Atheism discussion

Your grandmother is splendidly sagacious.

YOu think someone who says athiests should "get out of her way" is wise? (no offense to my grandmother, but she is not wise.)

Probably smart and knowledgable enough to remember science has virtually proven many things which subsequently history has made laughable.

Blood humors and phrenology and geocentrism, and even not long ago that the universe is speeding up, and not slowing down as has been taught until very recently.

First of all, I'm not trying to dis my grandmother, but has not read alot about this and no, she doesn't remember a history of science.

You're comparisons arn't balanced. Comparing blood humors to evolution is just silly. Brooks, I thought you were a smart conservative, but here you seem to be a little ill-informed. They have proved evolution to beyond a reasonable doubt. Evolution is proved. No christian fundamentalists can deny what science proves. ID hasn't even been tested by the rules of science. More than that, guess what ID revolves around: "evolution is wrong."

Consensus does not prove factuality.

True, but consensus, when scientifically proven does indeed prove factuality.

When everyone said the earth was flat, that was an example of consesus not proving factuality. They had no proof. But when scientists study something for over a century, yes, census proves factuality. Because it is based on facts.

 

The architect designed it. The men in the cement truck poured out the foundation. The carpenters framed it, the electricians wired it, the plumbers plumbed it, the sheet rockers sheetrocked it, the cabinet makers put in the cabinets. The floor installers put in the carpeting and tiles. Insulators insulated. And so on...

The roofers climbed atop it all, and commenced to roofing, then, layed the last shingle and they pronounced to the world from the apex;"We have made a house!"

 

Shredder,

"True, but consensus, when scientifically proven does indeed prove factuality."

I just presented you with a few examples past and present which demonstrate otherwise.

 

And in my earlier post I told you that evolution is proved so much more than blood humor.

 

Y'know, what so disappoints me is that I know you know, the modern disciplines of science were almost virtually all founded by "creationists."

And that matters how? They to some degree believed in naturalism. Maybe once they went as far as they could or as they needed they ended it with 'and God did the rest.' But to assume that there are explanations in nature that can be understood and used is what naturalism really seems to be.

You may wish to back up a page or two to my comments to Mr. Bunny pertaining to inheritance. Maybe, you'll see the point.

Yeah, I read it. And what little respect that was left of your maturity was gone after reading the 'essay' about the puppets right before hand.

And it does not answer my question really. You basically said that we should acknowledge God for everything He has done. That does not really say much about how we figure stuff out. Are you basically saying that naturalism with a 'Thank you God' at the end is the way to go?

And even just separate from all of that, what are the alternatives to naturalism? Just to know what they are.

And from many peoples point of view, there is still the question if there is even a god of some sort. Until that is known for sure, I see no reason why one should assume there is one.

You were complaining that through naturalism we think we know things that could be false, like how people thought that the universe was slowing down. I am asking how should things be? Would you possibly give your opinion for this topic? Or are you just going to say something vague and cryptic with a 'figure it out' at the end? Or will you say something clearly and plainly that might actually help exchange ideas and help everyone understand your position?

How about this, why don't you ever just come out and say what you mean? Why didn't you just say "We should not assume that we are so great and powerful given that God is the one who gave us what power we have and He is the one who did everything' (assuming that is what you meant)? Why do you feel the need to be vague and IMO snipid about everything? Why not just come out and say it?

 

Enforcer,

So disappointing. You keep attempting to insult me.

"Et tu, Brute?"

You should know there was a modest point. Modus operandi, eh?

But, if I lost your respect so easily, was it ever really mine?
Ah well, "better to have loved and lost than to have never loved at all..."

My assurances, I am not "snipid" or snippy, parsnickity, tweaked, torqued, or bothered. I am certainly not whining or complaining. DDSF(Different Day, Same Forum.)

I'm simply resigned to the definition of insanity:
"To do the same thing over and over and expect different results."

[In fact, as I one-handedly type this, almost literally with one hand behind my back, my wife is informing me that my blood pressure is 128/80, thus scientifically corroborating my hypothesis as to being officially not torqued. ]

She's done.

I posted this in another thread not wanting to post it twice, yet it's applicability is unmistakable. Please read it slowly and without disdain, perhaps even remembering the superlative brilliance of it's author.

This does embody my opinion of your over-attributing to "naturalism" it's achievements. Please note the identity of the "mother" to whom Benjamin Franklin alludes.



"TO THOMAS PAINE.
[Date uncertain.]"
(Prior to the publication of his treatise which the modern infidel holds in highest esteem.)

