Total Posts:29|Showing Posts:1-29
Jump to topic:

I am not an atheist.

Mr.Big_is_Bud_Good
Posts: 32
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2011 6:47:33 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I am not an atheist.
An Atheist is someone who does not believe in a God or Gods
That does not exclude them from believing in luck, astrology, ghosts, destiny, magic, good/evil, etc. etc. etc ad nausium.
And it's not that I don't believe in God, luck, ghosts, etc.
There is no God, luck, magic, etc. for me not to believe in.
In order for me to maintain this position, I must constantly scrutinize the underlying facts that lead me to my understanding of reality, and be willing to discard my position should any underlying fact prove false.

This is why I ask Theist (particularly Christians) tough questions.
More often than not, the responses I get from Christians completely miss the point.
And I find it extremely difficult to phrase a question in a way to get a straight answer. And when I refute the underlying premise of a reply. (to a tough question).
Seldom is there a follow up.

Do you as a Christian feel it is beneficial for me to continue to scrutinize my convictions?
And if so, who better to put my questions to other than a Christian?

And if you feel it is beneficial for me to scrutinize my positions, do you feel you could gain the same benefits from scrutinizing your own positions?
And if not why?

Thanks.
Brian: I'm not the Messiah! Will you please listen? I am not the Messiah, do you understand? Honestly!
Girl: Only the true Messiah denies His divinity.
Brian: What? Well, what sort of chance does that give me? All right! I am the Messiah!
Followers: He is! He is the Messiah!
Brian: Now, f**k off!
[silence]
Arthur: How shall we f**k off, O Lord?
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2011 8:14:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/28/2011 6:47:33 PM, Mr.Big_is_Bud_Good wrote:
I am not an atheist.
An Atheist is someone who does not believe in a God or Gods
That does not exclude them from believing in luck, astrology, ghosts, destiny, magic, good/evil, etc. etc. etc ad nausium.
And it's not that I don't believe in God, luck, ghosts, etc.
There is no God, luck, magic, etc. for me not to believe in.
In order for me to maintain this position, I must constantly scrutinize the underlying facts that lead me to my understanding of reality, and be willing to discard my position should any underlying fact prove false.

This is why I ask Theist (particularly Christians) tough questions.
More often than not, the responses I get from Christians completely miss the point.
And I find it extremely difficult to phrase a question in a way to get a straight answer. And when I refute the underlying premise of a reply. (to a tough question).
Seldom is there a follow up.

Do you as a Christian feel it is beneficial for me to continue to scrutinize my convictions?
And if so, who better to put my questions to other than a Christian?

And if you feel it is beneficial for me to scrutinize my positions, do you feel you could gain the same benefits from scrutinizing your own positions?
And if not why?

Thanks.

Do you believe in god?

If the answer to this question is anything other than "Yes." Then you're an atheist.
Mr.Big_is_Bud_Good
Posts: 32
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2011 10:54:13 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/28/2011 8:14:13 PM, drafterman wrote:

Do you believe in god?

If the answer to this question is anything other than "Yes." Then you're an atheist.

There is no God not to believe in.

Thats like asking somebody "Have you stopped beating your wife?"
If there is no history of wife beating the question is pointless.

And by the way, good job of avoiding the original question in this post,
I;ll take that as a, "No" to whether you feel it is beneficial for me to scrutinize my convictions because it allows you to avoid the question whether you would feel its beneficial to scrutinize your convictions.

Thats ok drafterman, those who have a world view that does not include higher or lower values placed on people based on their deeds like Christianity does, can not judge you as anything because there is no authority to say this is "good, and that is "Evil" .
Good can only come from God
And Evil can only come from the devil according Christian doctrine.

horrendous acts committed by mass murders are not caused by supernatural forces.
no supernatural force, no evil.

there's a little catch though, the devil cant do any evil without God's permission. (ask Job)

thats pretty messed up when you think about it.

But don't worry about it , we existentialists are incapable of judging you.

An Atheist might, if he believes in good and evil.
But, I'm not an Atheist.
Brian: I'm not the Messiah! Will you please listen? I am not the Messiah, do you understand? Honestly!
Girl: Only the true Messiah denies His divinity.
Brian: What? Well, what sort of chance does that give me? All right! I am the Messiah!
Followers: He is! He is the Messiah!
Brian: Now, f**k off!
[silence]
Arthur: How shall we f**k off, O Lord?
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2011 10:57:27 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Congratulations. Want a trophy?

Your claim that you are not an atheist because there is no God to believe in is nonsensical. The question itself means "Do you think there exists a being known as God?"

"To believe in" also means "to acknowledge the existence of" - in which case you clearly don't do when it comes to God. Thus, you're an atheist.
Mr.Big_is_Bud_Good
Posts: 32
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/28/2011 11:47:05 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/28/2011 10:57:27 PM, Mirza wrote:
Congratulations. Want a trophy?

Umm... whats the implication there?


Your claim that you are not an atheist because there is no God to believe in is nonsensical.

Is this the part you stopped reading at?

The question itself means "Do you think there exists a being known as God?"

Question? what question?.. nobody asked me a question.

If someone were to ask me "Do you think there exists a being known as the sugar plumb fairy?", Being as there is no sugar plumb fairy, there are no sugar plumb fairy unbelievers. because there is nothing there to not acknowledge the existence of.

Now, you can be a devoted follower of the sugar plumb fairy. (and I'm sorry if you are) But the cold hard truth is, theres still nothing there for me not to believe in.

And just like drafterman above, good job of avoiding the original question in this post,
I'll take your refusal, inability, or incapability to respond to the question that was presented to you as a, "No" to whether you feel it is beneficial for me to scrutinize my convictions because it allows you to avoid the question whether you would feel its beneficial for you to scrutinize your own convictions.

