Atheism. What are your thoughts?

[ToddNotTodd]

Relax friend. I responded to a poster claiming to be an athiest, one that doesn't believe God exists. The Bible says that God exists.

Your post (#372) was specifically to me, since you quoted me and only me in your post. You specifically said I called Christians liars.

Please retract that or prove your point by finding where I call Christians liars.

 

[Eudaimonist]

The fact that you have considered eternity to be true is a step in the direction of beliving, whether you want to admit it or not.

Or it isn't a step in the direction of believing, whether you want to admit it or not.

However, I don't believe in eternity if that means believing in an infinite past, or in some timeless state. I don't believe in either.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[someguy14]

Your post (#372) was specifically to me, since you quoted me and only me in your post. You specifically said I called Christians liars.

Please retract that or prove your point by finding where I call Christians liars.

You accussed him of badgering the self procaliming atheist, when he(self proclaiming atheist) stated that he did not have any answers of where the big bang happened or started(before the big bang in other words), which I was discussing with him long before. The self procalimign atheist said that he only had theorys and that theorys were good enough for proof that God does not exist. I stated that a theory is a guess, a maybe this or maybe that, assumption, and not worthy of authoritive position since it provides no answer but a statement that proves he had no answer. I said that God provides an answer and he said that he does not believe it. So I said test it. Try it. And he hasnt posted as of yet to reply.

So yes, him demanding proof and he does provide any himself and has not tested The Bible and then saying The Bible is wrong, is calling those that believe in The Bible, wrong(liars).

Instead of saying, ok, that is right for you, atheists havnt come to a conclusion yet, he said that The Bible is wrong and has not tested it and said that he is a scientist. I said a scientist will have no problem testing if he truely desires to understand the truth about it.

 

[someguy14]

Or it isn't a step in the direction of believing, whether you want to admit it or not.

However, I don't believe in eternity if that means believing in an infinite past, or in some timeless state. I don't believe in either.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Your free to believe however you like.
May I ask, how your view of eternity is from your view? If you have a view or belief in eternity.
I have no idea about your definition of "infinite past".

 

[Eudaimonist]

Yes. A non existant god is a no existant god. God is existant though.

I realize that you believe that.

All false gods fail. You can testify to that friend.

The Christian God is a good example.

The one and only actual God, though, never fails. You and I are proof of that.

If so, we are also proof that....

The beginning of life was fire and ice, with the existence of only two worlds: Muspelheim and Niflheim. When the warm air of Muspelheim hit the cold ice of Niflheim, the jötunn Ymir and the icy cow Audhumla were created. Ymir's foot bred a son and a man and a woman emerged from his armpits, making Ymir the progenitor of the Jötnar. Whilst Ymir slept, the intense heat from Muspelheim made him sweat, and he sweated out Surtr[citation needed], a jötunn of fire. Later Ýmir woke and drank Auðhumla's milk. Whilst he drank, the cow Audhumbla licked on a salt stone. On the first day after this a man's hair appeared on the stone, on the second day a head and on the third day an entire man emerged from the stone. His name was Búri and with an unknown jötunn female he fathered Borr (Bor), the father of the three gods Odin, Vili and Ve.

When the gods felt strong enough they killed Ymir. His blood flooded the world and drowned all of the jötunn, except two. But jötnar grew again in numbers and soon there were as many as before Ymir's death. Then the gods created seven more worlds using Ymir's flesh for dirt, his blood for the Oceans, rivers and lakes, his bones for stone, his brain as the clouds, his skull for the heaven. Sparks from Muspelheim flew up and became stars.

One day when the gods were walking they found two tree trunks. They transformed them into the shape of humans. Odin gave them life, Vili gave them mind and Ve gave them the ability to hear, see, and speak. The gods named them Askur and Embla and built the kingdom of Middle-earth for them; and, to keep out the jötnar, the gods placed a gigantic fence made of Ymir's eyelashes around Middle-earth.

Norse mythology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

All false gods fail, but we are still here friend.

All gods may be false, in that case. That we are here doesn't mean that any god is true.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[3rdHeaven]

Or it isn't a step in the direction of believing, whether you want to admit it or not.

