Atheism...

[-Mav-]

Serious question: Did cavemen wear socks?

I’m not talking about those proto-boots made from animal skins, I’m talking about an actual layer of “something” between the animal skin and the caveman’s skin. Also, was Adam a caveman, and, if so, what kind? Neanderthal? Cro-Magnon?

 

[IdaCat]

If there is no God, or no giver of morality, how do we know these men are bad or evil?

How does naturalism come to this conclusion?

Which culture from the world is it based on?

Hitler could argue he was a good man. That he was trying to expedite evolution by breeding out undesirable genetic traits.

My official stance is I don't believe in the existence of atheists. No one has been able to prove to me they exist.

We (humans) define morality based on evolutionary instinct and societal influences including religion, politics, and really every experience in reality. It's the constant struggle.

It's easy to see that morality has changed over time and varies to some degree among cultures. The cosmos doesn't GAF about morality. That idea is rooted in theology and has no supporting evidence.

 

[MegaBlue05]

I don't agree with any of that, but I respect your right to believe it just like you said you respect mine. That's what makes this country the best.

I can agree with that.

[cheers]

 

[It'saDoneDeal]

For the kids that want to slay at bible camp, these are really catching on:

 

[TheEgyptianMagician]

Abrahamic God?

Jews he was a no nonsense kind of guy, disciplinarian.
Christians, grace and mercy, and love..
Muslims, time to submit to his will.

Hindu God? Shiva is tired of you chit and going to destroy you.. Hare Krishna.
Buddhist don't have a God, Buddha claimed Hindu gods didn't exist and not to take his word on authority as he was not a god.

They all have morality and "different" god, but we have an innate sense of morality so long as you are a person of good will. If not, then you make up your own terms.

 

[MegaBlue05]

Man has misinterpreted and misrepresented Gods words.

Completely wrong about children being taught and that is the reason why they are believers. Some are brought up that way others commit themselves after experiencing something that proved the existence of God to them long after they grew up.

Well, I'm the opposite.

I was raised in the church and thought it was all a pile of BS when I was about 12 and every plot hole I asked about was answered with " gotta have faith." That holds the same water with me as "because I said so." I stuck it out until I moved out my folks' home and never willingly went to church again outside of a wedding or funeral setting. Best decision I ever made.

You won't convince me that there is a god. I won't convince you that there's not, so we'll just have to agree to disagree. Keep doing what you do, though. As always, I respect your right to your beliefs.

 

[warrior-cat]

Well, I'm the opposite.

I was raised in the church and thought it was all a pile of BS when I was about 12 and every plot hole I asked about was answered with " gotta have faith." That holds the same water with me as "because I said so." I stuck it out until I moved out my folks' home and never willingly went to church again outside of a wedding or funeral setting. Best decision I ever made.

You won't convince me that there is a god. I won't convince you that there's not, so we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Heathen.:angry:[winking]

 

[Henogee1975]

Being an Atheist takes a lot of faith.

 

[420grover]

I love when someone explains their view on why they're a non-believer then a believer comes along and says "Well, that just tells me there is a god. LMAO.

 

[MegaBlue05]

Do you believe what you just said is the truth? If you do, then you believe in absolute truth and your claim that no religion is true is a religious truth claim. Therefore, we put our faith in your authority or Jesus' authority...I'm going with Jesus.

I'm going with what I've seen and what I believe to be true. It's truth to me. Never said it has to be truth to you.

You can go with Jesus. I'll go with nothing.

You believe the story. I think it's ********.

We're never gonna change each others' minds.

 

[78Gooses]

I wholeheartedly believe in socks and the Golden Rule.

 

[UKserialkiller]

I'll be honest. I believe in crack cocaine

 

[magic8ball]

We (humans) define morality based on evolutionary instinct and societal influences including religion, politics, and really every experience in reality. It's the constant struggle.

It's easy to see that morality has changed over time and varies to some degree among cultures. The cosmos doesn't GAF about morality. That idea is rooted in theology and has no supporting evidence.