Don't be concerned that I would feel you lacked integrity for avoiding the question, those who have a world view that does not include higher or lower values placed on people based on their deeds like Christianity does, can not judge you as anything because there is no authority to say this is "good, and that is "Evil" (bad) .
Good can only come from God
And Evil can only come from the devil according Christian doctrine.
horrendous acts committed by mass murders are not caused by supernatural forces, they are caused by peoples individual actions.
no supernatural force = no evil.
it doesn't mean its acceptable behavior and should not be dealt with accordingly, but it is not evil.

there's a little catch though, the devil cant do any evil without God's permission. (ask Job)

thats pretty messed up when you think about it.

But don't worry about it , we existentialists are incapable of judging you.
An Atheist might, if he believes in good and evil.
But, I'm not an Atheist.
Brian: I'm not the Messiah! Will you please listen? I am not the Messiah, do you understand? Honestly!
Girl: Only the true Messiah denies His divinity.
Brian: What? Well, what sort of chance does that give me? All right! I am the Messiah!
Followers: He is! He is the Messiah!
Brian: Now, f**k off!
[silence]
Arthur: How shall we f**k off, O Lord?
ConservativePolitico
Posts: 8,210
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2011 12:26:00 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
You are an atheist.

Just because you don't believe there is a god not to believe in doesn't exempt you from the status of atheist. Just because you believe there is no god doesn't mean that there isn't a god. In fact according to 3 billion or so people there is a god. Lets take this "god" that all of these people believe in, its an idea. So you are in opposition to the idea of god i.e. you don't hold this idea to be true i.e. you don't believe in it meaning you don't believe in god meaning you are an atheist by definition in the eyes of the world.

You may not think so but the world will.

Your logic on the sugar plumb fairy is in error. When posed the question do you believe in the sugar plumb fairy there can only be three answers. Yes, no or there is no sugar plumb fairy but answer three then leads the asker to assume that you also are in accordance with answer two "no". Therefore under assumptions that 99.9% of people will make you do not believe in the sugar plumb fairy even if there is no fairy in existence.

Also Christians don't believe that evil is supernaturally influenced, at least I don't. We believe evil is born out of free will that we took from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. This free will can be used to create evil on our own and is usually done so with selfish intentions in mind. Free will created selfishness which is the root of most evil.
Physik
Posts: 686
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2011 2:09:13 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/29/2011 12:26:00 AM, ConservativePolitico wrote:

Also Christians don't believe that evil is supernaturally influenced, at least I don't. We believe evil is born out of free will that we took from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. This free will can be used to create evil on our own and is usually done so with selfish intentions in mind. Free will created selfishness which is the root of most evil.

A little vague, but did you just say that the Tree of Knowledge is not supernatural? The tree that produces fruit that when eaten dooms the entire human race to original sin, that tree is not supernatural?
"Just don't let them dissuade you. Stick to your beliefs no matter what and you'll be fine." - ConservativePolitico, the guy that accused me of being close-minded.

"We didn't start slavery, they themselves started it. When the white man first got to Africa they had already enslaved themselves, they just capitalized on an opportunity." - ConservativePolitico

"The Bible to me is a history book and requires very little faith to believe in." - ConservativePolitico
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2011 2:44:34 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
"I am not a Theist neither am I Atheist. God simply is not there so there is no question of Theism or Atheism."
-- Osho (Eastern sage)

"I do not believe that God does not exist... I know for sure."
-- Osho
"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
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2011 7:54:43 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/28/2011 10:54:13 PM, Mr.Big_is_Bud_Good wrote:
At 12/28/2011 8:14:13 PM, drafterman wrote:

Do you believe in god?

If the answer to this question is anything other than "Yes." Then you're an atheist.

There is no God not to believe in.

This is predicated upon the notion that, in order to disbelieve in something, it has to exist. This is stupid. The only thing required for you to disbelieve in something is for you to lack a belief in it.


Thats like asking somebody "Have you stopped beating your wife?"
If there is no history of wife beating the question is pointless.

Uhm, not, it's not a loaded question.


And by the way, good job of avoiding the original question in this post,
I;ll take that as a, "No" to whether you feel it is beneficial for me to scrutinize my convictions because it allows you to avoid the question whether you would feel its beneficial to scrutinize your convictions.

Well, if I see that a post is predicated on false premises, I like to attack the premises, as they the root of the problem.


Thats ok drafterman, those who have a world view that does not include higher or lower values placed on people based on their deeds like Christianity does, can not judge you as anything because there is no authority to say this is "good, and that is "Evil" .
Good can only come from God
And Evil can only come from the devil according Christian doctrine.

I don't subscribe to Christian doctrine.


horrendous acts committed by mass murders are not caused by supernatural forces.
no supernatural force, no evil.

there's a little catch though, the devil cant do any evil without God's permission. (ask Job)

thats pretty messed up when you think about it.

But don't worry about it , we existentialists are incapable of judging you.

An Atheist might, if he believes in good and evil.
But, I'm not an Atheist.

But you are.
Mr.Big_is_Bud_Good
Posts: 32
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2011 11:51:06 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Heya drafterman,

It seems that each of us has missed the point in one form or another.
The implication behind the thread title "I am not an Atheist" is not that I deny Atheism, but I am more than an Atheist. A super-Atheist if you will.
I laid out the foundation of the premise by pointing out that I am not limited to just not believing in a God or Gods, which defines an Atheist.
An Atheist can indeed not believe in a god, but still hold such nonsense notions as luck, and good and evil etc.
It appears that you missed that point.
Without having context in your reply that you were not a Christian, the reply was much more indicative of what one would expect from a theist.
And I followed the path that responded to the more likely perspective.
resulting in none other than missing the point.
(see Christians, we non theist can miss the point too)
sorry about that.

