Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 1/22/08 09:10 PM, Memorize wrote: Blah blah blah irrelevant crap.

I'm not going to comment on those issues you brought up any further, because there are other threads for those.

I'm not arguing against having laws, I'm against some evil space ghost dictating what the laws should be. No matter how you slice it, the God described in the bible is a brutal dictator, and I am morally opposed to HIM.

At 1/22/08 09:23 PM, Angry-Hatter wrote:

I'm not going to comment on those issues you brought up any further, because there are other threads for those.

Why is that?

All I did was give examples of laws and ideas that people disagree or agree with to put it into perspective.

You replied to them so I did it back.

I'm not arguing against having laws, I'm against some evil space ghost dictating what the laws should be.

Which brings me to my previous point: That's all a matter of opinion.

Just because YOU don't like it, doesn't mean everyone else will disagree with it.

You're saying that the religious "God" is evil. Well obviously you're in the very extreme minority on that issue considering the world's being religious.

No matter how you slice it, the God described in the bible is a brutal dictator, and I am morally opposed to HIM.

You're opposed to God, yet you talk of morals.

Oxymoron.

If God does not exist, then Morals are irrelevant.

But hey, if you want to avoid the issue we're talking about, go right ahead. It's not my fault you can't counter my argument.

At 1/22/08 08:37 PM, Grammer wrote: That's what I've been saying for 25+ threads now and no one listens

Yes because nobody cares about you lol

At 1/22/08 09:37 PM, Memorize wrote:

I'm not arguing against having laws, I'm against some evil space ghost dictating what the laws should be.

Which brings me to my previous point: That's all a matter of opinion.

Not when it comes to God. There is NO room for opposing views. God is always right, end of discussion, and if you don't like it, then you can go to hell and burn forever and ever.

You're saying that the religious "God" is evil. Well obviously you're in the very extreme minority on that issue considering the world's being religious.

Slaughtering millions upon millions of innocents is not evil to you?

You're opposed to God, yet you talk of morals.

Oxymoron.

If God does not exist, then Morals are irrelevant.

Killing innocent people, discriminating against women and people of different religions is VERY immoral in my book. In short, God is a real prick, and we're expected to just follow him blindly?

What would make you think that without God, morals would be irrelevant? Is the only reason you don't go around killing, raping, and stealing because a book told you so?

But hey, if you want to avoid the issue we're talking about, go right ahead. It's not my fault you can't counter my argument.

I'm not avoiding the issue. You seem to be confused on what the issue is. The issue is not against having laws, it's about God dictating how I and everyone else should live their lives without us having any say whatsoever in the matter.

At 1/22/08 09:54 PM, Angry-Hatter wrote: Killing innocent people, discriminating against women and people of different religions is VERY immoral in my book. In short, God is a real prick, and we're expected to just follow him blindly?

...What book?

At 1/22/08 09:59 PM, Christopherr wrote:

At 1/22/08 09:54 PM, Angry-Hatter wrote: Killing innocent people, discriminating against women and people of different religions is VERY immoral in my book. In short, God is a real prick, and we're expected to just follow him blindly?

...What book?

MY book. >=(

My main problem with Christianity is this:
Intelligent man has been around for thousands and maybe tens of thousands (depends on your definition of intelligent) yet god did not care enough about these people until just 2008 years ago when he sent his son to die for us. Even then he didn't send his son to the place with the most people he sent him to the middle east. What about those people for those thousands of years before christ. Did god not care about the chinese who knew how to read and write and could understand his message thousands of years before christ. God did not show himself to these people and being all knowing he must have known that the Asian people would have no contact with those people. Christianity is very late coming to China so i guess if you were unlucky enough to be born chinese during this time you are pretty much damned to hell for eternity.

At 1/22/08 10:18 PM, Angry-Hatter wrote: MY book. >=(

Harry Potter?

At 1/22/08 09:54 PM, Angry-Hatter wrote:

Not when it comes to God. There is NO room for opposing views. God is always right, end of discussion, and if you don't like it, then you can go to hell and burn forever and ever.

Irrelevant.

