So Atheists, What's Your Rationale In Your Belief Of No God?

No, but it tells us we should eat it, whereas this was rejected for a very long time until science verified it.

wiistation36000

Citation needed please.

No, but it tells us we should eat it, whereas this was rejected for a very long time until science verified it.

wiistation36000

Have a Merry Christmas atheists. I'm sure you'll feel the Christian spirit when opening those presents.GrindingAxe

[QUOTE="whatsit2ya"]

[QUOTE="kate_jones"]

I am a good person, perhaps not a good catholic, there are some pretty strange rules, different priests and popes have different opinions on what is acceptable and what isnt, I will just do my best, if that's not acceptable then so be it.

Ed_Cetera

why would your God not let you into the good afterlife even though you're a good person?

But according to a reilgion are you a good person due to good deeds or through prayer and following tradition? Is the Good Afterlife really only for people who follow traditions and prayer? Or can those who help others get in without following customs?

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]

[QUOTE="wiistation36000"]

"See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food."

Apparently religion found out that fruit is good for you sooner than science did. Just throwin that out there :P

wiistation36000

No, but it tells us we should eat it, whereas this was rejected for a very long time until science verified it.

[QUOTE="Ed_Cetera"][QUOTE="whatsit2ya"]

why would your God not let you into the good afterlife even though you're a good person?

whatsit2ya

But according to a reilgion are you a good person due to good deeds or through prayer and following tradition? Is the Good Afterlife really only for people who follow traditions and prayer? Or can those who help others get in without following customs?

[QUOTE="GrindingAxe"]Have a Merry Christmas atheists. I'm sure you'll feel the Christian spirit when opening those presents.GTR2addict

[QUOTE="wiistation36000"]No, but it tells us we should eat it, whereas this was rejected for a very long time until science verified it.

foxhound_fox

I suppose it could be open for interpretation, but it hints at it...

I don't know if you're religious or not but I'm going to assume you're not, so I'll put you in a believer's shoes.

The creator of the universe has just said he's given you fruit for food. Don't you think he intends for you to eat it?

[QUOTE="whatsit2ya"]

[QUOTE="Ed_Cetera"] Who defines what a good person is? Morality is relative.oh_boss

But according to a reilgion are you a good person due to good deeds or through prayer and following tradition? Is the Good Afterlife really only for people who follow traditions and prayer? Or can those who help others get in without following customs?

But there also verses in the Bible saying that homosexuals and people who work on the sabbath should be put to death. How can a religious person follow some areas of the Bible but not others?

I suppose it could be open for interpretation, but it hints at it...

I don't know if you're religious or not but I'm going to assume you're not, so I'll put you in a believer's shoes.

The creator of the universe has just said he's given you fruit for food. Don't you think he intends for you to eat it.wiistation36000

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]

[QUOTE="wiistation36000"]No, but it tells us we should eat it, whereas this was rejected for a very long time until science verified it.

wiistation36000

I suppose it could be open for interpretation, but it hints at it...

I don't know if you're religious or not but I'm going to assume you're not, so I'll put you in a believer's shoes.

The creator of the universe has just said he's given you fruit for food. Don't you think he intends for you to eat it?

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]

[QUOTE="wiistation36000"]No, but it tells us we should eat it, whereas this was rejected for a very long time until science verified it.

wiistation36000

I suppose it could be open for interpretation, but it hints at it...

I don't know if you're religious or not but I'm going to assume you're not, so I'll put you in a believer's shoes.

The creator of the universe has just said he's given you fruit for food. Don't you think he intends for you to eat it?

We used to eat fruits long before we made up any kind of religion dude. What are you talking about? We didn't need religion to proceed and eat fruits...

First, I am not atheist, I just don't believe in any religion or any scientific belief on how our world began.

My argument is the same as it was in the last thread we had about religion: Why would God create human beings, like Muslims or followers of other religions,that would reject God's own existenceand therefore, contradict himself. If they choose not to believe in him and they sin, or what Christan's consider sin, they will not be able to repent for their sins, because they do not believe in God,andtherefore, they will all go to Hell.