In regards to the notion that, "in order to disbelieve in something, it has to exist."
consider the aforementioned "Sugar Plumb Fairy" argument:
If someone were to ask me "Do you believe in the sugar plumb fairy?", Being as there is no sugar plumb fairy, there are no sugar plumb fairy unbelievers. because there is nothing there to not acknowledge the existence of.

Now, one could be a devoted follower of the sugar plumb fairy but the reality is, theres still nothing there for me not to believe in.

and as for this post being predicated on false premises, the premise is that in order for me to maintain my position, I must constantly scrutinize the underlying facts that lead me to my understanding of reality, and be willing to discard my position should any underlying fact prove false. and if you are a Christian do you feel it is beneficial for me to continue to scrutinize my convictions? leading to the larger question, "if you feel it is beneficial for me to scrutinize my positions, do you feel you could gain the same benefits from scrutinizing your own positions?"

perhaps you overlooked that?

and whether you or anyone else wishes to limit the definition of my world view to just being an atheist, that is beyond my circle of influence, the reality is I am more than that, I am an Existentialists! :-D
Brian: I'm not the Messiah! Will you please listen? I am not the Messiah, do you understand? Honestly!
Girl: Only the true Messiah denies His divinity.
Brian: What? Well, what sort of chance does that give me? All right! I am the Messiah!
Followers: He is! He is the Messiah!
Brian: Now, f**k off!
[silence]
Arthur: How shall we f**k off, O Lord?
Mr.Big_is_Bud_Good
Posts: 32
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2011 1:23:30 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
ConservativePolitico

Thank you for your response, but sadly you missed the point.
Be not concerned, drafterman did as well. (and he's not a theist)
See my response to drafterman above for further context.

I very much like your ability to articulate your argument and welcome your viewpoint.
Therefore, I will address your points accordingly.

It's fair to assume that roughly 99% of the world's 6 billion people believe in "Cold"
There is no such thing as cold. Only "lack of heat"
No matter how many people believe in cold, it does not change the fact that it does not exist.
Through your reasoning, if someone were to ask me,
"Do you believe in cold?"
there are 3 possible answers,
A. Yes
B. No
C. theres no such thing as cold
and that if I answer C, it will lead the asker to assume that I am also in accordance with answer B. "no"
See the flaw there?
The asker is assuming that C, is in accordance with B.
the askers assumptions does not change the underlying fact that there is no cold not to believe in.

There is no evidence of cold, and there never will be.
There is no evidence of God , never has been, nor will there ever be.
Evidence would nullify the requirement of free will, undermining the entire foundation of the Abrahamic God.

As for your assertion that "Christians don't believe that evil is supernaturally influenced." that is incorrect, some Christians do, some Christians don't.
I take my source from the early Christian churches teachings which all the other denominations are founded upon (and later modified to their own interpretations).
That would be 38,000 different denominations (not congregations) all believing something different. Theres a huge problem with that in my opinion. especially considering that each member in each congregation may not hold the exact same beliefs as the others in the same congregation, so I refer back to the early churches teachings in order to not have to provide tens of thousands of different examples of Christian idology.
I Hope you can see the difficulties there.

Thanks for your input, and if ya could, could you address my inquiry on self scrutinization?
thanks again.
Brian: I'm not the Messiah! Will you please listen? I am not the Messiah, do you understand? Honestly!
Girl: Only the true Messiah denies His divinity.
Brian: What? Well, what sort of chance does that give me? All right! I am the Messiah!
Followers: He is! He is the Messiah!
Brian: Now, f**k off!
[silence]
Arthur: How shall we f**k off, O Lord?
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2011 2:09:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/28/2011 6:47:33 PM, Mr.Big_is_Bud_Good wrote:
I am not an atheist.
An Atheist is someone who does not believe in a God or Gods
That does not exclude them from believing in luck, astrology, ghosts, destiny, magic, good/evil, etc. etc. etc ad nausium.
And it's not that I don't believe in God, luck, ghosts, etc.
There is no God, luck, magic, etc. for me not to believe in.
In order for me to maintain this position, I must constantly scrutinize the underlying facts that lead me to my understanding of reality, and be willing to discard my position should any underlying fact prove false.

This is why I ask Theist (particularly Christians) tough questions.
More often than not, the responses I get from Christians completely miss the point.
And I find it extremely difficult to phrase a question in a way to get a straight answer. And when I refute the underlying premise of a reply. (to a tough question).
Seldom is there a follow up.

Do you as a Christian feel it is beneficial for me to continue to scrutinize my convictions?
And if so, who better to put my questions to other than a Christian?

And if you feel it is beneficial for me to scrutinize my positions, do you feel you could gain the same benefits from scrutinizing your own positions?
And if not why?

Thanks.

First, such a concept of belief stated above is non compliant with reality and merely an attempt to play upon words.
Sort of silly like the 1980's athiestic claim "I just believe in one less God than the Christian!"

Second,
If you are wanting answers from Christians and truly want to scrutinize your atheistic convictions, you should approach Christian theologians and avoid the 15 year olds on this website.

To scrutinize your beliefs against non-theologians seems disingenuous.

Like beating up an english teacher on her inability to relay principles of atomic theory and claiming victory each time she does not have a response.

Additionally,
I would put the bottom 50% of Christian theologians in intellect against any of the upper eschalon of Atheism.

As we see every atheist has been defeated by Craig to the point Dawkins is scared stiff to even be on the same stage alone with him.

