
 
Simba
post Mar 11 2008, 06:52 PM
Post #20


Photoartist
********

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 12,363
Joined: Apr 2006
Member No: 399,390



I've seen a couple of Roman Catholics out there who accept evolution, actually.
 
illriginal
post Mar 11 2008, 06:58 PM
Post #21


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 6,349
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 455,274



QUOTE(brooklyneast05 @ Mar 10 2008, 09:40 PM) *
i think it would just depend on how literal you choose to take genesis. 7 days could be 7 billion years if someone wanted to try to interpret it that way you know. but yeah i get what you're saying.



Possibly 1 day to God could be 1000 years.
 
misoshiru
post Mar 11 2008, 08:23 PM
Post #22


yan lin♥
********

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 14,129
Joined: Apr 2004
Member No: 13,627



QUOTE(ArjunaCapulong @ Mar 12 2008, 07:52 AM) *
I've seen a couple of Roman Catholics out there who accept evolution, actually.

2 weeks ago, there was a priest who came to my astronomy class to talk about the Big Bang. Apparently he's part of the Roman Catholic "science department".
 
brooklyneast05
post Mar 11 2008, 08:27 PM
Post #23


I'm Jc
********

Group: Mentor
Posts: 13,619
Joined: Jul 2006
Member No: 437,556



QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 11 2008, 06:58 PM) *
Possibly 1 day to God could be 1000 years.

yeah, that's what i just said.
 
EddieV
post Mar 12 2008, 12:52 AM
Post #24


cB Assassin
********

Group: Official Member
Posts: 10,147
Joined: Mar 2004
Member No: 7,672



QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 11 2008, 07:58 PM) *
Possibly 1 day to God could be 1000 years.


If that were the case religiously, then the Big Bang was done by God.
 
illriginal
post Mar 12 2008, 03:52 PM
Post #25


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 6,349
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 455,274



QUOTE(Sulfur @ Mar 12 2008, 01:52 AM) *
If that were the case religiously, then the Big Bang was done by God.



Shhhhh... you can't say things like that, their heads will explode in tryin to associate God with the creation of the Universes.

QUOTE(brooklyneast05 @ Mar 11 2008, 09:27 PM) *
yeah, that's what i just said.

Actually no... you were assuming that maybe it could be billions of years at a time.

I'm sayin by religious text/sources that 1 day to God is 1000 years to planet earth, ya dig? Good.
 
NoSex
post Mar 12 2008, 04:16 PM
Post #26


in the reverb chamber.
*******

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 4,022
Joined: Nov 2005
Member No: 300,308



QUOTE(brooklyneast05 @ Mar 10 2008, 07:40 PM) *
i think it would just depend on how literal you choose to take genesis. 7 days could be 7 billion years if someone wanted to try to interpret it that way you know. but yeah i get what you're saying.


QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 11 2008, 05:58 PM) *
Possibly 1 day to God could be 1000 years.


QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 12 2008, 02:52 PM) *
I'm sayin by religious text/sources that 1 day to God is 1000 years to planet earth, ya dig? Good.


And, I'm saying you're all wrong. How many f**king times do I have to point this shit out?

1. Why should we ever believe that the word "day" is written in any other intent than its natural and understood meaning? And, why should we believe it's any different for the biblical texts?

2. The Hebrew word used in the actual text is "yôm." This word is used to indicate a normal 24-hour day (often guided by the movements of the sun).

3. In Genesis 1:5 the text even defines a day as how we understand it naturally: "And God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day."

4. What is the difference? God is omnipotent, but just not omnipotent enough to have believably made the world in six days? Gotta make it six thousand or else the almighty God just couldn't handle it? f**king stupid.

P.S. I have an opinion on this topic and intend to post it sometime soon. Oh, and, just the simple doodle: Theism and evolution are not mutually exclusive.
 
brooklyneast05
post Mar 12 2008, 04:23 PM
Post #27


I'm Jc
********

Group: Mentor
Posts: 13,619
Joined: Jul 2006
Member No: 437,556



QUOTE(NoSex @ Mar 12 2008, 04:16 PM) *
And, I'm saying you're all wrong. How many f**king times do I have to point this shit out?
1. Why should we ever believe that the word "day" is written in any other intent than its natural and understood meaning? And, why should we believe it's any different for the biblical texts?

we shouldn't, and i wasn't saying we should. i was just saying that some choose to, especially ones who believe in the bible and evolution at the same. every time i've ever pointed that out i've received the argument that a day wouldn't have to equal a day if you are one of those people who take the bible as one big metaphor bla bla bla.
 
NoSex
post Mar 12 2008, 04:54 PM
Post #28


in the reverb chamber.
*******

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 4,022
Joined: Nov 2005
Member No: 300,308



QUOTE(brooklyneast05 @ Mar 12 2008, 03:23 PM) *
we shouldn't, and i wasn't saying we should. i was just saying that some choose to, especially ones who believe in the bible and evolution at the same. every time i've ever pointed that out i've received the argument that a day wouldn't have to equal a day if you are one of those people who take the bible as one big metaphor bla bla bla.


I do concede that the perspective of a theistic evolution-believer would have a far more serious consideration into the idea of a day (in Genesis) not being a literal twenty-four hour period. But, it's really not convincing. And, further, the suggestion from the believer to redefine the day in order to satisfy conflicting ideas is a clear psychological trait of cognitive dissonance. The proposal is merely designed to cure the believer of his conflicting discomfort but still retain the "feel-good" rewards of holding his beliefs.

Anyone else heard of the Parable of the Invisible Gardener?
 
brooklyneast05
post Mar 12 2008, 04:56 PM
Post #29


I'm Jc
********

Group: Mentor
Posts: 13,619
Joined: Jul 2006
Member No: 437,556



we are in agreement.
 
EddieV
post Mar 12 2008, 08:51 PM
Post #30


cB Assassin
********

Group: Official Member
Posts: 10,147
Joined: Mar 2004
Member No: 7,672



What I'm trying to do is backing up religious statements with things proven by science, and theories of science which have religious referencing. Tis hard.
 
illriginal
post Mar 17 2008, 06:34 PM
Post #31


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 6,349
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 455,274



QUOTE(NoSex @ Mar 12 2008, 05:16 PM) *
And, I'm saying you're all wrong. How many f**king times do I have to point this shit out?

1. Why should we ever believe that the word "day" is written in any other intent than its natural and understood meaning? And, why should we believe it's any different for the biblical texts?

2. The Hebrew word used in the actual text is "yôm." This word is used to indicate a normal 24-hour day (often guided by the movements of the sun).

3. In Genesis 1:5 the text even defines a day as how we understand it naturally: "And God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day."

4. What is the difference? God is omnipotent, but just not omnipotent enough to have believably made the world in six days? Gotta make it six thousand or else the almighty God just couldn't handle it? f**king stupid.

P.S. I have an opinion on this topic and intend to post it sometime soon. Oh, and, just the simple doodle: Theism and evolution are not mutually exclusive.



Who gives a shit what a human has to say about Gods work. So what if a Jew said 7 days. Mother f**ker what I'm sayin is... when God told his people it took him 7 days, mother f**ker it was his 7 days, not human, planetary, motherf**kin earthly 7 mther shit f**k 7 days. f**k!!!


If God said, Earth is the size of a pea... motherf**ker, do you really think we're on planet earth the size of a pea? No.. this isn't taken literally. To God's enormous size... from his own EYES, from his OWN perception earth from the distance OF HIM makes the motehr f**kin shitty f**kin planet the size of the mother f**kin pea that's in your mother f**kin mouth mother f**ker!!....


Sorry.. I just hate people and their f**kin literal minds. -.-

Please forgive me.
 
EddieV
post Mar 17 2008, 09:11 PM
Post #32


cB Assassin
********

Group: Official Member
Posts: 10,147
Joined: Mar 2004
Member No: 7,672



But for all we know, it could still be 7 literal days.
 
illriginal
post Mar 18 2008, 01:27 AM
Post #33


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 6,349
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 455,274



QUOTE(Sulfur @ Mar 17 2008, 10:11 PM) *
But for all we know, it could still be 7 literal days.

In a literal sense it could be yes.

Sorry from before... I was in Samuel L. Jackson mode.
 
michellerrific
post Mar 18 2008, 09:35 PM
Post #34


vivacity
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 3,183
Joined: Jan 2007
Member No: 495,247



IMO, evolution is simply another sector of science to me, whether you want to say so or not. Science, to me, is all about hypothesizing and experimenting, so not everything is always deemed accepted. But as of now, I am intaking the evolution theory as a form of science. And I believe in God as well. No one wrote in stone that these two ideas, atheism and evolution, had to correlate together. It's all a matter of opinion and what kind of opinions YOU choose to form.
 
BadCraziness
post Mar 29 2008, 03:16 AM
Post #35


nicola
***

Group: Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Mar 2008
Member No: 635,560



QUOTE(monster @ Mar 10 2008, 05:53 PM) *
and for those of you who say evolution and atheism are not entwined are ignorant. evolution is now the marching banner on which atheism marches to.

ALSO, when evolution tells me that everything i do is subconcious, and even doing things such things as skipping in line is some sort of subconcious way for me to try to get ahead of the gene-battle?

that says a lot. that tells me something about how evolution speaks about life.


You are getting Freud confused with Darwin and it is hilarious.
Most atheists believe in evolution, but atheism was here before the other. They're not entwined, it just so happens that most atheists are smart enough to recognize that evolution is fact.
 
