Total Posts:179|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Question for atheists

Charles0103
Posts: 523
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2011 12:44:15 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I don't really care too much for starting an argument, I just wanna see what everyone's opinions are.

Ok, atheists, this is your moment. I'm curious to hear your reasons for why you don't believe in God or that Jesus was the Messiah. I'm not gonna argue, I just wanna see your opinions.

I'm looking forward to everyone's responses.
"And so I tell you, keep on asking, and you will receive what you ask for. Keep on seeking, and you will find. Keep on knocking, and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks, receives. Everyone who seeks, finds. And to everyone who knocks, the door will be opened." Jesus in Luke 11:9-10
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2011 12:53:27 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/26/2011 12:44:15 PM, Charles0103 wrote:
I don't really care too much for starting an argument, I just wanna see what everyone's opinions are.

Ok, atheists, this is your moment. I'm curious to hear your reasons for why you don't believe in God or that Jesus was the Messiah. I'm not gonna argue, I just wanna see your opinions.

I'm looking forward to everyone's responses.

As an evidentialist I try my best to base all of my beliefs proportionately to the evidence available and as of yet the Christian religion has brought dozens of claims forth that have not been backed up with evidence.

You'll get the same response from most atheists on this site.

And why did you posit this question only to atheists? Muslims and Jews and Deists disbelieve in Jesus' alleged divinity. And Buddhists, most Daoists, and some form of Hinduism disbieleve in a deity. Why the fascination with the reason for an atheist's disbelief?
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
azander1
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2011 1:12:53 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
1. No evidence back then..i dont mean to be rude but there is no evidence that suggests that jesus was anything more than a carpenter that talked alot..no offense.

2. No evidence today...we dont see all these miracles, walking on water healing the blind and sick and all these things...except for those scam artists on t.v.

3. science practically explains everything in todays world and in the words of the famous stevin hawking "god is unnecessary"
petersaysstuff
Posts: 38
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2011 1:32:25 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I agree with all the others about the lack of evidence but about Jesus, it is unlikely that he even existed seeing as there is no eyewitness evidence and his story is based off of other Pagan religions.
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2011 1:49:21 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Lack of evidence, yes, and no reason to believe.

But it goes beyond that.

I've lived around Christians, and not just your average type.. The real deal true believer types(the crazier ones). Pentecostal styled Christians who still go around casting demons, healing, speaking in tongues, etc.

None of these "spiritual gifts" or "miracles" were ever done convincingly, yet the people around acted like they believed in it. On top of this, I've studied the bible extensively. Both by itself, and as a historical document. I studied it obsessively. I was duped myself, until I snapped out of my hypnosis, and realized how my own biases and faulty assumptions were keeping me from having a clear view.

I've always been a man of integrity, and when I became aware of my subconscious dishonesty, things changed drastically. I will not believe something that I truly can not believe. The traditional orthodox understanding of Christianity is utter bullocks, and is in direct conflict with reality. Properly interpreted, the bible can be a spiritual book.

How do you properly interpret the bible? Holy spirit. The holy spirit is a mindset of integrity, one that is constantly seeking. When your interpretation of the bible meshes with reality, you'll get the real message.. And you'll realize that the bible is not divinely set apart.

By the time you get it, calling yourself a Christian is misleading. If people understood Jesus, they would keep their religion to themselves, and stop letting it be a divide amongst us.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
tigg13
Posts: 302
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2011 3:39:36 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/26/2011 12:44:15 PM, Charles0103 wrote:
I don't really care too much for starting an argument, I just wanna see what everyone's opinions are.

Ok, atheists, this is your moment. I'm curious to hear your reasons for why you don't believe in God or that Jesus was the Messiah. I'm not gonna argue, I just wanna see your opinions.

I'm looking forward to everyone's responses.

I, too, find the lack of evidence in the Christian God to be problematic.

But it's more than that.

To me, modern Christianity seems much more like a product that is packaged by apologists and sold by churches. I have often found parallels between talking to an apologist about the Bible and talking to a used car salesman about last year's models. All you get is hype, statistics, slogans, excuses and every reason why you would be out of your mind not to drive one home with you today.

There are also way too many Christian churches and institutions that are involved with secular issues who try to use the pulpit to push political agendas.