For example, think of all the women killed in the Middle East over things that their religion commands them to do, like always obeying their husbands and always wearing a veil in public. In God's eyes, he would probably consider it murder for people to kill for those reasons. He allowed the religion, that allowed the murder,to come into existence, if he really is omniscient, and therefore, condemnedthose peopleto Hell.

[QUOTE="wiistation36000"]

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]
1) How can you interpret that to mean that "fruit is good"? All it says is "fruit shall be your food." It doesn't say anything about it being "healthy," "beneficial" or "good for you."
2) Religion can never tell us "why" those things are "good" or "bad" for us. Does religion tell us that if we don't eat fruit that we will get scurvy? Does it explain how the body gets scurvy if it is deficient of Vitamin C?

BumFluff122

No, but it tells us we should eat it, whereas this was rejected for a very long time until science verified it.

Are you sure that person didn't know the health benefits? I'm not saying he/she did, but it's possible. Similar to how the Bible's sanitation laws "fit the boot" for today's scientifically proven sanitation concepts.

Read this before you deny it.

[QUOTE="oh_boss"][QUOTE="whatsit2ya"]

But according to a reilgion are you a good person due to good deeds or through prayer and following tradition? Is the Good Afterlife really only for people who follow traditions and prayer? Or can those who help others get in without following customs?

whatsit2ya

But there also verses in the Bible saying that homosexuals and people who work on the sabbath should be put to death. How can a religious person follow some areas of the Bible but not others?

[QUOTE="wiistation36000"]

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]
No it doesn't... it tells us that "trees that bear fruit will be our food." It is a common sense observation.

Science doesn't have to verify that trees that bear fruit will be our food. Unless you define science as simply as "observation."

oh_boss

I suppose it could be open for interpretation, but it hints at it...

I don't know if you're religious or not but I'm going to assume you're not, so I'll put you in a believer's shoes.

The creator of the universe has just said he's given you fruit for food. Don't you think he intends for you to eat it?

I used to eat fruits long before we made up any kind of religion dude. What are you talking about? We didn't need religion to proceed and eat fruits...

[QUOTE="GTR2addict"][QUOTE="GrindingAxe"]Have a Merry Christmas atheists. I'm sure you'll feel the Christian spirit when opening those presents.GrindingAxe

First, I am not atheist, I just don't believe in any religion or any scientific belief on how our world began.

My argument is the same as it was in the last thread we had about religion: Why would God create human beings, like Muslims or followers of other religions,that would reject God's own existenceand therefore, contradict himself. If they choose not to believe in him and they sin, or what Christan's consider sin, they will not be able to repent for their sins, because they do not believe in God,andtherefore, they will all go to Hell.

For example, think of all the women killed in the Middle East over things that their religion commands them to do, like always obeying their husbands and always wearing a veil in public. In God's eyes, he would probably consider it murder for people to kill for those reasons. He allowed the religion, that allowed the murder,to come into existence, if he really is omniscient, and therefore, condemnedthose peopleto Hell.

RazerBlade13

[QUOTE="oh_boss"]

[QUOTE="wiistation36000"]

I suppose it could be open for interpretation, but it hints at it...

I don't know if you're religious or not but I'm going to assume you're not, so I'll put you in a believer's shoes.

The creator of the universe has just said he's given you fruit for food. Don't you think he intends for you to eat it?

wiistation36000

I used to eat fruits long before we made up any kind of religion dude. What are you talking about? We didn't need religion to proceed and eat fruits...

[QUOTE="whatsit2ya"]

[QUOTE="oh_boss"] There are the ten amendments.oh_boss

But there also verses in the Bible saying that homosexuals and people who work on the sabbath should be put to death. How can a religious person follow some areas of the Bible but not others?

