Why I don't care why you don't believe in God.

[sealybobo]

There's no proof either way for Santa Claus either but I'm quite sure most adults are atheistic about the existence of him.

Actually, there's tons of proof that Santa was made up:
"The legend of Santa Claus can be traced back hundreds of years to a monk named St. Nicholas. It is believed that Nicholas was born sometime around 280 A.D. in Patara, near Myra in modern-day Turkey. Much admired for his piety and kindness, St. Nicholas became the subject of many legends."
Santa Claus - Christmas - HISTORY.com

Do you believe Mary was a virgin? Or are you agnostic about that too?

Agnostics are just pussy atheists. You have balls enough to not buy into Christianity though so at least you can't be bullied or guilted into believing that stuff.

You are an atheist towards organized religions but agnostic about a creator?

Otherwise, what more do you need to know about Christianity for you to finally make a decision? I'd like to help you decide if you believe Jesus walked on water. Remember, God still burns agnostics in hell for all eternity, not just atheists. You agnostic or undecided on that too?

I don't see any proof for or against the possible existence of a god. Atheists say that god is not possible. I feel that there's no way to know that.
As for religions, they all have no real foundation in reality, i.e. no proof, but that doesn't really have anything to do with whether there's a god or not.

We don't say a god is not possible. Its possible. Just doesn't seem probable. And most of our anti god attitude has to do with Christians, Muslims, Mormons and Jews saying God visited.

If all you are saying is there might be a god, I as an atheist will agree with you I have to be agnostic about that because to know for sure, I'd either have to be a god or die to find out.

Now tell me he visited you and I'll go to hell if I don't believe. That's when I become an atheist.

Just so you know what you're not. You're welcome.

Atheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities. In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities. Most inclusively, atheism is the absence of belief that any deities exist."

Do you believe in deities?

a deity is either a natural or supernatural being, who is thought of as holy,divine, or sacred.

a deity as "a being with powers greater than those of ordinary humans, but who interacts with humans, positively or negatively, in ways that carry humans to new levels of consciousness beyond the grounded preoccupations of ordinary life"

Deities are often thought to be immortal, and are commonly assumed to have personalities and to possess consciousness, intellects, desires, and emotions comparable but usually superior to those of humans. A male deity is a god, while a female deity is agoddess.

Are you agnostic about all this?

 

[Mudda]

We don't say a god is not possible. Its possible. Just doesn't seem probable. And most of our anti god attitude has to do with Christians, Muslims, Mormons and Jews saying God visited.

If all you are saying is there might be a god, I as an atheist will agree with you I have to be agnostic about that because to know for sure, I'd either have to be a god or die to find out.

Now tell me he visited you and I'll go to hell if I don't believe. That's when I become an atheist.

That's what I've been saying and you've argued about it. If god is possible then you are in fact an agnostic. If someone brings up the Bible you call yourself an atheist, that means it's an anti-Christian reaction.

I'm an agnostic that thinks the bible is total crap. That doesn't make me an atheist.

The devil is not my problem, it's a Catholic problem. The bible is bullshit from start to finish, imo. I think all organized religions are retarded.

Lol in that statement you expose yourself as an ignoramus.

I'm ignorant because I can see that the bible is bullshit, and is made up of fiction? Or are you just projecting again? Or maybe you just had no real comeback to dispute what i said?

So if every story ever written about god is a lie, why do you believe? If you have no evidence to prove god exists, maybe that is you evidence he doesn't.

So gravity couldn't have existed if we hadn't discovered it? ...
I just think that there's possibly more than just what we can see right now. Could there be multiple universes? Could our universe be an experiment in someone's lab that we just can't see right now? ... The possibilities are endless and until empirical evidence points in the right direction, no possibility that hasn't been empirically proven to be wrong should be discounted prematurely.

Doesn't sound like you are referring to any of the gods of any of the organized religions. In that case, I am perfectly ok with someone thinking there MIGHT be a generic thing that created the universe. Your position is so vanilla generic who cares, right? If you aren't claiming he visited you or that I'll go to hell for not believing you, we really have nothing to argue about. You believe there could be a creator, and I too won't rule it out. I tend to lean on the side of doubt based on all the information I've uncovered, but still I can't say I know for sure so that's why I say I'm an agnostic atheist. I doubt it but remain open to the possibility. Do you lean either way?

“I would love to believe that when I die I will live again, that some thinking, feeling, remembering part of me will continue. But much as I want to believe that, and despite the ancient and worldwide cultural traditions that assert an afterlife, I know of nothing to suggest that it is more than wishful thinking. The world is so exquisite with so much love and moral depth, that there is no reason to deceive ourselves with pretty stories for which there’s little good evidence. Far better it seems to me, in our vulnerability, is to look death in the eye and to be grateful every day for the brief but magnificent opportunity that life provides.” – Carl Sagan

Would you call someone who says this an agnostic?