Last, but not least, I have serious problems with Christian theology. The idea of damnation, for example, is something that I find completely unacceptable from both a logical and a moral perspective. And the hoops that one needs to jump through just to lay the foundation for why it might be true are both excessive and unrealistic . And if there in no such thing as damnation, then there is no need for a savior.
Charles0103
Posts: 523
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2011 3:40:38 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/26/2011 12:53:27 PM, socialpinko wrote:
At 3/26/2011 12:44:15 PM, Charles0103 wrote:
I don't really care too much for starting an argument, I just wanna see what everyone's opinions are.

Ok, atheists, this is your moment. I'm curious to hear your reasons for why you don't believe in God or that Jesus was the Messiah. I'm not gonna argue, I just wanna see your opinions.

I'm looking forward to everyone's responses.

As an evidentialist I try my best to base all of my beliefs proportionately to the evidence available and as of yet the Christian religion has brought dozens of claims forth that have not been backed up with evidence.

You'll get the same response from most atheists on this site.

And why did you posit this question only to atheists? Muslims and Jews and Deists disbelieve in Jesus' alleged divinity. And Buddhists, most Daoists, and some form of Hinduism disbieleve in a deity. Why the fascination with the reason for an atheist's disbelief?

I was primarily focusing this for people that don't believe in a monotheistic God.
"And so I tell you, keep on asking, and you will receive what you ask for. Keep on seeking, and you will find. Keep on knocking, and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks, receives. Everyone who seeks, finds. And to everyone who knocks, the door will be opened." Jesus in Luke 11:9-10
Fatihah
Posts: 7,770
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2011 4:06:13 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/26/2011 12:44:15 PM, Charles0103 wrote:
I don't really care too much for starting an argument, I just wanna see what everyone's opinions are.

Ok, atheists, this is your moment. I'm curious to hear your reasons for why you don't believe in God or that Jesus was the Messiah. I'm not gonna argue, I just wanna see your opinions.

I'm looking forward to everyone's responses.

Response: There is no logical reason to disbelieve that there is no deity. Many atheists don't acknowledge the existence of Allah(God) because of their disapproval of religions. So since they don't agree with the religion, they naturally disagree that the God mentioned in the religion actually exists. Then when looking at scientific claims and theories, this further encourages the belief that there is no God, as they feel that the science in which they've read is much more credible than religious texts. The problem is that the science itself is false. This leads to a further problem, as both the evidence which is to show that God does not exist is false as well as the evidence within religious scriptures which they have come across to prove that God exist. But the truth has to be somewhere, so out of convenience and their understanding of credibility, it is more logical to side with the scientific evidence then the religious evidence they've come across, despite both being false.

As a result, an atheist who decides not to continue searching for the truth with an opened mind remains an atheist out of ignorance and stubbornness, not because they have proof that Allah(God) does not exist.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2011 6:22:05 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/26/2011 4:06:13 PM, Fatihah wrote:

Response: There is no logical reason to disbelieve that there is no deity. Many atheists don't acknowledge the existence of Allah(God) because of their disapproval of religions. So since they don't agree with the religion, they naturally disagree that the God mentioned in the religion actually exists. Then when looking at scientific claims and theories, this further encourages the belief that there is no God, as they feel that the science in which they've read is much more credible than religious texts. The problem is that the science itself is false. This leads to a further problem, as both the evidence which is to show that God does not exist is false as well as the evidence within religious scriptures which they have come across to prove that God exist. But the truth has to be somewhere, so out of convenience and their understanding of credibility, it is more logical to side with the scientific evidence then the religious evidence they've come across, despite both being false.

As a result, an atheist who decides not to continue searching for the truth with an opened mind remains an atheist out of ignorance and stubbornness, not because they have proof that Allah(God) does not exist.

What about the atheists like C_N who want to believe in God? What do you have to say about them? Wouldn't they be trying to search for "truth"(I know C_N tries to get religious people to convert him all the time)?
Fatihah
Posts: 7,770
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2011 6:48:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/26/2011 6:22:05 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 3/26/2011 4:06:13 PM, Fatihah wrote:

Response: There is no logical reason to disbelieve that there is no deity. Many atheists don't acknowledge the existence of Allah(God) because of their disapproval of religions. So since they don't agree with the religion, they naturally disagree that the God mentioned in the religion actually exists. Then when looking at scientific claims and theories, this further encourages the belief that there is no God, as they feel that the science in which they've read is much more credible than religious texts. The problem is that the science itself is false. This leads to a further problem, as both the evidence which is to show that God does not exist is false as well as the evidence within religious scriptures which they have come across to prove that God exist. But the truth has to be somewhere, so out of convenience and their understanding of credibility, it is more logical to side with the scientific evidence then the religious evidence they've come across, despite both being false.