But surely if it is the one true religion then it wouldn't need ammending? Does that mean that Christians of the 9th century have gone to Hell because they don't follow the 'updated' version of Christianity?

[QUOTE="oh_boss"]

[QUOTE="wiistation36000"]

I suppose it could be open for interpretation, but it hints at it...

I don't know if you're religious or not but I'm going to assume you're not, so I'll put you in a believer's shoes.

The creator of the universe has just said he's given you fruit for food. Don't you think he intends for you to eat it?

wiistation36000

I used to eat fruits long before we made up any kind of religion dude. What are you talking about? We didn't need religion to proceed and eat fruits...

[QUOTE="oh_boss"][QUOTE="whatsit2ya"]

But there also verses in the Bible saying that homosexuals and people who work on the sabbath should be put to death. How can a religious person follow some areas of the Bible but not others?

whatsit2ya

But surely if it is the one true religion then it wouldn't need ammending? Does that mean that Christians of the 9th century have gone to Hell because they don't follow the 'updated' version of Christianity?

[QUOTE="wiistation36000"]I suppose it could be open for interpretation, but it hints at it...

I don't know if you're religious or not but I'm going to assume you're not, so I'll put you in a believer's shoes.

The creator of the universe has just said he's given you fruit for food. Don't you think he intends for you to eat it.foxhound_fox

[QUOTE="wiistation36000"]

[QUOTE="oh_boss"]

I used to eat fruits long before we made up any kind of religion dude. What are you talking about? We didn't need religion to proceed and eat fruits...

GTR2addict

[QUOTE="BumFluff122"]

[QUOTE="wiistation36000"]

No, but it tells us we should eat it, whereas this was rejected for a very long time until science verified it.

wiistation36000

Are you sure that person didn't know the health benefits? I'm not saying he/she did, but it's possible. Similar to how the Bible's sanitation laws "fit the boot" for today's scientifically proven sanitation concepts.

Read this before you deny it.

[QUOTE="whatsit2ya"]

[QUOTE="oh_boss"] That's why if a religion doesn't advance along with society, people get rid of said religion. Either religion will be "modernised" or it shall cease to exist.oh_boss

But surely if it is the one true religion then it wouldn't need ammending? Does that mean that Christians of the 9th century have gone to Hell because they don't follow the 'updated' version of Christianity?

Wait... are youa Theist or not? I just sort of assumed...

We should really announce our beliefs before the argument begins :P I am an Atheist.

[QUOTE="whatsit2ya"]

[QUOTE="oh_boss"] There are the ten amendments.oh_boss

But there also verses in the Bible saying that homosexuals and people who work on the sabbath should be put to death. How can a religious person follow some areas of the Bible but not others?

You can follow some bits and not others as I do, I'm willing to go to hell for disagreeing with somethings, killing people who work on sundays or who are gay doesnt sound like a very nice thing to do and not something I condone. Like oh_boss says it needs to get with the times.

This is something I touched on earlier some priests and even popes have differing opinions than the bible.

[QUOTE="oh_boss"][QUOTE="whatsit2ya"]

But surely if it is the one true religion then it wouldn't need ammending? Does that mean that Christians of the 9th century have gone to Hell because they don't follow the 'updated' version of Christianity?

whatsit2ya

Wait... are youa Theist or not? I just sort of assumed...

We should really announce our beliefs before the argument begins :P I am an Atheist.

I do not believe in any higher power because there is zero evidence. Severed_Hand

Maybe the creator wants us to be healthy. That would depend on the situation, but seeing as fruit IS indeed good for you...

wiistation36000

[QUOTE="Severed_Hand"]I do not believe in any higher power because there is zero evidence. oh_boss

So there isn't anything supernatural? D:oh_boss

[QUOTE="oh_boss"] So there isn't anything supernatural? D:foxhound_fox

As long as there is something supernatural, religion will continue existing.

[QUOTE="HipYoungster42"]

[QUOTE="curtdoggLP5"]

The whole "Designed by intelligence" argument is possibly the failest thing ever. Your theory goes by the idea that something complex must have been created by an intelligence. This argument fails right here to begin with, as a designer would have be designed, as they are also a complex being.

Not to mention the fact that Evolution has been proven.

gubrashadow

God's origin is a completely different matter, in which philosophy would have to be injected into this debate. For the third time in a row, I'm not going to be intentionally injecting any form of philosophy into this argument, for philosophy is not something to be compacted into a single post.

It's called the "Theory of Evolution" for a reason. Until it can be 100% proven with no missing links, then I will acknowledge as a theory and nothing more.

I'm not saying evolution is wrong; what I'm saying is that the theory of evolution hasn't been set in stone as scientific law. It is still very much a work-in-progress. Until it can be concretely proven as scientific law with no missing links, I will not acknowledge it as fact. I find that to be quite logical.

@oh_boss: First, tell me this: Do you believe in God or not? Through all of this, I still haven't been able to get the answer. Could you please clarify?

[QUOTE="gubrashadow"]

[QUOTE="HipYoungster42"]

God's origin is a completely different matter, in which philosophy would have to be injected into this debate. For the third time in a row, I'm not going to be intentionally injecting any form of philosophy into this argument, for philosophy is not something to be compacted into a single post.

It's called the "Theory of Evolution" for a reason. Until it can be 100% proven with no missing links, then I will acknowledge as a theory and nothing more.

HipYoungster42

I'm not saying evolution is wrong; what I'm saying is that the theory of evolution hasn't been set in stone as scientific law. It is still very much a work-in-progress. Until it can be concretely proven as scientific law with no missing links, I will not acknowledge it as fact. I find that to be quite logical.

@oh_boss: First, tell me this: Do you believe in God or not? Through all of this, I still haven't been able to get the answer. Could you please clarify?

@ HipYoungster42: Which god? D:

[QUOTE="whatsit2ya"]

[QUOTE="kate_jones"]

I am a good person, perhaps not a good catholic, there are some pretty strange rules, different priests and popes have different opinions on what is acceptable and what isnt, I will just do my best, if that's not acceptable then so be it.

kate_jones

why would your God not let you into the good afterlife even though you're a good person?

because my opinion of what a good person is may not be the same as other peoples or gods.

Anyway this is about atheism, to the person who explained about animals having morales that is a good point, but we can't ask an animal what they believe in. A few of you have said you like to have a good life and be good people while being an atheist, same result in the end isnt it. Seems strange to say you dont believe in a god, but youre going to do what he says, not because its what god wants but its because you just happen to want the same thing as a god you dont believe in.

I would have thought it was more effective to be an atheist who disagree's with god.

One can take the morals in the story of the bible without believing in the stories. Just as one can find good messages and believe in morals found in Star Wras, but that doesn't mean they have to believe in the force.

As long as there is something supernatural, religion will continue existing.

oh_boss

[QUOTE="oh_boss"]

As long as there is something supernatural, religion will continue existing.

foxhound_fox

Yes. It interpretes the supernatural. It translates it into something we can relate or understand. Long ago they believed in the gods of Olympus because the couldn't explain phenomena. Currently we believe in God because we cannot explain death, how big the universe is etc. It's just a human need. Like smoking, music or art. We need to coprehend everything.

[QUOTE="GTR2addict"]

[QUOTE="wiistation36000"] Dude, how old are you?? O_O

whatsit2ya

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]

[QUOTE="oh_boss"]

As long as there is something supernatural, religion will continue existing.

oh_boss

Yes. It interpretes the supernatural. It translates it into something we can relate or understand. Long ago they believed in the gods of Olympus because the couldn't explain phenomena. Currently we believe in God because we cannot explain death, how big the universe is etc. It's just a human need. Like smoking, music or art. We need to coprehend everything.

Even if one society uses the god Zeus on Mount Olympis to explain lightning bolts coming from the sky.. and can't explain them any other way.. that doesn't make the lightning bolts super natural.. they are still a natural phenomina without a proper explanation.

[QUOTE="oh_boss"]

[QUOTE="foxhound_fox"]
Not exactly... religion is merely conceptualization of the supernatural... not actual supernatural things.

EMOEVOLUTION

Yes. It interpretes the supernatural. It translates it into something we can relate or understand. Long ago they believed in the gods of Olympus because the couldn't explain phenomena. Currently we believe in God because we cannot explain death, how big the universe is etc. It's just a human need. Like smoking, music or art. We need to coprehend everything.

Even if one society uses the god Zeus on Mount Olympis to explain lightning bolts coming from the sky.. and can't explain them any other way.. that doesn't make the lightning bolts super natural.. they are still a natural phenomina without a proper explanation.

I know all these are actually "natural". But since we know little of them they seem distinct to our definition of natural.

Yes. It interpretes the supernatural. It translates it into something we can relate or understand. Long ago they believed in the gods of Olympus because the couldn't explain phenomena. Currently we believe in God because we cannot explain death, how big the universe is etc. It's just a human need. Like smoking, music or art. We need to coprehend everything.

oh_boss

[QUOTE="gubrashadow"]

[QUOTE="HipYoungster42"]

God's origin is a completely different matter, in which philosophy would have to be injected into this debate. For the third time in a row, I'm not going to be intentionally injecting any form of philosophy into this argument, for philosophy is not something to be compacted into a single post.

It's called the "Theory of Evolution" for a reason. Until it can be 100% proven with no missing links, then I will acknowledge as a theory and nothing more.

HipYoungster42

I'm not saying evolution is wrong; what I'm saying is that the theory of evolution hasn't been set in stone as scientific law. It is still very much a work-in-progress. Until it can be concretely proven as scientific law with no missing links, I will not acknowledge it as fact. I find that to be quite logical.

@oh_boss: First, tell me this: Do you believe in God or not? Through all of this, I still haven't been able to get the answer. Could you please clarify?

Gravity is still just a theory, do you believe in it? Evolution is one of the most well-supported (perhaps THE most well-supported) scientific theories in existence. Most of the worlds scientists would tell you that you might as well consider it to be fact. Even if science works upon the basis that it must not be considered to be such.

[QUOTE="HipYoungster42"]

[QUOTE="curtdoggLP5"]

The whole "Designed by intelligence" argument is possibly the failest thing ever. Your theory goes by the idea that something complex must have been created by an intelligence. This argument fails right here to begin with, as a designer would have be designed, as they are also a complex being.

Not to mention the fact that Evolution has been proven.

jus2nyce

God's origin is a completely different matter, in which philosophy would have to be injected into this debate. For the third time in a row, I'm not going to be intentionally injecting any form of philosophy into this argument, for philosophy is not something to be compacted into a single post.

It's called the "Theory of Evolution" for a reason. Until it can be 100% proven with no missing links, then I will acknowledge as a theory and nothing more.

In the sciences, a scientific theory (also called an empirical theory) comprises a collection of concepts, including abstractions of observable phenomena expressed as quantifiable properties, together with rules (called scientific laws) that express relationships between observations of such concepts. A scientific theory is constructed to conform to available empirical data about such observations, and is put forth as a principle or body of principles for explaining a ****of phenomena.

Wiki

@gubrushadow: If you don't even know what God is, why do you bother practicing religion? I find that a practice with uncertanties must not be very validable.:?

@jherbach1222: Why don't you actually ask theists their motives for their beliefs before you make such claims for them, m'kay?;)

[QUOTE="oh_boss"]

Yes. It interpretes the supernatural. It translates it into something we can relate or understand. Long ago they believed in the gods of Olympus because the couldn't explain phenomena. Currently we believe in God because we cannot explain death, how big the universe is etc. It's just a human need. Like smoking, music or art. We need to coprehend everything.

foxhound_fox

"What is the meaning of life?"