BadCraziness
post Mar 29 2008, 03:21 AM
Post #36


nicola
***

Group: Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Mar 2008
Member No: 635,560



QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 11 2008, 07:58 PM) *
Possibly 1 day to God could be 1000 years.


but they aren't saying it in terms of some kind of "Godyear." The Bible was written by man and when they say year, they meant year.

You're making it up as you go lmao.
 
illriginal
post Mar 29 2008, 03:27 AM
Post #37


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 6,349
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 455,274



QUOTE(BadCraziness @ Mar 29 2008, 04:16 AM) *
You are getting Freud confused with Darwin and it is hilarious.
Most atheists believe in evolution, but atheism was here before the other. They're not entwined, it just so happens that most atheists are smart enough to recognize that evolution is fact.

Yeah let me know when a monkey evolves again into a human.

Anyways, there's evolution but to an extent. I find it highly laughable that people would sit here and assume that we came from monkeys.

But the different forms of evolutions do exist...

let me know when you atheist realize there's more information than what darwin has revealed about the Galapagos ruins. Until then, don't talk shit like you know shit cool.gif

QUOTE(BadCraziness @ Mar 29 2008, 04:21 AM) *
but they aren't saying it in terms of some kind of "Godyear." The Bible was written by man and when they say year, they meant year.

You're making it up as you go lmao.


HA! "You're makin it up as you go"

Again go read something before assuming what I know. On top of that, don't associate the Bible with God... the Bible aint shit and I'd wipe my ass with it, as it holds no authenticity.

LOL @ People who read the bible... misunderstand the bible, then use the bible to slam religion/God. Pathetic fools loool.gif
 
BadCraziness
post Mar 29 2008, 03:33 AM
Post #38


nicola
***

Group: Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Mar 2008
Member No: 635,560



QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 17 2008, 07:34 PM) *
Who gives a shit what a human has to say about Gods work. So what if a Jew said 7 days. Mother f**ker what I'm sayin is... when God told his people it took him 7 days, mother f**ker it was his 7 days, not human, planetary, motherf**kin earthly 7 mther shit f**k 7 days. f**k!!!
If God said, Earth is the size of a pea... motherf**ker, do you really think we're on planet earth the size of a pea? No.. this isn't taken literally. To God's enormous size... from his own EYES, from his OWN perception earth from the distance OF HIM makes the motehr f**kin shitty f**kin planet the size of the mother f**kin pea that's in your mother f**kin mouth mother f**ker!!....
Sorry.. I just hate people and their f**kin literal minds. -.-

Please forgive me.


Dude, are you some kind of Nazi? Jesus Christ was a Jew and he was a pretty nice dude, and so were his disciples. It sucked that they had to completely f**k up the world for the next 2 million years, but what the hell.


You are completely missing the point. It doesn't matter what God said in this case because in this case a human being was recounting the fairytale that is Genesis and stating that it happened in seven human days, because it was a human who wrote it. Stop making shit up about how we have to read 1 human year as 1000 godyears, and other bullshit.

Please don't ask us to forgive you. If you know that you're being a turd (which you do, or you wouldn't be apologizing), and you act like a turd regardless, it doesn't matter if you apologize or not. Just because you apologize for something doesn't make it alright when you do it anyway. In fact, not being ignorant about the wrongness of your actions and committing them anyway makes it worse. I hope you understand that some day.
 
BadCraziness
post Mar 29 2008, 03:36 AM
Post #39


nicola
***

Group: Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Mar 2008
Member No: 635,560



QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 18 2008, 02:27 AM) *
In a literal sense it could be yes.

Sorry from before... I was in Samuel L. Jackson mode.



Jesus f**k. Of course it's 7 literal days! When it was written, the man who wrote it said 7 days. Seven days means seven days, don't cherrypick or make stuff up to justify anyone's faith in this bullshit.
 
illriginal
post Mar 29 2008, 03:38 AM
Post #40


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 6,349
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 455,274



QUOTE(BadCraziness @ Mar 29 2008, 04:33 AM) *
Dude, are you some kind of Nazi? Jesus Christ was a Jew and he was a pretty nice dude, and so were his disciples. It sucked that they had to completely f**k up the world for the next 2 million years, but what the hell.
You are completely missing the point. It doesn't matter what God said in this case because in this case a human being was recounting the fairytale that is Genesis and stating that it happened in seven human days, because it was a human who wrote it. Stop making shit up about how we have to read 1 human year as 1000 godyears, and other bullshit.


Go read somethin else other than the Bible as a whole. Stop using Christianity as a source of God.

QUOTE
Please don't ask us to forgive you. If you know that you're being a turd (which you do, or you wouldn't be apologizing), and you act like a turd regardless, it doesn't matter if you apologize or not. Just because you apologize for something doesn't make it alright when you do it anyway. In fact, not being ignorant about the wrongness of your actions and committing them anyway makes it worse. I hope you understand that some day.

Ah... well in that case, f**k you. Eat shit and die. wink.gif

QUOTE(BadCraziness @ Mar 29 2008, 04:36 AM) *
Jesus f**k. Of course it's 7 literal days! When it was written, the man who wrote it said 7 days. Seven days means seven days, don't cherrypick or make stuff up to justify anyone's faith in this bullshit.



Again... go learn somethin other than Christianity. You're gonna sit here and try to tell me that for a fact that because God said 1 year that the human should write 1 year, right? Ok that's fine... but it doesn't mean it's literally one year, or at least doesn't have to mean it is.

And can you learn how to quote so you can just post once, instead of posting over and over. Post-whore.

By the way I find it kinda funny how you're standing up for religion... yet you slam God.
 
BadCraziness
post Mar 29 2008, 03:55 AM
Post #41


nicola
***

Group: Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Mar 2008
Member No: 635,560



QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 29 2008, 04:27 AM) *
Yeah let me know when a monkey evolves again into a human.

Anyways, there's evolution but to an extent. I find it highly laughable that people would sit here and assume that we came from monkeys.


I'm pretty sure you'd be dead if that ever happens again, but whatever.

Evolution is a very complicated process and it takes millions and millions of years to occur, and the chances of similar stimuli ever occurring twice and the same genetic changes to occur successfully are very slim.

And the fact that our genetic codes are 99.4% similar and new scientific genetic research has proven that chimps should be considered members of the same genus (homo) as us is pretty goddamn convincing.

I really don't know why you find this notion so ridiculous. There is a thousand times more evidence that we evolved from monkeys than there is that God said Abracadabra! one day and there we were(of which there is 0 evidence, and trillions of dinosaurian years of evidence in which there were no human beings to the contrary). Anyone with half a brain is more inclined to believe the former.

QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 29 2008, 04:27 AM) *
let me know when you atheist realize there's more information than what darwin has revealed about the Galapagos ruins. Until then, don't talk shit like you know shit cool.gif
HA! "You're makin it up as you go"

Again go read something before assuming what I know.


You've just contradicted yourself lmao. Here, once again, you're making shit up as you go, this time saying that I don't know this or I don't know that, or I haven't read this or I haven't read that. Way to go, man.



QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 29 2008, 04:27 AM) *
On top of that, don't associate the Bible with God... the Bible aint shit and I'd wipe my ass with it, as it holds no authenticity.

LOL @ People who read the bible... misunderstand the bible, then use the bible to slam religion/God. Pathetic fools loool.gif


The Christian God is just as authentic as the Islamic God, in the fact that there is no authenticity whatsoever behind belief in either of them.

I've read the Qur'an and the Bible and the Torah, and I found little truth in either. And all were fundamentally very similar.

 
BadCraziness
post Mar 29 2008, 04:01 AM
Post #42


nicola
***

Group: Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Mar 2008
Member No: 635,560



QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 29 2008, 04:38 AM) *
Go read somethin else other than the Bible as a whole. Stop using Christianity as a source of God.


I'm only talking in terms of the Bible here because YOU are. lmao.
Stop assuming what I have and haven't read, thanks. It makes you look like an idiot.


QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 29 2008, 04:38 AM) *
Ah... well in that case, f**k you. Eat shit and die.

And can you learn how to quote so you can just post once, instead of posting over and over. Post-whore.


Gee, what a compelling argument. Really stands testament to your quality as a person and what your religion has taught you.

And I posted, what, three times? Why don't try putting up a good argument for once instead of resorting to pettiness and insults.


QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 29 2008, 04:38 AM) *
By the way I find it kinda funny how you're standing up for religion... yet you slam God.


How am I standing up for religion lol? I think religion is one of the most dreadful things ever spawned by society.
 
illriginal
post Mar 29 2008, 04:19 AM
Post #43


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 6,349
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 455,274



QUOTE(BadCraziness @ Mar 29 2008, 04:55 AM) *
I'm pretty sure you'd be dead if that ever happens again, but whatever.

Evolution is a very complicated process and it takes millions and millions of years to occur, and the chances of similar stimuli ever occurring twice and the same genetic changes to occur successfully are very slim.

And the fact that our genetic codes are 99.4% similar and new scientific genetic research has proven that chimps should be considered members of the same genus (homo) as us is pretty goddamn convincing.

I really don't know why you find this notion so ridiculous. There is a thousand times more evidence that we evolved from monkeys than there is that God said Abracadabra! one day and there we were(of which there is 0 evidence, and trillions of dinosaurian years of evidence in which there were no human beings to the contrary). Anyone with half a brain is more inclined to believe the former.


Ok and as time continues... so would evolution. So show me evolution from a monkey to human, til then I'll sit back and laugh

And actually if you been researching scientific studies, you'd realize that there's a probability that humans could have actually existed during the dinosaurian era. Again you should study a lil deeper into the Galapagos ruins.
QUOTE
You've just contradicted yourself lmao. Here, once again, you're making shit up as you go, this time saying that I don't know this or I don't know that, or I haven't read this or I haven't read that. Way to go, man.