A Trappist Monestary would be a great start if you have one nearby.
MyVoiceInYourHead
Posts: 260
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2011 3:26:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/29/2011 2:09:12 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 12/28/2011 6:47:33 PM, Mr.Big_is_Bud_Good wrote:
I am not an atheist.
An Atheist is someone who does not believe in a God or Gods
That does not exclude them from believing in luck, astrology, ghosts, destiny, magic, good/evil, etc. etc. etc ad nausium.
And it's not that I don't believe in God, luck, ghosts, etc.
There is no God, luck, magic, etc. for me not to believe in.
In order for me to maintain this position, I must constantly scrutinize the underlying facts that lead me to my understanding of reality, and be willing to discard my position should any underlying fact prove false.

This is why I ask Theist (particularly Christians) tough questions.
More often than not, the responses I get from Christians completely miss the point.
And I find it extremely difficult to phrase a question in a way to get a straight answer. And when I refute the underlying premise of a reply. (to a tough question).
Seldom is there a follow up.

Do you as a Christian feel it is beneficial for me to continue to scrutinize my convictions?
And if so, who better to put my questions to other than a Christian?

And if you feel it is beneficial for me to scrutinize my positions, do you feel you could gain the same benefits from scrutinizing your own positions?
And if not why?

Thanks.

First, such a concept of belief stated above is non compliant with reality and merely an attempt to play upon words.
Sort of silly like the 1980's athiestic claim "I just believe in one less God than the Christian!"

It's a fair point though. Why don't Christians believe in any of the other gods?

Additionally,
I would put the bottom 50% of Christian theologians in intellect against any of the upper eschalon of Atheism.

As we see every atheist has been defeated by Craig to the point Dawkins is scared stiff to even be on the same stage alone with him.

You're joking. Dawkins scared of Craig? He just doesn't want to give him any credibility at all because it would be like a gynaecologist or midwife arguing with someone who was an advocate of The Stork Theory.

Craig's best argument is mistaking probability for inevitability after the event and then claiming this is proof that the Bible is true! Why does God need people like Craig anyway to prop himself up?

Craig is simply a used car salesman. A lawyer for God. And he's got a really irritating voice.
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2011 3:32:25 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/29/2011 3:26:03 PM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:
At 12/29/2011 2:09:12 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 12/28/2011 6:47:33 PM, Mr.Big_is_Bud_Good wrote:
I am not an atheist.
An Atheist is someone who does not believe in a God or Gods
That does not exclude them from believing in luck, astrology, ghosts, destiny, magic, good/evil, etc. etc. etc ad nausium.
And it's not that I don't believe in God, luck, ghosts, etc.
There is no God, luck, magic, etc. for me not to believe in.
In order for me to maintain this position, I must constantly scrutinize the underlying facts that lead me to my understanding of reality, and be willing to discard my position should any underlying fact prove false.

This is why I ask Theist (particularly Christians) tough questions.
More often than not, the responses I get from Christians completely miss the point.
And I find it extremely difficult to phrase a question in a way to get a straight answer. And when I refute the underlying premise of a reply. (to a tough question).
Seldom is there a follow up.

Do you as a Christian feel it is beneficial for me to continue to scrutinize my convictions?
And if so, who better to put my questions to other than a Christian?

And if you feel it is beneficial for me to scrutinize my positions, do you feel you could gain the same benefits from scrutinizing your own positions?
And if not why?

Thanks.

First, such a concept of belief stated above is non compliant with reality and merely an attempt to play upon words.
Sort of silly like the 1980's athiestic claim "I just believe in one less God than the Christian!"

It's a fair point though. Why don't Christians believe in any of the other gods?

We believe in "all" of the other gods that have existed. The little gods are real. They are not the Living God in charge of all 'gods'. They are the fallen angels given authority over the earth and they are running around today in various capacities.

We do not deny any other religion's experiences with their gods.


Additionally,
I would put the bottom 50% of Christian theologians in intellect against any of the upper eschalon of Atheism.

As we see every atheist has been defeated by Craig to the point Dawkins is scared stiff to even be on the same stage alone with him.

You're joking. Dawkins scared of Craig? He just doesn't want to give him any credibility at all because it would be like a gynaecologist or midwife arguing with someone who was an advocate of The Stork Theory.

Craig's best argument is mistaking probability for inevitability after the event and then claiming this is proof that the Bible is true! Why does God need people like Craig anyway to prop himself up?

Craig is simply a used car salesman. A lawyer for God. And he's got a really irritating voice.

LOL. Sure, you do not want to give the greatest walking advocate of theism a voice, especially as Dawkins beat his drum he could beat anyone with just a conversation.

You keeping thumming that drum. I am certain that it makes Dawkins feel better.

Did you see the Oxford Buses advertising?
"There probably is no Dawkins....so relax and enjoy the lecture with Craig."
I could barely control myself when I first heard it.
MyVoiceInYourHead
Posts: 260
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2011 3:43:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/29/2011 3:32:25 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 12/29/2011 3:26:03 PM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:
At 12/29/2011 2:09:12 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 12/28/2011 6:47:33 PM, Mr.Big_is_Bud_Good wrote:
I am not an atheist.
An Atheist is someone who does not believe in a God or Gods
That does not exclude them from believing in luck, astrology, ghosts, destiny, magic, good/evil, etc. etc. etc ad nausium.
And it's not that I don't believe in God, luck, ghosts, etc.
There is no God, luck, magic, etc. for me not to believe in.
In order for me to maintain this position, I must constantly scrutinize the underlying facts that lead me to my understanding of reality, and be willing to discard my position should any underlying fact prove false.

This is why I ask Theist (particularly Christians) tough questions.
More often than not, the responses I get from Christians completely miss the point.
And I find it extremely difficult to phrase a question in a way to get a straight answer. And when I refute the underlying premise of a reply. (to a tough question).
Seldom is there a follow up.

Do you as a Christian feel it is beneficial for me to continue to scrutinize my convictions?
And if so, who better to put my questions to other than a Christian?

