Are you an Atheist?
- Started
- Last post
- 113 Responses
- walkman0
i believe in love
- walkman0
but i also believe in odin and thor and the blair witch project.
- FrdmOfSpch0
atheism requires too much faith whilst a belief that every single animal on earth today is descended from a single pair all of which were put on the worlds biggest boat there ever was, and that a bearded man who was executed came back to life, needs no leap of imagination.
riiiiiiiight.
FrdmOfSpch
(Apr 12 07, 06:31)
- Brookoioioi0
"For some reason, it's harder for me to swallow that life sprang from non-life, by non-living mechanisms, and developed into all we know today, than believing that it's all the result of the animals on an ark."
All this does is expose the limits of your imagination imposed by your faith. The argument from design was a weak one even in Darwin's time, now it's made only by the ignorant or (as in your case) the pious. Why don't you try posting these baseless assumptions in a forum where people give a shit? Oh yeah, you did, on usenet, where you got your ass handed to you.
- gramme0
I guess it's true, to an extent, what dawkins said. Indoctrinating your kids to your absolutist truth is a form of child abuse.
so sad.
FrdmOfSpch
(Apr 11 07, 14:31)If you truly agree with Dawkins, then your statement above sounds just a bit like you're claiming a corner on the truth market as well. You should perhaps examine your own beliefs before slamming a person or groups of people for the same "sin", even if they're coming from the opposite end of the sperctrum.
A belief in an absolute truth provides stability, purpose, and allows one the luxury of resting on the sovereign will of a Being that is greater than any one of us could ever be. To me that sounds like responsible parenting, but hey what do I know. Many here will tell me to shut the hell up or that I'm a nut job, but if you haven't really ever tried it, then perhaps knocking it is unwise...either way, nothing you could say would ever dismantle my faith. Shake it, possibly. Cause me to question things I might have always taken for granted, I sure hope so. It's the questioning, the delving into history and philosophy, and finding the bones and gears behind what the Bible or Koran or Bhagavadgita says that enables faith. So keep it coming with the questioning.
Brookoioi, the fact of the matter is that people here do give a shit, especially folks like mrdobolina, Mimio and TheBlueOne, judging by their frequency of posting in threads with religious topics. I don't know anything about usenet or whatever and I don't always agree with flagellum's tactics, but when you try to chase people out of forums you are ultiimately personifying the intolerance you are so convinced is at the core of their being.
- Brookoioioi0
"A belief in an absolute truth provides stability, purpose, and allows one the luxury of resting on the sovereign will of a Being that is greater than any one of us could ever be. To me that sounds like responsible parenting..."
Or a diminishing of the responsibility of the individual.
The bells which toll for mankind are—most of them, anyway—like the bells of Alpine cattle; they are attached to our own necks, and it must be our fault if they do not make a cheerful and harmonious sound.
Sir Peter Medawar; The Future of Man, 1959
- FrdmOfSpch0
Hello gramme.
I don't "truly" agree with Dawkins. After watching that clip, however, i understood what he meant about parents demanding devotion from their kids to their faith as being equivalent to a form of child abuse.
i think allowing your children to develop their own beliefs and not being upset if they chose to follow a religion/non-religion not of your chosing, is the way to go in terms of good parenting.com.
thansk for listening
- FrdmOfSpch0
(ps - i understand what you mean about how being convinced in the absolute truth of your doctrines gives you a sense of security when times are hard).
- Brookoioioi0
Gramme, the fact is, this is a design forum, not a evolutionary biology forum. Flagellum continually posts empirically false claims about specific scientific theorems, which go un-challenged precisely becuase of the location of his postings. If he tried to post the same opinions to a informed audience (which he has) he would have to quanitfy his claims. (which he can't)
I personally don't care about peoples religious beliefs, you can follow whatever doctrine you like.
- gramme0
"A belief in an absolute truth provides stability, purpose, and allows one the luxury of resting on the sovereign will of a Being that is greater than any one of us could ever be. To me that sounds like responsible parenting..."
Or a diminishing of the responsibility of the individual.
The bells which toll for mankind are—most of them, anyway—like the bells of Alpine cattle; they are attached to our own necks, and it must be our fault if they do not make a cheerful and harmonious sound.