Uh no.
QUOTE
The Christian God is just as authentic as the Islamic God, in the fact that there is no authenticity whatsoever behind belief in either of them.

No. You've failed to realize quite a lot of authenticity. But since you know so much of religion, you should be able to cross reference and realize the authenticities.

QUOTE
I've read the Qur'an and the Bible and the Torah, and I found little truth in either. And all were fundamentally very similar.


Unfortunately this is the internet so I can't ask for proof as you could easily google it. But the fact that you claim they are fundamentally very similar only proves to me that you have not read all three. And if you read the Torah, you would have had to read the Talmud as well. On top of that, the Torah and Talmud should only be read in Hebrew as there's MANY scriptures which cannot be translated to English as a whole...


QUOTE(BadCraziness @ Mar 29 2008, 05:01 AM) *
I'm only talking in terms of the Bible here because YOU are. lmao.

LOL I don't use the Bible as my references... it's not authentic enough. The Trinity alone is laughable.

QUOTE
Stop assuming what I have and haven't read, thanks. It makes you look like an idiot.

Obviously there's certain things you haven't read because your argument is pretty typical of atheists... it's pretty much elementary knowledge.
QUOTE
Gee, what a compelling argument. Really stands testament to your quality as a person and what your religion has taught you.

What argument? There is no argument... if you re-read my "apology" it's not even serious... I simply meant sorry for the cursing... I was in a Samuel L. Jackson mode =\

QUOTE
And I posted, what, three times? Why don't try putting up a good argument for once instead of resorting to pettiness and insults.

You're insulting my belief system... so uh, f**k you, eat shit and die. You're lucky we aren't back in time. I'd cut your head off, infidel. That's what God likes.

QUOTE
How am I standing up for religion lol? I think religion is one of the most dreadful things ever spawned by society.

You were just suckin the Christian god's dick about how jesus is a good guy... if you don't believe in jesus.. then why would you even compliment his existence?... In my opinion, non-believers are the most dreadful things that ever spawned by society.
 
heyo-captain-jac...
post Mar 29 2008, 05:00 AM
Post #44


/人◕‿‿◕人\
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 8,283
Joined: Dec 2007
Member No: 602,927



Thats retarded. Atheism requires evolution though, because Creation and Reincarnation are the only other widely accepted theories.
 
BadCraziness
post Mar 29 2008, 05:06 AM
Post #45


nicola
***

Group: Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Mar 2008
Member No: 635,560



QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 29 2008, 05:19 AM) *
Ok and as time continues... so would evolution. So show me evolution from a monkey to human, til then I'll sit back and laugh


You're completely missing the point of what I just said. Man you are thick. stubborn.gif

QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 29 2008, 05:19 AM) *
And actually if you been researching scientific studies, you'd realize that there's a probability that humans could have actually existed during the dinosaurian era.


Yeah, PROBABILITY. It doesn't matter either way, considering that there were no humans back in the Precambrian period, which also supports my point.


QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 29 2008, 05:19 AM) *
You've failed to realize quite a lot of authenticity. But since you know so much of religion, you should be able to cross reference and realize the authenticities.

What authenticity? Don't make mention of so-called authenticities with no proof or specification thereof.


QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 29 2008, 05:19 AM) *
But the fact that you claim they are fundamentally very similar only proves to me that you have not read all three. And if you read the Torah, you would have had to read the Talmud as well. On top of that, the Torah and Talmud should only be read in Hebrew as there's MANY scriptures which cannot be translated to English as a whole...


The Bible was written in Hebrew first too, lol. Claiming that the Torah can only be basically understood in Hebrew is the is the same as saying that the Bible needs to be read in Hebrew/Greek and the Qur'an needs to be read in Arabic. That's not the case. Sure, something is always lost in the translations, but it's not hard to get a fundamental understanding of what's there. And sorry, but I don't have the time to learn three languages. And yes, they are very similar. In fact, I'd say not being able to recognize their many similarities is evidence one has not read each of them. They have their differences, sure, but they're not that different, and the differences aren't worth fighting wars over.

If you don't want to accept the fact that I've read them, that's fine with me, it just supports my claim that you're making shit up as you go.


QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 29 2008, 05:19 AM) *
LOL I don't use the Bible as my references... it's not authentic enough.


For the past page you've been arguing about the 7 days referred to in Genesis.


QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 29 2008, 05:19 AM) *
You're insulting my belief system... so uh, f**k you, eat shit and die. You're lucky we aren't back in time. I'd cut your head off, infidel. That's what God likes.

If you don't want your beliefs insulted, then stop having such ridiculous beliefs. happy.gif

Religion doesn't teach you to kill and butcher anyone no matter how different your beliefs are. If it does, it is morally void. And it just so happens that Islam is one of those religions which does promote violence in the name of God. Hmmmmm.


QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 29 2008, 05:19 AM) *
You were just suckin the Christian god's dick about how jesus is a good guy... if you don't believe in jesus.. then why would you even compliment his existence?... In my opinion, non-believers are the most dreadful things that ever spawned by society.


I kind of just said he was a pretty nice dude, but whatever. Either way, Jesus wasn't God lol, he was supposedly God's son. There is little physical evidence of his existence besides stuff from the Bible and a Roman historian (I think it might have been Tiberius) who wrote about him. He probably existed and was a real person, just as much as Mohammad existed and was a real person, but he wasn't any son of any god. But I do recognize the that he was a great teacher as he is portrayed in the Bible, promoting peace and tolerance and love. Peace and tolerance and love are pretty neato, you should try them out someday.
 
illriginal
post Mar 29 2008, 05:07 AM
Post #46


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 6,349
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 455,274



QUOTE(ChaseTheDragon @ Mar 29 2008, 06:00 AM) *
Thats retarded. Atheism requires evolution though, because Creation and Reincarnation are the only other widely accepted theories.

Not necessarily true. Because evolution is actually real. But to an extent. Just because we find proof of evolution in one thing, we shouldn't automatically associate everything that exist with evolution. Above that, God never said that evolution is not real. Only the ignorant followers of God have made such claims.
 
BadCraziness
post Mar 29 2008, 05:11 AM
Post #47


nicola
***

Group: Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Mar 2008
Member No: 635,560



QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 29 2008, 05:19 AM) *
In my opinion, non-believers are the most dreadful things that ever spawned by society.


Hate to burst your bubble, but everyone on earth is born a non-believer, an atheist. You must hate a whole lotta babies.


QUOTE
Thats retarded. Atheism requires evolution though, because Creation and Reincarnation are the only other widely accepted theories.


No, Atheism was here far before evolution. I know atheists who don't agree with evolution, for whatever reason. The only criteria for atheism is the absence of any belief in God whatsoever.
 
illriginal
post Mar 29 2008, 05:25 AM
Post #48


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 6,349
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 455,274



QUOTE(BadCraziness @ Mar 29 2008, 06:06 AM) *
You're completely missing the point of what I just said. Man you are thick. stubborn.gif

No... basically if what you're claiming is legitimate then there has to be some sort of change.. some sort of evidence in evolution during this time period. If there isn't any sort of evolution during this time period, not even a slight change in the human "DNA"... this I call bullshit and fallacies.

QUOTE
The Bible was written in Hebrew first too, lol. Claiming that the Torah can only be basically understood in Hebrew is the is the same as saying that the Bible needs to be read in Hebrew/Greek


Exactly. And do you know how many versions of the bible there is? Easily over a thousand different versions...

QUOTE
That's not the case. Sure, something is always lost in the translations, but it's not hard to get a fundamental understanding of what's there.


Right... but then that's when human error occurs. Misinterpreting and taking things out of context.

QUOTE
They have their differences, sure, but they're not that different, and the differences aren't worth fighting wars over.

Christians are the blame for it, typically Romans who pushed their pagan mixed belief system onto the benevolence.

QUOTE
If you don't want to accept the fact that I've read them, that's fine with me, it just supports my claim that you're making shit up as you go.
For the past page you've been arguing about the 7 days referred to in Genesis.


Just because I don't believe in what you claim doesn't mean I'm makin shit up.. that just doesn't make sense. The 7 days is not just in reference to the bible... and all I simply said was that it could actually be possible that God's 7 days could be 7 thousand years to the Earthly beings... lets think outside of the box. Not every planet has 24 hours in a day... this should give you a hint as to what I'm sayin.

QUOTE
If you don't want your beliefs insulted, then stop having such ridiculous beliefs. happy.gif


It's people like you who start problems in the first place.

QUOTE
Religion doesn't teach you to kill and butcher anyone no matter how different your beliefs are. If it does, it is morally void. And it just so happens that Islam is one of those religions which does promote violence in the name of God. Hmmmmm.

Ha... you sure you read those 3 books? You really don't know the divinity of God, you should re-read them.

QUOTE
you should try them out someday.

I do... just not with people who insult me, my belief, or non-believers. wink.gif

QUOTE(BadCraziness @ Mar 29 2008, 06:11 AM) *
Hate to burst your bubble, but everyone on earth is born a non-believer, an atheist. You must hate a whole lotta babies.

Spoken like a true satanist. That is completely backwards and far from the truth.
 
heyo-captain-jac...
post Mar 29 2008, 05:33 AM
Post #49


/人◕‿‿◕人\
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 8,283
Joined: Dec 2007
Member No: 602,927



QUOTE(BadCraziness @ Mar 29 2008, 05:11 AM) *
No, Atheism was here far before evolution. I know atheists who don't agree with evolution, for whatever reason. The only criteria for atheism is the absence of any belief in God whatsoever.