However, I don't believe in eternity if that means believing in an infinite past, or in some timeless state. I don't believe in either.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Do you believe in the M-Theory or at least possibly.

The problem as I see it is if you do not believe in eternity, then there must be a beginning. And we go back to the eon old argument, you can not get some thing from nothing.

So, at best what we can do is either keep pushing the goal posts farther back, or come to a realization that either there was a beginning or there was no beginning meaning there always was eternal some thing some where.

DO you agree with this and if not please explain.

 

[InThePinc]

First, I would like to be very clear. I'm not here to promote atheism. I am not here to answer questions about atheism, as that is clearly not allowed on these forums.

I had an entire thread deleted because I wanted to answer any questions about atheism, respectively, so that I can show that we are good, normal people like everyone else. I wanted to inform and educate about what, exactly, we are or are not. That is clearly not allowed. I was respectful the entire time. I even appealed, but I was denied that request. The reason given is that they do not allow "Ask a ___" for non-Christians. I did not post in a Christian only sub-forum category.

I am here to hear any conceptions you may have about atheism. I will then attempt to either confirm, correct, elaborate, or debate.

I am here to engage in stimulating conversation. I kindly request that everyone be respectful at all times. I thank everyone for their time and comments.

-Atheist Alan

See this is another reason I have never had faith in religion and has been athiest all my life. Freedom of speech is all fine and good if you are praising god but say something something that isn't positive about god they get deleted! How is that letting people believe in things they do? I want to believe in god but I won't be told what to believe. I've been brought up being told religion is bad because they're judgemental and controlling. I came here thinking 'they can't really be like that!' and hoped to find evidence that what I've been told is not true but I've not been here 24 hours and already been judged and this deleting your post because they didn't like what you said because it goes against what they believe is controlling!! People should have the right to say and read what they want to! I'm already wondering why I bothered coming here in the first place and am thinking about leaving, turning my back on religion and not coming back. If that's what I do I will be leaving with the knowledge that two of the biggest problems my dad has with religion as an ex catholic boy is true! Judgemental and controlling! I honestly thought I'd find something good here but so far I haven't.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

You accussed him of badgering the self procaliming atheist, when he(self proclaiming atheist) stated that he did not have any answers of where the big bang happened or started(before the big bang in other words), which I was discussing with him long before. The self procalimign atheist said that he only had theorys and that theorys were good enough for proof that God does not exist. I stated that a theory is a guess, a maybe this or maybe that, assumption, and not worthy of authoritive position since it provides no answer but a statement that proves he had no answer. I said that God provides an answer and he said that he does not believe it. So I said test it. Try it. And he hasnt posted as of yet to reply.

So yes, him demanding proof and he does provide any himself and has not tested The Bible and then saying The Bible is wrong, is calling those that believe in The Bible, wrong(liars).

Instead of saying, ok, that is right for you, atheists havnt come to a conclusion yet, he said that The Bible is wrong and has not tested it and said that he is a scientist. I said a scientist will have no problem testing if he truely desires to understand the truth about it.

First of all, you didn't say that Wican Child called Christians liars, you said I did. Prove it or retract.

Second, as has already been pointed out to you, saying the Bible isn't correct in some fashion isn't calling Christians who believe it is correct liars. It simply means the person making the statement believes the Christian is mistaken. You see the difference, right?

 

[someguy14]

The Christian God is a good example.

That is only your opinion. A fact is based upon a fact. Note that I said false god. The actual God, Creator of all is not a false god. I am proof of that.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Do you believe in the M-Theory or at least possibly.

No, I gravitate to loop quantum gravity theory, if anything. I'm not a die hard supporter of that theory though.

The problem as I see it is if you do not believe in eternity, then there must be a beginning. And we go back to the eon old argument, you can not get some thing from nothing.

Yes, there is a beginning to change, but not to existence. So, there never was pure philosophical "nothingness", IMV. Something did not come from nothing. There has always been something, even if that something was some sort of pure vacuum or flat spacetime.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[someguy14]

First of all, you didn't say that Wican Child called Christians liars, you said I did. Prove it or retract.

Second, as has already been pointed out to you, saying the Bible isn't correct in some fashion isn't calling Christians who believe it is correct liars. It simply means the person making the statement believes the Christian is mistaken. You see the difference, right?

