Christians hate atheists for their freedom?

It makes sense if you think about it.  Christians have this all-powerful authoritarian figure telling them how to live out their lives.  Not only do you get punished horribly for stepping out of line, but this authoritarian is omni-present and will always catch you.  There is literally no freedom to do anything.  The most amazing thing is they don't realize this, or don't admit it.  This God does a better job than Big Brother could ever possibly dream.  But deep down in their hearts, they know they are being watched and controlled and it makes them angry to see those of us who are free.  Thus, they lash out at us.  Please do no fault them for it though, imagine how quickly you would become like that if you knew there was someone watching and condeming you every time you masturbate.

I think we should help our christian brethren escape this oppressive fascist called God.

Some scientist think we may be hardwire to have and need beliefs and to varying degrees. That means you are all argueing because of a boilogical determinant. The beleivers beleive because they are wired such and need to. Non-beleivers do not need it and as such do not understand why the beleivers are so adament about it. Yet neither is any position to criticise what the other is doing, as they may just be following out a hard wired poragative. It's as stupid to argue about as how you produce say maelin and  ... oh wait.

oh god.. not another one of these threads

XEL SHUT THE FUCK UP IMMEDIATELY, GO TO YOUR LOCAL BAR HAVE A FEW WHISKEYS, GO HOME AND SLEEP IT OFF

>>163 I'M 17 - I CAN'T GO TO A BAR EVEN IF I WANTED TO! WHY ARE WE SHOUTING!!
>>162 How do I spelled good?

>>164
You suffer from a pathological personality disorder. See a psychiatrist.

People are stupid whether they are atheist, theist, agnostic or whatever. Religious affiliation is not an indicator of intelligence, reasoning, or coherence! 

>>165 :*(
>>166 No, but I think it is very probable that non-theists (agnostics, atheists) are a smarter crowd on average. Case in point, Saudi Arabia and Alabama. If there were more communists around I wouldn't be so cocky though.

Religion is always going to be a shady area concerning logic, not like the universality of science. It is necessary to ask if the universe has some intelligent creator, but it is not logical. Many famous scientists and logical philosophers have been theists in times when belief in god was not as illogical as it seems today. God to them would be like your attempts to judge a person's thoughts during a business deal or during a game of poker (a true american game). You cannot assume a certainty in what they are thinking, but by their body language and background you can get an impression of that "shady" area and make a decent guess.

Weeeee! I believe in GOD!And everyone else will die and suffer eternal damnation! GOD loves me and I love him!

>>169
Prove it.

>>168 Yeah, seconded and signed. Saying "NO INTELLIGENT ENTITY EVAR " is illogical, but saying "Let's sort ourselves and our brittle globe out before we live as if Big Daddy may be watching us" is doing a favor to mankind.

>>164. Totally off topic but I have a hard time beleiving that you're 17.

He means Radical.. Think about it, honestly, dont make asumptions

Xel must be like 13 or something.

>>161

How old are you?

25.

What have you experienced that allows you to thump your chest?

Is this really about me and my ego? No, it's not. (Strike 1) It is basically as I said: "Experience gives you clairity."

Does a more varied and lengthy relationship with the environment intrinsically make for a more credible and balanced organism?

Yes. (Strike 2)

Is theoretical conviction even desirable and a positive trait in a complex reality?

Again: Yes. (Strike 3)

I know I'm being a precocious little motherfuck who'll probably be having different opinions in the future - but since your alpha-male calumny holds little value to me I figured we could dance a little.

Let's dance then, you little dipshit. Oh, but what! I'm up to bat. My assertion is simple: There will always be the unknown. The idea or notion of a God, or omnipotent metaphysical trans-dimension being is seeded in the unknown.

Your "we're going to know everything pretty soon, so let's act like we've already figured out the universe and maybe we'll get there faster" approach to soceity is impetuous and lacks the pragmatism of human kind's wisest and greatest minds- namely, Einstien.

The point I'm also making is that we *do* need to discuss the metaphysical, while we sort out the physical at the same time. Your type of apathy is to blame for christian-fundamentalism. Science struggles against religous-based ignorance now because we let Islam and Rome steal away the notion of 'God'. And it is not as if, anyone is asking you to devote yourself completely to the notion of God. It's just the metaphysical world is something that needs to be possessed by logic or else we leave the decisions and discoveries in that regard up to zealots and televagelists.

Looks like Xel has a new challenger..

<GG>
Heaven or Hell?
Duel 1!

LET'S ROCK!
</GG>

>>158

science doesnt know everything yet. a god could exist; its just that no evidence whatsoever has been found. therefore any god that has an earthly following at this time is completely fictional.