And if you feel it is beneficial for me to scrutinize my positions, do you feel you could gain the same benefits from scrutinizing your own positions?
And if not why?

Thanks.

First, such a concept of belief stated above is non compliant with reality and merely an attempt to play upon words.
Sort of silly like the 1980's athiestic claim "I just believe in one less God than the Christian!"

It's a fair point though. Why don't Christians believe in any of the other gods?

We believe in "all" of the other gods that have existed. The little gods are real. They are not the Living God in charge of all 'gods'. They are the fallen angels given authority over the earth and they are running around today in various capacities.

We do not deny any other religion's experiences with their gods.

I find this comment very bizarre. Didn't Jesus say that no one comes to the Father except through him? What is a fallen angel anyway? And what could this possibly have to do with other religious belief systems such as the Ancient Egyptian ones or Mithraism? Very odd response.

Additionally,
I would put the bottom 50% of Christian theologians in intellect against any of the upper eschalon of Atheism.

As we see every atheist has been defeated by Craig to the point Dawkins is scared stiff to even be on the same stage alone with him.

You're joking. Dawkins scared of Craig? He just doesn't want to give him any credibility at all because it would be like a gynaecologist or midwife arguing with someone who was an advocate of The Stork Theory.

Craig's best argument is mistaking probability for inevitability after the event and then claiming this is proof that the Bible is true! Why does God need people like Craig anyway to prop himself up?

Craig is simply a used car salesman. A lawyer for God. And he's got a really irritating voice.

LOL. Sure, you do not want to give the greatest walking advocate of theism a voice, especially as Dawkins beat his drum he could beat anyone with just a conversation.

Craig is enough of a gobsh!te for the two of us.
GodSands
Posts: 2,843
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2011 4:33:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/28/2011 10:54:13 PM, Mr.Big_is_Bud_Good wrote:
At 12/28/2011 8:14:13 PM, drafterman wrote:

Do you believe in god?

If the answer to this question is anything other than "Yes." Then you're an atheist.

: There is no God not to believe in.

Thats like asking somebody "Have you stopped beating your wife?"
If there is no history of wife beating the question is pointless.
:

In short: Yes I am an atheist.
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2011 5:09:30 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/29/2011 3:43:29 PM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:

We believe in "all" of the other gods that have existed. The little gods are real. They are not the Living God in charge of all 'gods'. They are the fallen angels given authority over the earth and they are running around today in various capacities.

We do not deny any other religion's experiences with their gods.


I find this comment very bizarre. Didn't Jesus say that no one comes to the Father except through him? What is a fallen angel anyway? And what could this possibly have to do with other religious belief systems such as the Ancient Egyptian ones or Mithraism? Very odd response.

Why do you find the fact you are unfamiliar with Mainstream Christian Theology bizarre?
Are you a Christian Theologian?

To answer your question.
Fallen Angels are Abaddon, Satan etc.... historically recorded in the Bible and Judaic texts.

They are the gods of the pantheons. We agree they are real, they exist and that they have power. They can indeed perform wonders and healings all the way to raping women etc, as claimed by these ancient religions.

However, God gave power to the Christians to defeat their powers.

Some pantheons exist like hinduism and they operate within it. They also operate within Islam.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2011 6:39:58 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/29/2011 11:51:06 AM, Mr.Big_is_Bud_Good wrote:
Heya drafterman,

It seems that each of us has missed the point in one form or another.
The implication behind the thread title "I am not an Atheist" is not that I deny Atheism, but I am more than an Atheist. A super-Atheist if you will.

Then your thread title is missing a word. Namely the word "just." As in, you are not just an atheist.

I laid out the foundation of the premise by pointing out that I am not limited to just not believing in a God or Gods, which defines an Atheist.
An Atheist can indeed not believe in a god, but still hold such nonsense notions as luck, and good and evil etc.
It appears that you missed that point.

No, I got it. I just have a pet peeve regarding people who don't believe in god but yet, for some reason, have a problem with being called atheists even though that's what they are.

Without having context in your reply that you were not a Christian, the reply was much more indicative of what one would expect from a theist.
And I followed the path that responded to the more likely perspective.
resulting in none other than missing the point.
(see Christians, we non theist can miss the point too)
sorry about that.

In regards to the notion that, "in order to disbelieve in something, it has to exist."
consider the aforementioned "Sugar Plumb Fairy" argument:
If someone were to ask me "Do you believe in the sugar plumb fairy?", Being as there is no sugar plumb fairy, there are no sugar plumb fairy unbelievers. because there is nothing there to not acknowledge the existence of.

Which I disagree with. For one, I'm a sugar plumb fairy unbeliever because I don't believe in it. Sorry, but there is no connection between being able to believe or disbelieve in something and whether or not that thing exists. Belief is a cognitive state. It exists in our minds, independent of any objective reality.


Now, one could be a devoted follower of the sugar plumb fairy but the reality is, theres still nothing there for me not to believe in.

Well there is. There is your conception of the sugar plumb fairy and your disbelieve is merely an assertion that there is no actual entity that corresponds to your conception.


and as for this post being predicated on false premises, the premise is that in order for me to maintain my position, I must constantly scrutinize the underlying facts that lead me to my understanding of reality, and be willing to discard my position should any underlying fact prove false. and if you are a Christian do you feel it is beneficial for me to continue to scrutinize my convictions? leading to the larger question, "if you feel it is beneficial for me to scrutinize my positions, do you feel you could gain the same benefits from scrutinizing your own positions?"

perhaps you overlooked that?