DEAR SIR,
I have read your manuscript with some attention. By the argument it contains against a particular Providence, though you allow a general Providence, you strike at the foundations of all religion. For without the belief of a Providence, that takes cognizance of, guards, and guides, and may favor particular persons, there is no motive to worship a Deity, to fear his displeasure, or to pray for his protection. I will not enter into any discussion of your principles, though you seem to desire it. At present I shall only give you my opinion, that, though your reasonings are subtile and may prevail with some readers, you will not succeed so as to change the general sentiments of mankind on that subject, and the consequence of printing this piece will be, a great deal of odium drawn upon yourself, mischief to you, and no benefit to others. He that spits against the wind, spits in his own face.
But, were you to succeed, do you imagine any good would be done by it? You yourself may find it easy to live a virtuous life, without the assistance afforded by religion; you having a clear perception of the advantages of virtue, and the disadvantages of vice, and possessing a strength of resolution sufficient to enable you to resist common temptations. But think how great a portion of mankind consists of weak and ignorant men and women, and of inexperienced, inconsiderate youth of both sexes, who have need of the motives of religion to restrain them from vice, to support their virtue, and retain them in the practice of it till it becomes habitual, which is the great point for its security. And perhaps you are indebted to her originally, that is, to your religious education, for the habits of virtue upon which you now justly value yourself. You might easily display your excellent talents of reasoning upon a less hazardous subject, and thereby obtain a rank with our most distinguished authors. For among us it is not necessary, as among the Hottentots, that a youth, to be raised into the company of men, should prove his manhood by beating his mother.
I would advise you, therefore, not to attempt unchaining the tiger, but to burn this piece before it is seen by any other person; whereby you will save yourself a great deal of mortification by the enemies it may raise against you, and perhaps a good deal of regret and repentance. If men are so wicked with religion, what would they be if without it. I intend this letter itself as a proof of my friendship, and therefore add no professions to it; but subscribe simply yours,

B. Franklin

It is of interest to note this chronologically precedes the prior quotation of Paine given in this thread

 

Uh oh, I hope that wasn't "essay" length.

 

But think how great a portion of mankind consists of weak and ignorant men and women, and of inexperienced, inconsiderate youth of both sexes, who have need of the motives of religion to restrain them from vice, to support their virtue, and retain them in the practice of it till it becomes habitual, which is the great point for its security

Exactly; religions as crutch for the weak minded.

The point in obliterating religion, of course, is to weed out such weak minds. Darwinism at it's finest!

/Z

 

Would you still believe me if I said an angel came down and said christianity was false and for me to follow Islam? The point I was trying to make was that you shouldn't believe me, even if you KNOW I'm telling the truth you have to understand that even greater than our propensity to deceive others is our propensity to deceive ourselves. Everyday we remember situations in a way that did not happen at all, and on a greater level you have people that believe they've seen angels or aliens or boogiemen but they believe 100% that their experiences happened exactly how they remember it.

Plus, I'm not entirely sure you're telling the truth about knowing this person first hand. Generally when someone refers to another person as their job title, it's because they had no relationship with that person outside of that job. You introducing this person as a waitress tells me it's one of these things A.) You made the story up entirely B.) You did not hear this story first hand and you're only saying you are because it's to your advantage in the discussion C.) You heard it from this waitress who you did not know outside her being a waitress

My guess would be answer B, just the fact that you've had your own "holy visions" or whatever you call them, it's curious enough that you would run into another person with a similar experience. Most people don't broadcast those types of experiences for fear of social reprisal. UNLESS they were in a group that would be accepting of it, like a church event, but then why would you refer to her as a "waitress"? So that leaves out C, and I don't think you would flat out lie, so that leaves out A.

So there you go...you're deceiving me...in a post about our propensity to deceive no less. Oh the irony!

But some questions you have to ask yourself are: why do holy visions differ so greatly from culture to culture? Why are the morons of the world the only people having these visions? That would tell me it's because they're not smart enough or stable enough to stand back and look at it rationally.

 

CyprusG,

The waitress works at a WaffleHouse near Navarre, Florida. Sorry I don't recollect her name. She is caucasian, relatively short, probably mid-30's, and has a disabled child. Dishwater blonde hair. She's originally from Tennessee. Our conversation took place in the early evening, so I assume she regularly works afternoons.

I'm sure you can ask anyone answering the phone who she might be by providing the above description.

I safely assume you have access to a telephone, so getting a number for the Waffle Houses in that area should be no problem. The building itself is situated on Highway 90(or it may also be alternately known as The Gulf Breeze Highway). There are a number of Waffle Houses, but only one or two on that stretch of 90.

