There flat-out is no god.

These prayers seem to be following a disturbing pattern... Are most atheists drunken motor heads?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Actually, I don't own a car...and I'm not a drunk..I'm just actively supporting the adult beverage industry.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Clearly they have the right priorities. :spank:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I got it!

There is no god,
I am an atheist,
Yeah!

And the statue has no head, nor arms, nor legs. Its just a torso. And its made out of wire so you can only see a frame. And in the middle there is a little picture that says:

There is no god,
You wrote this,
Yeah to you!

And there would be no formal rules, you just sort of do this whenever you feel like it. Just go up to the little pretend alter and do a pretend prayer that is more of a statement. You could even hype it up with comments on the spot like:

And thats right!
We showed them!
Knew it all along!
Its a poof!
We are right and they are wrong!
We figured it out!
or or The explanation can not be explained!

 

I got it, there is God and there is no God, if you believe in this.

 

I don't know if that is atheist enough? Superluminal will have to decide!

 

I'm digging this

 

I have to, unfortunately, see how it works every day
as the monotheist people
as the
we are complicated machines people
fight it out - with each other, with the planet itself -
and make everything so miserable on what was basically
quite a nice little world.

 

And every now and then you can throw
a war (party)
and tithe the public.

 

Your atheistic beliefe system is unfounded. Therefore, it is a position which isn't clarified. Therefore, your beliefs are valid. Therefore, your valid beliefes are uncertain. Therefore, atheism as your religion is uncertain. Therefore, God exists. Therefore, God exists.

 

No, no. Argue as the modern atheist would.

I mean the God issue is so, like, 1900s, so passe.

A modern atheist does not believe in the self. You should be, like them, laying siege to all our conclusions drawn from qualia. Use the word counter-intuitive once or twice, smugly. Come out clearly in favor of determinism and link to a couple of experiments showing faulty perception.

Then whenever anyone posts on sciforums and uses the pronoun I - or refers to themselves - leap in and point out how irrational they are and demand evidence for their CLAIMS about this entity that continues through time, etc. Get huffy, too. Talk about how this sense of the 'I'

has caused unbelievable damage and is the root of selfishness and all sorts of problems including the manipulations of religions.

Any atheist worth his salt - gotta be 10 cents worth in that carbon based machinery somewhere - who doesn't take on this belief in the self is just wimp.

 

Interesting.

I would argue that the contemporary atheist believes in the primacy of the self.

 

More like the necessity of the self even!:shrug:

 

Hotty, Toddy, Gosh almighty,
Who The Hell Are We?
Flim, Flam! Bim, Bam!
ATHEIST, By Damn!

 

Those are stuck-in-battles-of-the-past atheists. The real fun intellectual high ground is to tear away at the MYTH of the self. The God of the twentieth century had no Nietschze to announce its death but the little ubermensch movement of modern atheists is hacking away.

P.S. Everybody is contemporary, as you put it, but few are modern.

 

Dawkins?

 

No, bullshit.

It doesn't need an announcement, it needs a overhaul.... which is exactly what it has got.

 

i am not religious. qualified...i do not think that one's beliefs should be institutionalized. i believe that everyone should think for themselves. experience life and be unafraid and open-minded and see what they learn, and share what they learn, and respect another's beliefs, for they are based on another's life and their experiences, none of which are the same. i think that the need to be a part of an institutionalized religion is co-dependency.

 

The first statement is just incorrect.

The second statement is correct, but another field of enquiry entirely (that of Personal Identity, which is an epistemological project...), but more importantly, is entirely unrelated to the question of the existence of a deity.

Incorret: "modern" means post 19th Century, while "contemporary" refers to thinkers of the past 2o years or so.

 

There's so much space and probability for a supreme being to exist... I don't see why so many people are against even the thought of it. Did you know there was a ''God-Box'' inside the brain, and is only used in cases of things like praying? This has been proven. Why do we have this?
Look, i'm not holding that as evidence, but we have a natural mysticism in life... We are creatures of spirit and consciousness... God could be the very thing we call 'us' -- Dr Wolf describes it as a giant spill of consciousness and thought, and that is God.
God could exist -- and there is no complete suggestive evidence to say there isn't.