Sir Peter Medawar; The Future of Man, 1959
I am still answerable for my actions, just as much as you are. The only difference between me and someone who does not share my beliefs is this: When Jesus asks me why I should be allowed into heaven, my answer will be that I don't deserve it. I am guilty of numerous faults. However, I know he went to hell in my behalf and thus paid the price in my stead. The person who doesn't see things the same way will say "I was a good person" or something along those lines...which is actually an ultimate shirking of ones' responsibilities. Such a statement involves a double denial, 1. that salvation is needed and 2. that any number of good deeds can tip the scales in a persons' favor.
I do actually agree that most of the "bells that toll for mankind" are hollow, are attached to our own necks as they are self-fabricated. I'd rather die right now than believe in a religion of that stripe.
Ultimately nothing will be proven beyond a reasonable doubt until the end of all things, if you even believe in such a future event. So we can talk all day until we're blue in the face, and and we're left with is a body of facts and an entity of faith that must fill in the gaps. This applies to Christianity, Buddhism, Judaism, Hinduism, Secular Humanism AKA Atheism AKA Scientific Darwinian Absolutism, Postmodern Agnosticism, or whatever else. We're all religious, like it or not. We all have faith or lack faith, a trait which by the way has nothing to do with mental or emotional acuity or disposition.
- gramme0
Hey FrdmOfSpch,
Thanks for being lucid and reasonable. I should clarify that while I believe in instructing my children in my religious, ethical and aesthetic beliefs is a good thing, forcing it down their throats is not a good thing. If, when they are old enough to know the difference between right and wrong, one religion and another, and if they should stray from the path I follow, then I will love them every bit as much. I will continue to be as integral a part of their lives as I can, however much I might grieve their wandering.
I personally took a long detour from the God of my childhood, and my parents never once yelled at me about it or turned their backs. Neither did they act ashamed of their beliefs in my presence. I hope to be able to behave in the same way should my kids end up like me.
My parents' patience was vital in ultimately bringing me to a true, deep understanding of the God of grace.
- flagellum0
Brookoi: You are correct about one thing, I do not have enough imagination to be a Darwinist. It requires a wild imagination to ignore the evidence and cling to just-so stories like life with all of it's specified complexity and programming, springing from non-life. I'm just not interested in bedtime stories, I'm interested in evidence.
Contrary to your uninformed pap, the design argument has been a strong one since Aristotle touted his version of teleology in nature. It was made stronger by Kant. But now, it's cry is ear-splitting and cannot be ignored with the advent of biochemistry and modern physics.
I don't know what your drooling babble of a "usenet" is all about, btw. Sounds delightful though.
- flagellum0
Brookoi: This forum is one of many forums I post at. I post at forums specifically about Intelligent Design and Evolution. The arguments we critics of Darwinism employ, meet challenges. It's just that the challenges hold no water. Usually, our arguments are simply met with name-calling. So, I do in fact post my arguments and I have quantified them. I love a good argument. If you took your head out of your rear for a moment, you'd see that here at NT, I simply respond on-topic to threads which are already in motion. :)
- Brookoioioi0
Don't remember?
Maybe this will help, you're not going to deny this is you, are you?
- Mimio0
lol. It's so obviously him.
- flagellum0
wow! I remember that... barely. Ahhh, Talk Origins... a hotbed of sophistry. A groupthink for evangelical atheists to attack any dissenter of Darwinism with the worst in equivocation and obfuscation. One has to really be on their game to catch all the bait and switch going on there. I learned that a loonnnnggg time ago. Anyway, nice googling brookoi!
- Brookoioioi0
In short, you posted your absurdities to an informed audience, got ridiculed (by a christian no less) then decided to stick to forums where people don't confront your lies as much.
- flagellum0
You can learn more about talk.origins here:
- flagellum0
In short, that's utter nonsense. I threw out some fodder and left that hotbed of Darwinian fundamentalism. Just to ruffle some Darwinian feathers. You speak of Talk.Origins as though it's a legitimate forum for discourse about evolution/design. lol. This would demonstrate your complete ignorance. Everyone knows what a hellish flamepit of obfuscation that place is. I don't waste my time there. If you want to have meaningful discourse about evolution/design, you have to go to places like: