Why do atheists compare God to Thor, Zeus, FSM, etc...?

[VitalOne]

Atheists commonly use an argument like "well I don't believe in Zeus or Thor or the Flying Spaghetti Monster so God must not exist either"

This argument simply makes no type of sense. Zeus, Thor, FSM, the Invisible Pink Unicorn, the Judeo-Christian God, and other Gods all have different attributes, characteristics and properties. Because they all have different characteristics, properties, and attributes, it means that one or some of them can exist , and others at the sametime can not exist.

It would be like someone saying "well I don't believe in the ether, so gravity, electromagnetism, quarks, blackholes, etc...must not exist either". What a foolish argument, gravity, the ether, electromagnetism, quarks, blackholes, etc...are all different things and have different properties, so some can exist and some also can not exist.

Why do atheists always bring up such an unnaturally foolish argument?

[ashpwner]

yea but all these gods kind alost popularity in the end dont u think tht about our god?

[Robert K S]

VitalOne, would you be surprised to learn that the best evidence we have--including scriptural evidence from the Bible--indicates that the Judeo-Christian God evolved out of one of the gods of the polytheistic Canaanite pantheon? In this light, do not the Old Testament references to gods in the plural (Genesis 3:22, 11:7) and the Commandment to have "no other gods before me" (Exodus 20:3) become much more understandable?

[James R]

VitalOne:

It appears you missed the point. If there is the same amount of evidence for the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster as there is for the existence of the Christian God, then it is no more reasonable to believe in the Spaghetti Monster than it is to believe in the Christian God. And vice-versa, of course.

See?

[iceaura]

This argument simply makes no type of sense. Zeus, Thor, FSM, the Invisible Pink Unicorn, the Judeo-Christian God, and other Gods all have different attributes, characteristics and properties. Not really. They vary in insignificant ways, but the essentials relevant to existence are pretty much common property.

Because they all have different characteristics, properties, and attributes, it means that one or some of them can exist , and others at the sametime can not exist. That would be true regardless of whether they differed in much of anything. So?

[IceAgeCivilizations]

Elohim means God, but of components, three of them, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, this is why in Genesis God says "let us make man in our image."

[Dark520]

Why do we compare all of those Gods together?

Because they are all Gods, and generally the main ones in whatever religion you are taking them from. The are all essentially the same thing, just different people worship different ones. In the end, they are all just the instruments of conveying social order or explanations of yet unexplainable phenomena, so why not then group them together? Instead of having us say why we compare your God to all the other Gods, I think that you should say why your God should be different than the other ones. I really don't like that in the end I have to answer your question with another question, but maybe if you think my question over you'll see why we bunch them all together (well, actually that's probably just an idealistic notion by me...of course you'll think of something like "Oh, well my God is the just right one..." Okay...why?).

[PsychoticEpisode]

Elohim means God, but of components, three of them, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, this is why in Genesis God says "let us make man in our image."

How do you know He's not talking to Satan?

[IceAgeCivilizations]

Because Satan is the adversary.

[PsychoticEpisode]

Because Satan is the adversary.

So? All I ever hear about is God's plan. You trying to say Satan wasn't part of it?

[IceAgeCivilizations]

What does the Bible say?

[PsychoticEpisode]

What does the Bible say?

Why? I offered up Satan as a reasonable substitute for your trinity.

[IceAgeCivilizations]

I go with what the Bible says on this, you can write your own bible if you want.

[PsychoticEpisode]

No need. I sense doubt in your words, not sure and unable to conceive the inconceivable.

[Medicine*Woman]

Elohim means God, but of components, three of them, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, this is why in Genesis God says "let us make man in our image."

*************
M*W: No it doesn't. "Eloh-im" is plural, meaning several or many "Eloh" or 'gods.' This has nothing to do with the trinity as you suggest. In fact, there is no reference to the trinity in the bible. But, I will go further to state that when Genesis was being written, and NOT by Moses as many would think, it refers to the "gods" of the sky, or the zodiacal creatures, that humans were created in the image of them, the "signs of the zodiac."

I have mentioned many times before, story of A&E in the GoE were taken from the constellations Bootes (Adam, the herdsman), Virgo (Eve, the virgin) and Serpens (the serpent of Eden). If you look up these constellations, you can easily see how the myths of A&E and the GoE were made up. Suggestion: Look up the constellations of Bootes, Virgo and Serpens. I don't have the exact website just now. However, the URL below touches on my point:

http://paganizingfaithofyeshua.netfirms.com/astro_theology_sun_or_son_on_the_cross.htm

[iceaura]

I go with what the Bible says on this, you can write your own bible if you want. So you are absolutely sure that the early Christians, right on the scene, who thought the Bible had been written by Satan, were completely wrong?

They did get wiped out by the rising Church, proving they were not favored by the powers that be, but is having murdered one's critics really that good a recommendation for authority in the word of Jesus Christ?

[Nutter]

Atheists commonly use an argument like "well I don't believe in Zeus or Thor or the Flying Spaghetti Monster so God must not exist either" ...

Why do atheists always bring up such an unnaturally foolish argument?


Look to Romans 1:19-20 for the answer:

"Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse."

The atheists are running out of excuses ...

[peta9]

Even if it wasn't an issue of god, what's funny is I've never met a single theist that I genuinely liked or admired. They, in my opinion are disgustingly primitively emotional, some are better at hiding it than others.

[VitalOne]

VitalOne:

It appears you missed the point. If there is the same amount of evidence for the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster as there is for the existence of the Christian God, then it is no more reasonable to believe in the Spaghetti Monster than it is to believe in the Christian God. And vice-versa, of course.

See?
But atheists refuse and reject any type of evidence for God or anything religious...why even ask for evidence?

Even if it wasn't an issue of god, what's funny is I've never met a single theist that I genuinely liked or admired. They, in my opinion are disgustingly primitively emotional, some are better at hiding it than others.
Woah, you seem to possess the same mentality as Stalin....

[Liege-Killer]

Because Satan is the adversary.


They say history is written by the victors. Hmmmm.....

[Liege-Killer]

Atheists commonly use an argument like "well I don't believe in Zeus or Thor or the Flying Spaghetti Monster so God must not exist either"


It's not an argument per se. It's more of a way to point out the vacuousness of theism. There are a literally infinite number of things that might exist that we can't see or detect in any way and have zero evidence for. The point is to ask, why do you pick out just one of those things to believe in? The evidence for all of them is precisely the same: zero. So how do you choose among them?

It would be like someone saying "well I don't believe in the ether, so gravity, electromagnetism, quarks, blackholes, etc...must not exist either".


No, it would be nothing like that. There is zero evidence for ether, while there are varying levels of evidence for those other areas. You might want to get a better grasp on how analogy works; just a friendly piece of advice. ;)

[ashpwner]

why do we care so much about god belive in him or don't but stop trying to prove each other wrong.

[SnakeLord]

And while you're at it stop talking about any other subject you might have interest in. Close schools, ban talking and just do whatever it is ashpwner would suggest. :bugeye:

At the end of the day Star Trek pwns Star Wars, but I would still happily debate it with a Star Wars fan. We could just leave it be but that would spell the death of conversation.

[Michael]

Elohim means God, but of components, three of them, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, this is why in Genesis God says "let us make man in our image.""no other gods before me" (Exodus 20:3)

try again.

It is stated Gods because at the time of writing the Jewish beleived there were other Gods but only worshipped one of them.

[Sarkus]

Atheists commonly use an argument like "well I don't believe in Zeus or Thor or the Flying Spaghetti Monster so God must not exist either"Please indicate (a link and post-number will suffice) where any atheist on this site has used such an argument.

You have once again confused an argument against believing in your god as an argument claiming non-existence of your god.

The examples cited by atheists demonstrate that there is no more reason to believe in yours than in any of the others.

However, at no point do they cite these examples as proof / evidence / argument for the non-existence of your deity.

You continue to misunderstand the arguments presented.
You continue to incorrectly generalise about atheism and atheistic arguments because you fail to actually comprehend them.

[VitalOne]

It's not an argument per se. It's more of a way to point out the vacuousness of theism. There are a literally infinite number of things that might exist that we can't see or detect in any way and have zero evidence for. The point is to ask, why do you pick out just one of those things to believe in? The evidence for all of them is precisely the same: zero. So how do you choose among them?
The reason you can believe in one and not another is because they have different characteristics....obviously....saying they're all the same is just wrong...