He saying there's nothing to suggest an afterlife, he's not saying no, there is no afterlife period. So yes, he could be considered an agnostic, but it's not really clear because he doesn't tackle the subject directly. Maybe he did have a position? I can't really tell by this quote.

 

[sealybobo]

I don't believe Jews or Mormons or Muslims if that makes you feel any better. I'm with Mudda. Your story is bullshit. As for a generic god that never told you anything? That I am open to.

What is my story? And how do you come to the conclusion I have an invested interest in your approval?

Because you are talking to me. I have a god complex. I think I'm that important.

You think pointing out fallacies is seeking your approval? Again, what's my story?

No one cares what your story is. I'm talking to you but really talking to all theists. No two theists are alike. You are like snowflakes or fingerprints.

 

[Mudda]

I'm ignorant because I can see that the bible is bullshit, and is made up of fiction?

The story of the boy who cried wolf is entirely made up fiction. We don't know where it happened, when it happened, or even what country it happened in. We don't know the name of the boy, the language that he spoke, how old he was, and there is absolutely no proof that any of it ever happened at all. Does that make it all worthless bullshit? Or does it convey a teaching and a truth not directly connected to the literal meaning of the words used and was never intended to be taken literally by intelligent people?

Are you talking about the part when god tells his followers to kill people? Or when he mass murders nearly everyone on earth in a flood? ...

Excellent question.

You know that all of the stories in scripture were written by men and many stories date back to a time when people believed that another human being could be a god. many allude to actual events with a divine explanation, and others are pure hyperbole and even eyewitness accounts of what was seen and heard in a dream.

When I read scripture it always is a man who claims to have heard from God. That alone makes it suspect.

The bible begins with a story of a talking serpent. I'm afraid that if you want to learn the teachings conveyed, you have to use your brain.

So you're saying that the big things in the bible are fictitious? Brah, you've just been excommunicated.

 

[sealybobo]

That's what I've been saying and you've argued about it. If god is possible then you are in fact an agnostic. If someone brings up the Bible you call yourself an atheist, that means it's an anti-Christian reaction.

I'm an agnostic that thinks the bible is total crap. That doesn't make me an atheist.

Lol in that statement you expose yourself as an ignoramus.

I'm ignorant because I can see that the bible is bullshit, and is made up of fiction? Or are you just projecting again? Or maybe you just had no real comeback to dispute what i said?

So if every story ever written about god is a lie, why do you believe? If you have no evidence to prove god exists, maybe that is you evidence he doesn't.

So gravity couldn't have existed if we hadn't discovered it? ...
I just think that there's possibly more than just what we can see right now. Could there be multiple universes? Could our universe be an experiment in someone's lab that we just can't see right now? ... The possibilities are endless and until empirical evidence points in the right direction, no possibility that hasn't been empirically proven to be wrong should be discounted prematurely.

Doesn't sound like you are referring to any of the gods of any of the organized religions. In that case, I am perfectly ok with someone thinking there MIGHT be a generic thing that created the universe. Your position is so vanilla generic who cares, right? If you aren't claiming he visited you or that I'll go to hell for not believing you, we really have nothing to argue about. You believe there could be a creator, and I too won't rule it out. I tend to lean on the side of doubt based on all the information I've uncovered, but still I can't say I know for sure so that's why I say I'm an agnostic atheist. I doubt it but remain open to the possibility. Do you lean either way?

“I would love to believe that when I die I will live again, that some thinking, feeling, remembering part of me will continue. But much as I want to believe that, and despite the ancient and worldwide cultural traditions that assert an afterlife, I know of nothing to suggest that it is more than wishful thinking. The world is so exquisite with so much love and moral depth, that there is no reason to deceive ourselves with pretty stories for which there’s little good evidence. Far better it seems to me, in our vulnerability, is to look death in the eye and to be grateful every day for the brief but magnificent opportunity that life provides.” – Carl Sagan

Would you call someone who says this an agnostic?

He saying there's nothing to suggest an afterlife, he's not saying no, there is no afterlife period. So yes, he could be considered an agnostic, but it's not really clear because he doesn't tackle the subject directly. Maybe he did have a position? I can't really tell by this quote.

In answer to the question why does the Universe exist, many traditional cultural answers have been simply to state that God did it. The belief that "everything must have a cause, therefore God exists" is called a First Cause argument. But that merely results in new questions: (1) why did god create the Universe? and (2) why does God exist? If it is valid to say "everything has a cause except God", it is more likely that everything has a cause except the Universe. If God doesn't need a cause because it is infinite, it is more likely that the natural Universe has existed forever and therefore doesn't need a cause. You therefore make fewer assumptions, and cause fewer puzzles, if you admit that you believe in one uncaused entity, and that that one uncaused entity is the Universe itself.

 

[Mudda]

I don't see any proof for or against the possible existence of a god. Atheists say that god is not possible. Presently, I feel that there's no way to know that.
As for religions, they all have no real foundation in reality, i.e. no proof, but that doesn't really have anything to do with whether there's a god or not.

What is a God? Define it. Then I can tell you if there is any proof for or against it. Is it all powerful? Because if it is, why did it create cancer?

The more you understand, the more you realize there is no need for God.

How can I define something for which their is no proof for or against? Or maybe I just did, lol.

Name one other thing you that there is no proof for that you are agnostic about.

Why does it matter that there is no proof against it? All you need to know is there is no proof for it.

There was no proof of the atom until we discovered it. Does that means that before that, you would have been atheist about the possibility of atoms being possible? Because if so, you would have been wrong.

Did they say the atom came and knocked up Mary and made a heaven and hell for us? So you have this hypothisis that a god exists or an atom exists. Prove either exists. You can prove the atom exists but you can never prove god exists. See the difference?

Again, you are talking about a generic creator of the universe. As long as you don't claim it came and talked to you, I really have no problem with your position. I'm just trying to point out how you are being 50-50 on something that can and will never be proven. Why? Do you lean either way?

You don't know that god will never be proven. What I say is: there is no proof that says god will never be proven, because I can't know what will be discovered in the future, nobody can. So by that fact alone, atheists are as deluded as theists for believing in something that has not been proven, i.e. the fact that god can never be proven, as you stated.

 

[Mudda]

We don't say a god is not possible. Its possible. Just doesn't seem probable. And most of our anti god attitude has to do with Christians, Muslims, Mormons and Jews saying God visited.

If all you are saying is there might be a god, I as an atheist will agree with you I have to be agnostic about that because to know for sure, I'd either have to be a god or die to find out.

Now tell me he visited you and I'll go to hell if I don't believe. That's when I become an atheist.

That's what I've been saying and you've argued about it. If god is possible then you are in fact an agnostic. If someone brings up the Bible you call yourself an atheist, that means it's an anti-Christian reaction.

I'm an agnostic that thinks the bible is total crap. That doesn't make me an atheist.

The devil is not my problem, it's a Catholic problem. The bible is bullshit from start to finish, imo. I think all organized religions are retarded.

Lol in that statement you expose yourself as an ignoramus.

I'm ignorant because I can see that the bible is bullshit, and is made up of fiction? Or are you just projecting again? Or maybe you just had no real comeback to dispute what i said?

You're ignorant because you don't know the bible, but still say it's bullshit. Only low functioning retards do that.

You assume that I don't know the bible. So no one can know the bible and thinks it's made up myths and bs? Everyone who has ever read the bible thinks that it's 100% fact? Ummm... no.

I know you don't know the bible...or history. If you did you wouldn't blather such blatant stupidity.

The story of Creation, the flood, the parting of the seas, the burning bush... all made up. What's stupid about saying the truth?

 

[hobelim]

I'm ignorant because I can see that the bible is bullshit, and is made up of fiction?

The story of the boy who cried wolf is entirely made up fiction. We don't know where it happened, when it happened, or even what country it happened in. We don't know the name of the boy, the language that he spoke, how old he was, and there is absolutely no proof that any of it ever happened at all. Does that make it all worthless bullshit? Or does it convey a teaching and a truth not directly connected to the literal meaning of the words used and was never intended to be taken literally by intelligent people?

Are you talking about the part when god tells his followers to kill people? Or when he mass murders nearly everyone on earth in a flood? ...

Excellent question.

You know that all of the stories in scripture were written by men and many stories date back to a time when people believed that another human being could be a god. many allude to actual events with a divine explanation, and others are pure hyperbole and even eyewitness accounts of what was seen and heard in a dream.

When I read scripture it always is a man who claims to have heard from God. That alone makes it suspect.

The bible begins with a story of a talking serpent. I'm afraid that if you want to learn the teachings conveyed, you have to use your brain.

So you're saying that the big things in the bible are fictitious? Brah, you've just been excommunicated.

Yeah, I had my chance to 'just believe' that a three in one God diddled a virgin to father himself so that he could become fully human without a human father who spoke in riddles and performed supernatural demonstrations of divine power over reality, pissed everyone off and was killed, because of my sins and because he loved the Romans so much, only to rise from the dead, spook his friends for a while, before floating up into the sky where he remains unseen and unheard from until one fine day he will descend and swoop all believers up into the clouds while leaving all those hated unbelievers behind to burn forever in sulfurous flames...any minute!.

I chose not to believe.

Woe is me.

 

[Mudda]

Actually, there's tons of proof that Santa was made up:
"The legend of Santa Claus can be traced back hundreds of years to a monk named St. Nicholas. It is believed that Nicholas was born sometime around 280 A.D. in Patara, near Myra in modern-day Turkey. Much admired for his piety and kindness, St. Nicholas became the subject of many legends."
Santa Claus - Christmas - HISTORY.com

Do you believe Mary was a virgin? Or are you agnostic about that too?

Agnostics are just pussy atheists. You have balls enough to not buy into Christianity though so at least you can't be bullied or guilted into believing that stuff.

You are an atheist towards organized religions but agnostic about a creator?

Otherwise, what more do you need to know about Christianity for you to finally make a decision? I'd like to help you decide if you believe Jesus walked on water. Remember, God still burns agnostics in hell for all eternity, not just atheists. You agnostic or undecided on that too?

I don't see any proof for or against the possible existence of a god. Atheists say that god is not possible. I feel that there's no way to know that.
As for religions, they all have no real foundation in reality, i.e. no proof, but that doesn't really have anything to do with whether there's a god or not.

We don't say a god is not possible. Its possible. Just doesn't seem probable. And most of our anti god attitude has to do with Christians, Muslims, Mormons and Jews saying God visited.

If all you are saying is there might be a god, I as an atheist will agree with you I have to be agnostic about that because to know for sure, I'd either have to be a god or die to find out.

Now tell me he visited you and I'll go to hell if I don't believe. That's when I become an atheist.

Just so you know what you're not. You're welcome.

Atheism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities. In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities. Most inclusively, atheism is the absence of belief that any deities exist."

Do you believe in deities?

a deity is either a natural or supernatural being, who is thought of as holy,divine, or sacred.

a deity as "a being with powers greater than those of ordinary humans, but who interacts with humans, positively or negatively, in ways that carry humans to new levels of consciousness beyond the grounded preoccupations of ordinary life"

Deities are often thought to be immortal, and are commonly assumed to have personalities and to possess consciousness, intellects, desires, and emotions comparable but usually superior to those of humans. A male deity is a god, while a female deity is agoddess.

Are you agnostic about all this?

Sounds made up.

 

[sealybobo]

I'm ignorant because I can see that the bible is bullshit, and is made up of fiction?

The story of the boy who cried wolf is entirely made up fiction. We don't know where it happened, when it happened, or even what country it happened in. We don't know the name of the boy, the language that he spoke, how old he was, and there is absolutely no proof that any of it ever happened at all. Does that make it all worthless bullshit? Or does it convey a teaching and a truth not directly connected to the literal meaning of the words used and was never intended to be taken literally by intelligent people?

Are you talking about the part when god tells his followers to kill people? Or when he mass murders nearly everyone on earth in a flood? ...

Excellent question.

You know that all of the stories in scripture were written by men and many stories date back to a time when people believed that another human being could be a god. many allude to actual events with a divine explanation, and others are pure hyperbole and even eyewitness accounts of what was seen and heard in a dream.

When I read scripture it always is a man who claims to have heard from God. That alone makes it suspect.

The bible begins with a story of a talking serpent. I'm afraid that if you want to learn the teachings conveyed, you have to use your brain.

So you're saying that the big things in the bible are fictitious? Brah, you've just been excommunicated.

“Now, if the book of Genesis is an allegory, then sin is an allegory, the Fall is an allegory and the need for a Savior is an allegory – but if we are all descendants of an allegory, where does that leave us? It destroys the foundation of all Christian doctrine—it destroys the foundation of the gospel.” – Ken Ham

 

[Mudda]

I'm an agnostic that thinks the bible is total crap. That doesn't make me an atheist.
I'm ignorant because I can see that the bible is bullshit, and is made up of fiction? Or are you just projecting again? Or maybe you just had no real comeback to dispute what i said?

So if every story ever written about god is a lie, why do you believe? If you have no evidence to prove god exists, maybe that is you evidence he doesn't.

So gravity couldn't have existed if we hadn't discovered it? ...
I just think that there's possibly more than just what we can see right now. Could there be multiple universes? Could our universe be an experiment in someone's lab that we just can't see right now? ... The possibilities are endless and until empirical evidence points in the right direction, no possibility that hasn't been empirically proven to be wrong should be discounted prematurely.

Doesn't sound like you are referring to any of the gods of any of the organized religions. In that case, I am perfectly ok with someone thinking there MIGHT be a generic thing that created the universe. Your position is so vanilla generic who cares, right? If you aren't claiming he visited you or that I'll go to hell for not believing you, we really have nothing to argue about. You believe there could be a creator, and I too won't rule it out. I tend to lean on the side of doubt based on all the information I've uncovered, but still I can't say I know for sure so that's why I say I'm an agnostic atheist. I doubt it but remain open to the possibility. Do you lean either way?

“I would love to believe that when I die I will live again, that some thinking, feeling, remembering part of me will continue. But much as I want to believe that, and despite the ancient and worldwide cultural traditions that assert an afterlife, I know of nothing to suggest that it is more than wishful thinking. The world is so exquisite with so much love and moral depth, that there is no reason to deceive ourselves with pretty stories for which there’s little good evidence. Far better it seems to me, in our vulnerability, is to look death in the eye and to be grateful every day for the brief but magnificent opportunity that life provides.” – Carl Sagan

Would you call someone who says this an agnostic?

He saying there's nothing to suggest an afterlife, he's not saying no, there is no afterlife period. So yes, he could be considered an agnostic, but it's not really clear because he doesn't tackle the subject directly. Maybe he did have a position? I can't really tell by this quote.

In answer to the question why does the Universe exist, many traditional cultural answers have been simply to state that God did it. The belief that "everything must have a cause, therefore God exists" is called a First Cause argument. But that merely results in new questions: (1) why did god create the Universe? and (2) why does God exist? If it is valid to say "everything has a cause except God", it is more likely that everything has a cause except the Universe. If God doesn't need a cause because it is infinite, it is more likely that the natural Universe has existed forever and therefore doesn't need a cause. You therefore make fewer assumptions, and cause fewer puzzles, if you admit that you believe in one uncaused entity, and that that one uncaused entity is the Universe itself.

We don't know the reason for the universe existing, and don't know whether it was caused or not. Maybe one day we will... Until then I leave open all possibilities that have not been empirically discounted.

 

[sealybobo]

That's what I've been saying and you've argued about it. If god is possible then you are in fact an agnostic. If someone brings up the Bible you call yourself an atheist, that means it's an anti-Christian reaction.

I'm an agnostic that thinks the bible is total crap. That doesn't make me an atheist.

Lol in that statement you expose yourself as an ignoramus.

I'm ignorant because I can see that the bible is bullshit, and is made up of fiction? Or are you just projecting again? Or maybe you just had no real comeback to dispute what i said?

So if every story ever written about god is a lie, why do you believe? If you have no evidence to prove god exists, maybe that is you evidence he doesn't.

So gravity couldn't have existed if we hadn't discovered it? ...
I just think that there's possibly more than just what we can see right now. Could there be multiple universes? Could our universe be an experiment in someone's lab that we just can't see right now? ... The possibilities are endless and until empirical evidence points in the right direction, no possibility that hasn't been empirically proven to be wrong should be discounted prematurely.

Doesn't sound like you are referring to any of the gods of any of the organized religions. In that case, I am perfectly ok with someone thinking there MIGHT be a generic thing that created the universe. Your position is so vanilla generic who cares, right? If you aren't claiming he visited you or that I'll go to hell for not believing you, we really have nothing to argue about. You believe there could be a creator, and I too won't rule it out. I tend to lean on the side of doubt based on all the information I've uncovered, but still I can't say I know for sure so that's why I say I'm an agnostic atheist. I doubt it but remain open to the possibility. Do you lean either way?

“I would love to believe that when I die I will live again, that some thinking, feeling, remembering part of me will continue. But much as I want to believe that, and despite the ancient and worldwide cultural traditions that assert an afterlife, I know of nothing to suggest that it is more than wishful thinking. The world is so exquisite with so much love and moral depth, that there is no reason to deceive ourselves with pretty stories for which there’s little good evidence. Far better it seems to me, in our vulnerability, is to look death in the eye and to be grateful every day for the brief but magnificent opportunity that life provides.” – Carl Sagan

Would you call someone who says this an agnostic?

He saying there's nothing to suggest an afterlife, he's not saying no, there is no afterlife period. So yes, he could be considered an agnostic, but it's not really clear because he doesn't tackle the subject directly. Maybe he did have a position? I can't really tell by this quote.

Are you agnostic about the dragon in my garage?

The Dragon In My Garage

 

[sealybobo]

So if every story ever written about god is a lie, why do you believe? If you have no evidence to prove god exists, maybe that is you evidence he doesn't.

So gravity couldn't have existed if we hadn't discovered it? ...
I just think that there's possibly more than just what we can see right now. Could there be multiple universes? Could our universe be an experiment in someone's lab that we just can't see right now? ... The possibilities are endless and until empirical evidence points in the right direction, no possibility that hasn't been empirically proven to be wrong should be discounted prematurely.

Doesn't sound like you are referring to any of the gods of any of the organized religions. In that case, I am perfectly ok with someone thinking there MIGHT be a generic thing that created the universe. Your position is so vanilla generic who cares, right? If you aren't claiming he visited you or that I'll go to hell for not believing you, we really have nothing to argue about. You believe there could be a creator, and I too won't rule it out. I tend to lean on the side of doubt based on all the information I've uncovered, but still I can't say I know for sure so that's why I say I'm an agnostic atheist. I doubt it but remain open to the possibility. Do you lean either way?

“I would love to believe that when I die I will live again, that some thinking, feeling, remembering part of me will continue. But much as I want to believe that, and despite the ancient and worldwide cultural traditions that assert an afterlife, I know of nothing to suggest that it is more than wishful thinking. The world is so exquisite with so much love and moral depth, that there is no reason to deceive ourselves with pretty stories for which there’s little good evidence. Far better it seems to me, in our vulnerability, is to look death in the eye and to be grateful every day for the brief but magnificent opportunity that life provides.” – Carl Sagan

Would you call someone who says this an agnostic?

He saying there's nothing to suggest an afterlife, he's not saying no, there is no afterlife period. So yes, he could be considered an agnostic, but it's not really clear because he doesn't tackle the subject directly. Maybe he did have a position? I can't really tell by this quote.

In answer to the question why does the Universe exist, many traditional cultural answers have been simply to state that God did it. The belief that "everything must have a cause, therefore God exists" is called a First Cause argument. But that merely results in new questions: (1) why did god create the Universe? and (2) why does God exist? If it is valid to say "everything has a cause except God", it is more likely that everything has a cause except the Universe. If God doesn't need a cause because it is infinite, it is more likely that the natural Universe has existed forever and therefore doesn't need a cause. You therefore make fewer assumptions, and cause fewer puzzles, if you admit that you believe in one uncaused entity, and that that one uncaused entity is the Universe itself.

We don't know the reason for the universe existing, and don't know whether it was caused or not. Maybe one day we will... Until then I leave open all possibilities that have not been empirically discounted.

Then you admit you/we don't know. You don't hold any weight to the god concept because there is no empirical evidence for it. You may be open to the idea if someone could give you any good evidence for it but so far no one has given you squat. Sounds like you lean towards atheism. At least you are atheistic regarding theists claims and arguments, no?

 

[sealybobo]

So if every story ever written about god is a lie, why do you believe? If you have no evidence to prove god exists, maybe that is you evidence he doesn't.

So gravity couldn't have existed if we hadn't discovered it? ...
I just think that there's possibly more than just what we can see right now. Could there be multiple universes? Could our universe be an experiment in someone's lab that we just can't see right now? ... The possibilities are endless and until empirical evidence points in the right direction, no possibility that hasn't been empirically proven to be wrong should be discounted prematurely.

Doesn't sound like you are referring to any of the gods of any of the organized religions. In that case, I am perfectly ok with someone thinking there MIGHT be a generic thing that created the universe. Your position is so vanilla generic who cares, right? If you aren't claiming he visited you or that I'll go to hell for not believing you, we really have nothing to argue about. You believe there could be a creator, and I too won't rule it out. I tend to lean on the side of doubt based on all the information I've uncovered, but still I can't say I know for sure so that's why I say I'm an agnostic atheist. I doubt it but remain open to the possibility. Do you lean either way?

“I would love to believe that when I die I will live again, that some thinking, feeling, remembering part of me will continue. But much as I want to believe that, and despite the ancient and worldwide cultural traditions that assert an afterlife, I know of nothing to suggest that it is more than wishful thinking. The world is so exquisite with so much love and moral depth, that there is no reason to deceive ourselves with pretty stories for which there’s little good evidence. Far better it seems to me, in our vulnerability, is to look death in the eye and to be grateful every day for the brief but magnificent opportunity that life provides.” – Carl Sagan

Would you call someone who says this an agnostic?

He saying there's nothing to suggest an afterlife, he's not saying no, there is no afterlife period. So yes, he could be considered an agnostic, but it's not really clear because he doesn't tackle the subject directly. Maybe he did have a position? I can't really tell by this quote.

In answer to the question why does the Universe exist, many traditional cultural answers have been simply to state that God did it. The belief that "everything must have a cause, therefore God exists" is called a First Cause argument. But that merely results in new questions: (1) why did god create the Universe? and (2) why does God exist? If it is valid to say "everything has a cause except God", it is more likely that everything has a cause except the Universe. If God doesn't need a cause because it is infinite, it is more likely that the natural Universe has existed forever and therefore doesn't need a cause. You therefore make fewer assumptions, and cause fewer puzzles, if you admit that you believe in one uncaused entity, and that that one uncaused entity is the Universe itself.

We don't know the reason for the universe existing, and don't know whether it was caused or not. Maybe one day we will... Until then I leave open all possibilities that have not been empirically discounted.