The answer is yes.


and whether you or anyone else wishes to limit the definition of my world view to just being an atheist, that is beyond my circle of influence, the reality is I am more than that, I am an Existentialists! :-D
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/29/2011 7:12:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
"I am not an atheist", that's exactly what an atheist would say, sneaky sneaky atheists.
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
Mr.Big_is_Bud_Good
Posts: 32
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2011 12:43:54 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
drafterman

Alright, alright, you busted me,
I guess I have to come out now,
I do believe in the Sugar Plumb Fairy!
And for me to admit that any part of your argument has merit would cause my entire world view to come crashing down.

So There! <grin>
Brian: I'm not the Messiah! Will you please listen? I am not the Messiah, do you understand? Honestly!
Girl: Only the true Messiah denies His divinity.
Brian: What? Well, what sort of chance does that give me? All right! I am the Messiah!
Followers: He is! He is the Messiah!
Brian: Now, f**k off!
[silence]
Arthur: How shall we f**k off, O Lord?
MyVoiceInYourHead
Posts: 260
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2011 8:39:44 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/29/2011 5:09:30 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 12/29/2011 3:43:29 PM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:

We believe in "all" of the other gods that have existed. The little gods are real. They are not the Living God in charge of all 'gods'. They are the fallen angels given authority over the earth and they are running around today in various capacities.

We do not deny any other religion's experiences with their gods.


I find this comment very bizarre. Didn't Jesus say that no one comes to the Father except through him? What is a fallen angel anyway? And what could this possibly have to do with other religious belief systems such as the Ancient Egyptian ones or Mithraism? Very odd response.

Why do you find the fact you are unfamiliar with Mainstream Christian Theology bizarre?
Are you a Christian Theologian?

To answer your question.
Fallen Angels are Abaddon, Satan etc.... historically recorded in the Bible and Judaic texts.

They are the gods of the pantheons. We agree they are real, they exist and that they have power. They can indeed perform wonders and healings all the way to raping women etc, as claimed by these ancient religions.

However, God gave power to the Christians to defeat their powers.


If this is what you truly believe then I'm glad I'm not that familiar with it.
"They can indeed perform wonders and healings all the way to raping women" WTF? Your views are as mad as a box of frogs and uglier than a pit bull channelling the ghost of Myra Hindley.
What's your purpose in posting such monumental horsecrap to this site? Reading your post was like watching a two year old playing with a loaded revolver - surreal and alarming.
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2011 9:56:53 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/30/2011 8:39:44 AM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:
At 12/29/2011 5:09:30 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 12/29/2011 3:43:29 PM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:

We believe in "all" of the other gods that have existed. The little gods are real. They are not the Living God in charge of all 'gods'. They are the fallen angels given authority over the earth and they are running around today in various capacities.

We do not deny any other religion's experiences with their gods.


I find this comment very bizarre. Didn't Jesus say that no one comes to the Father except through him? What is a fallen angel anyway? And what could this possibly have to do with other religious belief systems such as the Ancient Egyptian ones or Mithraism? Very odd response.

Why do you find the fact you are unfamiliar with Mainstream Christian Theology bizarre?
Are you a Christian Theologian?

To answer your question.
Fallen Angels are Abaddon, Satan etc.... historically recorded in the Bible and Judaic texts.

They are the gods of the pantheons. We agree they are real, they exist and that they have power. They can indeed perform wonders and healings all the way to raping women etc, as claimed by these ancient religions.

However, God gave power to the Christians to defeat their powers.


If this is what you truly believe then I'm glad I'm not that familiar with it.
"They can indeed perform wonders and healings all the way to raping women" WTF? Your views are as mad as a box of frogs and uglier than a pit bull channelling the ghost of Myra Hindley.
What's your purpose in posting such monumental horsecrap to this site? Reading your post was like watching a two year old playing with a loaded revolver - surreal and alarming.

Lol,
At least you consent to not having a Christian Background.
The misleading vividness in your response could be avoided though.

The concept of the Nephilim and Giants produced by the Angels is well referenced in the Bible.
From Genesis 6 to David slaying the descendents of the Nephilim (you may have heard of the story of David and Goliath, David also killed the four other brothers) to the New Testament book of Jude that directly references the Book of Enoch and the Nephilim called out in the book of Genesis.

The Bible actually traces the lineage of the Giants in Canaan to the time of David slaying the last 5 among the Philistines.

Why get mad at me? Just because most of the lay Christians on this website do not bother to discuss Satan and Fallen Angels?
PARADIGM_L0ST
Posts: 6,958
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2011 10:17:00 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
We believe evil is born out of free will that we took from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. This free will can be used to create evil on our own and is usually done so with selfish intentions in mind. Free will created selfishness which is the root of most evil.:

What theists often continually neglect should be very obvious to even a casual observer of the Fall narrative.

Who placed the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil in the garden?

Answer: God.

Who allowed the Serpent unlimited access to the world's most naive people?

Answer: God.

Who made mankind naive, yet also inquisitive?

Answer: God.

Yet God places this tree in their midst, with no other purpose than to tempt them, and explains BEFORE that eating of the fruit will result in bad things, even though they can only intellectually understand what "bad" means AFTER they eat from it. If the only way they understand what bad is is by eating of it, how then can he reasonably condemn them for it?

Even after all of that, God being ever petulent, not only condemns them to death, but ALL of mankind. WTF?!?!

It shouldn't be called "The Fall," it should be called "The Set-Up." So not only did God manufacture the results he wanted (which was failure), he then offers man himself as the only way to achieve thus creating a reliance on him. Yeah, Conservative, that's some freewill... I have lovely beachfront property in Afghanistan I'd like to sell you too.

There's only two logical conclusions to reach here. Either this story is a complete and utter fabricated campfire story or God is entirely at fault for the way man is. In either case, nothing in that merits any affection for God or merits any reason to believe in him.
"Have you ever considered suicide? If not, please do." -- Mouthwash (to Inferno)
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2011 10:50:29 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/30/2011 10:17:00 AM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
We believe evil is born out of free will that we took from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. This free will can be used to create evil on our own and is usually done so with selfish intentions in mind. Free will created selfishness which is the root of most evil.:

What theists often continually neglect should be very obvious to even a casual observer of the Fall narrative.

Who placed the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil in the garden?

Answer: God.

Who allowed the Serpent unlimited access to the world's most naive people?

Answer: God.

Who made mankind naive, yet also inquisitive?

Answer: God.

Yet God places this tree in their midst, with no other purpose than to tempt them, and explains BEFORE that eating of the fruit will result in bad things, even though they can only intellectually understand what "bad" means AFTER they eat from it. If the only way they understand what bad is is by eating of it, how then can he reasonably condemn them for it?

Even after all of that, God being ever petulent, not only condemns them to death, but ALL of mankind. WTF?!?!

It shouldn't be called "The Fall," it should be called "The Set-Up." So not only did God manufacture the results he wanted (which was failure), he then offers man himself as the only way to achieve thus creating a reliance on him. Yeah, Conservative, that's some freewill... I have lovely beachfront property in Afghanistan I'd like to sell you too.

There's only two logical conclusions to reach here. Either this story is a complete and utter fabricated campfire story or God is entirely at fault for the way man is. In either case, nothing in that merits any affection for God or merits any reason to believe in him.

or the Third logical conclusion, the Tree and Account had a greater purpose than the temptation of Man.

God and Satan were at war in this historical account. That means Humans were created for a purpose to resolve their conflict. The choice of humans, to follow Satan's path or for God is obviously displayed in this story.

The overall narative of the Bible clearly displays that the human race has a extrinsic purpose to clear God's name. He needed a weaker species to display the fullness of his Character toward.

He needed to allow evil so that the accusation of His evil could be resolved. Satan made an accusation in a 'perfect' environment about the 'imperfection' of God. Such an accusation could only be resolved within an imperfect environment that allowed imperfect choices by everyone involved. This would allow the comparison of God's response to everyone else's.

Only then could God's nature be revealed.
MyVoiceInYourHead
Posts: 260
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2011 11:56:41 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/30/2011 9:56:53 AM, Gileandos wrote:
At 12/30/2011 8:39:44 AM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:
At 12/29/2011 5:09:30 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 12/29/2011 3:43:29 PM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:

We believe in "all" of the other gods that have existed. The little gods are real. They are not the Living God in charge of all 'gods'. They are the fallen angels given authority over the earth and they are running around today in various capacities.

We do not deny any other religion's experiences with their gods.


I find this comment very bizarre. Didn't Jesus say that no one comes to the Father except through him? What is a fallen angel anyway? And what could this possibly have to do with other religious belief systems such as the Ancient Egyptian ones or Mithraism? Very odd response.

Why do you find the fact you are unfamiliar with Mainstream Christian Theology bizarre?
Are you a Christian Theologian?

Why? Do I need to be a Christian Theologian to understand God's "accessible" message?

To answer your question.
Fallen Angels are Abaddon, Satan etc.... historically recorded in the Bible and Judaic texts.

They are the gods of the pantheons. We agree they are real, they exist and that they have power. They can indeed perform wonders and healings all the way to raping women etc, as claimed by these ancient religions.

However, God gave power to the Christians to defeat their powers.


If this is what you truly believe then I'm glad I'm not that familiar with it.
"They can indeed perform wonders and healings all the way to raping women" WTF? Your views are as mad as a box of frogs and uglier than a pit bull channelling the ghost of Myra Hindley.
What's your purpose in posting such monumental horsecrap to this site? Reading your post was like watching a two year old playing with a loaded revolver - surreal and alarming.

Lol,
At least you consent to not having a Christian Background.

I was brought up in a liberal Church of England setting whereby all I was encouraged to believe was that Jesus was a nice bloke. The more I learnt about the Bible and what it says and its impact on the world, the more convinced I have become that it is dangerous nonsense and not the way forward for humanity. I am now an anti-Christian.

The concept of the Nephilim and Giants produced by the Angels is well referenced in the Bible.
From Genesis 6 to David slaying the descendents of the Nephilim (you may have heard of the story of David and Goliath, David also killed the four other brothers) to the New Testament book of Jude that directly references the Book of Enoch and the Nephilim called out in the book of Genesis.

The Bible actually traces the lineage of the Giants in Canaan to the time of David slaying the last 5 among the Philistines.


Why get mad at me? Just because most of the lay Christians on this website do not bother to discuss Satan and Fallen Angels?

Why do you believe all this? Why is it appealing? Would you at least concede that the assertions in the Bible and what you've just posted here is ridiculously far-fetched for ordinary people who have not been exposed to anything like this before?
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2011 8:13:41 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/30/2011 12:43:54 AM, Mr.Big_is_Bud_Good wrote:
drafterman

Alright, alright, you busted me,
I guess I have to come out now,
I do believe in the Sugar Plumb Fairy!
And for me to admit that any part of your argument has merit would cause my entire world view to come crashing down.

So There! <grin>

Sorry, but this notion that something must exist for me to believe it doesn't exist is nonsensical.
Physik
Posts: 686
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2011 8:30:23 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/30/2011 10:50:29 AM, Gileandos wrote:
At 12/30/2011 10:17:00 AM, PARADIGM_L0ST wrote:
We believe evil is born out of free will that we took from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. This free will can be used to create evil on our own and is usually done so with selfish intentions in mind. Free will created selfishness which is the root of most evil.:

What theists often continually neglect should be very obvious to even a casual observer of the Fall narrative.

Who placed the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil in the garden?

Answer: God.

Who allowed the Serpent unlimited access to the world's most naive people?

Answer: God.

Who made mankind naive, yet also inquisitive?

Answer: God.