No, it would be nothing like that. There is zero evidence for ether, while there are varying levels of evidence for those other areas. You might want to get a better grasp on how analogy works; just a friendly piece of advice. ;)
Oh so now you're saying evidence causes something to become true (another typical atheistic argument).

It is exactly like that. The point wasn't about evidence, the point was that you're taking completely different things with different attributes and characteristics and saying they're all the same......

[Sarkus]

TIt is exactly like that. The point wasn't about evidence, the point was that you're taking completely different things with different attributes and characteristics and saying they're all the same......But they share the KEY CHARACTERISTIC of having NO SUPPORTING EVIDENCE to support their existence.

Thus why believe in the existence of any of them.

This is not to say that none of them exist - but why believe that they do?

[EmptyForceOfChi]

But atheists refuse and reject any type of evidence for God or anything religious...why even ask for evidence?


Woah, you seem to possess the same mentality as Stalin....

an atheist that askes for evidence of god is not really asking for evidence, they are saying "god doesent exist and you cant prove it"


but they like to beat around the bush and spend time debating religion,


peace.

[SnakeLord]

an atheist that askes for evidence of god is not really asking for evidence, they are saying "god doesent exist and you cant prove it"


I think that is a misconception on your part.

[IceAgeCivilizations]

If God doens't exist, it should be evident to all, but the Atheists are so alone!

[Sarkus]

If God doens't exist, it should be evident to all, but the Atheists are so alone!IAC - please start posting your rationale for such comments - or stop trolling.
Why should it be evident to all?
In what way would it be evident?
In what way is it evident that your god DOES exist?
:rolleyes:

[Medicine*Woman]

If God doens't exist, it should be evident to all, but the Atheists are so alone!

*************
M*W: If a god existed, it would be evident to all. Atheists choose not to be affiliated with the delusional.

[Oli]

If god did exist then it should be evident to all. There can be no evidence of non-existence.

[Wisdom_Seeker]

We can never prove God, neither can we prove the infinity of the Universe, nor the existance or our souls.

If a skeptic have never seen the Ocean, then if someone comes and tell him there is a vast mass of water called the Ocean, the skeptic wont believe him.
But then the person comes with a drop of water from the Ocean, so the skeptic can do lab tests, and start believing in the existance of the Ocean.

The same is with us, we cannot prove the existance of our souls, but no person can deny the fact that there is life within us.

I believe this "drop of water" that is each of our lifes, is the proof of a infinite vast Ocean that we call God.

[Oli]

One drop does not an ocean prove.

[Wisdom_Seeker]

"A person can never judge the faith of others, because no human being can judge the ways of God"

Emperor Haile Selassie I

[Wisdom_Seeker]

One drop does not an ocean prove.

Ok dude, you can call it a glass of water and sand.

[Oli]

Oh good, a quote.
Faith does not desire evidence. Evidence does not need faith.

[Wisdom_Seeker]

One thing atheist´s dont understand is that faith and evidence go hand by hand. It is ignorance in the interpretation of evidence and faith that gets us nowhere.

[Enterprise-D]

Elohim means God, but of components, three of them, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, this is why in Genesis God says "let us make man in our image."

1. So what? Romans had the triad Jupiter, Juno and Minerva. Early Hindus had the triad vedic gods Agni, Vayu and Surya. This isn't as original as you would like to believe.

2. Correct me if i'm wrong but didn't the Christian god say "...our image" in genesis while addressing angels? Especially since Jesus was not written in as yet?

[Sarkus]

One thing atheist´s dont understand is that faith and evidence go hand by hand. It is ignorance in the interpretation of evidence and faith that gets us nowhere.It is the irrational interpretation of evidence that leads to god.

[Wisdom_Seeker]

God is a word created by humans to try to understand something eternal and divine, impossible to fit in our brains.
To not believe such a thing exists, is only ignorance.

[Oli]

To declare that such a thing exists, without evidence, is arrogance.

[Wisdom_Seeker]

You cannot give an evidence of eternity in this realm, but it exists doesnt it?

[Oli]

Does it?

[Wisdom_Seeker]

Does it?

The Universe, if it ends, whats beyond that? A multi-universe maybe? And the end of the multi-universe?

Were did it all start? and what was before that?

Were will everything end, and what is beyond that?

No one can honestly anwer this questions with a closed mind, like ours.

Even numbers imply eternity, and infinity, all over the place.

[Wisdom_Seeker]

If you say that the Universe has a start or an end, wether is timely or physically, you would be speaking without really thinking.

[Oli]

Numbers are part of the universe, as it is now. Just because numbers don't end does not imply or indicate that the universe won't.
If you say that the Universe has a start or an end, wether is timely or physically, you would be speaking without really thinking.
Start = most likely the big bang.
End = big crunch, heat death, whichever.
Oh, I said that without thinking. :rolleyes:

[Liege-Killer]

OK, let's try this again, shall we?

The reason you can believe in one and not another is because they have different characteristics....obviously....saying they're all the same is just wrong...


Of course different gods have different characteristics. But how do you know what those characteristics are? You have no evidence of what they are, you can only go on what their believers tell you. You have no way of knowing if those gods really have the characteristics their followers claim they do (let alone if they actually exist). So how do you go about choosing a god to believe in? It would appear you simply choose the one whose description (as described by his/her/its followers or their writings) you like the best.

This is no different than if I made up ten imaginary animals of varying sorts, and sent ten different people to describe them to you, and to tell you they believe in them for whatever reason, and you choose to believe in one of them because it's the cutest, or funniest, or whatever criteria trips your trigger.

Oh so now you're saying evidence causes something to become true (another typical atheistic argument).


I did not say that. You anti-rationalists keep persisting in this misunderstanding. Science does not aim to "prove" anything or to find what's "true" because those are impossible goals. It tries to find out what is most likely to be true. So no, evidence doesn't make something true; it makes it much more likely to be true than something without any evidence. In other words, evidence makes something more worthy of belief than something with no evidence. There are an infinite number of things we could dream up that have no evidence. But without varying levels of evidence by which to judge belief-worthiness, how do you choose which one(s) you want to believe?

[VitalOne]

OK, let's try this again, shall we?




Of course different gods have different characteristics. But how do you know what those characteristics are? You have no evidence of what they are, you can only go on what their believers tell you. You have no way of knowing if those gods really have the characteristics their followers claim they do (let alone if they actually exist). So how do you go about choosing a god to believe in? It would appear you simply choose the one whose description (as described by his/her/its followers or their writings) you like the best.
Man this comment is........why do you believe in some theories in science even before there's any evidence for them?

You have no way of knowing what the actual truth is....so why believe anything or have any theories or thoughts?

The reason I can believe in some God is because its fits my own rationality and thinking...just the sameway you can believe in some theory...otherwise go away with the "evidence causes something to become true people" and wait all your life for evidence (even though this phase in time is only a short period in history, and the truth exists without evidence) instead of seeking the truth on your own


This is no different than if I made up ten imaginary animals of varying sorts, and sent ten different people to describe them to you, and to tell you they believe in them for whatever reason, and you choose to believe in one of them because it's the cutest, or funniest, or whatever criteria trips your trigger.
Its very different from this...its like someone saying "well the bigbang theory and the superstring theory are like the same because people made them up in their minds first"...uhm NO...the reason they're different is because they have different properties, attributes, descriptions, etc....the fact that they were both thought up by people doesn't mean ANYTHING......


I did not say that. You anti-rationalists keep persisting in this misunderstanding. Science does not aim to "prove" anything or to find what's "true" because those are impossible goals. It tries to find out what is most likely to be true. So no, evidence doesn't make something true; it makes it much more likely to be true than something without any evidence. In other words, evidence makes something more worthy of belief than something with no evidence. There are an infinite number of things we could dream up that have no evidence. But without varying levels of evidence by which to judge belief-worthiness, how do you choose which one(s) you want to believe?
No, this is incorrect and very flawed. Before something is proven true, it still was already true, the evidence only revealed the truth....therefore there are innumerable possibly unlimited things that exist without any shred of evidence right now.....you atheists really think that evidence makes something true...like say for instance if in the future telepathy is a proven scientific fact...after that time atheists will believe that its true just because there's evidence....they have no type of independent mind at all.....

How do you choose which to believe in? You use your own rationality and logic...

[Liege-Killer]

VitalOne: even after my post explicitly explaining how science is not about "proving" anything "true," you keep on babbling about how atheists try to "prove" things "true." And not for the first time, you demonstrate that you haven't the faintest shred of an idea how analogy works or the ability to recognize an accurate one. I don't know if you truly don't understand what other people are writing, or if you are dishonestly distorting it on purpose. Whichever it is, you clearly show that you are lacking in either intellectual capacity, or intellectual integrity, or possibly both. You're a lost cause.

But, at least you're not a one-liner troll like IceAge. You do respond at length to your opponents, I'll give you that (even if it's more quantity than quality).

[SnakeLord]

you atheists really think that evidence makes something true

For the umpteenth time, no.

Leprechauns might exist, but until such time where there is evidence to suggest they exist, you have no belief in them.

It's quite simple.

[Jeremyhfht]

VitalOne:

It appears you missed the point. If there is the same amount of evidence for the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster as there is for the existence of the Christian God, then it is no more reasonable to believe in the Spaghetti Monster than it is to believe in the Christian God. And vice-versa, of course.

See?

James R owned this thread. and nobody even bothered to quote him. Sad really. His assessment is true. There is no more evidence for any other God then there is for the Spaghetti monster, or the Turd Burglar God of Toiletry.

This from someone who has spent the better part of his teenage years pouring over countless hours of research, historical documents, debate forums, etc. If theists have some secret concise evidence to offer, they've yet, in all my years of study, to do so.

So I implore someone to actually do so. In a PM if need be (I advise it). If it's something I've not heard or addressed before I'll respond to it with something other then a simple rebuttal of possibly a link or two.

[Wisdom_Seeker]

Numbers are part of the universe, as it is now. Just because numbers don't end does not imply or indicate that the universe won't.

Start = most likely the big bang.
End = big crunch, heat death, whichever.
Oh, I said that without thinking. :rolleyes:

Hehe, ok we can talk about this forever, and none of us could actually prove one or another theory.

However, I find it quite illogic how the Universe would have a start and/or end. What was before the big bang? or after the end, what is next?
You would say a big black nothing, but that is something indeed isn´t it?

[Cyperium]

"no other gods before me" (Exodus 20:3)

try again.

It is stated Gods because at the time of writing the Jewish beleived there were other gods but only worshipped one of them.That's true, but God is the only living God. The Bible tells us to not be afraid of the other gods since they are made of wood and other earthly materials and cannot do anything, cannot walk or move or see. The Bible ridicules the people obeying the statues of gods and pictures of them as if they could do anything to change their situation. God is so to say the true God, the others are mere representations of the idea.

[VitalOne]

VitalOne:

It appears you missed the point. If there is the same amount of evidence for the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster as there is for the existence of the Christian God, then it is no more reasonable to believe in the Spaghetti Monster than it is to believe in the Christian God. And vice-versa, of course.

See?

James R owned this thread. and nobody even bothered to quote him. Sad really. His assessment is true. There is no more evidence for any other God then there is for the Spaghetti monster, or the Turd Burglar God of Toiletry.

This from someone who has spent the better part of his teenage years pouring over countless hours of research, historical documents, debate forums, etc. If theists have some secret concise evidence to offer, they've yet, in all my years of study, to do so.

So I implore someone to actually do so. In a PM if need be (I advise it). If it's something I've not heard or addressed before I'll respond to it with something other then a simple rebuttal of possibly a link or two.
You and James R are again using logically flawed arguments that make no sense. Your logic fails on every level.

Although there is no evidence for the superstring theory, the many-worlds interpretation, the copenhagen interpretation, etc....it does not mean that I make it seem like all these theories are the samethings....you would never say "I don't believe in the superstring theory because I think the many-worlds interpretation is false" simply because it makes no type of sense at all. The many-worlds interpretation and the superstring theory are two completely different things so you can believe in one and not the other.

Also using the Zeus analogy is also flawed, its like me saying "I don't believe in the geocentric theory, an ancient theory in science and a theory now ridiculed that no one believes in (Zeus) so thats why I don't believe in the superstring theory, another theory in science" The two things have completely different attributes why are you making it seem like they're the same?

And also your logic about evidence also fails since everyone knows that "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". I guess the heliocentric theory was false until proven true? wtf?

[Jeremyhfht]

You and James R are again using logically flawed arguments that make no sense. Your logic fails on every level.


You know, when I read this, I had to reread it. Since it had the mark someone that didn't even know what rationality or logic was. Then I saw it was you. Then I decided to ignore the rest. Since, y'know, it's obviously wrong.

But to sum it up: you misunderstood. again. Lack of evidence or not, it's still comparable to other religions and gods such as Zeus. Even if simply on the basis that there is no evidence. comparing Zeus to String Theory is an apple-buick comparison. There is no comparison.

Speaking of flawed logic...

So next time will I have to word it as if I'm speaking to a 3 year old, or do you not want to be that degraded?

[VitalOne]

You know, when I read this, I had to reread it. Since it had the mark someone that didn't even know what rationality or logic was. Then I saw it was you. Then I decided to ignore the rest. Since, y'know, it's obviously wrong.

But to sum it up: you misunderstood. again. Lack of evidence or not, it's still comparable to other religions and gods such as Zeus. Even if simply on the basis that there is no evidence. comparing Zeus to String Theory is an apple-buick comparison. There is no comparison.

Speaking of flawed logic...

So next time will I have to word it as if I'm speaking to a 3 year old, or do you not want to be that degraded?
Nothing you said addresses the substance of my argument...this is typical of atheists with blind atheistic faith...why read something that contradicts your faith-based belief system?

Also, you're really the one who doesn't know what logic is and your second paragraph clearly shows this. First you say something is comparable because there is no evidence for both, then you say there is no comparison between the superstring theory and Zeus, but there is...because there is no evidence for either...

The rest of your stuff is just vain insults that have nothing to do with the substance of the argument...you're really the one who sounds like a 3-year-old your post clearly demonstrates this...

[Jeremyhfht]

Nothing you said addresses the substance of my argument...this is typical of atheists with blind atheistic faith...why read something that contradicts your faith-based belief system?

Nevermind the fact it directly addressed the logic of your arguments, and ended up pointing out why it was incorrect of you to say what you did.

Yeah, I totally didn't address the substance of your argument. 'cept I did. Your little baseless attacks of "omfg blind atheist faith obviously atheist and faith filled and stuff!!!111oneoneoneoneelevenone" do nothing to support your argument.

The original thing to remember is that there is no proof any of those gods are the right one, since there's no evidence any of them exist. Even assuming that the lack of evidence does not equate to absence, there's the simple fact that every god claims to be the real one. Either directly or indirectly.


Also, you're really the one who doesn't know what logic is and your second paragraph clearly shows this. First you say something is comparable because there is no evidence for both, then you say there is no comparison between the superstring theory and Zeus, but there is...because there is no evidence for either...

"superstring"? I've never heard of it. I thought you were referring to string theory. Ah well, simple mistake. You can ignore that comparison then. I'll revise it right here:

It still applies, since Zeus is a god form. Superstring theory is a theory. It does, in fact, have some evidence (though highly disputed). Unlike Zeus, Superstring has the advantage of admitting it *doesn't exist*.

By the same coin, comparing those theories with each other doesn't work. Since they're all based on some amount of evidence, and rarely collaborate on anything. Gods, on the other hand, share a lot in common. Ranging from interfering with humans, to having superhuman sons that go down to earth (Jesus, Hercules, etc), to having no proven evidence to back them up. It's a completely rational comparison, when you compare all the beliefs to one another to prove a simple fact.

This fact normally proves that there are so many similarities between the Gods it's highly unlikely that any one of them is the true or unique one. And each of them suffer from the same lack of evidence as the next. If a group of scientific theories shared this trait, it would be more like a pseudoscience theory then a real theory.

It's still, largely, an apple-buick comparison. Comparing a deity to a scientific theory is ridiculous.

P.S: "I know you are but what am I" summarizes the first sentence of your statement above. Childish much?


The rest of your stuff is just vain insults that have nothing to do with the substance of the argument...you're really the one who sounds like a 3-year-old your post clearly demonstrates this...

The rest, hmm? So I suppose labeling us as flawed, etc, isn't an insult? Double-edged swords, Vital.

In either case, I have addressed the substance of your argument. Even revised how I addressed it when I found it lacking. Stop constructing straw-men to inflate your ego and hide your arguments failure.

P.S: And while absence of evidence is definitely not evidence of absence, absence of the things that are said to happen can prove that it's absent. For example, the "end times" that creationists have been screeching about for so long.

Absence of evidence which their own literature claims to have goes a long way into proving absence of it altogether. Especially when it claims historical actions that are proven to either not have happened, or happened without such bias (The Victor writes history).

another example of this particular type of cognitive dissonance would be found here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance.

[Wisdom_Seeker]

The original thing to remember is that there is no proof any of those gods are the right one, since there's no evidence any of them exist. Even assuming that the lack of evidence does not equate to absence, there's the simple fact that every god claims to be the real one. Either directly or indirectly.

Even when Gautama Buddha was teaching, he said to his disciples: "You can ask me about anything you want, but do not ask me about God."

Why do you think this is? It is because God cannot be explained to us, it is WAY beyond our understanding. This is the reason why atheists are atheists, is because their Ego does not let them believe in something they do not understand.

But the fact is, the true God is the one that is inside each one of us, and we don´t let HIM be, because our Ego, created since we are little kids, doesn´t let us listen to HIM.

So this is my understanding of the Old Testament and the metaphor of Satan, that because of his Ego, he didn´t obey the Lord.

And when you say that every God claims to be the real one, you should really question yourself if it was really God who did this claims, or it was a man´s Ego.

[(Q)]

God cannot be explained to us, it is WAY beyond our understanding. This is the reason why atheists are atheists, is because their Ego does not let them believe in something they do not understand.

This line of reasoning often has me rolling on the floor in hysterics as theists continue to tell us their detailed versions of their one-and-only god(s) despite their claims that god(s) are "WAY beyond our understanding."

And when questioned as to why we SHOULD believe, we must be content with precluding our "Egos" with blissful ignorance.

And when you say that every God claims to be the real one, you should really question yourself if it was really God who did this claims, or it was a man´s Ego.

Yes, it's men's "Egos" that proclaim god(s).

[orcot]

This is the reason why atheists are atheists, is because their Ego does not let them believe in something they do not understand.

Is their any sound reason why they chould?

But the fact is, the true God is the one that is inside each one of us, and we don´t let HIM be, because our Ego, created since we are little kids, doesn´t let us listen to HIM.
If your looking for (subjective)god then in people would be the best way to search for him however if that's your god then you can not, not be him.

So this is my understanding of the Old Testament and the metaphor of Satan, that because of his Ego, he didn´t obey the Lord.
Well his ego did pretty much create free will with the helpfull lesson that some things are better left unknown... that's not a bad lesson.

And when you say that every God claims to be the real one, you should really question yourself if it was really God who did this claims, or it was a man´s Ego.

well... their always written by men (and the ocasional women)

[kenworth]

most people's idea of god is simply an idealized version of themself

[Jeremyhfht]

Even when Gautama Buddha was teaching, he said to his disciples: "You can ask me about anything you want, but do not ask me about God."

Buddha wasn't exactly proven to exist either. He has about as much physical evidence for existing as Jesus.


Why do you think this is? It is because God cannot be explained to us, it is WAY beyond our understanding. This is the reason why atheists are atheists, is because their Ego does not let them believe in something they do not understand.

If god is beyond our understanding, then he's beyond your understanding. Therefore you can't say God exists, since whether he does or not is beyond your understanding.

Therefore, God purposefully set it up so it would spawn disbelief, since he left no trace of his existence, and setup a system that science can explain better then blind faith.

Yeah. That's a very kind God.


But the fact is, the true God is the one that is inside each one of us, and we don´t let HIM be, because our Ego, created since we are little kids, doesn´t let us listen to HIM.

So this is my understanding of the Old Testament and the metaphor of Satan, that because of his Ego, he didn´t obey the Lord.

And when you say that every God claims to be the real one, you should really question yourself if it was really God who did this claims, or it was a man´s Ego.


So you should question yourself if it was really God you believe in, or your own Ego. For you are so Egotistical you believe you have this knowledge, and some knowledge of God.

Right back at you, Ego Boy.

[Wisdom_Seeker]

Ok, I have provoked some atheists to get mad, and this in only due to the fact, that you feel threatened by this.

If you guys really didn´t believe in God, then you would not get upset when other people tell you otherwise, some may say is histerical, but deep inside, you are scared.

You are scared of change, by denying God, you are only denying the inner-experience of God, and that will only prove that God doesn´t exist, but you will prove it only to yourselfs.

Some may say: Jesus didn´t exist, Buddha either, there is no physicall evidence of that.
So, this make you feel better about yourselfs? that Buddha and Christ are not real? So if you feel better this way, it is because you are afraid of change, because the inner-experience that is God, can only change you, and you don´t want to change. You want a reason to continue being yourselfs, and not change, so you say God doesn´t exist, but by doing this, you are only saying that you don´t want to change.

Why else do you get so defensive when someone starts talking about God?? It disturbs you, if God exist, then you would have to change, so I better deny His existance, and keep proving that to yourselves.

The thing is, I cannot prove God existance to you, the same as you cannot prove that He doesn´t exist. You know this, so why do you guys get defensive? because the fact that God may exist disturbs you, more people will experience the realm of God, and you will continue your dis-belief. But that means you are happy with who you currently are.
But if you were truly happy, you would not get defensive when someone talks about God.

[Medicine*Woman]

Ok, I have provoked some atheists to get mad, and this in only due to the fact, that you feel threatened by this.

*************
M*W: You are wrong. In the first place, how can you know atheists feel threatened? I'm an atheist, and I don't feel threated because you or other theists believe in god. There is no threat whatsoever. In fact, I used to be a christian. I know how christians think and feel, and it's no threat to me that there is no god. Actually, it's a feeling of understanding and relief. All those mysteries of christianity are finally understood. They just don't exist. They mean nothing, so there is nothing to fear.

If you guys really didn´t believe in God, then you would not get upset when other people tell you otherwise, some may say is histerical, but deep inside, you are scared.

*************
M*W: I get 'upset,' not because there is a threat that there is no god, but because I see people lying to themselves. That really bothers me. I hurt for them, especially since I've been there and walked in their shoes. Or maybe, they are walking in my shoes, and someday they too will receive the gift of knowledge.

You are scared of change, by denying God, you are only denying the inner-experience of God, and that will only prove that God doesn´t exist, but you will prove it only to yourselfs.

*************
M*W: I experienced god in the past. It was a good 'feeling,' but it wasn't reality. I only made myself believe it was true when it wasn't. It's like believers wear blinders, so they can hide what they DON'T WANT to see and BELIEVE what they're afraid NOT to believe. It's a mind game. People play mind games with themselves all the time. It's human nature. The weak man looks in the mirror and sees Brad Pitt. The fat girl looks in the mirror and sees Christie Brinkley. The child looks in the mirror and imagines himself as an adult. We do this all the time. I used to sit in church and pretend to be a christian, but so did the entire congregation. We're all seeing ourselves as we want to be, but not as we truly are. We can't help it. Then one day we look in that mirror and we don't see the same image our imagination has told us to see and made us to believe. Sometimes we stand in front of that mirror, and we are stripped of everything that would remind us of our imagined selves. We either start to make ourselves over or we succumb to our imaginary selves. We can either see ourselves as we really are, or we can go on pretending to be what we think society wants us to be. I chose to be myself and lose the labels society put on me. One of those labels was being a christian. It was then and only then that I was able to remove that label and pursue the truth. Christians are afraid to pursue the truth, so they just keep believing in their imaginary self, the self they allow society to create of them.

So if you feel better this way, it is because you are afraid of change, because the inner-experience that is God, can only change you, and you don´t want to change. You want a reason to continue being yourselfs, and not change, so you say God doesn´t exist, but by doing this, you are only saying that you don´t want to change.

*************
M*W: Change can be scary for some and relief for others. I don't believe it is a "god' who changes you, it is yourself. Only you can imagine your being, and only you can change how you imagine yourself. Had I allowed myself to be more of a pawn to society, I probably would have gone along with the christian game plan just to please the public, but I saw that I was losing myself to a make-believe religion.

Why else do you get so defensive when someone starts talking about God?? It disturbs you, if God exist, then you would have to change, so I better deny His existance, and keep proving that to yourselves.

*************
M*W: Being defensive is not what atheism is about. I don't feel the need to defend my atheism, and I don't care about a god. There is no god, therefore, there is no reason at all to be defensive. I don't have to change unless I want to change. No one else can make me change, and certainly, no imaginary god can make me change. Having been there and done that in the past, I won't go there anymore. It's imaginary, not real.

The thing is, I cannot prove God existance to you, the same as you cannot prove that He doesn´t exist. You know this, so why do you guys get defensive? because the fact that God may exist disturbs you, more people will experience the realm of God, and you will continue your dis-belief. But that means you are happy with who you currently are.

