superfine upstanding member of society Posted:

the bible is my favorite work of fiction

OH **** fine upstanding member of society YOU OFF THE MOTHA****IN CHAIN TELL ME WHAT YOU THINK OF GEORGE BUSH

PRESIDENT MCCAIN WON’T CATER TO THE JESUSfabulous personS – HE WAS IN ‘NAM MAN! Log in to see images!

Agent Smith Posted:

Explain.

are there even any religious people on forum warz

Dan Electrode Posted:

are there even any religious people on forum warz

Rumor has it one of TSB is a jesusfabulous person!! Log in to see images!

OMG!! GUYZ!!!! NO ROLEPLAYING OUTSIDE OF ROLEPLAYING BOARDS Log in to see images!

It kills cute little fluffy bunnies and cute little newborn kittens every time you do it! Log in to see images!

Natalie Posted:

...I can’t imagine any reason that I’d want to debate the topic with you, particularly since it seems you clearly have formed your opinion to the point of not wanting real input from others.

I agree. Your thread should be retitled: “Give me an excuse to insult y’all!”

How dull. Log in to see images!

If I believe in a perfect god then he must be perfect. Anyways, if you choose to not believe in a god, then the non-existent god is not perfect, therefor cannot be the god I believe in. You cannot disprove my god because he is perfect, and the quality of nonexisting takes away from a perfect god. (Which as atheist you are claiming there is no god at all)

god that exists is perfect > god that doesn’t exist, therefore your nonexistent god doesn’t exist, but a perfect one with the quality of existing does.

Now this theory doesn’t state the Christan, Jewish, or Indian god is create. In essence it could say any god is right, but it does state there is a god. It is rather silly in one way to be such a close minded individual and state that there isn’t a possible chance at all for there to be a god. Agnostic would be a much better choice.

Atheism:

Once there was nothing, then it exploded.(ummm…conservation of mbum?)

Agnostic:

Can’t tell you what exactly happen, won’t shut down that the universe is part of a master plan, its got some trippy stuff, but at the same time, can’t shut down that there is other logic behind it.

Christian:

God decided He had an idea, so went with it, now here we are.

Now from this point you are lead into other questions, but I will let you decide if you ask them or not. But if you do believe in a god then it is your view on how can go about believing in one. I won’t lie, in personal opinion I am of Christan faith, its a feeling I have and one I wouldn’t mind to give others the opportunity to share, but ultimately thats your choice, which makes the whole thing pretty good, free will and such.

Now normally I don’t intend on replying to these posts, but do enjoy bashing on die-hard atheist just as much as they think its ‘cool’ to bash on every other religion. I think its rather arrogant, and almost stupid, to shut yourself down to any argument, to become completely closeminded to something just because you can’t prove it…lets face it you can’t prove it either. Common fact, our current theory(yes THEORY) on physics that is taught in grade school is actually a mix-mash form of the two most popular theories of physics. Truth be told, both can not exist at the same time, so we pick and choose the best parts(it doesn’t hurt us at the moment because much of it is at the subatomic and pure energy state). Since you cannot prove either form of physics, are you going to stop the clbum, or openly tell everyone you don’t believe in that? I believe the non-belief in any possible god would be atheist, and the non belief in something you can’t fully prove(such as physics) is arrogant. Have you ever personally seen an atom? seen gravity?(other then its effect) seen Pluto with your own eyes? You may have seen pictures and stuff, but you take it for granted it does exist. The fact you want to deny a possible explanation to the universe, life, and everything(42! I set myself up for that one) but keep the other explanations is rather close minded.

Sux2BU Posted:

I understand your position entirely, but I’d like to try and keep this to an honest discussion for a while even if the initial motives were dishonest, because I think good arguments are being made.

Fair enough.

AlPHa-mCStaGGeR-053 Posted:

If I believe in a perfect god then he must be perfect. Anyways, if you choose to not believe in a god, then the non-existent god is not perfect, therefor cannot be the god I believe in. You cannot disprove my god because he is perfect, and the quality of nonexisting takes away from a perfect god. (Which as atheist you are claiming there is no god at all)

god that exists is perfect > god that doesn’t exist, therefore your nonexistent god doesn’t exist, but a perfect one with the quality of existing does.

This is thinly-veiled circular reasoning.

“My god exists. Therefore, if you do not believe a god exists, you’re really not believing in some other god.”

Now this theory doesn’t state the Christan, Jewish, or Indian god is create. In essence it could say any god is right, but it does state there is a god. It is rather silly in one way to be such a close minded individual and state that there isn’t a possible chance at all for there to be a god. Agnostic would be a much better choice.

It’s not necessarily closed-minded. When you set the extreme end of a spectrum, you can make anything seem moderate. What’s your position on the existence of space ninjas? Don’t say you don’t believe in them, that’s closed-minded.

In these discussions it’s essential to be willing to look at the question from more than one point of view. Not only through the eyes of someone you’re debating with, but from the perspectives of different disciplines.

Atheism:

Once there was nothing, then it exploded.(ummm…conservation of mbum?)

Agnostic:

Can’t tell you what exactly happen, won’t shut down that the universe is part of a master plan, its got some trippy stuff, but at the same time, can’t shut down that there is other logic behind it.

Christian:

God decided He had an idea, so went with it, now here we are.

Cute, but overly simplistic, and why only those three?

_____________________________________________________________

The question I would ask is not whether you can prove God exists or does not exist, but rather…

What does your theism do for you?

OR

What does your atheism do for you?

On a larger scale…

What’s the point of actively converting people to your point of view?

NotJoePesci Posted:

Ok. Seriously, I claim to be Atheist, but that’s mostly so people leave me the **** alone. I’m a bit curious, though, would that be the proper way to describe myself if really, I just don’t care whether or not there is a God?

Well, it depends. If you don’t believe there is any sort of higher power, then you’d be an atheist, yes; however, if you figure that it’s impossible to know if there’s a higher power, you’d be an agnostic. Whichever of the two you lean more towards with your lack of caring would work as a descriptor, I think.

Natalie Posted:

Well, it depends. If you don’t believe there is any sort of higher power, then you’d be an atheist, yes; however, if you figure that it’s impossible to know if there’s a higher power, you’d be an agnostic. Whichever of the two you lean more towards with your lack of caring would work as a descriptor, I think.

Another distinction I’ve heard is between “soft” atheism and “hard” atheism; “hard” atheists believe that there is no god, while “soft” atheists believe that there is not enough evidence to determine if God exists or in what form. Most agnostics could easily be considered “soft atheists” by this definition.