As a result, an atheist who decides not to continue searching for the truth with an opened mind remains an atheist out of ignorance and stubbornness, not because they have proof that Allah(God) does not exist.

What about the atheists like C_N who want to believe in God? What do you have to say about them? Wouldn't they be trying to search for "truth"(I know C_N tries to get religious people to convert him all the time)?

Response: Searching for the truth is a good thing. But to say that there is no God because you have not seen proof is not rational when you also have no proof that there is no God.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2011 6:51:08 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/26/2011 6:48:14 PM, Fatihah wrote:

Response: Searching for the truth is a good thing. But to say that there is no God because you have not seen proof is not rational when you also have no proof that there is no God.

To be fair, usually the burden of proof is on theists to prove there is a God. However, if an atheist is claiming with 100% certainty there's no God then the burden of proof would be on the atheist.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,770
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2011 6:52:43 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/26/2011 6:51:08 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 3/26/2011 6:48:14 PM, Fatihah wrote:

Response: Searching for the truth is a good thing. But to say that there is no God because you have not seen proof is not rational when you also have no proof that there is no God.

To be fair, usually the burden of proof is on theists to prove there is a God. However, if an atheist is claiming with 100% certainty there's no God then the burden of proof would be on the atheist.

Response: The burden of proof is on any person making a claim, whether theist or atheist.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2011 6:54:21 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
This topic has already been done recently. Here's my response from the other thread:

On an intuitive level, there simply is no impact of a God in my life, nor is there any immediate indication that he exists. I also oppose the idea of a God because he is merely an authoritarian dictator, except worse because he has power over the whole universe and his reign extends over everyone. God is like a cosmic Hitler. While it is certainly possible for such a being to exist, I do not wish for such a being's existence.

On a more philosophical level, the arguments for God do not hold up and can all be dismantled. There are also strong Atheistic arguments actually demonstrate God's existence in both a philosophical and scientific way.

http://www.debate.org...
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2011 6:55:46 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/26/2011 12:46:34 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
I think most atheists will say lack of evidence.

Quite honestly, that's a weak reason. I'm surprised any rational Atheist would use that as a reason. Of course there's evidence for God, it's just not convincing enough.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Fatihah
Posts: 7,770
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2011 7:04:56 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/26/2011 6:54:21 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
This topic has already been done recently. Here's my response from the other thread:

On an intuitive level, there simply is no impact of a God in my life, nor is there any immediate indication that he exists. I also oppose the idea of a God because he is merely an authoritarian dictator, except worse because he has power over the whole universe and his reign extends over everyone. God is like a cosmic Hitler. While it is certainly possible for such a being to exist, I do not wish for such a being's existence.

On a more philosophical level, the arguments for God do not hold up and can all be dismantled. There are also strong Atheistic arguments actually demonstrate God's existence in both a philosophical and scientific way.

http://www.debate.org...

Response: Yet to question the existence of God is not rational. It is more rational to question the attributes of God. All of creation has obviously come from intelligent design because of the fact that human beings are an intelligent species. To say that we originated from something or someone without intelligence would mean that unintelligence created intelligence. This clearly makes no sense, as unintelligence can not create intelligence because by definition.....it's not intelligent.

Thus it is clear that creation comes from a higher power and authority with intelligence. So to question the existence of such a being is irrational. The question which needs answer is whether this being is the deity described in the qur'an as Allah? Or is it Jesus? Or is it someone else. So questioning the attributes of a deity is rational, not whether a deity exist.
InsertNameHere
Posts: 15,699
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2011 7:21:07 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/26/2011 7:04:56 PM, Fatihah wrote:

Thus it is clear that creation comes from a higher power and authority with intelligence. So to question the existence of such a being is irrational. The question which needs answer is whether this being is the deity described in the qur'an as Allah? Or is it Jesus? Or is it someone else. So questioning the attributes of a deity is rational, not whether a deity exist.

