Praising God in chat offends me
Ok, I ll say atheisim is more than a lack of belief, it is a belief in no god. A as a prefix means not, or non thei represents god/religion, and ism is basically a belief/practice
so atheisim, i would say is not the lack of belief in god, but rather the belief in no god.
i think agnosticism, is probably more properly a lack of belief.the default position is always negative until proven otherwise. “I have a dolphin in my bath” “I don’t believe in you”. Atheism is a similar deal. Still you can’t believe in lack of belief. That’s kind of like playing “I’m not going to play chess because I dislike it”.
Right on. Atheism isn’t a belief in the lack of something. It’s the refusal to accept untestable theories as explanations for what happens in the universe. I dismiss god as an explanation for things for the same reason that I dismiss the possibility that my car runs on skittles that pretend to be gasoline.
I don’t spend my day thinking of all of the things that God isn’t doing any more that I spend it thinking of how my dog isn’t causing the sun to emit light. Atheism is a belief in what IS rather than what ISN’T. It just so happens that theism is one of the dominant forces in our world, so we have to define ourselves by saying we aren’t part of that mindset.
if you dont know what your car runs on at all, you shouldnt really eliminate skittles from being the answer. People could build a car that runs on skittles, and you would thus be incorrect. In fact, being that skittles can power animals movements, it really isnt that improbably that one could create a car that uses the chemical energy in skittles to power a vehicle.
People have a bad habit of thinking because they do not know something, it does not exist. That isnt a logical argument. This is the same logic people would have used against radio waves, infrared and ultraviolet colors, atoms, etc.
a lack of belief, from the belief that something is false, those are two very different ideas.
now, you are free to believe whatever you want, and spend no time thinking about things you dont care about. But the lack of proof, is not a proof that something is not true. That is a mistake in logic.
I think the key was “skittles pretending to be gasoline” but good job homing in on the fact that I mentioned skittles.
Atheism isn’t the belief that God doesn’t exist. It is the lack of belief that God is a necessity for describing the universe. It is the act of saying “why did that just happen” without ascribing the possibility of anything but what is observed. If I don’t know what my car runs on, I will try to find out. I won’t say “I don’t know so it’s god until I prove otherwise.” The only reason that atheists define themselves according to what they aren’t is because the majority of people we meet define themselves by a different standard and we need to distinguish somehow.
My other posts were lost to the forum squirrels, apparently.
so by your definition, what is the difference between an atheist, and someone who says i dunno.
or is there no difference in your opinion?That is nonsense. Of course an atheist will say “I dunno” if they don’t know something. Here’s the difference: an atheist would say “I dunno, so I’ll find out,” an agnostic would say “I dunno, so I’ll find out but I can’t say for sure that it isn’t god,” and a Theist would say “God sure works in mysterious ways.”
Agnosticism and Atheism are not exclusive. Most Atheists are Agnostic Atheists in that they don’t believe in a deity but they don’t know for sure.
See my picture in my previous post.
Ok, I ll say atheisim is more than a lack of belief, it is a belief in no god. A as a prefix means not, or non thei represents god/religion, and ism is basically a belief/practice
so atheisim, i would say is not the lack of belief in god, but rather the belief in no god.
i think agnosticism, is probably more properly a lack of belief.the default position is always negative until proven otherwise. “I have a dolphin in my bath” “I don’t believe in you”. Atheism is a similar deal. Still you can’t believe in lack of belief. That’s kind of like playing “I’m not going to play chess because I dislike it”.
Right on. Atheism isn’t a belief in the lack of something. It’s the refusal to accept untestable theories as explanations for what happens in the universe. I dismiss god as an explanation for things for the same reason that I dismiss the possibility that my car runs on skittles that pretend to be gasoline.