I would ask, being that she and I do not know each other beyond that conversation, that you would speak to her respectfully and keep your atheism to itself. It's my assumption she will speak with you if you approach like a civilized person, although you may lack my personal charm.

A phone call from a complete stranger...I dunno. But give it a go.

Regardless of whether or not she will speak with you so abruptly, or whether you choose to believe her account, you will at the very least find sufficient reason to doubt my word less.

If I can be of any further assistance please just ask.



EDIT:

Now, what I can do, since I have experienced my own "HOLY" visions, as you put it, is allow you to contact me. That wouldn't likely do the trick, so I can also see if my wife will speak with you, although quite frankly "critics" annoy her, but she would humor me.

As you doubtlessly recall, we were present together in a few of the instances.

Naturally by telephone, since via internet I could fake it, not having a camera hooked up.

Or, if you care to visit in person, that can probably be likewise arranged, in which case I'm certain my uncle whose back was miraculously healed, and a friend of mine who is a pastor whose back also was miraculously healed could also speak with you in person.

Then, I can see if another personal friend would speak with you as well, and I'm fairly certain she would...as long as you were respectful. She's a very gentle and wonderful person, and before my "HOLY" vision, when I was still somewhat skeptical she and her now late husband had graciously taken time for me. So, I am very certain she would also speak with you.

Whatever I can do to help you come to a faith in the Lord I will be glad to do if I am able.

I also am aquainted with a local missionary who was attended to by angels when she was ill. She is exceedingly kind, and would probably agree to speak with you.

The fact is as I said earlier, it's more common than you imagine.

Nothing special about myself or any of these people. It's all God.


Why have I had these experiences and know so many others? God opened a flood gate when I gave up my atheism/agnosticism/skepticism for the Lord Jesus Christ.

 

CyprusG,

I can also put you in contact with a friend of mine in Tennessee, one of my closest, who can likewise testify to an account I gave of him in one of my older posts. I know that if asked, he will speak with you via telephone.

Then, there's my attorney friend, the above's brother, who saw the large angel in the brown robe I once wrote of in a post somewhere here in the forum. He may also speak with you, but he can be a bit grumpy.

I've another friend, currently away, who works for the merchant marine...I don't know if he would speak with you, but he might. He could tell you of the night in prayer something demonic attempted to suffocate him.

There's actually a few individuals that probably wouldn't open up to you, but I'd certainly see if they would.


I can't even remember all of the miracles anymore.

Will you believe them? Even if not, you would at least know they are all real people.


The truth is, right where you are you can find out.

But not for the sake of entertainment.

You see the devil demanded Jesus turn the stones to bread.
Satan demanded bread and received nothing!

However, those who came humbly to the Lord in faith, the multitudes, who probably expected nothing, received not only bread but fish as well. The Lord will always give you more than you expect.

Do you understand?

Most all of these people will tell you their stories, and you will know that I've only spoken the truth...at least to that extent, since you won't be able to "prove" we are telling the truth.

But, you would see every one's character, see the sincerity.
You'll know they are good people, from all walks of life.


I once made a pilgrimage to Conyers, Ga., not because I knew it was real.
But, I did realize, if God was really speaking...what if it's real...shouldn't I be listening, wouldn't I want to know?!

And, now I do.

And, since you mentioned "morons"...gee, if there's a chance the Creator of the universe is presenting a message through someone...only a class A moron wouldn't try to find out. Isn't that just a no-brainer?

Welcome to the world.




And, by the way, Mr. Analytical, you asked if I received the story first hand, I certainly did. First hand = from the source. You deceived yourself.

I wrote:

"Have I had a chance to tell you about the waitress who saw the angel?
She said it was a female with outstretched wings who told her basically,"Fear not. Everything will be alright."
Her physician had discovered a problem with her unborn child, and pressure was being placed upon her to abort the pregnancy. It was at that time the angel appeared. Her child was born with severe handicaps, but she loves him and cannot imagine being without him.

Beautiful, isn't it?"

You wrote:

"The waitress that saw an angel huh? Do you know this waitress? Did you hear the story first hand?"

I replied:

"Of course I heard it first hand."

You are correct, you apparently have the propensity to deceive yourself. Or make moutains out of mole hills, or over analyze, or whatever.

Regardless, your contention seems to be that I shouldn't know anyone else who experiences the miraculous.

Well, I do.

Furthermore, hallucinations are relative to the individual by definition, such that while someone may possess the propensity to deceive themselves, that cannot explain two or more experiencing the same simultaneous "HOLY" "vision" miracle.