"Does a more varied and lengthy relationship with the environment intrinsically make for a more credible and balanced organism?

Yes. (Strike 2)" - It depends on the situation.

"Is theoretical conviction even desirable and a positive trait in a complex reality?

Again: Yes. (Strike 3)" - Err, no.. it isn't.


www.whywontgodhealamputees.com -coughs-

>>178
Stop posting that stupid site. You only serve to make atheists look stupid. Any theist can say god created this universe and filled it with evil in order to test souls to see if they are worthy to go to heaven, that is why it does not heal amputees, to test their resolve.

>>178

"It depends on the situation."

"The situation" is always the environment. It's "credibility" or "balance" are ability to deal with and adapt the environment.

"Err, no.. it isn't."

Er, yes it fucking is.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_relativity
www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/gr/public/qg_ss.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity

Your link sucks shit for the same reasons Xel (when it comes to this matter of metaphysics) is a child.

>>180 No, the situation in this case is which parts of the environment that has been experienced and in which order. But this is semantics - what I meant to argue was that more input/output between and organism and the surroundings does not necessarily make for a more amicable/intelligent/reasonable/trustworthy individual. Experience = Credibility and maturity either, due to cognitive imperfections in perception and mental patterns (one can experience but still be too prejudiced or self-deluding to fail to learn a lesson). A human with poor values in such variables can become king of the hill as well, but usually at the unfair expense of others (case in point, Ivy League bending over to get as many children of previous alumni as possible enrolled, dictators et al.).
Regarding the criticizm that I want to blot out meta-physical hypothesizing and reasoning in favor of reality-based focus on wordly issues - I understand if my position is vague. What I seek is not to turn off the debate altogether to rob religious people of ammo, but rather explain the folly of using super-dimensional entities and *hypothetical* factors to back up arguments referring to worldly matters. (For example, christians like Mark Steyn say we must turn to the christian work ethic and industrious values of western culture to survive the muslim onslaught. According to these people christian values prevent practices such as slavery, while it says quite clearly in the Old Testament that slavery is a-ok. Then they say that the Old Testament is allegory, that it does not invalidate other biblical teachings. Then I wonder if Eve's original sin is allegory, and if Jesus died for allegorical sins. We should not have to refer to 'god' to become industrious and anti-islamist adults, especially when said god is a genocidal, homophobic paternalistic cunt.) What I mean is that while we can and should discuss the nature of the universe and the possibility of a sentient creator, we must put our foot down the minute said sentient creator is used as leverage in human issues such as abortion. God/Tiamat/Whomever may exist - I like to discuss that. What they may have said and dictated is not for us to follow, because it is apparent that they know shit about human nature.

>>181
That may be true, however, the same reasoning could be applied yourself. Indeed, what is your basis for believing you know more, and thus be in a position to judge them? Sociology nor physics nor politics are moral authorities. Perhaps you realise you are not in any credible position, revealing that you are simply a hypocrite?

>>179 "Any theist can say god created this universe and filled it with evil in order to test souls to see if they are worthy to go to heaven, that is why it does not heal amputees, to test their resolve." - Yeah, a lot Christians make up a lot of excuses for why God doesn't help people and save victims during rape. It's all a part of God's 'plan'.

>>180 This thread is about religion right? My post was merely pertaining to religion, somehow, a few of us got off topic. We don't need religion in a complex reality and so on. Also, that link serves as a helping means of providing thought and reasoning.

>>181 If Jesus died for our sins, then why is everyone still born with sin? (As Christians still proclaim.) Jesus' sacrifice should've wiped those sins out as well.

Cheers,
Kumori

Expanding on >>183 ">>181 If Jesus died for our sins, then why is everyone still born with sin? (As Christians still proclaim.) Jesus' sacrifice should've wiped those sins out as well."

If God exsists Jesus exists. If Jesus exists he died to expunge me of my sins. If that is the case then I can go out and kill somebody with no fear because Jesus died for me. I am going to heaven.

If God doesn't exist there is no one to judge me for my actions. Ergo I can go out and kill someone with no fear of ever being judged. I will die and nothing will happen to me because God/Heaven/Hell does not exist.

Quod erat demonstratum.

>>182 If one looks at reality and covers for all variables, cross-checking and all that, then one can say "This is so until counter-evidence becomes heavier than the other scale". The problem with religion is that people depend on the notion of this super-natural entity, and when this notion is chafed they are as well, reducing their capacity for rational thinking and comporting their opinions and actions with reality. This goes for any irrational opinions of course (my stance on, say, healthcare could be proven to be uneconomical, unethical, non-utilitarian and not comporting with human nature and current factors, and then I would gladly change my position. Thus far, however, the facts and the logic doesn't chafe with I believe) but since god and 'his' various scriptures (including the Qu'ran et al.) permeates the world for these people, their irrationality goes deeper and wider.