I don’t spend my day thinking of all of the things that God isn’t doing any more that I spend it thinking of how my dog isn’t causing the sun to emit light. Atheism is a belief in what IS rather than what ISN’T. It just so happens that theism is one of the dominant forces in our world, so we have to define ourselves by saying we aren’t part of that mindset.
if you dont know what your car runs on at all, you shouldnt really eliminate skittles from being the answer. People could build a car that runs on skittles, and you would thus be incorrect. In fact, being that skittles can power animals movements, it really isnt that improbably that one could create a car that uses the chemical energy in skittles to power a vehicle.
People have a bad habit of thinking because they do not know something, it does not exist. That isnt a logical argument. This is the same logic people would have used against radio waves, infrared and ultraviolet colors, atoms, etc.
a lack of belief, from the belief that something is false, those are two very different ideas.
now, you are free to believe whatever you want, and spend no time thinking about things you dont care about. But the lack of proof, is not a proof that something is not true. That is a mistake in logic.
I think the key was “skittles pretending to be gasoline” but good job homing in on the fact that I mentioned skittles.
Atheism isn’t the belief that God doesn’t exist. It is the lack of belief that God is a necessity for describing the universe. It is the act of saying “why did that just happen” without ascribing the possibility of anything but what is observed. If I don’t know what my car runs on, I will try to find out. I won’t say “I don’t know so it’s god until I prove otherwise.” The only reason that atheists define themselves according to what they aren’t is because the majority of people we meet define themselves by a different standard and we need to distinguish somehow.
My other posts were lost to the forum squirrels, apparently.
so by your definition, what is the difference between an atheist, and someone who says i dunno.
or is there no difference in your opinion?That is nonsense. Of course an atheist will say “I dunno” if they don’t know something. Here’s the difference: an atheist would say “I dunno, so I’ll find out,” an agnostic would say “I dunno, so I’ll find out but I can’t say for sure that it isn’t god,” and a Theist would say “God sure works in mysterious ways.”
Im saying say this is the question
Does god exist?
does the atheist answer yes, no, or i dont know. as far as you see it.
Am I the only one who thinks this argument is incredibly stupid and pointless?
If you believe in a deity, fine. If you don’t believe in a deity, fine.
Maybe we could, I don’t know, go with whatever makes sense to us and leave everyone else to do the same?
Do not allow the perfect to be the enemy of the good.
Ok, I ll say atheisim is more than a lack of belief, it is a belief in no god. A as a prefix means not, or non thei represents god/religion, and ism is basically a belief/practice
so atheisim, i would say is not the lack of belief in god, but rather the belief in no god.
i think agnosticism, is probably more properly a lack of belief.the default position is always negative until proven otherwise. “I have a dolphin in my bath” “I don’t believe in you”. Atheism is a similar deal. Still you can’t believe in lack of belief. That’s kind of like playing “I’m not going to play chess because I dislike it”.
Right on. Atheism isn’t a belief in the lack of something. It’s the refusal to accept untestable theories as explanations for what happens in the universe. I dismiss god as an explanation for things for the same reason that I dismiss the possibility that my car runs on skittles that pretend to be gasoline.
I don’t spend my day thinking of all of the things that God isn’t doing any more that I spend it thinking of how my dog isn’t causing the sun to emit light. Atheism is a belief in what IS rather than what ISN’T. It just so happens that theism is one of the dominant forces in our world, so we have to define ourselves by saying we aren’t part of that mindset.
if you dont know what your car runs on at all, you shouldnt really eliminate skittles from being the answer. People could build a car that runs on skittles, and you would thus be incorrect. In fact, being that skittles can power animals movements, it really isnt that improbably that one could create a car that uses the chemical energy in skittles to power a vehicle.
People have a bad habit of thinking because they do not know something, it does not exist. That isnt a logical argument. This is the same logic people would have used against radio waves, infrared and ultraviolet colors, atoms, etc.
a lack of belief, from the belief that something is false, those are two very different ideas.
now, you are free to believe whatever you want, and spend no time thinking about things you dont care about. But the lack of proof, is not a proof that something is not true. That is a mistake in logic.
I think the key was “skittles pretending to be gasoline” but good job homing in on the fact that I mentioned skittles.
Atheism isn’t the belief that God doesn’t exist. It is the lack of belief that God is a necessity for describing the universe. It is the act of saying “why did that just happen” without ascribing the possibility of anything but what is observed. If I don’t know what my car runs on, I will try to find out. I won’t say “I don’t know so it’s god until I prove otherwise.” The only reason that atheists define themselves according to what they aren’t is because the majority of people we meet define themselves by a different standard and we need to distinguish somehow.
My other posts were lost to the forum squirrels, apparently.
so by your definition, what is the difference between an atheist, and someone who says i dunno.
or is there no difference in your opinion?That is nonsense. Of course an atheist will say “I dunno” if they don’t know something. Here’s the difference: an atheist would say “I dunno, so I’ll find out,” an agnostic would say “I dunno, so I’ll find out but I can’t say for sure that it isn’t god,” and a Theist would say “God sure works in mysterious ways.”
That is way to general of statement to make.
Being a theist doesn’t mean they don’t want to find out more about how the universe/world came to be and how things work. There are theist astronomers, geologists, evolution scientists, ect; there are theists in all forms of science.
By that same logic I could discuss disliking a particular race of people, because that’s my opinion. That opinion would be very offensive, but by what you’re saying I should be allowed to express that without consequences.
People are already doing that, in and also out of game, whether you allow them or not.
People can say whatever they want but there are always consequences, even though they have the freedom of speech. The law doesn’t protect us against jerks, bigots, or idiots. You have the freedom of speech, but that doesn’t imply that everything you say would be popular with the people around you.
And really, people of any religion is and should continue to be allowed in this game. There would be Christians, Muslims, Buddhists, etc. around you, so what? Not everyone should be an Atheist and not everyone should be FORCED into a single religion called Atheism (yes it is also its own ‘religion’).
(edited by DarkSpirit.7046)
Ok, I ll say atheisim is more than a lack of belief, it is a belief in no god. A as a prefix means not, or non thei represents god/religion, and ism is basically a belief/practice
so atheisim, i would say is not the lack of belief in god, but rather the belief in no god.
i think agnosticism, is probably more properly a lack of belief.the default position is always negative until proven otherwise. “I have a dolphin in my bath” “I don’t believe in you”. Atheism is a similar deal. Still you can’t believe in lack of belief. That’s kind of like playing “I’m not going to play chess because I dislike it”.
Right on. Atheism isn’t a belief in the lack of something. It’s the refusal to accept untestable theories as explanations for what happens in the universe. I dismiss god as an explanation for things for the same reason that I dismiss the possibility that my car runs on skittles that pretend to be gasoline.
I don’t spend my day thinking of all of the things that God isn’t doing any more that I spend it thinking of how my dog isn’t causing the sun to emit light. Atheism is a belief in what IS rather than what ISN’T. It just so happens that theism is one of the dominant forces in our world, so we have to define ourselves by saying we aren’t part of that mindset.
if you dont know what your car runs on at all, you shouldnt really eliminate skittles from being the answer. People could build a car that runs on skittles, and you would thus be incorrect. In fact, being that skittles can power animals movements, it really isnt that improbably that one could create a car that uses the chemical energy in skittles to power a vehicle.
People have a bad habit of thinking because they do not know something, it does not exist. That isnt a logical argument. This is the same logic people would have used against radio waves, infrared and ultraviolet colors, atoms, etc.
a lack of belief, from the belief that something is false, those are two very different ideas.
now, you are free to believe whatever you want, and spend no time thinking about things you dont care about. But the lack of proof, is not a proof that something is not true. That is a mistake in logic.
I think the key was “skittles pretending to be gasoline” but good job homing in on the fact that I mentioned skittles.
Atheism isn’t the belief that God doesn’t exist. It is the lack of belief that God is a necessity for describing the universe. It is the act of saying “why did that just happen” without ascribing the possibility of anything but what is observed. If I don’t know what my car runs on, I will try to find out. I won’t say “I don’t know so it’s god until I prove otherwise.” The only reason that atheists define themselves according to what they aren’t is because the majority of people we meet define themselves by a different standard and we need to distinguish somehow.
My other posts were lost to the forum squirrels, apparently.
so by your definition, what is the difference between an atheist, and someone who says i dunno.
or is there no difference in your opinion?That is nonsense. Of course an atheist will say “I dunno” if they don’t know something. Here’s the difference: an atheist would say “I dunno, so I’ll find out,” an agnostic would say “I dunno, so I’ll find out but I can’t say for sure that it isn’t god,” and a Theist would say “God sure works in mysterious ways.”
Im saying say this is the question
Does god exist?
does the atheist answer yes, no, or i dont know. as far as you see it.
No and I don’t know = Atheist
Yes = Theist
Ok, I ll say atheisim is more than a lack of belief, it is a belief in no god. A as a prefix means not, or non thei represents god/religion, and ism is basically a belief/practice
so atheisim, i would say is not the lack of belief in god, but rather the belief in no god.
i think agnosticism, is probably more properly a lack of belief.the default position is always negative until proven otherwise. “I have a dolphin in my bath” “I don’t believe in you”. Atheism is a similar deal. Still you can’t believe in lack of belief. That’s kind of like playing “I’m not going to play chess because I dislike it”.
Right on. Atheism isn’t a belief in the lack of something. It’s the refusal to accept untestable theories as explanations for what happens in the universe. I dismiss god as an explanation for things for the same reason that I dismiss the possibility that my car runs on skittles that pretend to be gasoline.
I don’t spend my day thinking of all of the things that God isn’t doing any more that I spend it thinking of how my dog isn’t causing the sun to emit light. Atheism is a belief in what IS rather than what ISN’T. It just so happens that theism is one of the dominant forces in our world, so we have to define ourselves by saying we aren’t part of that mindset.
if you dont know what your car runs on at all, you shouldnt really eliminate skittles from being the answer. People could build a car that runs on skittles, and you would thus be incorrect. In fact, being that skittles can power animals movements, it really isnt that improbably that one could create a car that uses the chemical energy in skittles to power a vehicle.
People have a bad habit of thinking because they do not know something, it does not exist. That isnt a logical argument. This is the same logic people would have used against radio waves, infrared and ultraviolet colors, atoms, etc.
a lack of belief, from the belief that something is false, those are two very different ideas.
now, you are free to believe whatever you want, and spend no time thinking about things you dont care about. But the lack of proof, is not a proof that something is not true. That is a mistake in logic.
I think the key was “skittles pretending to be gasoline” but good job homing in on the fact that I mentioned skittles.
Atheism isn’t the belief that God doesn’t exist. It is the lack of belief that God is a necessity for describing the universe. It is the act of saying “why did that just happen” without ascribing the possibility of anything but what is observed. If I don’t know what my car runs on, I will try to find out. I won’t say “I don’t know so it’s god until I prove otherwise.” The only reason that atheists define themselves according to what they aren’t is because the majority of people we meet define themselves by a different standard and we need to distinguish somehow.
My other posts were lost to the forum squirrels, apparently.
so by your definition, what is the difference between an atheist, and someone who says i dunno.
or is there no difference in your opinion?That is nonsense. Of course an atheist will say “I dunno” if they don’t know something. Here’s the difference: an atheist would say “I dunno, so I’ll find out,” an agnostic would say “I dunno, so I’ll find out but I can’t say for sure that it isn’t god,” and a Theist would say “God sure works in mysterious ways.”
Agnosticism and Atheism are not exclusive. Most Atheists are Agnostic Atheists in that they don’t believe in a deity but they don’t know for sure.
See my picture in my previous post.
i see your picture, but thats doesnt really make sense. Some one who believes something cannot be unsure. If you are unsure, you do not believe.
not having proof btw, does not make you unsure, it just means you have no proof.
That diagram basically implies knowledge as a degree of belief, which i dont think is an accurate representation of what knowledge means.
Ok, I ll say atheisim is more than a lack of belief, it is a belief in no god. A as a prefix means not, or non thei represents god/religion, and ism is basically a belief/practice
so atheisim, i would say is not the lack of belief in god, but rather the belief in no god.
i think agnosticism, is probably more properly a lack of belief.the default position is always negative until proven otherwise. “I have a dolphin in my bath” “I don’t believe in you”. Atheism is a similar deal. Still you can’t believe in lack of belief. That’s kind of like playing “I’m not going to play chess because I dislike it”.
Right on. Atheism isn’t a belief in the lack of something. It’s the refusal to accept untestable theories as explanations for what happens in the universe. I dismiss god as an explanation for things for the same reason that I dismiss the possibility that my car runs on skittles that pretend to be gasoline.
I don’t spend my day thinking of all of the things that God isn’t doing any more that I spend it thinking of how my dog isn’t causing the sun to emit light. Atheism is a belief in what IS rather than what ISN’T. It just so happens that theism is one of the dominant forces in our world, so we have to define ourselves by saying we aren’t part of that mindset.
if you dont know what your car runs on at all, you shouldnt really eliminate skittles from being the answer. People could build a car that runs on skittles, and you would thus be incorrect. In fact, being that skittles can power animals movements, it really isnt that improbably that one could create a car that uses the chemical energy in skittles to power a vehicle.
People have a bad habit of thinking because they do not know something, it does not exist. That isnt a logical argument. This is the same logic people would have used against radio waves, infrared and ultraviolet colors, atoms, etc.
a lack of belief, from the belief that something is false, those are two very different ideas.
now, you are free to believe whatever you want, and spend no time thinking about things you dont care about. But the lack of proof, is not a proof that something is not true. That is a mistake in logic.
I think the key was “skittles pretending to be gasoline” but good job homing in on the fact that I mentioned skittles.
Atheism isn’t the belief that God doesn’t exist. It is the lack of belief that God is a necessity for describing the universe. It is the act of saying “why did that just happen” without ascribing the possibility of anything but what is observed. If I don’t know what my car runs on, I will try to find out. I won’t say “I don’t know so it’s god until I prove otherwise.” The only reason that atheists define themselves according to what they aren’t is because the majority of people we meet define themselves by a different standard and we need to distinguish somehow.
My other posts were lost to the forum squirrels, apparently.
so by your definition, what is the difference between an atheist, and someone who says i dunno.
or is there no difference in your opinion?That is nonsense. Of course an atheist will say “I dunno” if they don’t know something. Here’s the difference: an atheist would say “I dunno, so I’ll find out,” an agnostic would say “I dunno, so I’ll find out but I can’t say for sure that it isn’t god,” and a Theist would say “God sure works in mysterious ways.”
Im saying say this is the question
Does god exist?
does the atheist answer yes, no, or i dont know. as far as you see it.
That’s like asking how many things do you think don’t exist.
The atheist would say that based on our observations of the universe, the creatures described in religious texts are not causing what we observe. Nor is Harry Potter, Mrs
Doubtfire, Lord Xenu, and so on. Asking what isn’t causing something would result in an infinite and meaningless list.
To which the Theist would undoubtedly reply that we aren’t looking hard enough or that Allah is the force BEHIND the force that we observe. An agnostic would leave the possibility for a god as the explanation, whereas the atheist wouldn’t consider the possibility of a god without evidence leading us to that conclusion in the first place.
Ok, I ll say atheisim is more than a lack of belief, it is a belief in no god. A as a prefix means not, or non thei represents god/religion, and ism is basically a belief/practice
so atheisim, i would say is not the lack of belief in god, but rather the belief in no god.
i think agnosticism, is probably more properly a lack of belief.the default position is always negative until proven otherwise. “I have a dolphin in my bath” “I don’t believe in you”. Atheism is a similar deal. Still you can’t believe in lack of belief. That’s kind of like playing “I’m not going to play chess because I dislike it”.
Right on. Atheism isn’t a belief in the lack of something. It’s the refusal to accept untestable theories as explanations for what happens in the universe. I dismiss god as an explanation for things for the same reason that I dismiss the possibility that my car runs on skittles that pretend to be gasoline.
I don’t spend my day thinking of all of the things that God isn’t doing any more that I spend it thinking of how my dog isn’t causing the sun to emit light. Atheism is a belief in what IS rather than what ISN’T. It just so happens that theism is one of the dominant forces in our world, so we have to define ourselves by saying we aren’t part of that mindset.
if you dont know what your car runs on at all, you shouldnt really eliminate skittles from being the answer. People could build a car that runs on skittles, and you would thus be incorrect. In fact, being that skittles can power animals movements, it really isnt that improbably that one could create a car that uses the chemical energy in skittles to power a vehicle.
People have a bad habit of thinking because they do not know something, it does not exist. That isnt a logical argument. This is the same logic people would have used against radio waves, infrared and ultraviolet colors, atoms, etc.
a lack of belief, from the belief that something is false, those are two very different ideas.
now, you are free to believe whatever you want, and spend no time thinking about things you dont care about. But the lack of proof, is not a proof that something is not true. That is a mistake in logic.
I think the key was “skittles pretending to be gasoline” but good job homing in on the fact that I mentioned skittles.
Atheism isn’t the belief that God doesn’t exist. It is the lack of belief that God is a necessity for describing the universe. It is the act of saying “why did that just happen” without ascribing the possibility of anything but what is observed. If I don’t know what my car runs on, I will try to find out. I won’t say “I don’t know so it’s god until I prove otherwise.” The only reason that atheists define themselves according to what they aren’t is because the majority of people we meet define themselves by a different standard and we need to distinguish somehow.
My other posts were lost to the forum squirrels, apparently.
so by your definition, what is the difference between an atheist, and someone who says i dunno.
or is there no difference in your opinion?That is nonsense. Of course an atheist will say “I dunno” if they don’t know something. Here’s the difference: an atheist would say “I dunno, so I’ll find out,” an agnostic would say “I dunno, so I’ll find out but I can’t say for sure that it isn’t god,” and a Theist would say “God sure works in mysterious ways.”
That is way to general of statement to make.
Being a theist doesn’t mean they don’t want to find out more about how the universe/world came to be and how things work. There are theist astronomers, geologists, evolution scientists, ect; there are theists in all forms of science.
Yes, and it’s ironic. At some point you need to attribute the existence of phenomena to god, or else you’ll keep looking for the answer behind the answer and keep finding non-religious explanations for your questions, at which point god might as well not exist if it has no effect on the universe.
Every time we ask “why” we get an answer that is something other than god or angels dancing on the head of a pin. Every single time. The mental gymnastics required to shift the effect of God one level further down the answer chain must be exhausting.
Usually debates like this come down to “God exists!” “No he doesn’t!”.
But this time it comes down to discussing wether atheists have a lack of belief or simply believe god doesn’t exist. Interesting turn of events.
Dear A-net: Please nerf rock. Paper is fine
~Sincerely, Scissors
~Sincerely, Scissors
To which the Theist would undoubtedly reply that we aren’t looking hard enough or that Allah is the force BEHIND the force that we observe. An agnostic would leave the possibility for a god as the explanation, whereas the atheist wouldn’t consider the possibility of a god without evidence leading us to that conclusion in the first place.
That sounds like a fallacy to me. Just because we do not have evidence of something, doesn’t necessarily imply that it doesn’t exist. Sure, it doesn’t imply that it exists either, but I said still holds true.
For example, we have no evidence that alien lifeforms exist, yet most scientists that you ask today would think that they do. In other words, they have “faith” that they do exist even though they have no real evidence to support that other than just probability. Sometimes even the progress of science and technology requires a leap of faith.
(edited by DarkSpirit.7046)
Why hasn’t this thread been locked? It doesn’t serve any purpose except to be inflammatory.