Based on this I can't tell if you agree or disagree with what I said. Lol

 

[funKYcat75]

For the kids that want to slay at bible camp, these are really catching on:

Can you imagine how disappointed you’d be as a young teen boy seeing your favorite gal waltz into the basement, 2 crystal Pepsis in hand, pg-13 vhs running on the floor console tv, she sits down and puts her feet up in your lap, and you look down and see bible verse socks.

 

[AustinTXCat]

I'll be honest. I believe in crack cocaine

I'll also be honest. Grew up Lutheran and Baptist. Been to Iraq when **** came down. Had been mostly agnostic, but I prayed hard to something upstairs my *** would not get hit.

Regardless of our beliefs, sometimes we really must occasionally embrace a higher power. I went that route.

Still here.

 

[JimmyWa11]

I'm going with what I've seen and what I believe to be true. It's truth to me. Never said it has to be truth to you.

You can go with Jesus. I'll go with nothing.

You believe the story. I think it's ********.

We're never gonna change each others' minds.

You’re right, I could never change your mind. Salvation is by the grace of God and only He can can open blind eyes to the truth.

But you should know that you are placing your faith in your own reason/logic, yet you have no reason to do so if there is no God. For example, saying, “my truth, your truth.” That’s totally inconsistent logic. There either is truth or there is no truth...and if there is no God, there is no truth and we would not even have the capacity to consider “truth.”

Put your faith in Jesus...He is much more trustworthy than your reasoning.

 

[UKserialkiller]

I'll also be honest. Grew up Lutheran and Baptist. Been to Iraq when **** came down. Had been mostly agnostic, but I prayed hard to something upstairs my *** would not get hit.

Regardless of our beliefs, sometimes we really must occasionally embrace a higher power. I went that route.

Still here.

So man, you believe in crack cocaine too? Haha

 

[JimmyWa11]

We (humans) define morality based on evolutionary instinct and societal influences including religion, politics, and really every experience in reality. It's the constant struggle.

It's easy to see that morality has changed over time and varies to some degree among cultures. The cosmos doesn't GAF about morality. That idea is rooted in theology and has no supporting evidence.

Is beating babies inherently wrong or just a socially constructed difference of opinion?

“My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line." -Lewis

 

[IdaCat]

Is beating babies inherently wrong or just a socially constructed difference of opinion?

“My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line." -Lewis

If the only reason you don't beat your baby is because you think God told you not to, then please keep your beliefs. Protecting children is a moral value that I strongly support and for mentally healthy people it is a deep seated instinct.

Any culture that regularly beat babies wouldn't last long, so yes, beating babies is inherently wrong.

 

[JimmyWa11]

If the only reason you don't beat your baby is because you think God told you not to, then please keep your beliefs. Protecting children is a moral value that I strongly support and for mentally healthy people it is a deep seated instinct.

Any culture that regularly beat babies wouldn't last long, so yes, beating babies is inherently wrong.

Glad to see you say that beating babies is “inherently” wrong. The problem is that you’re being inconsistent with your stated worldview. If materialistic naturalism is true then beating genetically inferior babies to death is simply doing natural selection a favor...but, as you admitted, no mentally same person would approve of that.

If there is no God then you have absolutely no basis for saying that beating babies is wrong, or that Hitler was wrong. It is simply your opinion if there is no God, and therefore no moral absolutes.

This is one of the chief reasons atheism is foolish...it is impossible to live out consistently.

 

[Ahnan E. Muss]

Define "baby." Does a 3 year old count?

Then define "beating." Does a light spanking count?

Then define "genetically inferior." What genetic attributes, and what makes them inferior? And to whom are they inferior?

 

[Ahnan E. Muss]

You’re right, I could never change your mind. Salvation is by the grace of God and only He can can open blind eyes to the truth.

So God determines (predetermines?) who gets salvation and who doesn't?

But you should know that you are placing your faith in your own reason/logic, yet you have no reason to do so if there is no God. For example, saying, “my truth, your truth.” That’s totally inconsistent logic. There either is truth or there is no truth...and if there is no God, there is no truth and we would not even have the capacity to consider “truth.”

Put your faith in Jesus...He is much more trustworthy than your reasoning.

You just made a huge leap, a huge leap of logic if you will, in going from saying his position is logically inconsistent to concluding that Jesus is a more trustworthy alternative to logic. There are multiple logical flaws with your/Lewis's position here.

 

[IdaCat]

Glad to see you say that beating babies is “inherently” wrong. The problem is that you’re being inconsistent with your stated worldview. If materialistic naturalism is true then beating genetically inferior babies to death is simply doing natural selection a favor...but, as you admitted, no mentally same person would approve of that.

If there is no God then you have absolutely no basis for saying that beating babies is wrong, or that Hitler was wrong. It is simply your opinion if there is no God, and therefore no moral absolutes.

This is one of the chief reasons atheism is foolish...it is impossible to live out consistently.

False. Social evolution doesn't work like biological natural selection. Jealousy doesn't support the health of a jealous person, but it is an evolved instinct that we all have to some degree.

If you can't see how morality has evolved throughout history, I don't know what to tell you. You can even look at the Bible and compare the OT with the NT and see it.

Moral values are just as real to me as they are to you. I just have a different opinion on where they originate. To me it is common sense. I don't care that you don't agree with me. I've learned to appreciate religious people. At least most of them HAVE some good moral values. Something in short supply these days. But I still enjoy discussing these topics.

 

[TheEgyptianMagician]

I think the broader point he makes is that there is absolute truth as opposed to relative anything goes truth, which is certainly the case. To borrow Orwell's quote from the political thread, only intellectuals (The Franco-German ones who came up with the ideas underlying Communism, Fascism, or National SOcialism etc) are foolish enough to think otherwise.


We in the West have these ideas from the ancient Greeks, it's in our art and our movies and while maybe socially evolved independent of Judeo-Christian values they cannot be separated from them. In that sense, while it is maybe opinion that this truth is divinely inspired and inseparable and maybe a logical leap, it cannot be stated as fallacy or necessarily untrue.

 

[IdaCat]

I think the broader point he makes is that there is absolute truth as opposed to relative anything goes truth, which is certainly the case. To borrow Orwell's quote from the political thread, only intellectuals (The Franco-German ones who came up with the ideas underlying Communism, Fascism, or National SOcialism etc) are foolish enough to think otherwise.


We in the West have these ideas from the ancient Greeks, it's in our art and our movies and while maybe socially evolved independent of Judeo-Christian values they cannot be separated from them. In that sense, while it is maybe opinion that this truth is divinely inspired and inseparable and maybe a logical leap, it cannot be stated as fallacy or necessarily untrue.

OK, so Christianity can have the credit for helping to steer us away from moral relativism. Good job Christianity. But if they want to claim they have divine absolute truth, that's a positive claim of which they have the burden of proof. And if their response is to send me a Bible (which is all they really have), I'll use it's own contradictions, inconsistencies, and ignored immoral directives to debunk their claim ... which will expose the claim as false.

 

[IdaCat]

On second thought, I think I'm done with this thread. We've got much bigger fish to fry and it somehow seems wrong possibly harming the belief structure of those who are mostly allies in the fight. Good day everybody.

 

[-Mav-]

Can't we all just get along and talk about comfortable, yet stylish, footwear?

 

[wildcatsboston1984_rivals]

Explain it to me then if I'm so stupid. Try to use logic and reason instead of insults if you can.

Well why don't you explain to me how the belief in a make-believe god gives your life meaning?

 

[wildcatsboston1984_rivals]

If there is no God, or no giver of morality, how do we know these men are bad or evil?

How does naturalism come to this conclusion?

Which culture from the world is it based on?

Hitler could argue he was a good man. That he was trying to expedite evolution by breeding out undesirable genetic traits.

My official stance is I don't believe in the existence of atheists. No one has been able to prove to me they exist.

What is your cold hard scientific proof for the existence of a god, any god?

 

[wildcatsboston1984_rivals]

Being an Atheist takes a lot of faith.