*************
M*W: The inability to prove a god exists or doesn't exist is all the more reason for a god to be imaginary. I don't worship an imaginary god. The inability to prove such a being is enough for me to deny its existence. I've been happier with myself since I became an atheist. One must strip away all the imaginary labels society sticks on us. I'm not saying that it is an easy thing to do, but if one pursues happiness, it must be done. We should answer to no one but ourselves.

But if you were truly happy, you would not get defensive when someone talks about God.

*************
M*W: Sorry, but I've just seen too many god-fearing people who were miserable to the core. Most, if not all, of these people were christian. It's not about being defensive. If one truly believed in their faith, there would be no need to be defensive. There is no need to be a defensive atheist, either. I'm not defensive about my lack of belief. There are no consequences in being an atheist. It is christians who live in fear. What a way to live! How can one be defensive of something that is not there? That is called delusion.

[Wisdom_Seeker]

*************
M*W: You are wrong. In the first place, how can you know atheists feel threatened? I'm an atheist, and I don't feel threated because you or other theists believe in god. There is no threat whatsoever. In fact, I used to be a christian. I know how christians think and feel, and it's no threat to me that there is no god. Actually, it's a feeling of understanding and relief. All those mysteries of christianity are finally understood. They just don't exist. They mean nothing, so there is nothing to fear.

Hi there girl, I knew someone would write against my post quickly, it is in your nature to find the truth...

I believe Christians have been fooled.
In the great work of Nietzsche “Thus spoke Zarathustra”, the last message from Zarathustra to his disciples was: “Be careful with me. I have told you everything I had to say. Now be careful with me. Don´t follow me; forget about me. Let me and go away.”
This is the last message from all the great masters. No great master want to turn you into a puppet, because he would be killing you. He would be a Killer. He will help you be yourself. The master means a chance for you, to be yourself. Only the small minds, the narrow minds that pretend to be masters and aren´t, will want to impose over you.


M*W: I get 'upset,' not because there is a threat that there is no god, but because I see people lying to themselves. That really bothers me. I hurt for them, especially since I've been there and walked in their shoes. Or maybe, they are walking in my shoes, and someday they too will receive the gift of knowledge.

Yes, you were fooled, and they are continue being fooled into following a belief system, no belief system is real; there are spiritual paths as there are people walking in this Earth. The key, is acceptance.

Knowledge is a dangerous thing my friend, if you put selfless love into the equation, you may find wisdom, and that is indeed a wonderful gift.

M*W: I experienced god in the past. It was a good 'feeling,' but it wasn't reality. I only made myself believe it was true when it wasn't. It's like believers wear blinders, so they can hide what they DON'T WANT to see and BELIEVE what they're afraid NOT to believe. It's a mind game. People play mind games with themselves all the time. It's human nature. The weak man looks in the mirror and sees Brad Pitt. The fat girl looks in the mirror and sees Christie Brinkley. The child looks in the mirror and imagines himself as an adult. We do this all the time. I used to sit in church and pretend to be a christian, but so did the entire congregation. We're all seeing ourselves as we want to be, but not as we truly are. We can't help it. Then one day we look in that mirror and we don't see the same image our imagination has told us to see and made us to believe. Sometimes we stand in front of that mirror, and we are stripped of everything that would remind us of our imagined selves. We either start to make ourselves over or we succumb to our imaginary selves. We can either see ourselves as we really are, or we can go on pretending to be what we think society wants us to be. I chose to be myself and lose the labels society put on me. One of those labels was being a christian. It was then and only then that I was able to remove that label and pursue the truth. Christians are afraid to pursue the truth, so they just keep believing in their imaginary self, the self they allow society to create of them.

You are right, you thought you experienced God, but that is not real. If you really had experienced God, we wouldn´t be having this conversation.

Most people in religious groups are hipocryte, because of the reasons you stated. There is no "common path" towards God, that doesn´t exist. Each of us have to seek God within ourselves, and not in an external place.
The realm of God is an inner-experience, and once you reach it, there is no center... You become one with the existance, you realize our current reality is nothing but a lie. You change my friend, you are no longer a person, you have become enlightened.
Each of us have to potential to become Christ, to become a Buddha, we have the same seed; but we can never become Jesus, and we can never become Gautama. this is the reason why a belief system is not the answer, because it teaches you only how to follow Jesus in the case of Christianity. But there is no figure to follow, God is within ourselves, we cannot find Him by walking someone else´s path...


M*W: Change can be scary for some and relief for others. I don't believe it is a "god' who changes you, it is yourself. Only you can imagine your being, and only you can change how you imagine yourself. Had I allowed myself to be more of a pawn to society, I probably would have gone along with the christian game plan just to please the public, but I saw that I was losing myself to a make-believe religion.

Yes, Christianity is a make-believe religion, so are many others, but that doesn´t mean there is no God. There is no religion that will show you the way to reach God, there is not even one.
You can see thousands and thousands of Christians, Catholics, whatever, but none of them have really experienced God.
God is a search within our very soul, our most inner-self, and that is different from person to person.

M*W: Being defensive is not what atheism is about. I don't feel the need to defend my atheism, and I don't care about a god. There is no god, therefore, there is no reason at all to be defensive. I don't have to change unless I want to change. No one else can make me change, and certainly, no imaginary god can make me change. Having been there and done that in the past, I won't go there anymore. It's imaginary, not real.

That is what Im talking about, you don´t know how to reach the realm of God, and now you know you cannot reach it through a religious system... That is a good start my friend.
It is true, only you can change, and through change, internal change, you can reach the kingdom of God in this very realm, this very reality.
But just by saying that you don´t believe in God, you are obviously saying you don´t believe in something you don´t understand. And no one can really understand God, unless you experience it. No one can really tell you what God is, because words are not enough.

M*W: The inability to prove a god exists or doesn't exist is all the more reason for a god to be imaginary. I don't worship an imaginary god. The inability to prove such a being is enough for me to deny its existence. I've been happier with myself since I became an atheist. One must strip away all the imaginary labels society sticks on us. I'm not saying that it is an easy thing to do, but if one pursues happiness, it must be done. We should answer to no one but ourselves.

Only a religious belief system can tell you to worship their God, and it is different in every religion, that is the reason why most people don´t believe in God, confussion. So we agree that religious belief systems are not for real, those are man-made solutions to a divine issue.
Why can´t people explain what God is? because we haven´t experienced Him ourselves, so we can´t possibly explain it to you.
If you try to teach the colors to a blind person, you will not succeed, but the colors are there, they are a reality. But there is no communication between you and the blind person in this matter, because how can you explain colors?
The same happens with the masters and their disciples, the master has experienced the realm of God, but his disciples haven´t, so the master can only try, this is the main obstacle, there is no communication.
But many masters have come to show us techniques and precepts to reach God, and it is very difficult to understand. You need to change, in order to reach God, that is the main reason why you don´t believe in Him. Because why would you change for someone who doesn´t exist?
For me is logical, the fact that there is life within us, it is indeed a prove of God; God is everywere and everything, but we can only experience HIm deep within ourselves.

M*W: Sorry, but I've just seen too many god-fearing people who were miserable to the core. Most, if not all, of these people were christian. It's not about being defensive. If one truly believed in their faith, there would be no need to be defensive. There is no need to be a defensive atheist, either. I'm not defensive about my lack of belief. There are no consequences in being an atheist. It is christians who live in fear. What a way to live! How can one be defensive of something that is not there? That is called delusion.

Yes my friend, that is delusional, but if you believe in karma, you know that everything that happens to you is because of your previous karma. We have done many stupid things, and continue doing this things, this affects our karma.
Then you may think, how can I get over this vicious cycle? of karma, you can, that is what the teachers of manking have come here to show us. You can break the karma cycle, you can be one with the existance, in eternal bliss, and you can achieve that in this very life.
Like Jesus, he paid for his whole Karma in his last life, he broke his cycle, his karma was discipated in the crucifixion, so he will not experience another birth, unless he wants to. Christians don´t tell you this things do they?

When you break the cycle of karma, you get into the realm of God, you become one with the Universe.

[Medicine*Woman]

Hi there girl, I knew someone would write against my post quickly, it is in your nature to find the truth...

*************
M*W: Please. I am not a "girl." I am a grown woman and a grandmother.

Yes, you were fooled, and they are continue being fooled into following a belief system, no belief system is real; there are spiritual paths as there are people walking in this Earth. The key, is acceptance.

*************
M*W: Acceptance of what? Delusions?

Knowledge is a dangerous thing my friend, if you put selfless love into the equation, you may find wisdom, and that is indeed a wonderful gift.