>>184 But if you can kill anyone anyone can kill you, so if you kill randomly you die. My philosophy (subject to change) consists of considering every single human case being me, meaning that if one person is discriminated on grounds outside of her responsibility, I could be, and am, discriminated on grounds outside of my responsibility and therefore I must defend this person the same way I would defend myself.

>>186
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hobbes

Why cant religion threads ever die with people agreeing to disagre? Not every beleiber is a fundimentalist and not every non beliver wants to murder priests. Most of the time there is a happy medium. Just let the fucking thread die.

>>183
>>186
>>188

Or maybe Xel and Kumori should pull their heads out of their asses. Their form of attack is truly pathetic, in that, they seem to focus solely on Christianity because that's the easiest religion to pick apart. Well, see, I agree: Christianity and most Semetic religions are bunk.

Where they fail at, however, is making blanket statements on metaphysics with degrees of certainity in an uncertain world. In their childish ramblings they don't understand that they execute the same process of belief that a fundamentalist does when they go off like this.

We all got over Christianity in High School, kids. And by providing further lip service to them- while at the same time subtlely downplaying the idea of God or omnipresence is just fucking stupid for the same reasons I state in >>175. After reading some of Einstien's quotes on God from his youth to his twighlight I've arrived at my own conclusion that you can't dismantle religion or spirituality by desconstructing Christianity, the same way you can't destroy science by saying Malthusianism was wrong, or this theory here (or there) didn't pan out.

Uncertainty is the only constant in a complex reality, and so, things that address this uncertainty (spirituality, science) are definately needed. And this, I feel, is proven by humankinds dominance, surviviability, etc....

>>189

Belief isn\'t necessarily a fact. Xel and Kumori were merely weighing and examining things out in front of them based on fact, not belief. They aren\'t being fundamentalists by doing that.

Also, Christianity is the biggest religion, which is why it\'s easy to pick out. Not to mention one that most certainly has caused much violence, brainwashing and crap in history. Christianity = Western Taliban

>>188

because that is the route theists take when they realise they are loosing.

>>185
You didn't answer the question. What makes you superior?

>>184
Expanding on >>183 ">>181 If Jesus died for our sins, then why is everyone still born with sin? (As Christians still proclaim.) Jesus' sacrifice should've wiped those sins out as well."

If God exsists Jesus exists. If Jesus exists he died to expunge me of my sins. If that is the case then I can go out and kill somebody with no fear because Jesus died for me. I am going to heaven.

You don't know much of anything about Christianity, so I'd suggest you do your research before you lamely attempt to deconstruct a whole religion with high school logic. Most Christian denominations you have to confess or pray for forgiveness for your sins. The point of Jesus dying was so that all you had to do was ask for forgiveness and God would grant it. Catholocism especially is focused on confessing. If you commit a mortal sin (murder, suicide, etc.) and die without confessing you go to hell.

Not what I believe, but being a former Christian I know what they believe.

So if evolution is true it means there was no garden of eden. And thus the whole book is a load of shit.. right. Just one thing. What page does it tell you to take this all literally, cause some cultures do not take their religous texts literally as christians tend to. But since they all are I'm sure they only do so cause the bible tells tehm to.

I'm still impressed with the way god made sure there was a pair of every animal within walking distance of Noah's home. "But that is allegory! Symbolic! SAme thing with Eve's lapse in Eden!" say christians who cling to their useless, tasteless pacifier. Symbolic?! So Jesus had himself tortured and executed for a symbolic sin by a non-existent individual? Lol. Lol lol lol lol lol lol.

>>189 Blanket statements? I say that the existence of a super-dimensional entity is a possibility but not something we can investigate until we've disassembled this universe and started to look in the others. I want to discuss that possibility now however. What I disagree with, what I abhor, is that some people use the power of such a notion to prop up their arguments and destroy their own capacity for rational behavior and that of their children. When we retailate and pick apart their illusion they scream "Atheist inquisition! Left-wing agenda! What about the christian work-ethic! Where will we find the moxie to defend ourselves against the Muslims?!". Dear hearts, if we need the banner of a paternalistic, genocidal fuck who knows nothing about the crowns of his creation and who failed high school ethics to keep our civilization together then I don't care if it crumbles to dust. I'll fight for the right of my mother to show her face, my right to play video-games and say "god is dead" out loud or the rights of my friends to kiss a dude in the streets but not for retarded *morality*.

>>200 get

>>200 get

Thread over. Faggotry=very yes.

THIS THREAD ENDS HERE