I explained it very clearly. Please read through the post if you desire to discuss further.
And yes, regardless of how much your wanting to convince yourself calling our beliefs wrong isn't calling our beliefs wrong, the fact remains, calling a believers beliefs wrong is calling a believer wrong.

 

[someguy14]

That we are here doesn't mean that any god is true.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Of course God is true. We came from somewhere. A "big bang theory(assumption)" isn't good enough for those that understand the truth of God.

 

[3rdHeaven]

I am a believer, have been for as long as I can recall and that's a long time. One thing I have learned is if you are to discuss any of this with an atheist you must realize that the discussion will need to stay on track with logic, and tangible evidence. The Bible and our faith is irrelevant in these discussions. As soon as believers realize this it will eliminate much frustration and you may decide not to engage or if you do engage it will be on a more intellectual level.

We believe in GOD. This concept is irrational and illogical. Our only proof is our faith and personal experiences. In other words, our feelings. Feelings will never win a argument. We believe despite the lack of proof or evidence, it's what faith is all about. Our faith is the evidence of unseen things. This may be a fantastic revelation for us, but don't expect atheists to be as impressed.

So, I bring this up because we are discussing atheism and we are the guests here so we should be respectful.

Peace!

 

[Eudaimonist]

That is only your opinion.

Only? You have only stated opinions.

A fact is based upon a fact.

Actually, a fact is based on observational evidence and successful cognition regarding the implications of that evidence.

Note that I said false god. The actual God, Creator of all is not a false god. I am proof of that.

No, you aren't. You are a product of evolution.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[ToddNotTodd]

I explained it very clearly. Please read through the post if you desire to discuss further.

Oh... I read it. You accused me of calling Christians liars, then when you couldn't find an instance of me doing so, you apparently attempted to shift the goal posts and bring Wican Child into it somehow. I'll go ahead and drop it after this post, but the fact that you can't own up to what you did is quite telling...

And yes, regardless of how much your wanting to convince yourself calling our beliefs wrong isn't calling our beliefs wrong, the fact remains, calling a believers beliefs wrong is calling a believer wrong.

Yes... "calling a believers beliefs wrong is calling a believer wrong". That's a tautology. But that's not what you implied before. You implied that calling a believer's beliefs incorrect was the same as calling them liars. Which, of course, it isn't.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Of course God is true. We came from somewhere.

Of course we came from somewhere. That doesn't mean that God is real.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Of course we came from somewhere.

Speak for yourself. I'm actually a virtual particle that popped into being from nothing and could at any moment just disap

 

[3rdHeaven]

Lets remove God from the equation.

How do you get some thing from nothing?

If you say there always was some thing, then you imply you can accept eternal some thing.

Can't you see all we do here is either move the goal posts back farther or avoid a point of origin all together?

Even without God, the explanation of life and the beginning is equally extraordinary and mind boggling.

So if there is no god, we need to explain how it all started.

No beginning? Fine, then we agree on a eternal some thing.

What shall it be? Where do you feel most comfortable?

 

[someguy14]

Freedom of speech is all fine and good if you are praising god but say something something that isn't positive about god they get deleted!

God is all of goodness. There isn't any need or reason to speak against goodness.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Lets remove God from the equation.

Sounds good.

How do you get some thing from nothing?

You don't, IMV.

If you say there always was some thing, then you imply you can accept eternal some thing.

What does "eternal" mean to you in this context?

Can't you see all we do here is either move the goal posts back farther or avoid a point of origin all together?

I see differently.

As I had said, I do believe that there is a beginning to change, but not to the existence of "something". The "goal posts" only go as far back as that "cosmic egg" (whatever that might have been) that changed into what we see today.

Even without God, the explanation of life and the beginning is equally extraordinary and mind boggling.

Absolutely.

So if there is no god, we need to explain how it all started.

Do we? Why? I mean, it's certainly very interesting research, but I don't think that we actually need to do that.

No beginning? Fine, then we agree on a eternal some thing.

What shall it be? Where do you feel most comfortable?

I don't believe that what I'm calling the cosmic egg is "eternal". It did not exist "outside of time" in that it was changing, and never changeless.


eudaimonia,

Mark