The New Atheist Crusaders and their quest for the Unholy Grail

caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2599
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
The New Atheist Crusaders and their quest for the Unholy Grail

Hey all.  It's been a while since I've been on. I appologise, I've been busy. 

The title of this forum is the title of a book I just finished reading.  It's a catchy title, so I figured it'd be a good way to grab someone's attention on here.  The book is written by Becky Garrison. 

If her name doesn't sound familiar, that's fine, it shouldn't.  So why am I wasting your time telling you about this book?  Well, I'm glad you asked.  This is a book written by a True Christian.  HUH?  For all of you who have discussed with me in the past, you understand what I'm talking about and for those of you who haven't you can research my blogs.  Caposkia is my name. 

Anyway, It's written from the viewpoint of how a true Christian feels about of course the atheists in the world today, but more importantly for you, how she feels about Christians in the world. 

This is for all of you arguing with me about how Christians have to be black and white.  How you have to follow a religion and there's nothing outside of religion etc.  She touches on all of this.  I truly think you'll enjoy reading this book and I would like to hear from those of you who have read it if anyone.  If not, I"ll wait till someone finishes it.  It's not a very long book.

When I first came onto this site, I wanted to discuss directly with those who were involved in the infamous television debate that RRS was involved in about the existence of God with Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron.  They didn't have time and the other non-believers I came across were too opinionated to involve themselves in a conversation that made any progress.  Instead I got into other debates which for the most part were a lot of fun, but I digress. 

Becky mentions this debate as well in her book at the end.  This is for all of you on here I've talked to who would not believe me or had other personal issues with the fact that my opinion didn't flow with their idea of a Christian.  I will breifly say that I hold her viewpoint when she says that if she was at that debate, she would have "crawled out of that church in shame. "

Simply put, we both agree that both sides put forth deplorable excuses for their side and did not defend their side succesfully.  I know I know, many of you will disagree and say that RRS did disprove the existance of God in that debate, but enough with the opinions, I'm saying the other side did just as good of a job proving God.  This debate is a poor excuse to not follow Christ and this book talks about those types of Christians.

This book should clarify many misunderstandings of how True Christians are and I hope bring light to a new understanding of our following. 

It is written differently than most books, but is an informational peice and uses a lot of researched information.  It does focus on the "New Atheists" and is not a book preaching to the masses.  As said, it is from the point of  view of a True Christian.

enjoy, let me know your thoughts.  I would also request, please be respectful in your responses.  I'm here to have mature discussions with people. 


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13549
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:jcgadfly

caposkia wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Ah, that must be wht you've disregarded nearly every poster on this thread...

yea, couldn't be because no one wants to give me a method of research that they would find acceptable AND that they have nothing to do with the topic of this post. 

(Sorry, Jcgadfly, I respect you.  You're one of the few on here who seem to have some sense about them, but it had to be said)

You are so dense!

You want us to give you a method? You are an idiot!

Isn't it funny that you can seat an atheist, a Jew, a Hindu, a Muslim all side by side in the same physics class....in the same biology class.... and when METHOD is followed properly all will come up with the same answer. Otherwise why would they print the answers in the back of the book, if everyone had different answers?

THE "METHOD" IS THERE FOR EVERYONE. YOU SIMPLY WANT TO IGNORE "METHOD" IN FAVOR OF YOUR WARM FUZZY FEELINGS FOR YOUR SUPER HERO.

I can imagine the answer chapter in texbooks:

"If x+y=z JESUS DID IT"

but if you are Muslim

"If x+y=z ALLAH DID IT"

but if you are Hindu

"If x+y=z Vishnu did it"

If "Method" were dependent on your deity's approval then why do so many who buy other myths, or people like us who buy no myth, why can we understand science the same way?

Fictional super heros can't hold a candle to reality. Their cheer leaders are apt at promoting them, but that is nothing but mundain self centered ego placating ones emotions.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13549
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
And let me add, out of all

And let me add, out of all the bright minds here on this site, my forte is not science.

BUT, what I did not forget is that when you flipped the page to the back of the book for the answer, you either got it wrong or right. When you got it right, you had followed the method properly, when you got it wrong, the answer did not match.

Deities do not follow a "method" because imagination is a whim, not a method.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
Like George Carlin I

Like George Carlin I consider entertaining rrs Brian37 to be a sociologist or the like. We most all have our talents. Me the atheist preacher clown? Beats me.    

Autodidact

, a perceptive person mostly self-taught.


 


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:jcgadfly

caposkia wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

I work for a university library and haven't seen it yet. It's not in the local public library either.

huh... well, it is written to Christians, do you have any seminaries near by?  Their library should have it, if not they should be able to get it for you.  Other libraries should be able to get it for you through loan from other libraries as well. 

Well IU - Bloomington started out as a seminary and we have a strong religious studies department. I'd think it would be here for research if nothing else.

Also, you wrote earlier that "spirit" could be interpreted as "life energy". All life energy is electrical in nature - so is "spirit" electricity and "God" just a big honkin' generator (to you)?

Oh, thanks for the kind words also. I have respect for you as well.  I may not agree with you but I respect you.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2599
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:Could it also

jcgadfly wrote:

Could it also be something like:

1. Person feels depressed.

There are depressed Christians

jcgadfly wrote:

2. Person reads Bible.

You're telling me all people have to do on this site is read the Bible and they'll believe???

jcgadfly wrote:

3. Person prays the Lord's prayer (just an example).

sure, ok

jcgadfly wrote:

4. Person feels emotional release.

sex can do that too

jcgadfly wrote:

4. Person tells story to Christian.

Only to Christians?

jcgadfly wrote:

5. Christian tells person "You got saved".

and VOILA! another one in the fold because God gives them warm fuzzies.

saved from what? (hypothetical question asked by most people who don't know what that would mean)

 


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2599
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
I AM GOD AS YOU

I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:

caposkia,

I checked out a bit of that PTM site, and glad it's not much fundy oriented. Having mentors can often be good, importand and helpful, but having an idol as is taught in most religion is obviously wrong.

Whether Buddha of Jesus even existed historically is not relevant to me. 

We are the Christ, the Buddha etc. Knowing why is to awaken to understading the meaning of "the good word". In the east it is more about who is your favorite "mentor". In the west it's so much like, my mentor or fuck you. I find wise and silly, in all religious philosophies and groups. Heck, the "Twilight Zone" can be profound too.

I am an atheist materialist to the bone, but I am also a jesus, buddha, taoist, confucius, hindu, mythology fan. But FUCK dogma by any design .... i am god as you are god, as all is god, period. Fuck all supernatural separatism. Whatever the fuck there is, is ME and YOU. What is not connected? Why invent or believe myth?

This RRS thread, gets interesting like pg 8 and going back , where I wrote a lot that might entertain you. See you there maybe, me jesus, as you. Bring beer!  

 "Question for our Christian visitors"

http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/sapient/atheist_vs_theist/2534?page=7

  Also, clicking on any posters name will allow you "track" all their writing.

I checked out that link.  I was entertained for sure and it was a good idea to grab a beer while I checked it out. 

I have to say I agree with your M. Twain quote.  if Jesus came into our world today, he in fact would not be Christian mainly because of the quote that followed, "I like your Christ, I don't like Christians.  They don't seem anything like Christ" yes that was paraphrased, but that was the jist. 

 


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2599
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:I think

jcgadfly wrote:

I think that's the point, cap. The "spiritual world" can't be studied because it is a figment of the imagination. If you want to use fiction to study imagination (the Bible to study the spiritual world), go for it.

right, but my point is that to even come up with the conclusion that it is a figment of my imagination, you'd have to have some source for research that can conclude that, otherwise, it's mere speculation.

 


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2599
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
Magus wrote: This constant

Magus wrote:

 

This constant statement made by you that we should come up with the methods for determining the truth about your beliefs is absurd. You are the one with the positive claim it is your job to present the evidence.  If you don't have a method that can be tested all you have is blind idiotic assertions. 

The spiritual world should be treated as nonsense until you proved evidence that it exists.

What don't you understand about this?

What I don't understand is I have presented to you methods that helped me conclude my understanding.  I don't remember where, but I listed some off in this forum.  My question isn't whether you have a method that will be effective, it's whether there's a method that you will accept if I present it to you.

I've learned with my time on this site not to waste my time explaining myself until I can get a clear basis of understanding that we can all agree on.


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
The only method I would

The only method I would accept is the scientific method.


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:jcgadfly

caposkia wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Could it also be something like:

1. Person feels depressed.

There are depressed Christians

jcgadfly wrote:

2. Person reads Bible.

You're telling me all people have to do on this site is read the Bible and they'll believe???

jcgadfly wrote:

3. Person prays the Lord's prayer (just an example).

sure, ok

jcgadfly wrote:

4. Person feels emotional release.

sex can do that too

jcgadfly wrote:

4. Person tells story to Christian.

Only to Christians?

jcgadfly wrote:

5. Christian tells person "You got saved".

and VOILA! another one in the fold because God gives them warm fuzzies.

saved from what? (hypothetical question asked by most people who don't know what that would mean)

 

There are depressed Christians - glad you acknowledge that. Many Christian folk I know would say that those aren't "true christians".

Did they read the Bible and simply believe? How would I know? That's your position, not mine. You're the one that said millions found god with no outside person influencing them.

Sex does give emotional release. You're the one that brought up finding god - I simply suggested that "the peace of God" that many Christians make noise about is nothing more than catharsis,

Only to christians? Christianity is the only religion that I know of that claims a sin-forgiving god.

Okay, perhaps the Christian used "Jesus saved you from your sins". Doesn't change the problem of confusing warm fuzzies with God.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2599
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
Fish wrote:I'm not sure if

Fish wrote:

I'm not sure if this is actually your reply (or just an indication that you will reply at some point), since it doesn't address the question at all, so I apologize if I'm not giving you adequate time to repsond.  It does appear, however, that there is some confusion that has to be clarified.

 

The question is NOT: "What personal experiences have you had that makes you believe in god?"

 

The question IS: "How can you rely on the argument 'Lots of people believe in X, therefore X must be true' when that argument is easily shown to be completely invalid?"

That was clarified in another post when I mentioned that most people will believe in something because "someone told them so". 

In this case, take a personal source away from the information and statistically, it's impossible for people to come to the same conclusion. 


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2599
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:If "Method"

Brian37 wrote:

If "Method" were dependent on your deity's approval then why do so many who buy other myths, or people like us who buy no myth.

People buy it because someone sells it to them. 

Brian37 wrote:

why can we understand science the same way?

the same way as myths?


 


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2599
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:Also,

jcgadfly wrote:

Also, you wrote earlier that "spirit" could be interpreted as "life energy". All life energy is electrical in nature - so is "spirit" electricity and "God" just a big honkin' generator (to you)?

Pneumotologists study the spiritual world with electro-magnetic impulses... I think... They do something with electricity to study it anyway.  God is more than just a big hunkin' generator to me of course.  Understand I'm just trying to figure out how to explain it where you and people on here can grasp it logically. 


 


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2599
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
MattShizzle wrote:The only

MattShizzle wrote:

The only method I would accept is the scientific method.

In other words do you only accept the method of conclusion that science uses or the study of our physical world.  If it's the study of our physical world and you won't accept any method beyond that, then I guess we're done here.

 


WillieBop
Theist
Posts: 61
Joined: 2007-03-19
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:MattShizzle

caposkia wrote:

MattShizzle wrote:

The only method I would accept is the scientific method.

In other words do you only accept the method of conclusion that science uses or the study of our physical world.  If it's the study of our physical world and you won't accept any method beyond that, then I guess we're done here.

 

 

All this and you stil haven't realized you've offered them anything to deal with and don't seem capable of doing so.


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:jcgadfly

caposkia wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Also, you wrote earlier that "spirit" could be interpreted as "life energy". All life energy is electrical in nature - so is "spirit" electricity and "God" just a big honkin' generator (to you)?

Pneumotologists study the spiritual world with electro-magnetic impulses... I think... They do something with electricity to study it anyway.  God is more than just a big hunkin' generator to me of course.  Understand I'm just trying to figure out how to explain it where you and people on here can grasp it logically. 


 

 

they study the immaterial with something that's material? How does that work, I wonder?

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


MattShizzle
Posts: 7966
Joined: 2006-03-31
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:MattShizzle

caposkia wrote:

MattShizzle wrote:

The only method I would accept is the scientific method.

In other words do you only accept the method of conclusion that science uses or the study of our physical world.  If it's the study of our physical world and you won't accept any method beyond that, then I guess we're done here.

 

 

Science is the only way to prove anything. If there was a non-physical world science could prove it. Otherwise it's bullshit.

Matt Shizzle has been banned from the Rational Response Squad website. This event shall provide an atmosphere more conducive to social growth. - Majority of the mod team


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
Caring caposkia , This

Caring caposkia ,

This recent serious thread may be of real help to better understanding the basic simple Atheistic view.

Is materialism self-evident?

http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/15239

 

 


Fish
Posts: 315
Joined: 2007-05-31
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:Fish

caposkia wrote:

Fish wrote:

I'm not sure if this is actually your reply (or just an indication that you will reply at some point), since it doesn't address the question at all, so I apologize if I'm not giving you adequate time to repsond.  It does appear, however, that there is some confusion that has to be clarified.

 

The question is NOT: "What personal experiences have you had that makes you believe in god?"

 

The question IS: "How can you rely on the argument 'Lots of people believe in X, therefore X must be true' when that argument is easily shown to be completely invalid?"

That was clarified in another post when I mentioned that most people will believe in something because "someone told them so". 

In this case, take a personal source away from the information and statistically, it's impossible for people to come to the same conclusion. 

So your argument actually is "lots of people believe in X, therefore X must be true"?  So then you also believe in astrology, right?  Many people believe in that independenlty.  You must also believe that the sun revolves around the earth, right?  Many people came to that conclusionn on their own (from observations, no less).  Do you believe that dolphins are fish?  Lots of people believed that on their own, and not because "someone told them so." 