This is one thing that makes religion so problematic, imo. There's literally thousands of deities from different cultures, all with the religion's adherents claiming their god is the correct one. How do we know? What if Zeus is the one true God? In that case we're all doomed to eternal suffering for not worshipping him...
Fatihah
Posts: 7,770
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2011 7:32:45 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/26/2011 7:21:07 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 3/26/2011 7:04:56 PM, Fatihah wrote:

Thus it is clear that creation comes from a higher power and authority with intelligence. So to question the existence of such a being is irrational. The question which needs answer is whether this being is the deity described in the qur'an as Allah? Or is it Jesus? Or is it someone else. So questioning the attributes of a deity is rational, not whether a deity exist.

This is one thing that makes religion so problematic, imo. There's literally thousands of deities from different cultures, all with the religion's adherents claiming their god is the correct one. How do we know? What if Zeus is the one true God? In that case we're all doomed to eternal suffering for not worshipping him...

Response: To know which deity and revelation is true, you examine the evidence of each scripture as a start. The qur'an provides 2 tests which confirm that it is the proven true word of Allah. One being that the qur'an has no discrepancies. I don't say that a book of no discrepancy is proof that it is true so one should not take it that way. It is simply a test to show that is has no error. The second test is a challenge to produce a chapter like the qur'an, for it is this particular tests which confirms that the qur'an is the true word of Allah. The explanation is in the following:

"Here we have a test which proves that it is not humanly possible to produce a chapter like the qur'an and proves so by challenging all of those who doubt so to prove so by trying to produce a chapter like the qur'an. For by trying to produce a chapter like the qur'an, you'll learn first hand that such a thing is humanly impossible to do.

But before the thread is filled with the common response of simply producing something in Arabic or claiming that the challenge is not valid because not being able to produce a play like Shakespeare does not mean that the play is from God so the same analogy applies to the qur'an, let me further elaborate. The qur'an, like any scripture, is inspiration. And like any scripture, it's intent is to inspire people to follow it's teaching. Thus the challenge is to produce something which is as inspirational as the qur'an, for it's the inspiration of the qur'an which is miraculous. And what is that miracle you ask? The miracle is within the following:

"It is impossible for a person/s to use speech or literature invented by any person or people to inspire enough follows to conquer a nation."

This is the miracle of Muhammad. For the challenge proves that it is impossible to use any speech or literature invented by a person/s to inspire enough followers to conquer a nation. You disagree? Then take the challenge and prove differently. Try using a speech or literature invented by any person/s to inspire enough followers to conquer a nation and see what happens. I'll even simplify the challenge by asking you to just conquer the street you live on and see what happens. You will fail and fail miserably. You won't come close to achieving the challenge. You'll learn first hand that such an act is humanly impossible and that is when you'll learn the miracle of Muhammad. Why? Because Muhammad used the qur'an to inspire enough followers to conquer a nation. So if it is humanly impossible to use speech or literature invented by a person/s to inspire enough followers to conquer a nation yet Muhammad used the qur'an to inspire enough followers to conquer a nation, then what does that mean? That means that the qur'an in which Muhammad used is not the invention of any human but must come from a higher power and authority greater than humans, and that is Allah (swt). You disagree? Take the challenge and prove differently."
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2011 7:34:49 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/26/2011 7:21:07 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
At 3/26/2011 7:04:56 PM, Fatihah wrote:

Thus it is clear that creation comes from a higher power and authority with intelligence. So to question the existence of such a being is irrational. The question which needs answer is whether this being is the deity described in the qur'an as Allah? Or is it Jesus? Or is it someone else. So questioning the attributes of a deity is rational, not whether a deity exist.

This is one thing that makes religion so problematic, imo. There's literally thousands of deities from different cultures, all with the religion's adherents claiming their god is the correct one. How do we know? What if Zeus is the one true God? In that case we're all doomed to eternal suffering for not worshipping him...
If you look at the major religions, they give the same core definitions of God. Hindu scriptures condemn serving demigods. The Bible condemns idolatry and polytheism. Sikhism calls for belief in One True God. And I can go on. When you say "Zeus," notice that this name stems from the word "Theos" in Greek, which means "god." So, even 'if' Zeus is God, then God still exists as accepted by other religions, and only difference is the name itself. If I say a plant is a deity, do I create a dilemma over definitions of God? No. The definition remains the same.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2011 7:42:47 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/26/2011 7:04:56 PM, Fatihah wrote:
Response: Yet to question the existence of God is not rational.