There is no reason the universe exists. It exists. That's it. No reason. See that big boulder outside? What is the reason it exists?

 

[Fueri]

Again, I made no claim of any sort wrt to belief or non belief. Not in the post you quoted here or my original post. In fact nowhere on this board. Ever.

You can read so I'm left with the conclusion that you are willfully ignoring the actual posts to continue with your ego stroking by continuing to spout your talking points.

If you'd like to sit in the corner and jerk off who am I to stop you. Enjoy your ignorant assholery....

It's impossible to not confuse you with the other retards on this thread and it's impossible to remember or keep track of what each and everyone of you believes. So if I'm arguing with you I can only assume you're one of them and not one of me good day sir

So when you respond to a post you don't actually respond to it. Pretty much what I figured. One hand on your johnson the other on your talking points.

"Oh me, oh me, oh me!!!!"

THats your question or point? That no one knows? So then what would a scientist do if you came to them with such evidence to a hypothesis you're trying to convince them of?

I'll tell you what they would do with it. They would throw it out do you understand that so to be agnostic about a theory that isn't even a theory yet it's insane. You're not neutral on this you don't believe God f*** marry you don't believe God talk to Moses you don't believe God talk to Joseph Smith or Muhammad or the Jehovah Witnesses you don't believe any of it so why are you exhausted about it? If you were talking about a generic God or creator then who cares he's thinking about you just as much as you're thinking about it ant in Ethiopia

Good grief. My only point, as indicated in my first pair, which you responded to, was that jerkoffs that shit on the holiday to insult those that celebrate so that they can get their own rocks off were/ are douchebags.

That stuff people type in the box and you respond to? Try reading it some time.

People who come here to debate this have been coming here long before xmas

Yah, no kidding. That changes nothing wrt to the post to which you responded, your repeated efforts to steer in the direction of a broader debate notwithstanding.

In terms of a broader debate, there is no 'winner', ever on this topic. I've seen many, and participated in my share, on other forums. They go nowhere and typically devolve quickly into nonsense as both sides go through their well-trodden paths of 'argument' on this issue and ride it well into dead horse territory.

 

[sealybobo]

It's impossible to not confuse you with the other retards on this thread and it's impossible to remember or keep track of what each and everyone of you believes. So if I'm arguing with you I can only assume you're one of them and not one of me good day sir

So when you respond to a post you don't actually respond to it. Pretty much what I figured. One hand on your johnson the other on your talking points.

"Oh me, oh me, oh me!!!!"

THats your question or point? That no one knows? So then what would a scientist do if you came to them with such evidence to a hypothesis you're trying to convince them of?

I'll tell you what they would do with it. They would throw it out do you understand that so to be agnostic about a theory that isn't even a theory yet it's insane. You're not neutral on this you don't believe God f*** marry you don't believe God talk to Moses you don't believe God talk to Joseph Smith or Muhammad or the Jehovah Witnesses you don't believe any of it so why are you exhausted about it? If you were talking about a generic God or creator then who cares he's thinking about you just as much as you're thinking about it ant in Ethiopia

Good grief. My only point, as indicated in my first pair, which you responded to, was that jerkoffs that shit on the holiday to insult those that celebrate so that they can get their own rocks off were/ are douchebags.

That stuff people type in the box and you respond to? Try reading it some time.

People who come here to debate this have been coming here long before xmas

Yah, no kidding. That changes nothing wrt to the post to which you responded, your repeated efforts to steer in the direction of a broader debate notwithstanding.

In terms of a broader debate, there is no 'winner', ever on this topic. I've seen many, and participated in my share, on other forums. They go nowhere and typically devolve quickly into nonsense as both sides go through their well-trodden paths of 'argument' on this issue and ride it well into dead horse territory.

Well I can tell you my intention is not to hurt good religious people. In fact I never spout this stuff in public. I come here because I hope eventually society will wake up and not need this crap.

I just feel that religions are bad for human beings and have maybe held us back 10,000 years. Imagine where we might be if we didn't fight all those religious wars. Imagine if stupid American Christians didn't fight the USSR in the cold war over some bullshit. Maybe we'd already be on Mars.

You know, you guys cry about the babies that are never born because they've been aborted. How about all the young men who died during the Thirty Years' War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Because of religion, their kids were never born and so instead of their ancestors being alive today, they are not because some religious nut cut their family line off.

 

[Fueri]

So when you respond to a post you don't actually respond to it. Pretty much what I figured. One hand on your johnson the other on your talking points.

"Oh me, oh me, oh me!!!!"

THats your question or point? That no one knows? So then what would a scientist do if you came to them with such evidence to a hypothesis you're trying to convince them of?