Ok, to be more clear, Atheism with beliefs about the origin of humans would need evolution. And lack of belief in a god or goddess or whatever doesn't mean atheist. It simply means nonbeliever.
 
illriginal
post Mar 29 2008, 05:34 AM
Post #50


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 6,349
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 455,274



BadCraziness, can you agree that atheist derived from satanists? At least the common philosophy of atheism?
 
BadCraziness
post Mar 29 2008, 05:39 AM
Post #51


nicola
***

Group: Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Mar 2008
Member No: 635,560



QUOTE(ChaseTheDragon @ Mar 29 2008, 06:33 AM) *
Ok, to be more clear, Atheism with beliefs about the origin of humans would need evolution. And lack of belief in a god or goddess or whatever doesn't mean atheist. It simply means nonbeliever.


No, not necessarily. You could be atheists and have no beliefs about the origin of humans, and you could still be an atheist.

A nonbeliever of any kind of god is the definition of atheism.
"a" is a Latin preposition turned prefix meaning "away from."
A nonbeliever in theism is "away from" theism.
Therefor they are atheist.
 
heyo-captain-jac...
post Mar 29 2008, 05:40 AM
Post #52


/人◕‿‿◕人\
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 8,283
Joined: Dec 2007
Member No: 602,927



QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 29 2008, 05:34 AM) *
BadCraziness, can you agree that atheist derived from satanists? At least the common philosophy of atheism?

Thats actually very true. Both aim to better the self without any higher power. The biggest difference is Satanism has Satan.

QUOTE(BadCraziness @ Mar 29 2008, 05:39 AM) *
No, not necessarily. You could be atheists and have no beliefs about the origin of humans, and you could still be an atheist.

A nonbeliever of any kind of god is the definition of atheism.
"a" is a Latin preposition turned prefix meaning "away from."
A nonbeliever in theism is "away from" theism.
Therefor they are atheist.

That first part is exactly what I was saying. The second part has nothing to do with what I was talking about.
 
BadCraziness
post Mar 29 2008, 05:40 AM
Post #53


nicola
***

Group: Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Mar 2008
Member No: 635,560



QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 29 2008, 06:34 AM) *
BadCraziness, can you agree that atheist derived from satanists? At least the common philosophy of atheism?



No.

Satanism came from Theism, obviously. And before we had theism, we had atheism.

 
illriginal
post Mar 29 2008, 05:43 AM
Post #54


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 6,349
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 455,274



QUOTE(BadCraziness @ Mar 29 2008, 06:40 AM) *
No.

Satanism came from Theism, obviously. And before we had theism, we had atheism.

LOL.... this kid doesn't even know his origins of atheism. The answer is yes and I rest my case. Good night and good luck.

QUOTE(ChaseTheDragon @ Mar 29 2008, 06:40 AM) *
Thats actually very true. Both aim to better the self without any higher power. The biggest difference is Satanism has Satan.

Correct. I'm hittin the sack.
 
heyo-captain-jac...
post Mar 29 2008, 05:45 AM
Post #55


/人◕‿‿◕人\
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 8,283
Joined: Dec 2007
Member No: 602,927



QUOTE(BadCraziness @ Mar 29 2008, 05:40 AM) *
No.

Satanism came from Theism, obviously. And before we had theism, we had atheism.

I really think Satanism is a sort of fusion of the two others.
 
heyo-captain-jac...
post Mar 29 2008, 05:47 AM
Post #56


/人◕‿‿◕人\
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 8,283
Joined: Dec 2007
Member No: 602,927



QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 29 2008, 05:43 AM) *
LOL.... this kid doesn't even know his origins of atheism. The answer is yes and I rest my case. Good night and good luck.
Correct. I'm hittin the sack.

Actually he is right on the origins of atheism. Check the Theism and Atheism section on Wikipedia or something of the sort.
 
BadCraziness
post Mar 29 2008, 05:49 AM
Post #57


nicola
***

Group: Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Mar 2008
Member No: 635,560



QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 29 2008, 06:25 AM) *
No... basically if what you're claiming is legitimate then there has to be some sort of change.. some sort of evidence in evolution during this time period. If there isn't any sort of evolution during this time period, not even a slight change in the human "DNA"... this I call bullshit and fallacies.


Uh, yeah, considering the little ocean-dwellers evolved to later step foot on land. Scientists have found a fossilized fish who exhibits evidence of these evolutionary traits.

And there definitely has been change in the human DNA in the time we've been on earth. For one, we're much taller than our human counter-parts in the early middle ages (their height only usually ranged from 4-5 feet as adults). Plus our appendixes (which used to be another stomach when we couldn't get enough food) have withered away and become useless. And our pinky toes have become progressively smaller over time.



QUOTE
Exactly. And do you know how many versions of the bible there is? Easily over a thousand different versions...
Right... but then that's when human error occurs. Misinterpreting and taking things out of context.
Christians are the blame for it, typically Romans who pushed their pagan mixed belief system onto the benevolence.


Oohh, I saw this really interesting documentary about that on the history channel once! The same thing could have happened with any book back then though, including the Qur'an, when the only printing methods are having a bunch of monks copying shit down over and over again in candlelight.

QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 29 2008, 06:25 AM) *
Spoken like a true satanist. That is completely backwards and far from the truth.


lol no, in fact, it IS the truth, whether you like it or not.
A baby is born without a coherent thought in its head, let alone any societal concept of God.

And I'm not a Satanist, as I don't believe in Satan or hell, and I really don't dig ritualism.
 
BadCraziness
post Mar 29 2008, 05:51 AM
Post #58


nicola
***

Group: Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Mar 2008
Member No: 635,560



QUOTE(ChaseTheDragon @ Mar 29 2008, 06:40 AM) *
The biggest difference is Satanism has Satan.
That first part is exactly what I was saying. The second part has nothing to do with what I was talking about.



Lol yes it does.

You said that a person who doesn't believe in god is just a nonbeliever, not an atheist.
I proved you wrong through a basic understanding of linguistics.
 
illriginal
post Mar 29 2008, 05:51 AM
Post #59


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 6,349
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 455,274



QUOTE(ChaseTheDragon @ Mar 29 2008, 06:47 AM) *
Actually he is right on the origins of atheism. Check the Theism and Atheism section on Wikipedia or something of the sort.

Wikipedia isn't a good source. Fact of the matter is, I've already had the discussion about atheism deriving from satanism. And a respectable member who is atheist and very intelligent one at that, agreed. Atheism is like a sect of Satanism, without the belief in a higher power of any sort.

I know of a few atheist scholars who've actually admitted as well but made it clear that it's not satanism but just a sect of satanism which neglects any sort of association with God.

QUOTE(BadCraziness @ Mar 29 2008, 06:49 AM) *
lol no, in fact, it IS the truth, whether you like it or not.
A baby is born without a coherent thought in its head, let alone any societal concept of God.

Because we have a machine that can read minds by scanning their brains... this is the assumption given to us? Dood I'm done discussing this, I'm hittin the sack.

Ha! "And our pinky toes have become progressively smaller over time."
Bro that's due to wearing shoes man.. wtf
 
BadCraziness
post Mar 29 2008, 05:54 AM
Post #60


nicola
***

Group: Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Mar 2008
Member No: 635,560



QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 29 2008, 06:43 AM) *
LOL.... this kid doesn't even know his origins of atheism. The answer is yes and I rest my case. Good night and good luck.
Correct. I'm hittin the sack.


Her, thanks.
The fact is that we are born without any belief system whatsoever, and by definition we are atheists. This is where atheism originates. Atheism is as old as the human race. Theism is only as old as its prophets.

This is historical fact, whether you like it or not.
 
BadCraziness
post Mar 29 2008, 05:56 AM
Post #61


nicola
***

Group: Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Mar 2008
Member No: 635,560



QUOTE(ChaseTheDragon @ Mar 29 2008, 06:47 AM) *
Actually he is right on the origins of atheism. Check the Theism and Atheism section on Wikipedia or something of the sort.


No, just because we didn't have someone to define the lack of belief in god (which existed as long as the human race has existed), doesn't mean that it never was.
 
BadCraziness
post Mar 29 2008, 06:00 AM
Post #62


nicola
***

Group: Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Mar 2008
Member No: 635,560



QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 29 2008, 06:51 AM) *
Wikipedia isn't a good source. Fact of the matter is, I've already had the discussion about atheism deriving from satanism. And a respectable member who is atheist and very intelligent one at that, agreed. Atheism is like a sect of Satanism, without the belief in a higher power of any sort.


Oh, well if he says it, it MUST be so! Don't be ridiculous.

QUOTE
Because we have a machine that can read minds by scanning their brains... this is the assumption given to us? Dood I'm done discussing this, I'm hittin the sack.


We know this because we know that everyone is born a blank slate. Basic psychology.

Unless you went and saw "Baby Geniuses" and took it literally, lol.
 
BadCraziness
post Mar 29 2008, 06:07 AM
Post #63


nicola
***

Group: Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Mar 2008
Member No: 635,560



QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 29 2008, 06:51 AM) *
Bro that's due to wearing shoes man.. wtf


lmao no. If our pinky toes got smaller just because we wore shoes, then everyone would be born with a long pinky toe like the other toes and it would get smaller only if they wore shoes.