I've offered every reasonable accomodation that I can think of, going well and far beyond what an anonymous individual behind a screen name with a bad attitude deserves, nontheless, there it is.

If you care to exchange numbers via PM, with the sole provision of your acting in civil capacity as though you are familiar with good manners, I'll be happy to risk a conversation with a potential lunatic.



Your call. No pun intended.

 

Vagrant wakes up

DB, me ol' pal! Where've you been?

 

What would possess you to believe without question a story dealing in the supernatural coming from a waitress at a Wafflehouse no less? You know NOTHING of this person but yet you accept it? Which leads us back to the biggest issue of all and sends red flags to anyone that knows anything about psychology, the fact that you would believe such nonsense without any evidence or even critical thinking tells me more about your own personal experiences with the supernatural than anything else does.

Now I'm not totally against the idea of the supernatural at all, I think there is more to this universe than we could possibly comprehend, even more to our brains than we can comprehend. But it's one hell of a jump to go from having what appears to be a supernatural experience with no direct religious connotation to attributing that to your religion of choice. It's even a bigger jump to attribute it to something supernatural when 99.99% of the time there are very good logical explanations for it happening.

But even if we throw out logic and reason and free thinking I still can't accept that these are in any way connected to christianity because frankly, christianity is stupid. I could rant for hours about how stupid christianity is, I look at it and if I don't laugh I find myself utterly disgusted that as human beings we've come so far but most of the world is still believing in ridiculous fairytales. That's not an exaggeration, I literally laugh when I think about it, that's not meant to be an insult, but that's honestly how I feel.

I'll never ever ever ever again be a christian. Not because my mind is closed, most certainly not, thankfully my mind was open enough to go from a christian to an atheist. But my position on christianity has come about through a ton of FREE thinking. I'm surrounded by christians, my roommate used to be a missionary and traveled all over the world teaching the word of christianity, but when it comes to an argument I wipe the floor with her. She can throw bible quotes at me faster than I can register them, but you can't defeat good ole logic and reason. But at the end of the day her position is still "regardless, I still believe", which is so telling about people, no matter how much they're bombarded with reason and how stupid their position is, they'll clinge to it for dear life merely because it was drilled into their heads as children.

But any attempt to convert me to christianity is futile, it's like trying to convince

 

Darth Brooks

How was it insulting; I was completely honest. I try to have some basic respect of everyone I meet and let them do with it what they will. The bit about being snipped is my opinion that I feel is accurate, and the rest were serious questions that as usual you didn't answer.

As for your quote; again is it coming down to just some respect for the creator of everything? God gave us our senses and set up all the 'laws' of nature and stuff, and when we figure it out we should be thankful for God? That is all fine and great, but to a degree naturalism is still thrown in there. Assuming that there are natural relations between events and assuming that we can figure them out is what naturalism seems to be even if something supernatural is at the root of it. Something supernatural may have thrown the switch, but the way the machine runs seems to be all natural. If we can know with some certainty that there is a God, then yes we should acknowledge Him for what He is, yet how does that change the fact that naturalism can be wrong? It still could be? How should the world be?

"To do the same thing over and over and expect different results."

And prayer does not fall into that category? Yeah (according to many Christians) there have been cases of prayer resulting in great things, but has it always happened? Has everyone who has been prayed for been healed or gotten what they needed? Or blind faith (which I argue is a part of Christianity since you cannot know God absolutely to be justified to trust Him absolutely)? Does blind faith always give you the same results?

And debating with you; I keep hopping to get a strait clear answer from you, but I guess I am just insane. One that does not end with a 'think it over' or 'figure it out' but one that clearly states (preferably in your own words) what you are trying to get across.

?Hope, it is the quintessential human delusion, simultaneously the source of your greatest strength, and your greatest weakness. ?

Maybe he was right.

 

Regardless of whether or not you asked the waitress first hand what she saw, there's a reason eyewitness testimony is generally not given much credence in court. People, consciously or not, believe they see all sorts of things and can't really remember what they saw most of the time.

 

Enforcer,

Saw a Simpson's rerun last night. Homer and Marge were overlooking Bart knelt in prayer at the side of his bed. Bart had about wrapped it up, and, then, hastily added a final petition,"Oh yeah, God, please kill Sideshow Bob!"

Homer in paternal-mode sternly corrected Bart;"Boy, do your own dirty work!"

[Paraphrased. Don't know if the dialogue is exact.]

How timely, huh.


What does your sig say? "God answers all prayers. Sometimes the answer is no."