Doesn't take much faith to not believe in a bunch of fanciful fairy tales.

 

[cole854]

Glad to see you say that beating babies is “inherently” wrong. The problem is that you’re being inconsistent with your stated worldview. If materialistic naturalism is true then beating genetically inferior babies to death is simply doing natural selection a favor...but, as you admitted, no mentally same person would approve of that.

If there is no God then you have absolutely no basis for saying that beating babies is wrong, or that Hitler was wrong. It is simply your opinion if there is no God, and therefore no moral absolutes.

This is one of the chief reasons atheism is foolish...it is impossible to live out consistently.

Good post. Morality w/o a God wouldn't exist....one would be as likely to stone someone as give them flowers w/o thinking one was worse than the other.

I have seen many an atheist questions their "beliefs" after watching the Truth Project...excellent series.

 

[cole854]

Doesn't take much faith to not believe in a bunch of fanciful fairy tales.

Actually, it does. Because for every story told in the Bible, atheists have to be able to counter it in order to sustain their illogical stance.

 

[wildcatsboston1984_rivals]

If there is no God then you have absolutely no basis for saying that beating babies is wrong, or that Hitler was wrong. It is simply your opinion if there is no God, and therefore no moral absolutes.

If you really think the only reason murdering others is considered wrong is because of the alleged existence of a God, then it sounds like you have some mental issues you might want to get checked out.

 

[wildcatsboston1984_rivals]

Actually, it does. Because for every story told in the Bible, atheists have to be able to counter it in order to sustain their illogical stance.

Wrong. Please provide me proof that the Red Sea actually parted (or any other fanciful fairy tales from the Bible). Not how it may have happened or how it could have happened. Show me undeniable proof that it actually happened.

 

[CatOfDaVille]

Well why don't you explain to me how the belief in a make-believe god gives your life meaning?

I asked you first.

But since you asked, if you take the stance that there is no intelligent creator, you are essentially saying that life itself is the product of chemical reactions over billions of years. That means, at a scientific level, human life is meaningless from a big picture perspective. You are born, you live, then the lights go out. Pretty depressing.

Atheism cannot be proven because you can't prove a negative. You can talk about science, but what you are missing is that science is an attempt to make sense of the physical or natural world, not the supernatural. There is plenty of evidence for supernatural occurrences.

You can also, as many atheists do, pretend that religious people are dumber than they are. What you fail to realize is that some of the most intelligent people in this world believe in God. Scientists, scholars, etc.

Like i said elsewhere in this thread, I respect people's right to believe (or not believe) what they want. What I won't tolerate is someone assuming I'm an idiot for my beliefs. I could mention the Golden Rule, but that comes from a make-believe God, so you probably don't believe in it.

 

[rudd1]

-why are you guys ruining the sock thread?

 

[-Mav-]

What is your cold hard scientific proof for the existence of a god, any god?

Actually, it does. Because for every story told in the Bible, atheists have to be able to counter it in order to sustain their illogical stance.

I asked you first.

Fellas, fellas, let's get real...where do you stand on wool vs cotton vs synthetics?

 

[BlueVelvetFog]

For the kids that want to slay at bible camp, these are really catching on:

BOat shoes always ruined it for me. That and chicks wearing chucks. Hate that **** w a passion

 

[wildcatwelder_rivals]

<<<< Born and raised in a Baptist home.
I believe "religion" was created by early man as a way to comfort themselves when a loved one passed; thus giving rise to the "soul". Nothing else makes sense.

<<<<Pro sock, btw.

 

[cole854]

Wrong. Please provide me proof that the Red Sea actually parted (or any other fanciful fairy tales from the Bible). Not how it may have happened or how it could have happened. Show me undeniable proof that it actually happened.

My proof is the Bible, as that is the word of God. If you disagree, then so be it.

But since we are on the burden of proof here, please explain how man originated...would love to hear this. And how the law of order is maintained, human emotions developing, how faith originated, morality, shame, and the ability to make something out of nothing, to name a few.