The reason why we still have them at all is because there is no real evolutionary pressure for it. Evolution is lazy - if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Scientists believe that the toe has only shrunken at all because it could have been getting in the way of running fast and making an escape. But now, people don't need to do that anymore really, so hence the lack of evolutionary pressure.
 
illriginal
post Mar 29 2008, 06:08 AM
Post #64


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 6,349
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 455,274



QUOTE(BadCraziness @ Mar 29 2008, 07:00 AM) *
Oh, well if he says it, it MUST be so! Don't be ridiculous.
We know this because we know that everyone is born a blank slate. Basic psychology.

Unless you went and saw "Baby Geniuses" and took it literally, lol.

Yes but psychology isn't 100% accurate either. They're guestimations at most. To claim that a child is born at a blank slate is claimin that a child is basically a vegetable, c'mon man =\

QUOTE(BadCraziness @ Mar 29 2008, 07:07 AM) *
lmao no. If our pinky toes got smaller just because we wore shoes, then everyone would be born with a long pinky toe like the other toes and it would get smaller only if they wore shoes.

The reason why we still have them at all is because there is no real evolutionary pressure for it. Evolution is lazy - if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Scientists believe that the toe has only shrunken at all because it could have been getting in the way of running fast and making an escape. But now, people don't need to do that anymore really, so hence the lack of evolutionary pressure.

Ok so when you have a child, never have them wear any sort of covering over their feet... EVER. Make it a commitment to your independent self. It'll be your own experiement. Sadly, I think myth busters debunked that theory too...


alright it's 7:15 AM and I have a hang over.
 
BadCraziness
post Mar 29 2008, 06:20 AM
Post #65


nicola
***

Group: Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Mar 2008
Member No: 635,560



QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 29 2008, 07:08 AM) *
Yes but psychology isn't 100% accurate either. They're guestimations at most. To claim that a child is born at a blank slate is claimin that a child is basically a vegetable, c'mon man =\


Not really. Psychology might be a soft science but I think someone whose studied it all their lives would have more insight as to what the human brain is like than you. _dry.gif


QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 29 2008, 07:08 AM) *
Ok so when you have a child, never have them wear any sort of covering over their feet... EVER.


Have you ever seen a baby's foot? They have a dinky pinky toe too. I was just proving your claim wrong - your claim being that the pinky toe getting smaller isn't from evolution and is from wearing shoes. Which would be wrong. And even if it did come from wearing shoes, it would still involve evolution.



And goodnight/morning.
 
NoSex
post Mar 29 2008, 05:21 PM
Post #66


in the reverb chamber.
*******

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 4,022
Joined: Nov 2005
Member No: 300,308



There are so many errors and absurdities in this thread right now that it would be fat too trying to even begin to "make right" the confusion in this place. Instead, I'll just deal with some really simple shit:

QUOTE(ChaseTheDragon @ Mar 29 2008, 04:33 AM) *
Ok, to be more clear, Atheism with beliefs about the origin of humans would need evolution. And lack of belief in a god or goddess or whatever doesn't mean atheist. It simply means nonbeliever.


A non-believer is an atheist. An atheist is a non-believer. All of this is analytical. Atheism is merely the lack of a belief in any god (not a prefix "a," meaning without, "theos" meaning god).

Since atheism is not a religion, a doctrine, or a philosophy (just like theism), there can be nothing more said of it than that it indicates a "lack of belief in god or gods." So, to be an atheist, all you must adhere to is the narrow definition of "lacking belief." That's it. That's atheism.

Because of this, babies, who do indeed "lack belief," happen to be atheists. Further, atheism must be as old as non-belief, as old as mankind itself (possibly even older - it might be silly to call an insect an atheist, but it would still be analytically true).

QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Mar 29 2008, 04:34 AM) *
can you agree that atheist derived from satanists? At least the common philosophy of atheism?


(See above)
 
Rhianann
post Mar 29 2008, 05:22 PM
Post #67


Member
**

Group: Member
Posts: 16
Joined: Mar 2008
Member No: 635,733



QUOTE(monster @ Mar 10 2008, 05:53 PM) *
no.

-edit

tung, im ranting here.

why is it that you're coming off as a 'hey, i go to college so i know more about you. i can insult God all i want now because i am a biology major and that makes me smarter than all of you. ' ?

honestly, tung. it's called arrogance. you have it. quit being a dick.

and for those of you who say evolution and atheism are not entwined are ignorant. evolution is now the marching banner on which atheism marches to.

ALSO, when evolution tells me that everything i do is subconcious, and even doing things such things as skipping in line is some sort of subconcious way for me to try to get ahead of the gene-battle?

that says a lot. that tells me something about how evolution speaks about life.

tung, if you are starting bio 1, don't come across as some dick with some bits of knowledge. i've read your topics in here, they don't come off as intelligent. in fact, all you do is have a ' f**k you ' demeanor while successfully avoiding the actual debate/question.


I saw nothing in what Tung said as being arrogant. Everything you do is subconscious? That's not evolution, that's psychology. There are believing and non-believing psychiatrists out there so can't blame that on a belief system.


QUOTE(NoSex @ Mar 12 2008, 05:54 PM) *
I do concede that the perspective of a theistic evolution-believer would have a far more serious consideration into the idea of a day (in Genesis) not being a literal twenty-four hour period. But, it's really not convincing. And, further, the suggestion from the believer to redefine the day in order to satisfy conflicting ideas is a clear psychological trait of cognitive dissonance. The proposal is merely designed to cure the believer of his conflicting discomfort but still retain the "feel-good" rewards of holding his beliefs.

Anyone else heard of the Parable of the Invisible Gardener?


I think some of you are using the bible as being fact. There is a difference between fact and opinion. Belief in the bible is an opinion. Nothing it says can be proven. I'm not saying I don't believe there's a God; I'm just saying I don't believe in christianity and I certainly don't believe anything the bible has to say. I call it the grapevine theory. With each telling the story changes a little. Before the bible information was passed on mostly orally since hardly anybody knew how to read or write. Oral history is a very inaccurate source if information.


QUOTE(ChaseTheDragon @ Mar 29 2008, 06:47 AM) *
Actually he is right on the origins of atheism. Check the Theism and Atheism section on Wikipedia or something of the sort.


Wikipedia has been well known to be inaccurate. Anybody can add information to it.


QUOTE(BadCraziness @ Mar 29 2008, 06:49 AM) *
Uh, yeah, considering the little ocean-dwellers evolved to later step foot on land. Scientists have found a fossilized fish who exhibits evidence of these evolutionary traits.

And there definitely has been change in the human DNA in the time we've been on earth. For one, we're much taller than our human counter-parts in the early middle ages (their height only usually ranged from 4-5 feet as adults). Plus our appendixes (which used to be another stomach when we couldn't get enough food) have withered away and become useless. And our pinky toes have become progressively smaller over time.
Oohh, I saw this really interesting documentary about that on the history channel once! The same thing could have happened with any book back then though, including the Qur'an, when the only printing methods are having a bunch of monks copying shit down over and over again in candlelight.
lol no, in fact, it IS the truth, whether you like it or not.
A baby is born without a coherent thought in its head, let alone any societal concept of God.

And I'm not a Satanist, as I don't believe in Satan or hell, and I really don't dig ritualism.


Could someone please enlighten me on satanism? I have read the satanic bible and it seems full of contradiction. They say they have no belief in God or Satan. They are against altruism. But the book is full of rituals and witchcraft type things that all say "Hail, Satan!" at the end of them. What is Satan exactly to these people? They slam organized religion, but they themselves seem very organized.

I know I'm nitpicking here but it's not appendixes, it's appendices.

QUOTE(BadCraziness @ Mar 29 2008, 06:54 AM) *
Her, thanks.
The fact is that we are born without any belief system whatsoever, and by definition we are atheists. This is where atheism originates. Atheism is as old as the human race. Theism is only as old as its prophets.

This is historical fact, whether you like it or not.


Not too long ago after mapping the human genome, they have found the "God" gene. A gene that makes us predisposed to believing in a higher power. Not saying it WILL make you believe in one, just a predisposition for it. Unless they've changed their position on that. That's the last thing I heard about it in the news.



To answer the person who started this thread; I believe there is a God although I know it can't be proven. I also believe in evolution as being the only logical answer for how we are here. I don't believe any of the hocus pocus, mumbo jumbo the bible says. I know some people in here will try to slam me for being contractictory. I'm only contradicting YOUR beliefs. There's no rule that says I have to believe what the majority believes in. By majority I mean if you believe there's a God you must also believe what the organized religions say. I believe God isn't here. We're on our own, sink or swim. My parents were athiests and they taught me one very valuable lesson that I'm always grateful for. Question all authority! I'd have to say that questioning authority is the church's worst enemy and something they have striven (or is that strived?) to crush. I can see no other purpose for the church other than as a vehicle for controlling people. I know lots of nice people who use church as a means of comfort but the ones behind the scenes pulling the strings.....I question their motives. I think God takes care of the "why" we are here for some people. Evolution takes care of the "how".

I am new here and already I am seeing a trend. To some of you posters here: resorting to personal attacks only means you've lost the argument. It also makes you look less credible.
 
BadCraziness
post Apr 1 2008, 09:26 PM
Post #68


nicola
***

Group: Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Mar 2008
Member No: 635,560



So basically, Rhiannan, you're a deist.

I used to feel that way, but I think the probability of the existence of god is much, much lower than the probability that he does not exist. Bertrand Russell's celestial teapot, anyone?

So I'm an atheist in that I'm strongly inclined to disbelieve the existence of any god, but I do recognize that there is a possibility, however small. You might call that agnosticism, but agnosticism requires you to believe that the probability of god's existence and his nonexistence are equal, which just isn't the case.