A mere question cannot be deemed rational or irrational. It's just a question, an inquiry.

It is more rational to question the attributes of God. All of creation has obviously come from intelligent design because of the fact that human beings are an intelligent species.

Non-sequitur fallacy. First of all, intelligent design doesn't necessitate a deity. The processes of nature themselves could be intelligent and exist without a God. Also, the cause of something doesn't have to possess the same attributes as it's effect. A seed is not a tree, yet a tree turned into a tree. A sperm is not intelligent, but it turns into an intelligent human being. Therefore, it doesn't require intelligence to make intelligence. So your reasoning is fatally flawed.

To say that we originated from something or someone without intelligence would mean that unintelligence created intelligence. This clearly makes no sense, as unintelligence can not create intelligence because by definition.....it's not intelligent.

Again, refer to the above analogies. A seed is not a tree, yet a seed turns into a tree. Therefore, unintelligence can create intelligence.

Thus it is clear that creation comes from a higher power and authority with intelligence.

False. You haven't proven that to be the case.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Fatihah
Posts: 7,770
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/26/2011 7:55:33 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/26/2011 7:42:47 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 3/26/2011 7:04:56 PM, Fatihah wrote:
Response: Yet to question the existence of God is not rational.

A mere question cannot be deemed rational or irrational. It's just a question, an inquiry.

It is more rational to question the attributes of God. All of creation has obviously come from intelligent design because of the fact that human beings are an intelligent species.

Non-sequitur fallacy. First of all, intelligent design doesn't necessitate a deity. The processes of nature themselves could be intelligent and exist without a God. Also, the cause of something doesn't have to possess the same attributes as it's effect. A seed is not a tree, yet a tree turned into a tree. A sperm is not intelligent, but it turns into an intelligent human being. Therefore, it doesn't require intelligence to make intelligence. So your reasoning is fatally flawed.

To say that we originated from something or someone without intelligence would mean that unintelligence created intelligence. This clearly makes no sense, as unintelligence can not create intelligence because by definition.....it's not intelligent.

Again, refer to the above analogies. A seed is not a tree, yet a seed turns into a tree. Therefore, unintelligence can create intelligence.

Thus it is clear that creation comes from a higher power and authority with intelligence.

False. You haven't proven that to be the case.

Response: I am speaking in terms of someone who originated creation. So when it comes to the origin of humankind, it is clear that we originated from intelligent design, since the human species is intelligent. To say otherwise would mean that intelligence originated from unintelligence which makes no sense because by definition.....it's not intelligent. Thus your analogy of a seed creating a tree as proof of unintelligence creating intelligence is flawed because the seed did not always exist, nor can you prove otherwise. The seed is a creation which originated from intelligent design.
Randall999
Posts: 85
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2011 3:40:17 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
I believe in Zeus, and Apollo, and Mount Olympus. And Bacchus. They ARE real. I don't care what any of you say, they are REAL! And powerul! Gods! Prove me otherwise! They have even interacted with mere mortals, on earth, they have done miraculous things! They reign in the sky, on Mt. Olympus!

Well, at least I have as much evidence for Zeus as Christians do for their God.
)
Cliff.Stamp
Posts: 2,169
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2011 6:30:46 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/26/2011 7:55:33 PM, Fatihah wrote:

To say otherwise would mean that intelligence originated from unintelligence which makes no sense because by definition.....it's not intelligent.

Why does it make no sense that intelligence can come from a non-intelligent source. There is a vast wealth of experimental data on the RNA-hypothesis which supports that very position.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,770
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2011 6:37:18 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/27/2011 6:30:46 PM, Cliff.Stamp wrote:
At 3/26/2011 7:55:33 PM, Fatihah wrote:

To say otherwise would mean that intelligence originated from unintelligence which makes no sense because by definition.....it's not intelligent.

Why does it make no sense that intelligence can come from a non-intelligent source. There is a vast wealth of experimental data on the RNA-hypothesis which supports that very position.