Don’t worry, some day the whole bible and jesus thing will go out of style like all New Age religions do at some point.
Christianity has been around for over 2000 years and the Christian God has been worshiped for approximately 4000 years before that. What you say is highly unlikely to ever happen.
Why is it unlikely? It spread here around 900 years ago during the northern crusades and our old gods were around for thousands of years before that. Why wouldn’t the same thing happen again when the next big thing comes?
Those ‘old’ gods, as you put it, are still worshiped in some places. Even in America. The only god’s that I know of that have come close to extinction are the greek gods (Zeus, etc). But you can still find a few people who believe in them too. They are younger gods, however, than the Christian God, who is the oldest known God to be worshiped anywhere.
This is incorrect. Judaism is roughly 3000 years old. Christianity is younger than that. Greek, Roman, Celtic, Egyptian, etc pantheons predate Judaism.
Don’t look at me like that. Whatever you’ve heard, it’s probably not true.
Religion as a whole is the cause for hate, world wars, Yes i said World wars its a fact. Leave that stupid kitten for sundays and off of video games cause lets be honest nobody gives a kitten. lol
3570k oc 4.5Ghz on Water, 16 Gigs of RAM 1866, 2 SSD’s in RAID 0, 2x Gigabyte GTX 760 OC SLI
Why hasn’t this thread been locked? It doesn’t serve any purpose except to be inflammatory.
I’ve never seen a forum fall for this troll so hard.
If you don’t believe in god that means you will act on instinct and you will have no values since you hate the values of god therefore the only thing that will stop you from doing evil is the LAW , that means you made governmental law your god .
stupid atheists fail to understand this , if they even have brains in the first place lol
This is far from true. People can have values and morals without subscribing to an organized religion.
Besides, nature relies on instinct alone and it does far better than the human race seems to do even with it’s religion and laws.
Don’t look at me like that. Whatever you’ve heard, it’s probably not true.
Yes, and it’s ironic. At some point you need to attribute the existence of phenomena to god, or else you’ll keep looking for the answer behind the answer and keep finding non-religious explanations for your questions, at which point god might as well not exist if it has no effect on the universe.
Every time we ask “why” we get an answer that is something other than god or angels dancing on the head of a pin. Every single time. The mental gymnastics required to shift the effect of God one level further down the answer chain must be exhausting.
It is not hard at all, it is actually very easy, and no mental gymnastics are needed at all. It is the understanding of the process that God used to create the universe/world. Evolution science has a practical use, so much has been created from it that helps us in our everyday lives in some way. If God didn’t use evolution to help create the world as we know it, we wouldn’t have all the practical use of it like we do now.
Don’t worry, some day the whole bible and jesus thing will go out of style like all New Age religions do at some point.
Christianity has been around for over 2000 years and the Christian God has been worshiped for approximately 4000 years before that. What you say is highly unlikely to ever happen.
Why is it unlikely? It spread here around 900 years ago during the northern crusades and our old gods were around for thousands of years before that. Why wouldn’t the same thing happen again when the next big thing comes?
Those ‘old’ gods, as you put it, are still worshiped in some places. Even in America. The only god’s that I know of that have come close to extinction are the greek gods (Zeus, etc). But you can still find a few people who believe in them too. They are younger gods, however, than the Christian God, who is the oldest known God to be worshiped anywhere.
This is incorrect. Judaism is roughly 3000 years old. Christianity is younger than that. Greek, Roman, Celtic, Egyptian, etc pantheons predate Judaism.
The Christian God has been worshiped for 6000 years, give or take a decade or a few. It became known as Christianity after Jesus’ death in 33ac. Christian means Follower of Christ.
Xev Munroe, Human Ranger: “I love my menagerie
of animals. I love them more than I do most
people. Even solo, I am never alone!”
of animals. I love them more than I do most
people. Even solo, I am never alone!”
Every so many seconds I hear lyssa be praised in battle. So I don’t see the problem.
I agree with several of the comments here, about being offended.
Taking offence is a choice. You have to choose to be upset by a certain topic/theme/discussion.
If you choose to be offended by something said in chat, than it’s up to you to take action. There are multiple methods to do that. Turn off chat, Block, Leave the area, Ignore it.
Same goes for both sides.
It’s not ok to shut someone/group down because they hold differring opinons/beliefs than you. It’s also not ok to harass, insult, belittle, or otherwise cause grief to someone who holds differring opinions to yourself.
If you find that a certain phrase regarding faith is offensive, that certainly is your perogative, but it does not give you the right to force someone to stop talking about it, or give justification to insult or harass them or otherwise interfere.
It’s like saying that because someone did something to you, that you have the right to do something to them.
So in the end, live and let live. If you are offended, block/ingore and move on.
“You know what the chain of command is?
It’s the chain I beat you with until you
recognize my command!”
It’s the chain I beat you with until you
recognize my command!”
If you don’t believe in god that means you will act on instinct and you will have no values since you hate the values of god therefore the only thing that will stop you from doing evil is the LAW , that means you made governmental law your god .
stupid atheists fail to understand this , if they even have brains in the first place lol
Exactly. Religious people act morally because they know someone has his eye on them at all times and will punish them whenever they misstep. Atheists act morally because of an inner belief that treating others fairly is better.
Obviously the Religious way is better.
/sarcasm
Be careful what you ask for
ANet may give it to you.
ANet may give it to you.
No God exists never has never will. (obvious troll) watch people get kitten im gunna start counting till somone quotes me with RAGE!!! rawr.
3570k oc 4.5Ghz on Water, 16 Gigs of RAM 1866, 2 SSD’s in RAID 0, 2x Gigabyte GTX 760 OC SLI
As folks have said, the block feature is there if you don’t like what people are talking about. But how you could be offended by people talking about their religious beliefs is beyond me.
The atheist movement that is based upon “god doesn’t exist cause science haha stupid believers” is nothing but a ridiculous group of people with a superiority complex. Reducing religion to “I believe in God” or “I believe in many Gods” or “I believe the world to exist in this manner” is intentionally missing the point of religion. Religion is much more than just believing in God or whatnot. In fact, many religious people accept that the stories and such that they tell are not to be taken literally. Spirituality, culture, belief, and community are far more than some atheists reduce it to. And yes, religious folks can be scientists. They’re not mutually exclusive. The artificial “battle” between religion and science is ridiculous and pointless.
I’m not religious myself but I have the utmost respect for all faiths. I have little respect for people who get offended that other people have religious beliefs. What are they doing to you? Are you afraid you might start believing in God? The only thing I can’t stand are missionary faiths when they try to convert people. If folks are doing that in-game then I’d say it’s time to take action and block them or whatever. GW2 is not a missionary platform for people to spread their faith. Many atheists act similarly to missionary faiths and go about complaining about religious people and pointing out how they disagree with parts of the religion that isn’t even the most important part of the religion. If anybody ought to be shut up in religious conversations, it’s atheists.
To which the Theist would undoubtedly reply that we aren’t looking hard enough or that Allah is the force BEHIND the force that we observe. An agnostic would leave the possibility for a god as the explanation, whereas the atheist wouldn’t consider the possibility of a god without evidence leading us to that conclusion in the first place.
That sounds like a fallacy to me. Just because we do not have evidence of something, doesn’t necessarily imply that it doesn’t exist. Sure, it doesn’t imply that it exists either, but I said still holds true.
For example, we have no evidence that alien lifeforms exist, yet most scientists that you ask today would think that they do. In other words, they have “faith” that they do exist even though they have no real evidence to support that other than just probability.
In which case I would point you here: http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell's_teapot
The acknowledgement of the possibility of life on other worlds is based on observations of the conditions for life here on earth and the fact that we have telescopes that can see evidence for planets who could potentially support those same conditions (moons in the solar system and planets elsewhere).