I'm pretty sure the major belief of Satanism is just doing whatever pleases you, giving into your passions, etc. etc. That comes above everything else.

And that God gene is really nothing but a hypothesis. In addition, the experiments Hamer ran don't really seem that conclusive or credible to me at all.
 
shoryuken
post Apr 2 2008, 08:56 AM
Post #69


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 5,166
Joined: Oct 2007
Member No: 585,858



you ppl all idiot.. laugh.gif laugh.gif

stopp fukin sayin tha smalll chancee dat go(o) exist.. n den say tha low chancee go(o)d dun exist.. FUK go(o)d...

yes.. tha sum1 out tha butt it maibi go(o)d or not... so STOP FUKIN SAYIN THA GO(O)D N shiet.. stubborn.gif stubborn.gif
 
ersatz
post Apr 2 2008, 03:11 PM
Post #70


Ms. Granger
*****

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 735
Joined: Jul 2005
Member No: 165,238



There are no origins of atheism. Atheism is just the opposite of theism. It's not any sort of organized doctrine or anything...at all. Simply a word used to describe those who do not subscribe to theistic theories. There's no movement or beliefs or anything that goes along with being atheist, and no one "started" atheism. So, Tama, no one knows what you're talking about, because there's no such thing as the origins of atheism. It's a contrasting word, like light to dark.
 
shoryuken
post Apr 2 2008, 03:13 PM
Post #71


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 5,166
Joined: Oct 2007
Member No: 585,858



QUOTE(ersatz @ Apr 2 2008, 04:11 PM) *
There are no origins of atheism. Atheism is just the opposite of theism. It's not any sort of organized doctrine or anything...at all. Simply a word used to describe those who do not subscribe to theistic theories. There's no movement or beliefs or anything that goes along with being atheist, and no one "started" atheism. So, Tama, no one knows what you're talking about, because there's no such thing as the origins of atheism. It's a contrasting word, like light to dark.

rite... laugh.gif

alll ya'lll ppl.. idiott.. laugh.gif
 
illriginal
post Apr 2 2008, 03:28 PM
Post #72


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 6,349
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 455,274



QUOTE(ersatz @ Apr 2 2008, 04:11 PM) *
There are no origins of atheism. Atheism is just the opposite of theism. It's not any sort of organized doctrine or anything...at all. Simply a word used to describe those who do not subscribe to theistic theories. There's no movement or beliefs or anything that goes along with being atheist, and no one "started" atheism. So, Tama, no one knows what you're talking about, because there's no such thing as the origins of atheism. It's a contrasting word, like light to dark.


Actually atheism is derived from satanism. So just because you don't know what I'm talkin about doesn't mean it doesn't hold weight. The problem here is that people who don't know what I'm talkin about haven't taken the time to learn history nor origins.

Like I said before, satanism is to Christianity, like atheism is to Baptist Christian.
Except with atheism which is a sect of satanism neglects any sort of omnipotence and doesn't have a specific faith in anything other than self and self only.

To sit here and tell me that the obvious is not true is just mind boggling as both have nearly the same agendas.

What I smell in here is that atheist are scared to admit the fact of the matter because people have labeled satanism as evil and evil only. Having that sort of origin would automatically catch attention on a negative perspective. Which would then probably make them lose all creditability.

Atheism existed AFTER satanism. Because before satanism and satan himself, people didn't have the thought nor the concept of a God existing or not, the word God most likely never even existed prior to Satanism. In those times it was just humans experiencing life.
 
brooklyneast05
post Apr 2 2008, 03:31 PM
Post #73


I'm Jc
********

Group: Mentor
Posts: 13,619
Joined: Jul 2006
Member No: 437,556



so what were you when you were born?
 
illriginal
post Apr 2 2008, 03:46 PM
Post #74


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 6,349
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 455,274



QUOTE(brooklyneast05 @ Apr 2 2008, 04:31 PM) *
so what were you when you were born?

If we carry souls, then we are born originally as agnostics, people of God. From the point of birth to the point of death it is the human, him/herself that chooses to believe in God or not; through their own personal experience.

Just a side note for the word experience.

experience
1. a particular instance of personally encountering or undergoing something: My encounter with the bear in the woods was a frightening experience.
2. the process or fact of personally observing, encountering, or undergoing something: business experience.
3. the observing, encountering, or undergoing of things generally as they occur in the course of time: to learn from experience; the range of human experience.
4. knowledge or practical wisdom gained from what one has observed, encountered, or undergone: a man of experience.
5. Philosophy. the totality of the cognitions given by perception; all that is perceived, understood, and remembered.
–verb (used with object)
6. to have experience of; meet with; undergo; feel: to experience nausea.
7. to learn by experience.
—Idiom
8. experience religion, to undergo a spiritual conversion by which one gains or regains faith in God.
 
NoSex
post Apr 2 2008, 05:14 PM
Post #75


in the reverb chamber.
*******

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 4,022
Joined: Nov 2005
Member No: 300,308



QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Apr 2 2008, 02:28 PM) *
Actually atheism is derived from satanism.


Blah blah, f**king blah.

1. Read a book.
2. What f**king "satanism" are you referring to? There are many different sects, philosophies, and ideas that are commonly identified as "satanistic."
3. The two main schools of Satanism are LaVeyan and Theistic: LaVeyan Satanism is a individualistic and atheistic church started in 1966 by Anton LaVey. [1] Theistic Satanism is often pagan in nature, but also immensely broad in its varieties. It's oldest known form dates back to the ancient texts of the Avesta. [2] [3]
4. Read a dictionary.
5. Read the posts in the f**king thread:


QUOTE(NoSex @ Mar 29 2008, 04:21 PM) *
There are so many errors and absurdities in this thread right now that it would be fat too trying to even begin to "make right" the confusion in this place. Instead, I'll just deal with some really simple shit:

A non-believer is an atheist. An atheist is a non-believer. All of this is analytical. Atheism is merely the lack of a belief in any god (prefix "a," meaning without, "theos" meaning god).

Since atheism is not a religion, a doctrine, or a philosophy (just like theism), there can be nothing more said of it than that it indicates a "lack of belief in god or gods." So, to be an atheist, all you must adhere to is the narrow definition of "lacking belief." That's it. That's atheism.

Because of this, babies, who do indeed "lack belief," happen to be atheists. Further, atheism must be as old as non-belief, as old as mankind itself (possibly even older - it might be silly to call an insect an atheist, but it would still be analytically true).
(See above)
 
illriginal
post Apr 2 2008, 05:19 PM
Post #76


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 6,349
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 455,274



QUOTE(NoSex @ Apr 2 2008, 06:14 PM) *
Blah blah, f**king blah.

1. Read a book.
2. What f**king "satanism" are you referring to? There are many different sects, philosophies, and ideas that are commonly identified as "satanistic."
3. The two main schools of Satanism are LaVeyan and Theistic: LaVeyan Satanism is a individualistic and atheistic church started in 1966 by Anton LaVey. [1] Theistic Satanism is often pagan in nature, but also immensely broad in its varieties. It's oldest known form dates back to the ancient texts of the Avesta. [2] [3]
4. Read a dictionary.
5. Read the posts in the f**king thread:


LOL @ Modernized satanism and their philosophies.
LOL @ Westernized philosophies of satanism

roflmao roflmao roflmao rofl1.gif loool.gif

Like YOU said, there's many different versions of Satanism. Theistic and Atheistic being the main differences. Don't bullshit me boy. You may be able to fool these kids, but you aren't foolin me lol
 
NoSex
post Apr 2 2008, 08:11 PM
Post #77


in the reverb chamber.
*******

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 4,022
Joined: Nov 2005
Member No: 300,308



QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Apr 2 2008, 04:19 PM) *
You may be able to fool these kids, but you aren't foolin me lol


Not only have I demonstrated the erroneous nature of your very premise, so have several other debaters - our points have been more or less ignored.

Until you can maturely and intelligently address the topic (and those arguing on either side), I would ask you to please refrain from making a complete ass of yourself. Don't post in the debate forums unless you have an honest intent towards intellectual discourse.

And, if you have any temptation to reply to my plea, may you first consider the counter-arguments presented to you and address them appropriately.
 
BadCraziness
post Apr 2 2008, 10:02 PM
Post #78


nicola
***

Group: Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Mar 2008
Member No: 635,560



Well, there goes my faith in the human race again. _dry.gif
 
illriginal
post Apr 3 2008, 09:33 AM
Post #79


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 6,349
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 455,274



QUOTE(NoSex @ Apr 2 2008, 09:11 PM) *
Not only have I demonstrated the erroneous nature of your very premise, so have several other debaters - our points have been more or less ignored.

Until you can maturely and intelligently address the topic (and those arguing on either side), I would ask you to please refrain from making a complete ass of yourself. Don't post in the debate forums unless you have an honest intent towards intellectual discourse.

And, if you have any temptation to reply to my plea, may you first consider the counter-arguments presented to you and address them appropriately.

You're using wikipedia for information on Satanism for f**k sake lol... are you kidding me? I don't care how many schools are founded here... I'm not makin an ass out of myself, I'm actually laughing at you for attempting to confuse and sway people from the fact.

But whatever, I'm not tryin to convince anyone about it. They should be responsible enough to look at sources other than wiki... wiki isn't always authentic. I just can't even believe you tried to bring modernized satanism into this discussion, westernized above that lol
 
ersatz
post Apr 3 2008, 03:07 PM
Post #80


Ms. Granger
*****

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 735
Joined: Jul 2005
Member No: 165,238



You can't hold everyone accountable for reading everything you have ever read and nothing more. Tell people what the fuck you're talking about. You can't just say, "No, that's wrong. You're responsible for knowing what's right though so I'll shut up now." Obviously people are going to disregard you if you do that.

No one knows what you're talking about because the word "atheist" does not entail anything more than the negation of theism. It's a word made up to contrast theist. You're saying we're wrong, but you're not telling us why. Please, enlighten us.
 
illriginal
post Apr 3 2008, 03:18 PM
Post #81


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 6,349
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 455,274



QUOTE(ersatz @ Apr 3 2008, 04:07 PM) *
You can't hold everyone accountable for reading everything you have ever read and nothing more. Tell people what the fuck you're talking about. You can't just say, "No, that's wrong. You're responsible for knowing what's right though so I'll shut up now." Obviously people are going to disregard you if you do that.

No one knows what you're talking about because the word "atheist" does not entail anything more than the negation of theism. It's a word made up to contrast theist. You're saying we're wrong, but you're not telling us why. Please, enlighten us.


It's not wrong that atheist is the opposite of theist. I never said that it wasn't the opposite. What I'm sayin is wrong is people who claim that atheism never derived from satanism... that's all.
 
NoSex
post Apr 3 2008, 03:24 PM
Post #82


in the reverb chamber.
*******

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 4,022
Joined: Nov 2005
Member No: 300,308



QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Apr 3 2008, 08:33 AM) *
You're using wikipedia for information on Satanism for f**k sake lol... are you kidding me? I don't care how many schools are founded here... I'm not makin an ass out of myself, I'm actually laughing at you for attempting to confuse and sway people from the fact.

But whatever, I'm not tryin to convince anyone about it. They should be responsible enough to look at sources other than wiki... wiki isn't always authentic. I just can't even believe you tried to bring modernized satanism into this discussion, westernized above that lol


You are not good at this.

1. Wikipedia is a great source of information. [1]
2. I'm not entirely ignorant of Satanism to begin with; I could have gone without citing information at all - I'm simply attempting to have a convincing, honest, and appropriate debate.
3. Nothing is "always authentic." But, in reviewing those articles myself, the information I cited was, insofar as I know. If you believe there is something specifically inauthentic about the information I presented to refute your arguments, it would be best to demonstrate this to us - as opposed to blabbering on bombastically.
4. "Modernized satanism" is the only sort of satanism that has anything to really do with atheism. Without LaVeyan Satanism, this supposed connection between satanism and atheism is even more embarrassingly false.
5. How would you define satanism (contextually?
6. How would you define an atheist?
7. If you aren't trying to persuade people, you might want to leave the debate forums.
8. The f**k did you even reply to my post for? It isn't like you're trying to make an effort - f**king still.

Seriously though, do you f**king know anything about proper argumentative discourse?

QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Apr 3 2008, 02:18 PM) *
It's not wrong that atheist is the opposite of theist. I never said that it wasn't the opposite. What I'm sayin is wrong is people who claim that atheism never derived from satanism... that's all.


How could something that is conceptually independent, as it is, in its most simplistic application, true by the default of non-belief, be a derivative?

Satanism is not as old as mankind (at least not in written history), but, atheism, by definition, must be, lest you hope to argue that non-belief did not exist, until after belief... which, of course, is an absurd summation.
 
illriginal
post Apr 3 2008, 04:35 PM
Post #83


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 6,349
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 455,274



QUOTE(NoSex @ Apr 3 2008, 04:24 PM) *
How would you define satanism (contextually?
How would you define an atheist?


Atheist creed:

Does not believe in God, Gods, Goddesses, human soul, disembodied spirits, after life, reincarnation, fate, destiny, man is nothin other than an animal with a high degree of self awareness, there is no meaning of life, they do not believe in religion nor superstition.

Satanism: The study of Satan and Satan's wisdom. Believed to bring us humans the wisdom of heaven and universe, both light and darkness as well as knowledge of self and self improvement. The study of self and self improvement teaches us that we do not depend on other humans; unless it's for self gain, do not depend on a force, nor God. We are the creation of omniscience, we are omniscience and we can achieve ultimate omniscience through self worship.


Atheism derived from Satanism or the bigger and broader root of Luciferian.
Like this: Luciferian > Satanism > Atheism

Atheism like I have mentioned before is nothin more than a sect to Satanism, where Luciferian would be the main belief. Atheist only differs 1 way and 1 way only. They lack in the belief of God, and lack of God is lack of Satan.

They are no better than Christians. For example, Christians believe in prophets, right? But why do they lack belief in Prophet Muhammad? Because they choose to! Because in their version of their religion, Muhammad wasn't worthy enough to have his point of view or his experiences put into the Holy Bible.

This is the same with Atheism. Atheism is just a human philosophy that was born out of Satanism. All Atheism did was re-create a belief system just like Scientologists did. Still the wisdom that Satan scripted is nearly the same that Atheists depend on... the wisdom of self... the wisdom of human philosophies. Atheist believe in science, the same science man has discovered.

The irony of Atheism is... it's a belief system in itself. It's a belief system that lacks belief in a higher being. Such a contradiction yet you dare use your belief system to disregard all other belief systems, almost the same way satanism teaches it, except some worship satan as their leader, while other worship them selves.

QUOTE
atheism, by definition, must be, lest you hope to argue that non-belief did not exist, until after belief... which, of course, is an absurd summation.


Cut the shit, atheism is a choice after being presented the idea of a omnipotence or a God in other words.
 
BadCraziness
post Apr 3 2008, 05:28 PM
Post #84


nicola
***

Group: Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Mar 2008
Member No: 635,560



QUOTE
Cut the shit, atheism is a choice after being presented the idea of a omnipotence or a God in other words.


Uh no.
Atheism is simply the absence of theism, by definition.
We have said this over and over again and you are not getting it.

I can remember back to the time when I was 6 years old and I had neither heard of or thought of any kind of God. This absence of theism made me an atheist by definition.


Later on Christianity was explained to me by my babysitter, and even then I found it utterly ridiculous.
 
NoSex
post Apr 3 2008, 05:36 PM
Post #85


in the reverb chamber.
*******

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 4,022
Joined: Nov 2005
Member No: 300,308



QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Apr 3 2008, 03:35 PM) *
Atheist creed:


Atheism has no creed. In it's most broad definition, atheism is merely the implicit or explicit lack of belief. A lack of belief does not equate to a "creed." Do you have a "creed" of non-belief in unicorns or Santa Claus? Even if you are going to argue atheism as a "creed," you can not further the definition of atheism by imposing upon it a philosophy or system of beliefs - that's just arbitrary, superfluous, and etymologically inaccurate.

An atheist does not have to believe in evolution. He does not have to deny all superstitions. He does not have to be a humanist, a selfist, or a fan of rock and roll music. Although some of these materialistic and naturalistic ideas are often associated, and held by atheists, it is not by necessity that they are (just as it is not necessary that a Catholic priest sexually assault little boys). In fact, all an atheist has to do, in order to be considered an atheist, is not believe in god.

Your error, at best, could be considered a hasty generalization. But, really, you're just moving the goal posts and redefining words to suite your argument. You're not fooling anyone but yourself.

And, if that wasn't enough:
"Atheism, as an explicit position, either affirms the nonexistence of gods or rejects theism. When defined more broadly, atheism is the absence of belief in deities, alternatively called nontheism.... Although many self-described atheists tend toward secular philosophies such as humanism and naturalism, there is no one ideology or set of behaviors to which all atheists adhere.... " [1]

Atheism is nothing more than the absence of belief in gods, just as theism is nothing more than the fullness of belief in god or gods.

QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Apr 3 2008, 03:35 PM) *
Satanism: The study of Satan and Satan's wisdom.


Great; no connection to atheism.

QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Apr 3 2008, 03:35 PM) *
Atheism like I have mentioned before is nothin more than a sect to Satanism, where Luciferian would be the main belief.


This is the equivalent of saying that theism is a sect of Christianity, where Baptist would be the main belief.

1. Atheism is not a belief system nor a religion, just as theism is not.
2. What you described as Satanism is clearly only as old as the God of Abraham. Are you trying to suggest that people never exhibited non-belief before this period?
3. Luciferians were not Satanists at all. They were actually follows of Lucifer, Bishop of Cagliari. [2] I think you might be referring to Luciferianism.
4. Luciferianism is only as old as the thirteenth-century and, really, a sect of Satanism.[3]
5. You suck.

QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Apr 3 2008, 03:35 PM) *
This is the same with Atheist. Atheist is just a human philosophy that was born out of Satanism. All Atheist did was re-create a belief system just like Scientologists did. Still the wisdom that Satan scripted is nearly the same that Atheist depend on... the wisdom of self... the wisdom of human philosophies. Atheist believe in science, the same science man has discovered.


An atheist doesn't have to believe in anything, let alone science.

QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Apr 3 2008, 03:35 PM) *
Cut the shit, atheism is a choice after being presented the idea of a omnipotence or a God in other words.


Not by the definition, jackass.

And, still, you don't really address anyone's points. What a f**king surprise!
 
illriginal
post Apr 3 2008, 05:42 PM
Post #86


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 6,349
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 455,274



QUOTE(NoSex @ Apr 3 2008, 06:36 PM) *
Atheism has no creed. In it's most broad definition, atheism is merely the implicit or explicit lack of belief. A lack of belief does not equate to a "creed." Do you have a "creed" of non-belief in unicorns or Santa Claus? Even if you are going to argue atheism as a "creed," you can not further the definition of atheism by imposing upon it a philosophy or system of beliefs - that's just arbitrary, superfluous, and etymologically inaccurate.

An atheist does not have to believe in evolution. He does not have to deny all superstitions. He does not have to be a humanist, a selfist, or a fan of rock and roll music. Although some of these materialistic and naturalistic ideas are often associated, and held by atheists, it is not by necessity that they are (just as it is not necessary that a Catholic priest sexually assault little boys). In fact, all an atheist has to do, in order to be considered an atheist, is not believe in god.

Your error, at best, could be considered a hasty generalization. But, really, you're just moving the goal posts and redefining words to suite your argument. You're not fooling anyone but yourself.

And, if that wasn't enough:
"Atheism, as an explicit position, either affirms the nonexistence of gods or rejects theism. When defined more broadly, atheism is the absence of belief in deities, alternatively called nontheism.... Although many self-described atheists tend toward secular philosophies such as humanism and naturalism, there is no one ideology or set of behaviors to which all atheists adhere.... " [1]

Atheism is nothing more than the absence of belief in gods, just as theism is nothing more than the fullness of belief in god or gods.
Great; no connection to atheism.
This is the equivalent of saying that theism is a sect of Christianity, where Baptist would be the main belief.

1. Atheism is not a belief system nor a religion, just as theism is not.
2. What you described as Satanism is clearly only as old as the God of Abraham. Are you trying to suggest that people never exhibited non-belief before this period?
3. Luciferians were not Satanists at all. They were actually follows of Lucifer, Bishop of Cagliari. [2] I think you might be referring to Luciferianism.
4. Luciferianism is only as old as the thirteenth-century and, really, a sect of Satanism.[3]
5. You suck.
An atheist doesn't have to believe in anything, let alone science.
Not by the definition, jackass.

And, still, you don't really address anyone's points. What a f**king surprise!

LOL... I've laid my point all you've done is use f**kin wiki f**kin shitty pedia. Then to make it more comical you used BBC for some sort of source... But whatever, we'll just agree to disagree.

Atheism is still a belief system.. and it's a choice. Just because someone never heard of God doesn't automatically make them atheist, it makes them uninformed.
 
NoSex
post Apr 3 2008, 05:50 PM
Post #87


in the reverb chamber.
*******

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 4,022
Joined: Nov 2005
Member No: 300,308



QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Apr 3 2008, 04:42 PM) *
LOL...


Get the f**k out of the debate forums.
(A man can dream: Make the Debate Forum Exclusive)
 
illriginal
post Apr 3 2008, 06:03 PM
Post #88


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 6,349
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 455,274



QUOTE(NoSex @ Apr 3 2008, 06:50 PM) *
Get the f**k out of the debate forums.
(A man can dream: Make the Debate Forum Exclusive)

No thanks... just because atheist can use any excuse in the book to defend themselves, doesn't mean I'm wrong.
 
BadCraziness
post Apr 3 2008, 06:24 PM
Post #89


nicola
***

Group: Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Mar 2008
Member No: 635,560



QUOTE(Tamacracker @ Apr 3 2008, 06:42 PM) *
LOL... I've laid my point all you've done is use f**kin wiki f**kin shitty pedia. Then to make it more comical you used BBC for some sort of source... But whatever, we'll just agree to disagree.


FAIL

He's making good points, maybe you should try addressing them for once, eh?

I remember you saying EXACTLY THE SAME THING ("we'll just agree to disagree") when we were debating earlier. Your debating skills are made of fail and AIDS, mr cracker.
 
illriginal
post Apr 3 2008, 06:30 PM
Post #90


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 6,349
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 455,274



QUOTE(BadCraziness @ Apr 3 2008, 07:24 PM) *
FAIL

He's making good points, maybe you should try addressing them for once, eh?

I remember you saying EXACTLY THE SAME THING ("we'll just agree to disagree") when we were debating earlier. Your debating skills are made of fail and AIDS, mr cracker.

Yes and why did it have to come down this way? Because the both of you are atheist, the both of you use excuses which tend to be "exclusive" to atheist only. It's quite laughable that history shows one thing, yet human philosophy some how over rules history. This is a reason why I dislike debating with atheist... because of their complete one sided views and all their excuses they have to defend themselves, it's just as bad as apologetics.

Atheism in itself is a contradiction. Atheism itself should have no reason to exist as atheist don't even have a reason why they should exist in the first place.

But in my opinion, I believe the reason why atheism exists is to sway the weak minded and the faithless away from God. To persuade those into believing your own philosophies with your cunning words.
 
BadCraziness
post Apr 3 2008, 06:39 PM
Post #91


nicola
***

Group: Member
Posts: 66
Joined: Mar 2008
Member No: 635,560




As for not having a reason to exist, most of us just find our own. I know why I am here, I know who I am and I have found my own path. Just because we don't subscribe to the same meaning shared by millions of others doesn't mean we don't have one.


You are confusing "excuses" with solid rebuttals and it is hilarious.
Solid rebuttals ...hmm.. maybe you should look into that some time?

until then,
arrivederci.

 
illriginal
post Apr 3 2008, 06:41 PM
Post #92


Senior Member
*******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 6,349
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 455,274



QUOTE(BadCraziness @ Apr 3 2008, 07:39 PM) *
You are confusing "excuses" with solid rebuttals and it is hilarious.
Solid rebuttals ...hmm.. maybe you should look into that some time?

until then,
arrivederci.

Right... go learn apologetics you'll find something in common, trust me.
 
ersatz
post Apr 3 2008, 10:04 PM
Post #93


Ms. Granger
*****

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 735
Joined: Jul 2005
Member No: 165,238



How does not believing in a god negate a person's reason to exist? Everyone has the same freaking reason to exist and that is merely to exist. Some people like to help others (I do), some people like to sit at home and breathe some air. Are you saying that if a person is a complete hermit and does nothing, but believes in a god, they automatically are contributing more to the world and have more of a reason to live?

You're absolutely absurd.
 
Tung
post Apr 4 2008, 03:58 PM
Post #94


٩(͡๏̯͡๏)۶
********

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 14,309
Joined: Nov 2004
Member No: 65,593



Wow the f**ken last 10 posts has nothing relevant to the topic at hand. f**k outta here yall.
 
Lanochka
post May 5 2008, 09:37 AM
Post #95


Hello, darling.
****

Group: Member
Posts: 227
Joined: Aug 2006
Member No: 456,349



Well my view is that if you believe in evolution then there is no way that you can believe in God (of the Bible at least). That's because the Bible states that God created the heavens and the earth and everything else. Evolution has several different theories on how the universe came to be, such as he big bang, matter always existed, etc. Also, the Bible states that God created plants and animals after their kind. And that he created man in his own image. Believing in evolution goes completely against God. Evolution states, yet again several different theories, which include life spontaneously emerged from primordial soup/a rock/non living matter and that everything on earth has one common ancestor. If you believe that you evolved from a rock to however many chains of species there are out there into a complex human bieing by complete blind chance, then you cannot possibly believe in God.
 
Reidar
post May 5 2008, 03:06 PM
Post #96


Vae Victis
******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 1,416
Joined: Sep 2006
Member No: 460,227



Evolution is the opposite of "blind chance". It's a series of specific, adaptive mutations.
 
NoSex
post May 5 2008, 04:01 PM
Post #97


in the reverb chamber.
*******

Group: Staff Alumni
Posts: 4,022
Joined: Nov 2005
Member No: 300,308



QUOTE(Lanochka @ May 5 2008, 09:37 AM) *
Evolution has several different theories on how the universe came to be, such as he big bang, matter always existed, etc.


Actually, the Theory of Evolution is purely post-life and biological in nature. It is not an all encompassing concept (exactly). The theory does not even posit an idea on the beginning of life, let alone on the beginning of the universe itself. The only thing that the theory addresses is the movements of biological populations (the mechanism that case variations to arise in the alleles in a specific population over a specific period of time).

Further, your evaluation of the supposedly mutually exclusive natures of creationism and evolution fails miserably because of your pigeon holed ideal of creationist thought and, at the same time, your broadening of evolutionary biology. Creationism (aka Intelligent Design) isn't bound to the text of the Bible (or the ideas of Christianity for that matter). Deists, for example, believe in a impersonal, mechanical sort of god. Also, as I had stated before, evolution only relates to the movements of already living populations.

So, essentially, belief in evolution, although it certainly encourages an atheistic "world-view," in no way makes belief in creationism impossible. The two ideas are not mutually exclusive.
 
Joss-eh-lime
post Jun 24 2008, 12:51 AM
Post #98


tell me more.
******

Group: Official Member
Posts: 2,798
Joined: Jul 2004
Member No: 35,640



i say no it doesnt
 
CelestialAbyss
post Jul 23 2008, 10:57 PM
Post #99


Senior Member
***

Group: Official Designer
Posts: 35
Joined: Aug 2007
Member No: 563,830



No it doesn't... because you could think of it like this.

The bible says that God created man in his image... a friggin long time ago. So long infact that for all we know, God looks like what evolutionist's believe our early ancestors looked like... and that's what Adam and Eve looked like... and then after a really long time... and a huge flood covering the whole entire earth... we turned out like this...

the only upside to the evolution only theory is that we don't have to assume that we are all spawns of incest... one little stipuation of the genesis story that still gives me the creeps.
 
brooklyneast05
post Jul 24 2008, 09:01 AM
Post #100


I'm Jc
********

Group: Mentor
Posts: 13,619
Joined: Jul 2006
Member No: 437,556



^it would seem like the bible needs to do quite a bit more begat-ing to get that far back
 

4 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members: