Do you believe in God?

[cullenand]

It's 6.5 minutes. You have the time. You are making excuses.

Ok I watched it and what does it have anything to do with the other atheist dictators? Again I will ask what is your excuse for them? By the way its 8 minutes not 6.5

 

[Tic Tach]

Ok I watched it and what does it have anything to do with the other atheist dictators? Again I will ask what is your excuse for them?

I'm shocked that after watching that video, you can make such a comment.

 

[spunwicked]

If you want a good thought provoking movie which touches base on motives for religious beliefs watch Zeitgeist: The Movie - http://youtu.be/guXirzknYYE

Don't look back.

 

[cullenand]

I'm shocked that after watching that video, you can make such a comment.

Am I missing something? What does Noahs Ark have anything to do with dictators?

 

[Tic Tach]

Am I missing something? What does Noahs Ark have anything to do with dictators?

I guess you must've watched the wrong one. This is the video, 6.5 mintues:


http://www.youtube.com/user/NonStampCollector?gl=CA&hl=en#p/u/30/LZr-JZYctvA

 

[High-Test]

Is it too hard to write out your points instead of lazily posting video links?

Some of us have workplace blocks of video hosting sites.

 

[Tic Tach]

Is it too hard to write out your points instead of lazily posting video links?
Some of us have workplace blocks of video hosting sites

Lazy is one way of looking at it, efficient is another. It's one of the things that make the internet so great.

Perhaps view it when you get home. If you're at work, you shouldn't be on here anyways.

 

[cullenand]

I guess you must've watched the wrong one. This is the video:

http://www.youtube.com/user/NonStampCollector#p/u/30/LZr-JZYctvA

Is the link supposed to go to Noahs Ark Part 1 of 2? Because that was the same video as your first.

 

[Villain]

I see nothing wrong with human evolution, in fact I studied it while at university for my degree. I also see no reason why evolution and God can't coexist.

So you are not Christian?

 

[hampus_dh]

It doesn´t for me. It´s bang on you two´s subject of dictators.

So you are not Christian?

No he´s not, one day he just imagined a God in his head and here we are today.

 

[Pyle_PMG]

If you want a good thought provoking movie which touches base on motives for religious beliefs watch Zeitgeist: The Movie - http://youtu.be/guXirzknYYE

Don't look back.

Exactly. 👍

 

[High-Test]

Lazy is one way of looking at it, efficient is another. It's one of the things that make the internet so great.

It might be efficient, but almost none of the content you post are your own words. They're all quotes from someone else or videos created by others.

 

[hampus_dh]

Religious people, watch this. Don´t get scared away by the title, just watch it.

 

[Tic Tach]

Is the link supposed to go to Noahs Ark Part 1 of 2? Because that was the same video as your first.

Hmm, that's weird, that's not where the link takes me. In the list of his vids, look for the one called: "Special Investigation - 20th Century Killers" (It should have a picture of Hitler on it).

Thanks.

 

[Tic Tach]

It might be efficient, but almost none of the content you post are your own words. They're all quotes from someone else or videos created by others.

That simply isn't true. Care to take that back?

 

[arora]

That simply isn't true. Care to take that back?

I pointed out one instance where you used someone else's words posted on the net as your own, and I found at least one other(two I think but it was a while ago). If you like I could dig around some more, but I'd rather not. The point is while you do have some ideas of your own, for the most part you just regurgitate an atheist montra you gather from radical anti christian sites.

 

[Tic Tach]

I pointed out one instance where you used someone else's words posted on the net as your own, and I found at least one other(two I think but it was a while ago). If you like I could dig around some more, but I'd rather not. The point is while you do have some ideas of your own, for the most part you just regurgitate an atheist montra you gather from radical anti christian sites.

Crybabies. Look, I compose lots of my own thought here, and while I also post many supporting quotes from greater minds, and links to books, videos etc, I suggest that you're just whining. If you expect me to stop and re-write a dissertation every time somebody says "evolution is just a theory" or "where do you get your morality from?", I'm sorry, it ain't gonna happen.



**Added: If I were to ask a question about GT5 which required a lengthy answer, you would fully expect someone to provide a link to where that has already been covered, and not demand that they re-write the whole thing over again.

 

[huskeR32]

This, but from the other side too.

I will respect an athiests beliefs if they respect mine. I don't plan on trying to convert others to Christianity or whatever, but I will challenge those that have the stubbornness to, lets be honest, preach that their is no God and that 70% of the world are idiots. The same goes for fundamentalists, asides from the ones that blow up buildings, you find most won't state their opinion with the same level of anger and aggression that athiests do.

One problem: atheism is not a belief. It's choosing rational thought and evidence rather than belief in something unproven.

You can't set atheism equal to religions, and demand that the two sides look at each other as different forms of the same thing. They are two completely different things.

After reading this thread, it seems the most common reason religious people get all bent out of shape is when they're asked to provide evidence for their beliefs. When they can't, they get upset and claim disrespect.

By asking for that evidence, we're not being disrespectful, we're trying to give an opportunity for you to make your views fit into a rational, thinking view of the world. And many of you can't. Doesn't that bother you?

 

[homeforsummer]

Before this goes too far, I'd advise people to try and avoid picking at each others' posting style or calling each other names like children and try and discuss the actual topic at hand.

Much of the last page or so (post above me that appeared at the same time as this one excepted) has had very little to do with the discussion and much more to do with moaning at each other.

I quite like this thread and I'd quite like to continue posting in it, so I'm cutting in and advising some of you take a different approach to the discussion, before it gets locked.

 

[Tic Tach]

...it seems the most common reason religious people get all bent out of shape is when they're asked to provide evidence for their beliefs. When they can't, they get upset and claim disrespect.

Yes, this is the cheap tactic that is so common, it has just become a habit, a knee-jerk reaction to "claim offence". Imagine using that ploy when vigorously debating any other subject; gun control, politics, animal rights - you name it - imagine "claiming offence" every time your position is debunked or shown to be false or untenable. Religion has enjoyed a freedom from criticism for far too long. After all, we're not persecuting anyone, it's a dialogue, a conversation; a far cry from burning people at the stake for "not believing" certain things as believers did in the past.

 

[High-Test]

That simply isn't true. Care to take that back?

No.

Let us look at all of your posts in the previous ten pages of this thread - pages 162-172:

3240 - 70% quotes

3268 - a point is made here.

3275 - 3/4 quotes

3279 - just a link.

3294 - xenophanes quote.

3301 - 4 links, some synthesis.

3309 - 1 quote, 2 links, no synthesis.

3315 - "fail. I don't have any beliefs." - What a pleasant comment.

3326 - There's an actual argument here.

3327 - "I have not attacked or made fun of people" - There are several who would disagree with this claim.

3331 - Smug comment and some actual argument.

3337 - an actual argument.

3341 - argument

3351 - argument

3353 - links.

3354 - quotes

3361 - somewhat abusive comment

3363 - 1 quote, 2 negations with no support

3364 - 75% quotes

3369, 3371, 3374 - "Watch the video"

3420 - a somewhat abusive "watch the video" comment.

3422 - "watch the video".

3425 "watch the video"

3427 - smug comment

3434 - "watch the video"

3435 - "take it back."

3437 - "Crybabies" comment.


30 total comments.

7 are little more than demands to watch a video. ( 3369, 3371, 3374, 3420, 3422, 3425, 3434 )

6 are dominated by quotes with very few points of your own (3240, 3275, 3294, 3354, 3363, 3364)

4 are full of links, (3279, 3301, 3309, 3353)

6 are smug/abusive comments, (3315, 3331, 3361, 3419, 3427, 3437)

and I've accounted for 23 posts out of 30, with none being repeated.

 

[Tic Tach]

Whiner & complainer. It's the way I roll. Deal with it.

See my post #3437 in case you missed it whilst doing your research.

Aren't you at work?

 

[High-Test]

Whiner & complainer. It's the way I roll. Deal with it.

Aren't you at work?

Lunch break.

 

[bonobo4]

Unfortunately there's little to no evidence of an actual historical Jesus. There may have been; there were many wandering eccentric mystics, sages, prophets and saviour figures in that part of the world at that time, but there's no strong evidence for Jesus. Not a mention of said character during the alleged time of his life. Nada. Strange that.

I know, I was merely stating that Jesus as depicted in Christianity is generally shown as a white man. Not saying he exists, but also the opposite applies.

 

[cullenand]

Hmm, that's weird, that's not where the link takes me. In the list of his vids, look for the one called: "Special Investigation - 20th Century Killers" (It should have a picture of Hitler on it).

Thanks.

Really? Why the hell did I just watch some idiots with too much time on their hands? Nowhere did I say they killed all those people because they were atheists. I was responding to what you said saying that what atheist believe is so important because there arent any religious extremists. As I said before and will say again, crazy people will be crazy people no matter the belief or non-belief.

 

[bonobo4]

The wife of Moses, Tzipporah, was from what is now Ethiopia. A inconvenient fact for those who used/use the Bible as a basis for racism.

Didn't know that, was Jesus descended from Moses? I know he was supposedly from David though not sure about Moses.

Oh and this disproves the ideas of the KKK.

 

[Tic Tach]

Really? Why the hell did I just watch some idiots with too much time on their hands? Nowhere did I say they killed all those people because they were atheists.

Perhaps I misunderstood you then. Could you please clarify what's behind your earlier comment:

"Being atheist does not mean that you are good or peaceful. Some of the worst dictators ever were atheists, Stalin, Mussolini, Mao Zedong, Pol Pot, Milosevic, Lenin, Ceausescu and possibly Hitler. As someone else stated here, crazy people will be crazy people, no matter the belief or non-belief."

The part in the middle sounds like.......no, is the tired old yarn dragged out by many theists, so maybe I'm misunderstanding you.

I can't concur with the last sentence though. You seem to be asserting that crazy people are somehow separate from crazy beliefs. I suggest to you that it is one's particular beliefs that makes us deem people crazy or not.

My point is that, I would vigorously oppose the ideas, beliefs & actions of all of those horrific dictators you've mentioned. I would oppose them because they are deleterious to human happiness and well being. If those individuals happened to be atheists, then not believing in invisible deities in the sky is likely all I would have in common with them. But to suggest that they did what they did "because of" or "in the name of" their unbelief, is tantamount to saying that they did what they did because they all have moustaches, and they did what they did in the name of moustaches.


Perhaps we fully agree on this and something is just getting lost in type. *shrug*

 

[cullenand]

Perhaps I misunderstood you then. Could you please clarify what's behind your earlier comment:

"Being atheist does not mean that you are good or peaceful. Some of the worst dictators ever were atheists, Stalin, Mussolini, Mao Zedong, Pol Pot, Milosevic, Lenin, Ceausescu and possibly Hitler. As someone else stated here, crazy people will be crazy people, no matter the belief or non-belief."

The part in the middle sounds like.......no, is the tired old yarn dragged out by many theists, so maybe I'm misunderstanding you.

I can't concur with the last sentence though. You seem to be asserting that crazy people are somehow separate from crazy beliefs. I suggest to you that it is one's particular beliefs that makes us deem people crazy or not.

My point is that, I would vigorously oppose the ideas, beliefs & actions of all of those horrific dictators you've mentioned. I would oppose them because they are deleterious to human happiness and well being. If those individuals happened to be atheists, then not believing in invisible deities in the sky is likely all I would have in common with them. But to suggest that they did what they did "because of" or "in the name of" their unbelief, is tantamount to saying that they did what they did because they all have moustaches, and they did what they did in the name of moustaches.

Perhaps we fully agree on this and something is just getting lost in type. *shrug*

I was responding to the post you wrote about what atheist believe being important because there arent any religious extremists. What you were saying made it sound like being religious means that you are automatically an extremist, I countered that by saying being atheist doesnt automatically make you peaceful. Sorry about that I might have worded it a little strange. What Im trying to say is there re just as many bad religious people as there are bad atheist. Like I said, crazy people will be crazy, no the beliefor non-belief.

 

[Tic Tach]

I was responding to the post you wrote about what atheist believe being important because there arent any religious extremists.

I'm not sure what you mean by the last half of that sentence (unerlined), but allow me to clarify: I don't mean to say that it's important what atheists believe, it's important what everyone believes. And as Sam Harris has so astutely pointed out, we exercise this in every day life. If you have somebody who believes that chanting to the sunrise causes the tides to occur, well, we don't elect that person to important positions in our society. They get marginalized as a matter of course. But a person who believes that a wafer literally becomes the body of a mythic character when eaten somehow gets a free pass from being deemed crazy.


"The problem is that religion, because it has been sheltered from criticism in the way it has been, allows people, perfectly sane…perfectly intelligent people, to believe en masse what only idiots or lunatics could believe in isolation. If you wake up tomorrow morning convinced that saying a few Latin words over your breakfast cereal is literally going to turn it into the body of Julius Caesar or Elvis…you have lost your mind. But if you believe that a cracker becomes the body of Jesus at the mass, you’re very likely perfectly sane, you just happen to be catholic. But these beliefs really are equivalent, and they are equivalently crazy."

What you were saying made it sound like being religious means that you are automatically an extremist

Nope, not suggesting that for a moment. I think I said that the vast majority of believers are not extremists or violent, and they may be fully rational people in every other aspect of their life, but they haven't yet placed said supernatural beliefs under critical, skeptical, and most importantly intellectually honest scrutiny. When one does, one cannot come out the other end believing the tenets of christianity.

I countered that by saying being atheist doesn't automatically make you peaceful.

I fully agree.

 

[High-Test]

Didn't know that, was Jesus descended from Moses?

Oh and this disproves the ideas of the KKK.

Nope. Jesus might not have even been Jewish - but he definitely wasn't descended from David in the legal sense of his time.