Yet God places this tree in their midst, with no other purpose than to tempt them, and explains BEFORE that eating of the fruit will result in bad things, even though they can only intellectually understand what "bad" means AFTER they eat from it. If the only way they understand what bad is is by eating of it, how then can he reasonably condemn them for it?

Even after all of that, God being ever petulent, not only condemns them to death, but ALL of mankind. WTF?!?!

It shouldn't be called "The Fall," it should be called "The Set-Up." So not only did God manufacture the results he wanted (which was failure), he then offers man himself as the only way to achieve thus creating a reliance on him. Yeah, Conservative, that's some freewill... I have lovely beachfront property in Afghanistan I'd like to sell you too.

There's only two logical conclusions to reach here. Either this story is a complete and utter fabricated campfire story or God is entirely at fault for the way man is. In either case, nothing in that merits any affection for God or merits any reason to believe in him.

or the Third logical conclusion, the Tree and Account had a greater purpose than the temptation of Man.

God and Satan were at war in this historical account. That means Humans were created for a purpose to resolve their conflict. The choice of humans, to follow Satan's path or for God is obviously displayed in this story.

Firstly, don't stain the word 'historical', it deserves better than that. Second, if god wanted to resolve a conflict with satan, wouldn't he have just destroyed him? You know, with the whole all-powerful thing.

The overall narative of the Bible clearly displays that the human race has a extrinsic purpose to clear God's name. He needed a weaker species to display the fullness of his Character toward.

He's so insecure he needs a so called 'weaker species' that he supposedly created to clear his name?

He needed to allow evil so that the accusation of His evil could be resolved. Satan made an accusation in a 'perfect' environment about the 'imperfection' of God. Such an accusation could only be resolved within an imperfect environment that allowed imperfect choices by everyone involved. This would allow the comparison of God's response to everyone else's.

Once again, that's awfully insecure of god. He creates a specifically flawed environment, causes immeasurable suffering; all so he seems good?

Only then could God's nature be revealed.

LoL
"Just don't let them dissuade you. Stick to your beliefs no matter what and you'll be fine." - ConservativePolitico, the guy that accused me of being close-minded.

"We didn't start slavery, they themselves started it. When the white man first got to Africa they had already enslaved themselves, they just capitalized on an opportunity." - ConservativePolitico

"The Bible to me is a history book and requires very little faith to believe in." - ConservativePolitico
Gileandos
Posts: 2,394
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/30/2011 9:27:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/30/2011 11:56:41 AM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:
At 12/30/2011 9:56:53 AM, Gileandos wrote:
At 12/30/2011 8:39:44 AM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:
At 12/29/2011 5:09:30 PM, Gileandos wrote:
At 12/29/2011 3:43:29 PM, MyVoiceInYourHead wrote:

We believe in "all" of the other gods that have existed. The little gods are real. They are not the Living God in charge of all 'gods'. They are the fallen angels given authority over the earth and they are running around today in various capacities.

We do not deny any other religion's experiences with their gods.


I find this comment very bizarre. Didn't Jesus say that no one comes to the Father except through him? What is a fallen angel anyway? And what could this possibly have to do with other religious belief systems such as the Ancient Egyptian ones or Mithraism? Very odd response.

Why do you find the fact you are unfamiliar with Mainstream Christian Theology bizarre?
Are you a Christian Theologian?

Why? Do I need to be a Christian Theologian to understand God's "accessible" message?

To answer your question.
Fallen Angels are Abaddon, Satan etc.... historically recorded in the Bible and Judaic texts.

They are the gods of the pantheons. We agree they are real, they exist and that they have power. They can indeed perform wonders and healings all the way to raping women etc, as claimed by these ancient religions.

However, God gave power to the Christians to defeat their powers.


If this is what you truly believe then I'm glad I'm not that familiar with it.
"They can indeed perform wonders and healings all the way to raping women" WTF? Your views are as mad as a box of frogs and uglier than a pit bull channelling the ghost of Myra Hindley.
What's your purpose in posting such monumental horsecrap to this site? Reading your post was like watching a two year old playing with a loaded revolver - surreal and alarming.

Lol,
At least you consent to not having a Christian Background.

I was brought up in a liberal Church of England setting whereby all I was encouraged to believe was that Jesus was a nice bloke. The more I learnt about the Bible and what it says and its impact on the world, the more convinced I have become that it is dangerous nonsense and not the way forward for humanity. I am now an anti-Christian.

The concept of the Nephilim and Giants produced by the Angels is well referenced in the Bible.
From Genesis 6 to David slaying the descendents of the Nephilim (you may have heard of the story of David and Goliath, David also killed the four other brothers) to the New Testament book of Jude that directly references the Book of Enoch and the Nephilim called out in the book of Genesis.

The Bible actually traces the lineage of the Giants in Canaan to the time of David slaying the last 5 among the Philistines.


Why get mad at me? Just because most of the lay Christians on this website do not bother to discuss Satan and Fallen Angels?

Why do you believe all this? Why is it appealing? Would you at least concede that the assertions in the Bible and what you've just posted here is ridiculously far-fetched for ordinary people who have not been exposed to anything like this before?

I will completely concede that it might be an unknown concept to a christian who was poor at his approach to Christianity and much more unknown to a non Christian.

That is different than saying something is far fetched.
My golf ball being made from animal testicles is far fetched.

These claims from ancient documents, supported by hundreds of millions of Chrsitians who have experienced the reality of these claims.

I am very sorry you were in a liberal church in England. Try a non-liberal one. Try a Catholic Monestary. Do not start and stop with one group of people who have not shared the experience.

As for appealing, the Truth is massively appealing. Reality is massively appealing. I have no idea why someone would prefer a lie to the Truth.

Victory in Jesus is just sweet Truth.