Response: Then such data is clearly false because unintelligence can not create intelligence because by definition it's not intelligent.
tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2011 7:20:01 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/26/2011 12:44:15 PM, Charles0103 wrote:
Ok, atheists, this is your moment. I'm curious to hear your reasons for why you don't believe in God or that Jesus was the Messiah. I'm not gonna argue, I just wanna see your opinions.

Well, first I don't think a objective good can exist, since good is almost irrefutably subjective (you wanna go there bra?).

I don't think that anything exists outside the natural world that we can possibly hope to understand, because it cannot be studied or experimented on with any certainty due the unpredictability of such things.

I'm thinking more and more that things are not what they seem and that there is more to the Universe than our meagre understandings. The truth is far beyond the reach of clever monkeys like outselves, at least for a while anyway. Perhaps we can evolve past thinking exclusively about today, but I don't see it. More likely, the Earth will crack in half and we'll all die, maybe next week.

I just don't think any monotheistic religion is remotely close to being right. There is no God; there is no being out there who gives a hootananny about what Human Beans do. If there was, free will be damned! Tell us what to do; help us out! Write that sh!t across the sky in flaming text. "HUMANS! I AM GOD! DO THIS: --"

If you think the drivel found in the scriptures of Bronze Age desert charlatans is a guide, then you should take a closer look. What original thought can you gain from the Bible? What amazing idea does it contain that I should care? Be good to one another? Derp, derp. I was keeping a women in my basement as a sex slave but then I read the Bible and now I'm going to donate my skin to children in the local burns ward. Get a grip. It's just not that good.

You could compress the moral teachings of the Bible into a fvcking twitter post.

It's rubbish. So what if it has some good stuff in it. Who cares? Most people aren't going to go to the length to understand what is a hyperbole and what is a complete metaphor. They aren't going to study the cultural significance of certain phrases. They are going to read that crap and think it means what it plainly says. AND THAT IS A TERRIBLE THING.

Why don't I believe in God and Jesus? Because the Bible isn't compelling enough for me. I'd rather watch South Park.
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2011 7:23:34 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/27/2011 6:37:18 PM, Fatihah wrote:
Response: Then such data is clearly false because unintelligence can not create intelligence because by definition it's not intelligent.

Such fail. There is no creation in the RNA theory. There is change over time. Do you deny change over time?
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
Fatihah
Posts: 7,770
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2011 7:42:38 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/27/2011 7:23:34 PM, tvellalott wrote:
At 3/27/2011 6:37:18 PM, Fatihah wrote:
Response: Then such data is clearly false because unintelligence can not create intelligence because by definition it's not intelligent.

Such fail. There is no creation in the RNA theory. There is change over time. Do you deny change over time?

Response: Things do change over time, but unintelligence doesn't create intelligence at any time.
tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2011 7:58:22 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/27/2011 7:42:38 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 3/27/2011 7:23:34 PM, tvellalott wrote:
At 3/27/2011 6:37:18 PM, Fatihah wrote:
Response: Then such data is clearly false because unintelligence can not create intelligence because by definition it's not intelligent.

Such fail. There is no creation in the RNA theory. There is change over time. Do you deny change over time?

Response: Things do change over time, but unintelligence doesn't create intelligence at any time.

Please stop saying create.
How do you know that unintelligence can't change to intelligence over time? Would you say that a sperm and an egg are intelligent?
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
Cliff.Stamp
Posts: 2,169
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2011 8:04:26 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/27/2011 6:37:18 PM, Fatihah wrote:

Response: Then such data is clearly false because unintelligence can not create intelligence because by definition it's not intelligent.

Were the scientists involved (there are quite a number of them, different universities,journals, etc. ) all incompetent or did they just lie and make it all up? Have you even reviewed the data or do you just reject it because of the conclusion.

Why does the cause of intelligence have to be intelligent. You are committing a compositional fallacy by assuming that the parts of a thing have to have the same properties of the thing itself.
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/27/2011 8:05:35 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 3/26/2011 6:55:46 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 3/26/2011 12:46:34 PM, InsertNameHere wrote:
I think most atheists will say lack of evidence.

Quite honestly, that's a weak reason. I'm surprised any rational Atheist would use that as a reason. Of course there's evidence for God, it's just not convincing enough.

No one wants to mention atheological arguments against the existence of god?
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.