I'll tell you what they would do with it. They would throw it out do you understand that so to be agnostic about a theory that isn't even a theory yet it's insane. You're not neutral on this you don't believe God f*** marry you don't believe God talk to Moses you don't believe God talk to Joseph Smith or Muhammad or the Jehovah Witnesses you don't believe any of it so why are you exhausted about it? If you were talking about a generic God or creator then who cares he's thinking about you just as much as you're thinking about it ant in Ethiopia

Good grief. My only point, as indicated in my first pair, which you responded to, was that jerkoffs that shit on the holiday to insult those that celebrate so that they can get their own rocks off were/ are douchebags.

That stuff people type in the box and you respond to? Try reading it some time.

People who come here to debate this have been coming here long before xmas

Yah, no kidding. That changes nothing wrt to the post to which you responded, your repeated efforts to steer in the direction of a broader debate notwithstanding.

In terms of a broader debate, there is no 'winner', ever on this topic. I've seen many, and participated in my share, on other forums. They go nowhere and typically devolve quickly into nonsense as both sides go through their well-trodden paths of 'argument' on this issue and ride it well into dead horse territory.

Well I can tell you my intention is not to hurt good religious people. In fact I never spout this stuff in public. I come here because I hope eventually society will wake up and not need this crap.

I just feel that religions are bad for human beings and have maybe held us back 10,000 years. Imagine where we might be if we didn't fight all those religious wars. Imagine if stupid American Christians didn't fight the USSR in the cold war over some bullshit. Maybe we'd already be on Mars.

You know, you guys cry about the babies that are never born because they've been aborted. How about all the young men who died during the Thirty Years' War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Because of religion, their kids were never born and so instead of their ancestors being alive today, they are not because some religious nut cut their family line off.

"You guys?"

Another attempt to broad brush me into a category so you can then put words in my mouth which you can then dispute.

I think the abortion issue is settled. I think the late term abortions are beyond repugnant, and think someone has plenty of time to get it done before the abortee is developed enough to wander across the room and dial up a cab, so that is a real head-scratcher for me, but abortion in general is settled, far as I'm concerned.

 

[Tuatara]

There's no proof either way for Santa Claus either but I'm quite sure most adults are atheistic about the existence of him.

Another childish atheist game. We have answers for the presents under the tree. You have no answer for the universe. Get it?

What do you mean no answer for the universe? That is not a question. Also the idea of Santa came from many sources as I pointed out earlier. It still doesn't proove if he actually existed or not.

 

[Tuatara]

Oh, and there is no American Atheism. We don't have a club, don't go to meetings, we aren't organized and there is no movement.

But we are pleased to see despite being unorganized our numbers are growing.

Survey Says: Atheism is on the Rise Worldwide (and in America)

A new global survey on religiosity (PDF) by WIN-Gallup International has two big findings:

First, the United States has gone from being 1% godless in 2005 to 5% in 2012. (The percentage of people simply calling themselves non-religious is 30%, significantly higher than ever before.) That jumps us up quite a bit on the Global Atheism Index:

The other finding is that atheists are now 13% of the world population, an increase of 9% since 2005:

Interesting. You claim there's no movement, no organization but continue to speak collectively. Yes, most atheists here are just anti-Christians. I don't know about the rest of the world because I live here but I suspect it's similar. Talk to any atheist you want here and they will immediately start kicking the Bible around as proof there is no god.

Atheists simply don't believe in god. Any god. Since you live in a predominately christian area you would only hear about why an atheist does not believe in the christian god.

 

[Meriweather]

Well I can tell you my intention is not to hurt good religious people. In fact I never spout this stuff in public. I come here because I hope eventually society will wake up and not need this crap.

I just feel that religions are bad for human beings and have maybe held us back 10,000 years. Imagine where we might be if we didn't fight all those religious wars. Imagine if stupid American Christians didn't fight the USSR in the cold war over some bullshit. Maybe we'd already be on Mars.

You know, you guys cry about the babies that are never born because they've been aborted. How about all the young men who died during the Thirty Years' War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Because of religion, their kids were never born and so instead of their ancestors being alive today, they are not because some religious nut cut their family line off.

Wars have nothing to do with religion. It has to do with disputes over wealth, power, and territory, trying to wear a cloak of religion to give it some respectability. In Forums today, it's used to change the topic and a weak attempt to turn the tables.

Focus on God, on religion, instead of war. Why don't atheists seek God? Instead of trying to understand the theme of any Biblical story, what's with always bringing in satire and mockery? I understand people who teach or promote religious ways are not perfect, and we do not teach or act perfectly either. In the end, all we want is to assure people of the reality of God, and that their individual search for Him is well worth their while. Experiencing God will no more send someone off to fight a "religious war" than being pregnant will send someone to an abortion clinic.