Reviewer said about the Bible: That because we're punished for not following Biblical rules, it is not true free will, but extortion.

But the same can apply to nations with a governmental authority, regardless of whether or not there are "opposing views".

The point was: You have free will, and you can either abide by or disregard the rules, but if you disregard the rules, you will be punished by the law.

Slaughtering millions upon millions of innocents is not evil to you?

Millions?

Also: Irrelevant

Killing innocent people, discriminating against women and people of different religions is VERY immoral in my book. In short, God is a real prick, and we're expected to just follow him blindly?

Irrelevant.

What would make you think that without God, morals would be irrelevant? Is the only reason you don't go around killing, raping, and stealing because a book told you so?

Irrelevant.

I'm not avoiding the issue. You seem to be confused on what the issue is. The issue is not against having laws, it's about God dictating how I and everyone else should live their lives without us having any say whatsoever in the matter.

That's not what I was responding to. I responded simpley to display that this "extortion" statement can apply to ANY Authority that has LAW.

And that was it. Then you replied to me, going completely off topic about YOUR personal issues.

At 1/22/08 10:05 PM, Grammer wrote:

At 1/22/08 09:45 PM, Brick-top wrote:

At 1/22/08 08:37 PM, Grammer wrote: That's what I've been saying for 25+ threads now and no one listens

Yes because nobody cares about you lol

Or because you're too stupid to realize you're wrong

Well actually, you can disprove the existience of God. However it all depends on the Religion, the denomination and the personal belief of a person in question.

Like for example, if you taught a deeply Religious creationist EVERYTHING there is to know about Evolution. Then they thought their Religion, denomination and personal belief was a lie does that mean you've just disproven God?

Of course not, but does that also mean that you can't disprove any other God from dead Religions even though Atheists and Theists will agree they don't exist?

If moderate or entire disbelief does not disprove a God/Gods, then therefore all of these creatures exist because someone at one point believed they did.

At 1/22/08 10:34 PM, Brick-top wrote:

Like for example, if you taught a deeply Religious creationist EVERYTHING there is to know about Evolution. Then they thought their Religion, denomination and personal belief was a lie does that mean you've just disproven God?

Evolution isn't all what it's cracked up to be.

Only reason why it has as much merrit as it does is because while it's taught in schools, they ONLY list the supporting arguements. Never any contradictory evidence; never lists any of the theories changes; or any evidence that has been proven wrong. All while still having inaccurate/false information still in those textbooks.

All it is mainly, is proof by assertion.

At 1/22/08 09:10 PM, Memorize wrote:

55% of all abortions are done by the middle class and up (majority = money isn't an issue)
60% of all abortions are by women who already have at least 1 other child.
Only 17% are by teenagers
Less than 1% are rape victims.

Source of those %'s?

At 1/22/08 10:39 PM, Memorize wrote: Only reason why it has as much merrit as it does is because while it's taught in schools, they ONLY list the supporting arguements. Never any contradictory evidence; never lists any of the theories changes; or any evidence that has been proven wrong. All while still having inaccurate/false information still in those textbooks.

Yet, I could say the exact same for Religious people when it comes to holy text.

All it is mainly, is proof by assertion.

I would like to know what text books you are referring to. And what Evidence is being ignored by the scientific community.

At 1/22/08 10:39 PM, Memorize wrote: Only reason why it has as much merrit as it does is because while it's taught in schools, they ONLY list the supporting arguements. Never any contradictory evidence; never lists any of the theories changes; or any evidence that has been proven wrong. All while still having inaccurate/false information still in those textbooks.

so why don't you enlilghten us?

At 1/22/08 10:29 PM, Memorize wrote: Irrelevant

Noooo. It's NOT irrelevant, because it's what I was talking about when I made my post. YOU'RE the one going off topic.

I'm not avoiding the issue. You seem to be confused on what the issue is. The issue is not against having laws, it's about God dictating how I and everyone else should live their lives without us having any say whatsoever in the matter.

That's not what I was responding to. I responded simpley to display that this "extortion" statement can apply to ANY Authority that has LAW.

Yes, but there are authorities that abuse their powers and make horrible, oppressive laws. You see, I live in a country where the people can influence which laws are used and which laws are not. If God exists, you, me and everybody else have absolutely no way to influence what laws to have whatsoever, the very opposite of democrasy.

This is the topic. Either you comment on that, or not at all.

At 1/22/08 10:49 PM, Angry-Hatter wrote: This is the topic. Either you comment on that, or not at all.

Actually, he could come up with any topic at all concerning atheism vs. religion.

Such is the nature of this thread.

You mean that this is the current topic at hand. ;-)

;

At 1/22/08 11:01 PM, reviewer-general wrote:

At 1/22/08 10:49 PM, Angry-Hatter wrote: This is the topic. Either you comment on that, or not at all.

Actually, he could come up with any topic at all concerning atheism vs. religion.

Such is the nature of this thread.

You mean that this is the current topic at hand. ;-)

;

Yes, of course. Maybe I should have been clearer. If he wants to comment on my views then he should go right ahead, but if he's only interested in challenging me on things I never claimed to be against, then he may respectfully STFU.

1)Why did the hell been created, and if god opposes it - why won't he destroy it?
2)Why can't a large group of physicals souls escape from hell?
N)*More questions*

At 1/22/08 11:09 PM, gufu wrote: 1)Why did the hell been created, and if god opposes it - why won't he destroy it?

Because there's no such thing as hell or God.

But if we're talking hypothetically, then I'd say it's because he's a vindictive dickhole.

At 1/22/08 11:09 PM, gufu wrote:

good God you have stupid questions.

1)Why did the hell been created, and if god opposes it - why won't he destroy it?

God created hell (it may also have already existed, i'm not sure if the creation of hell is mentioned anywhere in the Bible) and is where damned souls are sent including Lucipher.
this brings up some questions:
while Lucipher and the Devil are not the same they are generally believed to be and considered interchangeable. for this question let us take the common view that they are one and the same. first of all Lucipher is said to be a fallen Angel who rebelled against God. now there is a problem with this because angels have no free will, despite this Lucipher fights God and is thrown into hell. now if we believe Lucipher and the devil are one and the same, as is commonly mistaken, then how is it that this being locked away in hell is able to get out and do evil in this world?
if we were to believe that Lucipher and the devil are seperate entities then this poses another dilemma. while God created the angels, explaining how Lucipher came to be, who created the devil? if he is a being of pure evil wanting nothing less then the destruction of man and his ability to attain salvation,why isn't he locked away in hell?
both these questions raise some serious doubts with regards to the All Mightyness of God.

2)Why can't a large group of physicals souls escape from hell?

...
are you saying that you know what hell consists of and find that it isn't nearly as inescapable as made out to be?

N)*More questions*

yes, there are many questions, its not hard to come up with better ones than these.

At 1/22/08 10:44 PM, Brick-top wrote:

Yet, I could say the exact same for Religious people when it comes to holy text.

Depends on the religion.

Because for many religions; they are often verified by archeological discoveries.

I would like to know what text books you are referring to. And what Evidence is being ignored by the scientific community.

I never said it was ignored by the scientific community. I just said textbooks, mainly for highschool students. When they teach the theory, they never mention the actual amount of evidence of shortcomings. Just the theory and how it works with very little evidence presented.

At 1/22/08 10:43 PM, 0peth wrote:

Source of those %'s?

link 1link 2link 3

At 1/22/08 10:44 PM, Brick-top wrote:

Yet, I could say the exact same for Religious people when it comes to holy text.

Depends on the religion.

Because for many religions; they are often verified by archeological discoveries.

I would like to know what text books you are referring to. And what Evidence is being ignored by the scientific community.

I never said it was ignored by the scientific community. I just said textbooks, mainly for highschool students. When they teach the theory, they never mention the actual amount of evidence of shortcomings. Just the theory and how it works with very little evidence presented.

At 1/22/08 10:43 PM, 0peth wrote:

Source of those %'s?

link 1link 2link 3

At 1/22/08 10:49 PM, Angry-Hatter wrote:

Noooo. It's NOT irrelevant, because it's what I was talking about when I made my post. YOU'RE the one going off topic.

Yes, it is.

Why?

Because I'm not making an arguement on whether or not God actually exists. But that the statement of "extortion" can apply to world governments.

Yes, but there are authorities that abuse their powers and make horrible, oppressive laws. You see, I live in a country where the people can influence which laws are used and which laws are not. If God exists, you, me and everybody else have absolutely no way to influence what laws to have whatsoever, the very opposite of democrasy.

And like I said: Irrelevant.

Why? Because there are nations that AREN'T DEMOCRACIES.

This is the topic. Either you comment on that, or not at all.

No, it isn't. I am not saying God actually exists. I'm demonstrating the double standards in YOUR and his statements and thinking.

At 1/22/08 10:49 PM, SolInvictus wrote:

so why don't you enlilghten us?

Why don't you do anything yourself? Oh that's right. You're too lazy, so you rely on the words of other people to make your case for you.

Here's a couple. Have fun!

Now remember: I'm not saying that it's false. I just find it inaccurate. And the fact that things like some of these (as you'll see) are still around is just dishonest.

Example 1Example 2 (Meaning: Evolution =/= false. This is just a "dishonesty")
Example 2b (a vid, only because it has pictures)

And I did find this one quite amusing: Link

I just stumbled across it and I would've written it off as purely fact twisting bias, but he does have references so i'm going to have a look\read through and check those references.

How did I end up copying those replies twice?

Oh well. Anyway, sorry that the links are right next to each other. They didn't appear that way in the box.

At 1/22/08 11:26 PM, SolInvictus wrote: now if we believe Lucipher and the devil are one and the same, as is commonly mistaken, then how is it that this being locked away in hell is able to get out and do evil in this world?

Actually, according to the story, Lucifer wasn't cast to hell as most seem to think, but actually fell to Earth. So there was no escaping involved as he was already here to wreak havoc upon the world.

Just wanted to point that out.

At 1/23/08 12:00 AM, Memorize wrote: Example 1Example 2 (Meaning: Evolution =/= false. This is just a "dishonesty")
Example 2b (a vid, only because it has pictures)

And I did find this one quite amusing: Link

I just stumbled across it and I would've written it off as purely fact twisting bias, but he does have references so i'm going to have a look\read through and check those references.

Those 2 wikipedia links didn't prove too much. No one ever said that the theory of evolution as it stands now is perfect. It is constantly being revised when new evidence comes to light. Yet it is this ability of evolution to revise itself that makes me believe it. It is something that can admit its wrong when presented with evidence. When has the bible ever been revised to include new evidence?

At 1/23/08 12:04 AM, Ezgamer wrote:

Actually, according to the story, Lucifer wasn't cast to hell as most seem to think, but actually fell to Earth. So there was no escaping involved as he was already here to wreak havoc upon the world.

Just wanted to point that out.

Also, it makes a connection from Lucifer to "The Morning Star", which is also used in reference to King (I know i'm going to butcher this name) Nebucudnezer.

I so screwed up that name.

At 1/23/08 12:10 AM, pyrofreeze200 wrote:

Those 2 wikipedia links didn't prove too much. No one ever said that the theory of evolution as it stands now is perfect.

Oh, I already know that.

Which is why I said: I don't deny it; I just don't put much faith (irony) in it.

I just think it's sad that people come in here acting as if they're all knowledgable for believing in it; yet they don't even recognize "their" belief's own shortcomings (that goes for the religious as well).

My point was earlier, that these textbooks ONLY give the supporting arguments. All while we've known for decades that some of them are now false or inaccurate. And they also never list their own shortcomings or contradictory evidence.

That's all. I believe in evolution, but only to a degree. I just don't believe THEIR idea of it.

It is constantly being revised when new evidence comes to light. Yet it is this ability of evolution to revise itself that makes me believe it.

Hardly.

If they parade their findings around as absolute truth (i'm looking at the religious people too), only to have their findings turn out to be completely inaccurate (in some cases up to 40 years later), then i'm certainly not going to place that much faith (there it is again) in them today.

It is something that can admit its wrong when presented with evidence. When has the bible ever been revised to include new evidence?

Never. Because if it's true: Then it wouldn't need revising.

Some people also take the Book of Genesis and use the alternate meanings of the Hebrew words. Some say that although it is accurate to translate, the words could also translate to "fit" the evolutionary theory.

Link

Don't bug me about the site name. However, he makes the point that some translators did leave footnotes or marks to indicate these other translations. But he also makes the case that it is highly unlikely.

At 1/23/08 12:38 AM, Memorize wrote:

Good point. If something is true then no revision is needed. My argument is that even if it was true back then does it apply to us today. I don't believe evolution as it stands now explains much. But i believe through our revisions to it we are inching our way to the truth. My main problem with religion is that it thinks it has the final answer and does not need revision. Maybe the bible was perfect back then but maybe we need revisions to it today because some of those stories in the bible, even if they are metaphorical do not apply to our lives today. We know that the story of adam and eve is false. If only someone would get divinly inspired to revise it to a more time appropriate version then it would be easier to accept this book as perfect.

Memorize religion has been revised, way back when religious folks used to believe the earth was the center of the universe. Hell, they even killed scientists who rejected that theory.

At 1/22/08 10:49 PM, SolInvictus wrote:

so why don't you enlilghten us?

Why don't you do anything yourself? Oh that's right. You're too lazy, so you rely on the words of other people to make your case for you.

i can list and answer many problems people have presented with regards to evolution the thing is that evolution covers so much ground it would be impossible for me to adress all of them, which is why a little specifying and examples are helpful.

Here's a couple. Have fun!

Now remember: I'm not saying that it's false. I just find it inaccurate. And the fact that things like some of these (as you'll see) are still around is just dishonest.

Example 1

one misidentified pecary tooth. i have never heard anyone refer to the Nebraska man as a real hominid. it was a mistake and is referred to as such. i'm not particularly certain where you found this presented as an argument against evolution (though some creationists enjoy using acknowledged hoaxes and mistakes as proof against evolution) since there is no coverup or continued belief that the Nebraska man was not real (at least to my, and many others', knowledge).

Example 2 (Meaning: Evolution =/= false. This is just a "dishonesty")
Example 2b (a vid, only because it has pictures)

as you said this hardly does anything to disprove evolution but it does show the will of some individuals to gain aclaim. this was brought up a while ago and from what i remember about those discussions was that it had been known for some time that these images were fraudulent yet they continue to appear in biology textbooks. why this is the case i don't know.

And I did find this one quite amusing: Link

I just stumbled across it and I would've written it off as purely fact twisting bias, but he does have references so i'm going to have a look\read through and check those references.

i took a quick look and i've read about most of those arguments (thank you The Counter-Creationism Handbook) i'll get to those in detail in another post, but right off the bat #1 is a straight-forward lie.

Hey here's an idea.

Why not just have an Official Politics Thread? I mean, that way we wont even have to have separate threads anymore, we can just all post in one topic! And every time someone has something interesting or original to say and decides to create a new topic, we can just lock it and direct them here, where their post will get nowhere near as much attention.

At 1/23/08 12:56 AM, Musician wrote: Memorize religion has been revised, way back when religious folks used to believe the earth was the center of the universe. Hell, they even killed scientists who rejected that theory.

That's why I said in previous threads that there are a variety of religions all claiming the name "Christianity".

Truth is (since i'm assuming you're pertaining to the Bible): It says nothing about the earth literally being the center of the universe, or even flat.

Flat Earth

There are many things that are attributed to Religions (namely Christianity) which the Bible (in particular) have nothing to do with. Examples:

-Jesus' birthday
-Day Jesus' died
-Rose from the dead.

ect ect..

Also, many of these discoveries, such as the earth not being flat (known well before columbus), the earth not being the center of the universe, genetics... were discoveries made by people who were religious.

The problem (at least in Galileo's case), was that the ruling authority of that time was "the church", which used its theocracy to hinder scienctific advancement, even though many scientific breakthroughs were done by religious people without a Governmental Church being place to halt their findings.

Point is: Beliefs and Religions are going to be perverted and used to rule as supreme authority, if they become Government Policy.