*************
M*W: Knowledge is dangerous to the delusional. Knowledge destroys the delusions.

You are right, you thought you experienced God, but that is not real.

*************
M*W: I am sick and tired of you telling me what is real and not real to me. You weren't in my mind. You weren't in my life. You cannot know what was real or not for me, so stop trying.

If you really had experienced God, we wouldn´t be having this conversation.

*************
M*W: I believed in a god at one time. I found out there was no god. I am here because I am not afraid there might possibly be a go, but I'd be wrong. I am here, because I am not afraid to encourage others to not be afraid that there is no god.

Most people in religious groups are hipocryte, because of the reasons you stated. There is no "common path" towards God, that doesn´t exist. Each of us have to seek God within ourselves, and not in an external place.

*************
M*W: Why is it so important for you to believe that everyone must seek a god? That's crazy. Gods are simply not needed.

The realm of God is an inner-experience, and once you reach it, there is no center...

*************
M*W: The realm of oneself is also an inner experience.

You become one with the existance, you realize our current reality is nothing but a lie.

*************
M*W: Belief in gods are a lie. They are delusions.

You change my friend, you are no longer a person, you have become enlightened.

*************
M*W: Let me be concerned with my own enlightenment.

Each of us have to potential to become Christ, to become a Buddha, we have the same seed; but we can never become Jesus, and we can never become Gautama.

*************
M*W: But why would anyone want to become christ? I don't know anything about Buddha, and I'm not interested in learning about Buddha right now. Maybe someday in the future I will take up an interest in Buddha, but not today.

this is the reason why a belief system is not the answer, because it teaches you only how to follow Jesus in the case of Christianity.

*************
M*W: I don't have a belief system. All belief systems that involve creator gods are delusional. I chose not to follow the belief system of christianity, because it was delusional.

But there is no figure to follow, God is within ourselves, we cannot find Him by walking someone else´s path...

*************
M*W: I'll agree with this statement. We create our own lives, and we create our own spirit. We're lucky if we can find ourselves on the path of life. Religions prevent us from doing so.

Yes, Christianity is a make-believe religion, so are many others, but that doesn´t mean there is no God.

*************
M*W: Gods are the centers of all religions. Since there is no god, there should be no religions lying to mankind and leading us astray.

There is no religion that will show you the way to reach God, there is not even one. You can see thousands and thousands of Christians, Catholics, whatever, but none of them have really experienced God.

*************
M*W: That matters not. Unless one denies the ways of the world (man-made religions) one can never imagine the truth.

God is a search within our very soul, our most inner-self, and that is different from person to person.

*************
M*W: I had that philosophy when I first came to sciforums, but I learned quickly that I was only kidding myself. I was looking for a god within me, but no god was there. My own will is there, and that is what I follow.

That is what Im talking about, you don´t know how to reach the realm of God, and now you know you cannot reach it through a religious system...

*************
M*W: I don't believe there is a 'realm of god,' nor do I choose to reach such a delusionary place.

That is a good start my friend. It is true, only you can change, and through change, internal change, you can reach the kingdom of God in this very realm, this very reality.

*************
M*W: Not gonna change. Not looking for a god. Happy with reality as I know it.

But just by saying that you don´t believe in God, you are obviously saying you don´t believe in something you don´t understand.

*************
M*W: Please. You're talking out your ass. Go burn some insense or something.

And no one can really understand God, unless you experience it. No one can really tell you what God is, because words are not enough.

*************
M*W: I have a question for you. Why did you come to a predominantly atheist forum? Are you hoping to convert people to your philosophy? You seem to be working hard at it.

Only a religious belief system can tell you to worship their God, and it is different in every religion, that is the reason why most people don´t believe in God, confussion.

*************
M*W: Religion = confusion. I agree.

So we agree that religious belief systems are not for real, those are man-made solutions to a divine issue.

*************
M*W: Religions are man-made, ergo the confusion they cause.

Why can´t people explain what God is? because we haven´t experienced Him ourselves, so we can´t possibly explain it to you.

*************
M*W: So, please don't try. I've already experienced a god who wasn't there. I fooled myself.

If you try to teach the colors to a blind person, you will not succeed, but the colors are there, they are a reality.

*************
M*W: Bad analogy. Colors are there whether they are seen or not. God is not there whether he is seen or not.

But there is no communication between you and the blind person in this matter, because how can you explain colors?

*************
M*W: That's silly.

The same happens with the masters and their disciples, the master has experienced the realm of God, but his disciples haven´t, so the master can only try, this is the main obstacle, there is no communication.

*************
M*W: That's delusionary thinking. The whole master-disciple thing is a farce.

But many masters have come to show us techniques and precepts to reach God, and it is very difficult to understand.

*************
M*W: Sure, they come and go like all delusions.

You need to change, in order to reach God, that is the main reason why you don´t believe in Him. Because why would you change for someone who doesn´t exist?

*************
M*W: I keep telling you, there is no god to reach! Who are you to tell me to change?

For me is logical, the fact that there is life within us, it is indeed a prove of God; God is everywere and everything, but we can only experience HIm deep within ourselves.

*************
M*W: If that's what makes you happy, then you believe in it.

Yes my friend, that is delusional, but if you believe in karma, you know that everything that happens to you is because of your previous karma. We have done many stupid things, and continue doing this things, this affects our karma.

*************
M*W: Another delusion!

Then you may think, how can I get over this vicious cycle? of karma, you can, that is what the teachers of manking have come here to show us. You can break the karma cycle, you can be one with the existance, in eternal bliss, and you can achieve that in this very life.

*************
M*W: That's not for me.

Like Jesus, he paid for his whole Karma in his last life, he broke his cycle, his karma was discipated in the crucifixion, so he will not experience another birth, unless he wants to. Christians don´t tell you this things do they?

*************
M*W: Jesus didn't exist, so there was no karma for him. He's a fictional character.

When you break the cycle of karma, you get into the realm of God, you become one with the Universe.

*************
M*W: No karma, no realm of god, nada. All you have are a bunch of wasted words.

[Wisdom_Seeker]

Sorry if I offended you somehow, by saying there is a God.

Wow, I cannot imagine how scared are you going to be, when the your time comes, and there is nothing out there to hope for...
But it´s ok if you are happy with yourself you know?

One thing I know, you can never teach how to obtain hapiness unless you know how to be happy.

[Jeremyhfht]

Ok, I have provoked some atheists to get mad, and this in only due to the fact, that you feel threatened by this.

You've avoided my rebuttal completely. I'm neither angry, nor threatened. I've dealt with theists many many times, and never have I felt angry or threatened by their arguments. Annoyed by their stupidity? Yes.


If you guys really didn´t believe in God, then you would not get upset when other people tell you otherwise, some may say is histerical, but deep inside, you are scared.

I'm an avid study of psychology, and my analytical capabilities of both myself and others are superior to most. I can say with utmost assurance that throughout most of my life I've never had some fear of God. Even as a child, when I heard some verse or whatever about fearing God, I never could figure out why (since he was always portrayed as so kind, etc).

Aside from that, I could just as easily say that deep down you're so scared you're building up straw-man attacks to avoid the harsh reality. God doesn't exist. You're terrified about that reality.

And that's about as accurate as your argument above.


You are scared of change, by denying God, you are only denying the inner-experience of God, and that will only prove that God doesn´t exist, but you will prove it only to yourselfs.

Actually, I love change. So long as change is for the better. Your ignorant generalizations are about as accurate as saying a camel thirsts for sand.


Some may say: Jesus didn´t exist, Buddha either, there is no physicall evidence of that.

You say Jesus/Buddha exists, but there's no physical evidence of that. Are you just trying to make yourself feel better by having some mythical characters to lean on?

Jesus myth here. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesus_myth)

And further reading can be found by googling "Jesus Myth". There is, aside from the lack of material in the "jesus myth" article, an abundance of evidence for the reports of Jesus to have been falsified.

See here for further information: http://www.atheists.org/christianity/myth.html


So, this make you feel better about yourselfs? that Buddha and Christ are not real? So if you feel better this way, it is because you are afraid of change, because the inner-experience that is God, can only change you, and you don´t want to change. You want a reason to continue being yourselfs, and not change, so you say God doesn´t exist, but by doing this, you are only saying that you don´t want to change.

By saying God does exist you don't want change. Since God has "officially" existed in the minds of the majority of the planet for most of civilizations born days. Atheists are what are changing that.

Therefore, you are afraid of change.


Why else do you get so defensive when someone starts talking about God?? It disturbs you, if God exist, then you would have to change, so I better deny His existance, and keep proving that to yourselves.

Why else do you get so defensive when someone starts talking about the lack of a God?

Honestly, your arguments are ridiculous.


The thing is, I cannot prove God existance to you, the same as you cannot prove that He doesn´t exist. You know this, so why do you guys get defensive? because the fact that God may exist disturbs you, more people will experience the realm of God, and you will continue your dis-belief. But that means you are happy with who you currently are.
But if you were truly happy, you would not get defensive when someone talks about God.

I'm an analytical person. I live for information. The debate on whether or not God exits is absolutely nothing new to me, but every debate means a slightly different take.

It's unfortunate that your take ends up being one of the most irrational ones.

[Wisdom_Seeker]

I know man, I know that you have a lot of arguments about the non-existence of God. But that will only get YOU farther from Him, not me, not others, you will only succeed proving the non-existence of God to yourself.

[Medicine*Woman]

I know man, I know that you have a lot of arguments about the non-existence of God. But that will only get YOU farther from Him, not me, not others, you will only succeed proving the non-existence of God to yourself.

*************
M*W: All this wisdom you're spewing should be in the philosophy forum.

[Jeremyhfht]

I know man, I know that you have a lot of arguments about the non-existence of God. But that will only get YOU farther from Him, not me, not others, you will only succeed proving the non-existence of God to yourself.

Don't you believe the fact it gets me "farther from god" proves he doesn't exist? Or do you think you can only find god by not thinking?

[(Q)]

Ok, I have provoked some atheists to get mad, and this in only due to the fact, that you feel threatened by this.

If you guys really didn´t believe in God, then you would not get upset when other people tell you otherwise, some may say is histerical, but deep inside, you are scared.

Rolling on the floor in hysterics = mad/threatened/scared?

Have you ever been to a comedy club? Were you mad/threatened/scared by the comedians?

You are scared of change, by denying God, you are only denying the inner-experience of God, and that will only prove that God doesn´t exist, but you will prove it only to yourselfs.

Some may say: Jesus didn´t exist, Buddha either, there is no physicall evidence of that.
So, this make you feel better about yourselfs? that Buddha and Christ are not real? So if you feel better this way, it is because you are afraid of change, because the inner-experience that is God, can only change you, and you don´t want to change. You want a reason to continue being yourselfs, and not change, so you say God doesn´t exist, but by doing this, you are only saying that you don´t want to change.

You are correct, I would not want to become one of the blissfully ignorant.

Why else do you get so defensive when someone starts talking about God?? It disturbs you, if God exist, then you would have to change, so I better deny His existance, and keep proving that to yourselves.

Do you deny the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster?

The thing is, I cannot prove God existance to you, the same as you cannot prove that He doesn´t exist.

I cannot prove the existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, the same as you cannot prove it doesn't exist.

You know this, so why do you guys get defensive? because the fact that God may exist disturbs you, more people will experience the realm of God, and you will continue your dis-belief. But that means you are happy with who you currently are.
But if you were truly happy, you would not get defensive when someone talks about God.

No one is getting defensive, other than you.

[Enterprise-D]

Generally WS, it is not the supposed existence of a god that disturbs us logical folks; it is the unintelligent, centuries old, discriminatory, nepotistic, power-hungry, assimilative, blind-faith, conquest-based, possibly violent behaviour that goes along with it (with current religions). The strategy is, if we can open theists' minds at least to the possibility that god may not exist, we'll foster a developmental stage and continue the growth of humans as a species.

[Wisdom_Seeker]

Generally WS, it is not the supposed existence of a god that disturbs us logical folks; it is the unintelligent, centuries old, discriminatory, nepotistic, power-hungry, assimilative, blind-faith, conquest-based, possibly violent behaviour that goes along with it (with current religions). The strategy is, if we can open theists' minds at least to the possibility that god may not exist, we'll foster a developmental stage and continue the growth of humans as a species.

I never spoke of following ANY religion, I am AGAINST religions.

Everytime I speak of God, atheists come and start talking about the evilness of religion, I am with you guys on that one my friend.

The strategy is, if we can open theists' minds at least to the possibility that god may not exist, we'll foster a developmental stage and continue the growth of humans as a species.

I don´t think you are making a reasonable point there my friend.

God is a word created by humans, so you can make a lot of definitions and entities of God, if you talk about that God, I dont believe in it.

I believe in the life essence that is intrisic in all living beings. And I believe all the life in Earth can be accomodated into 1 and only life essence, that I myself call God.

[Enterprise-D]

I suggest you coin a different term then, lol :)

[Wisdom_Seeker]

Don't you believe the fact it gets me "farther from god" proves he doesn't exist?

Big NO my friend, it proves it only to youself, you should be aware of that.

This is the same thing, as if I experience God, and try to prove God to you, I couln´t, because I have only prove it to myself.

Or do you think you can only find god by not thinking?

Yes, but an incredible effort needs to be done to achieve this non-thinking virtue, it is called meditation... It is an experience of inner-knowledge that I´m talking about.

Homo nosce te ipsum

[Wisdom_Seeker]

I suggest you coin a different term then, lol :)

lol, yeap, I may call it "it", from now on...

[Medicine*Woman]

Big NO my friend, it proves it only to youself, you should be aware of that.

*************
M*W: It doesn't matter to you what anyone else has to say, so why are you here?

This is the same thing, as if I experience God, and try to prove God to you, I couln´t, because I have only prove it to myself.

*************
M*W: If you are only trying to prove god to yourself, why are you here?

Yes, but an incredible effort needs to be done to achieve this non-thinking virtue, it is called meditation... It is an experience of inner-knowledge that I´m talking about.

*************
M*W: Since you have all this "inner knowledge" you keep talking about, once again, why are you here?

[Wisdom_Seeker]

*************
M*W: It doesn't matter to you what anyone else has to say
Yes it matters to me, more than you know.

*************
M*W: If you are only trying to prove god to yourself
I am not trying to prove God to anyone, I am trying to understand people, and I like to cause controversy with my statements to know the REAL personality of the people that Im talking with.

For example: a person that does not want me to be here because I speak my mind, that person is clearly threatened with my words.

*************
M*W: Since you have all this "inner knowledge" you keep talking about, once again, why are you here?
I have some inner-knowledge, but I feel like is never enough.
Besides, I am not going to find any inner-knowledge in here, but external knowledge, inner-knowledge I have to experience by myself.

I am here because I like to learn, always, I am always seeking information, knowledge. And I may learn something here, I can learn from you.

For an honest example, from you, I have learned that sometimes when I speak of God, some people feel threatened, so I have to be more carefull on the use of the word "God".

[Medicine*Woman]

I am not trying to prove God to anyone, I am trying to understand people, and I like to cause controversy with my statements to know the REAL personality of the people that Im talking with.

*************
M*W: Now you've changed your tune, but I'm not buying it.

Yes, you are trying to prove a god to everyone. That's obvious. To state otherwise is lying.

You have no intention of trying to understand anyone. That is another lie.

You have no real desire to get to know anyone here, but you use controversy to trie to incite some kind of mind game. You are not a sincere person. In other words, you lie.

For example: a person that does not want me to be here because I speak my mind, that person is clearly threatened with my words.

*************
M*W: No one has a problem with you being here. No one has a problem with you speaking your mind. No one is threatened by your words. You set out to play mind games with us, and you got caught. That's why I've asked you many times now, "why are you here?" It is obvious that you came here to play games. Sorry, but no one has time for silly mind games.

I have some inner-knowledge, but I feel like is never enough.

*************
M*W: This statement alone tells me you are unhappy with who you are.

Besides, I am not going to find any inner-knowledge in here, but external knowledge, inner-knowledge I have to experience by myself.

*************
M*W: My point exactly. I will ask again, "why did you come here?" if you already believe you're not going to find any knowledge here? You're very presence here is a falsehood.

I am here because I like to learn, always, I am always seeking information, knowledge. And I may learn something here, I can learn from you.

*************
M*W: You've contradicted yourself. You "like to learn," but in your previous statement you said you "were not going to find any inner-knowledge in here." Which is it? Make up your mind, or at least be honest.

For an honest example, from you, I have learned that sometimes when I speak of God, some people feel threatened, so I have to be more carefull on the use of the word "God".

*************
M*W: No one here is threatened when you use the word "god." There is nothing to be threatened of! There is no god, so there is no threat. Your words mean nothing. Your words are no threat. Words are words, nothing more. Using the word "god" has no implications. I use the word "god" all the time, even though I believe there is no such creature. I use the word "god" so others will understand what I'm talking about. So, don't polish your little ego believing you have all kinds of assumed knowledge and power over the rest of us. You don't.

[Wisconsin Crippler]

The comparison exists, because it is a part of our human nature to ascribe the unknown human traits. As we discover and learn, we discard our gods, once we have acheived an understanding that power (fire, the seas, the sun, weather, etc....) we discard the Gods as we no longer need them. Thats all.

[Wisdom_Seeker]

*************
M*W: Now you've changed your tune, but I'm not buying it.

Yes, you are trying to prove a god to everyone. That's obvious. To state otherwise is lying.

You have no intention of trying to understand anyone. That is another lie.

You have no real desire to get to know anyone here, but you use controversy to trie to incite some kind of mind game. You are not a sincere person. In other words, you lie.
You have me all figured out don´t you? The thing is, you have only looked at me from a view formed by your own experiences, and you are reflecting yourself by judging me, because I am not those things. Don´t judge, you don´t have that capacity, no human being have that capacity, and doing so is ignorance at its best.

I have said many times I cannot prove God to you. So how can that be my purpose?

M*W: No one has a problem with you being here. No one has a problem with you speaking your mind. No one is threatened by your words. You set out to play mind games with us, and you got caught. That's why I've asked you many times now, "why are you here?" It is obvious that you came here to play games. Sorry, but no one has time for silly mind games.
I am going to be honest with you:
I am trying not to judge people because of their beliefs, that is diffucult to do; but I WILL achieve this, a non-judgemental mind, it is my goal.

I want to understand myself through you guys Med_Woman.

M*W: This statement alone tells me you are unhappy with who you are.
Again, keep judging me, that will help.
The truth is, I am a very happy person, I am not easily disturbed by someone. And I am learning, and I have a strong appetite for knowledge, that does not mean I am not happy, that is your asumption based on your own experience.

If you are not happy, then I give the best wishes for you Med_Woman, I hope that you reach inner-peace of your heart.

M*W: My point exactly. I will ask again, "why did you come here?" if you already believe you're not going to find any knowledge here? You're very presence here is a falsehood.
Maybe my presence here is a falsehood to you; that thought only affects you, not me. I am happy and learning.

M*W: You've contradicted yourself. You "like to learn," but in your previous statement you said you "were not going to find any inner-knowledge in here." Which is it? Make up your mind, or at least be honest.
Maybe I will find inner-knowledge in here, who knows?
I like contradicting myself, that means I am in another state of mind than in my first statement, that means I´m learning, and that is good enough for me.

M*W: No one here is threatened when you use the word "god." There is nothing to be threatened of! There is no god, so there is no threat. Your words mean nothing. Your words are no threat. Words are words, nothing more. Using the word "god" has no implications. I use the word "god" all the time, even though I believe there is no such creature. I use the word "god" so others will understand what I'm talking about. So, don't polish your little ego believing you have all kinds of assumed knowledge and power over the rest of us. You don't.
You are right, I have no knowledge and power over the rest of you, again, you are judging me from your own experiences, if you feel I have more knowledge than you, there is no reason to say that in a mean way.
And yes, people feel threatened with the word "God", the word itself is a mystery.

[Medicine*Woman]

You have me all figured out don´t you?

*************
M*W: I say it as I see it.

The thing is, you have only looked at me from a view formed by your own experiences, and you are reflecting yourself by judging me, because I am not those things.

*************
M*W: I have experienced a lot of things in my life. Your profile says you are 24, so you have a long way to go to catch up with me and my life experiences. I've been fortunate that I was able to see the world at your age, so my life experience aren't meager. So, don't consider my impression of you as judgmental. My children are older than you, so even their life experiences may be greater than yours. You said you were here to learn. You've come to the right place. So instead of being defensive when people try to understand you, stfu and listen.

Don´t judge, you don´t have that capacity, no human being have that capacity, and doing so is ignorance at its best.

*************
M*W: I just explained to you about your perception of our judging you.

I have said many times I cannot prove God to you. So how can that be my purpose?

*************
M*W: No, you can't prove god to anyone here, not just me. Well, let's see, you've been preaching, so that would seem to be your purpose to prove to us there is a god.

I am going to be honest with you: I am trying not to judge people because of their beliefs, that is diffucult to do; but I WILL achieve this, a non-judgemental mind, it is my goal.

*************
M*W: Again, if you really want to learn and not judge others, you need to listen. You came here preaching gung-ho, but not listening. You became very defensive and argumentative. That's not going to fly here.

I want to understand myself through you guys Med_Woman.

*************
M*W: I don't believe you. Seems you've changed your tune again. Stop playing these mind games. We're onto your game playing. The majority of members here are atheists. You say you want to "understand yourself through us." I just don't believe you are being honest. Tell us the truth. Why did you come here? Is that so hard to answer?

Again, keep judging me, that will help. The truth is, I am a very happy person, I am not easily disturbed by someone. And I am learning, and I have a strong appetite for knowledge, that does not mean I am not happy, that is your asumption based on your own experience.

*************
M*W: Again, no one is judging you. We all have far more important things to do than play these mind games you are playing. So, you're happy. We're glad you're happy. Your happiness doesn't affect anyone of us unless it spills over in your posts in a negative way.

If you are sincere about having a thirst for knowledge, then you have come to the right place. Do you have anything specific that you would like to learn? There are enough members of sciforums that have a wide variety of knowledge bases. I can't answer every question you may have, so I don't try. Like I told you, I study christianity. I can answer generally most questions you might have on christianity. But don't ask me about Buddha or Krishna, because that is not my area of expertise. I will let you know what I think I can answer and what I can't. I know my limitations.

If you are not happy, then I give the best wishes for you Med_Woman, I hope that you reach inner-peace of your heart.

*************
M*W: There was a time, like when I first came to sciforums, that I believed in a god that lived inside of us like we were spiritual creatures. I believed in the wholeness of the universe as being one. I believed the human race was the physical being of god on this earth. It makes for good poetry, but it has no reality.

Maybe my presence here is a falsehood to you; that thought only affects you, not me. I am happy and learning.

*************
M*W: Your presence here doesn't affect me at all. I'm glad you're here. You say you're here to learn. I welcome that.

Maybe I will find inner-knowledge in here, who knows?
I like contradicting myself, that means I am in another state of mind than in my first statement, that means I´m learning, and that is good enough for me.

*************
M*W: If you look for "inner knowledge," you will find it everywhere, but if you come here thinking that you are the only one of us with "inner knowledge," then you're lying to yourself.

You are right, I have no knowledge and power over the rest of you, again, you are judging me from your own experiences, if you feel I have more knowledge than you, there is no reason to say that in a mean way.

*************
M*W: Stop with believing you are being judged. You're not. We will be honest with you, but we expect you to be honest with us. I can't speak for the other members, however. That is how I feel, but I think I understand the character of other members. So, if I sound like I'm representing the forum, I am not. I can only speak for myself.

And yes, people feel threatened with the word "God", the word itself is a mystery.

*************
M*W: No one feels threatened with the word "god." The word "god" comes from the English word "good." There is no mystery to the word "god."

Maybe I have failed to welcome you to sciforums, but I would like to do that now. Welcome to Sciforums, Wisdom Seeker!
May your sojourn here be worthwhile.

[Saquist]

*************
M*W: It doesn't matter to you what anyone else has to say, so why are you here?



*************
M*W: If you are only trying to prove god to yourself, why are you here?



*************
M*W: Since you have all this "inner knowledge" you keep talking about, once again, why are you here?

The larger question...the question you might be asking yourself is why should you listen.

Thus far as I've seen you've excuse yourself from doing just that Medicine Woman. I believe it's all philosophical to you. Therefore what's the harm to listening to different view points?

[Wisdom_Seeker]

M*W: I may be 24, but that doesn´t say a thing about me; except that I was born in a time that knowledge and literature is more accesible than in past generations, and that is increasing with the years; so I feel the younger generation have more learning opportunities than us. I like to engage in arguments about religion and philosophy with my uncles and older friends, two-way communication, not a monologue from any side.

You may think you got me all figured out, but I´m nothing like you imagine. You have never met anyone like me.
You have never answered any of the questions I have asked you honestly, even about Christianity, and you try to lower the importance of my perspective with personal attacks to me, and not my arguments; that is just useless.

Thanks for the welcoming, I really appreciate.

And there is no harm intended in my words, I can only say that I´m here to learn.