So, what is it you are asking about prayer?

Btw, I am not "debating." Thought that was clear?(Let ya' know if I change my mind.)

Just a little light banter.

So, your "as usual" remark seems to be a form of baiting me into a "debate" you desire but I've already expressed(a few times) I do not.
It's the atheism thread, not the ID thread(and I do not how to find it).

I'm more interested in responding to CyprusG at the moment, as time permits.

ttfn

 

It's amusing to me after having read about so many creationists and their twisted views, misinterpretations and out right lies, and here we have one following the very same mode of thinking and long winded nonsensical banter no matter how many times it has been disputed by mountains of research and evidence that shows every bit of it to be wrong.

 

Darth Brooks

So, what is it you are asking about prayer?

I was asking if when you pray do you expect similar results and does it always happen and how does that relate to your quote about insanity?

Btw, I am not "debating." Thought that was clear?(Let ya' know if I change my mind.)

To me, that is irresponsible. You stroll in here, say nearly everyone is wrong about a lot of things, but conveniently don't back it up or take the time to explain it clearly. To me, it is the same thing as taking in a stray cat but never feeding it.

And I don't really want to debate, I want to understand. Obviously we have different views and it just does not sit well when people have a different view from me that I do not understand. So things that seem to disagree with my thoughts, I ask about hopping to get a clear enough answer to understand. I am not trying to prove myself right or wrong (which is what I consider a debate), I just want to understand other peoples (your) views. That is why I have been asking questions, that is why I have been trying to get past semantics and preconceived notions and get to the root of the matter.

But it looks like that will never happen.

So, your "as usual" remark seems to be a form of baiting me into a "debate" you desire but I've already expressed(a few times) I do not.

No. Again, it was just honesty. In my experience, it has been very rare for you to ever give a clear and complete answer to a question.

I'm more interested in responding to CyprusG at the moment, as time permits.

That's fine.

ttfn

TTYL, err, maybe not if there is nothing to say.

 

"It's amusing to me after having read about so many creationists and their twisted views, misinterpretations and out right lies, and here we have one following the very same mode of thinking and long winded nonsensical banter no matter how many times it has been disputed by mountains of research and evidence that shows every bit of it to be wrong."


No greater example of hypocrisy and lunacy could I present than those words.

Just for fun and intellectual honesty...

"It's amusing to me after having read about so many creationists...

Really? Specifically which "creationists?" You make it sound as though you've read extensively and indepth.

"...and their twisted views,..."

You will, naturally, in good conscience present the authors and references so that we may all see these "twisted views," right?

"...misinterpretations and out right lies,..."

Please, references, so that any reader can be certain you, in fact, are not the one presenting "misrepresentations" and "out right lies."

That's a Nazi tactic, to accuse others of what one is perpetuating.

"...and here we have one following the very same mode of thinking and long winded nonsensical banter no matter how many times it has been disputed by mountains of research and evidence that shows every bit of it to be wrong."

Every bit of it, huh?

So, instead of raving, perhaps you'll show where I've "out right" lied?
Misrepresented? Twisted? Please make certain you can factually demonstrate it to be so.

Or, simply provide the actual ingredients for the primordial soup recipe.

Nah, I thought you couldn't.

Perhaps, you'll so deign...so condescend...to inform me as to how one inarguably distinguishes common descent from intelligent design?

No?

Less is more. Being the case, if you cannot do any of the above, perhaps you'll post less to me and restrain yourself to company more suited to your tastes than my humble self?








Nugget of wisdom for the day:

Little men histrionically rave frothing ad hominem because they are inept shells of what they would be.

 

CyprusG,

"Oh and I'm not really down with calling people from a message board, but I am actually interested in reading about your holy visions, even if your wife would be kind enough to PM me that would be cool."

Sorry, serious offers only.

 

What was the alternative back then, before Darwin's theory? Other than being burned alive, that is.

 

So that's the reply you were so interested in discussing with me? Even here it makes absolutely no sense why you would be so weary of telling your personal holy vision story if you truly believed it was what it was. What's the difference if I want you to tell me over PM or over the phone? I just don't feel comfortable calling somebody I don't know from a message board.

 

Oooh!

E_S Edit: Oooh is right. Let's try not to bait, please? It's much more fun when you think rather than have your knees flailing about badly in a dire imitation of those whom you are mocking.

 

Voija...edit that post before a mod does.

And Brooks, stop baiting. I may not be a mod, but I do want my thread free of the tripe other threads go through.

 

E_S EDIT: Actually, let's not go there just because someone else did.