The bottom line is your argument fails spectacularly.  The entire population could believe something, and that would not make it true.  I guess at least in this case you're actually admitting that you're relying on a faulty argument, as opposed to trying to deny it.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13549
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:jcgadfly

caposkia wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Also, you wrote earlier that "spirit" could be interpreted as "life energy". All life energy is electrical in nature - so is "spirit" electricity and "God" just a big honkin' generator (to you)?

Pneumotologists study the spiritual world with electro-magnetic impulses... I think... They do something with electricity to study it anyway.  God is more than just a big hunkin' generator to me of course.  Understand I'm just trying to figure out how to explain it where you and people on here can grasp it logically. 

 

 

Cappy, You are in the same category as pantheists and Star Trek fans who believe that transporters will be possible. You are wacked out of your mind.

Electromagnectic immaging of "spirits" is bullshit sci-fi fantacy crap, just like big foot and Loc Ness.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13549
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:MattShizzle

caposkia wrote:

MattShizzle wrote:

The only method I would accept is the scientific method.

In other words do you only accept the method of conclusion that science uses or the study of our physical world.  If it's the study of our physical world and you won't accept any method beyond that, then I guess we're done here.

 

You are an idiot. Scientific method and the people who are objective in using it EXPECT TO BE CHALLENGED! And when proven wrong scientific method says that you go where the evidence leads you, not where you want it to go. YOU want a god to be real so bad you'll believe any crackpot claim in order to justify it.

That crap you see on A&E AND Sci-fi is just that, sensational garbage to get gullible people like you to watch.

"Ghost Hunters" and "Paranormal" claims have been around in popular media since the days of black and white TV and radio. And every generation has had crackpots making the same stupid claims, including today.

Do you really believe there is a giant green dino living in Loc Ness? Do you really believe that Vampires exist? Do you really believe that aliens anally probed you?

You need to stop sniffing glue when watching the X-Files.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13549
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
There is a difference

There is a difference between scientific method being challenged, which scientific method DEMANDS, because it helps as a form of quality control, and fictional crap which apologists do, which is nothing but bastardizing scientific method to suit their fantasy.

Again, we KNOW that it takes two sets of DNA to make a human. Specifically outside a petri dish, that would be a sperm and egg via conventional sex. Since all the bible claims is a "spirit" magically "poof" got a girl pregnant, I am rejecting the absurdity of such a naked assertion.

And we also know that the body cannot come back to life after rigor mortis but somehow, without explanation , but mere proclamation "POOF" a dead human magically survived rigor mortis. Another absurd naked assertion with absolutely nothing to back it up.

You want to believe that absurd garbage, that is up to you. Your claims are as valid as any other naked assertion any other theist in human history has made, be they pantheists, or Scientologists, or believers in Thor or Allah.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
"Category as Pantheists", is

"Category as Pantheists", is an especially hard one for me make a sweeping damning generalization.

Sure, lots of New Age silly "ghost spirit believers" grab that label, but for many others it's a science hypothesis regarding "nature" and placement of consciousness in the incomplete material, energy matter physics models we have. I relate many pantheists as those trying to come up with a "theory of everything". In this sense, pantheism is a dry humble philosophy, scientifically questioning the not yet answered. Not at all like I.D. Creation Science quackery.

I believe in God, only I spell it Nature. - Frank Lloyd Wright (atheist / pantheist ?)

I believe in god, I am god. ~ me 

I can universally accept only one best label for myself, I am 100% god. I reject theism theology, so indeed I am atheist. I'll pass on pantheism, the label is to undefined, and misunderstood. Agnostic, nope, I am god.

To be god, is to be atheist. Some say that is an oxymoron, a contradiction, and that's ludicrous, but is it ?!!!  

   Here's an oxymoron, "Holy War".

  Cool quotes to "compliment a pantheistic outlook"

http://home.utm.net/pan/quotes.html

         

 


WillieBop
Theist
Posts: 61
Joined: 2007-03-19
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Cappy, You are

Brian37 wrote:

Cappy, You are in the same category as pantheists and Star Trek fans who believe that transporters will be possible. You are wacked out of your mind.

Electromagnectic immaging of "spirits" is bullshit sci-fi fantacy crap, just like big foot and Loc Ness.

 

Wait.... no transporters... and all this time I've been waiting..  So sad.. i was hoping to do The Enemy Within thing and get split into my good and evil halves. 


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
WillieBop wrote:Brian37

WillieBop wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Cappy, You are in the same category as pantheists and Star Trek fans who believe that transporters will be possible. You are wacked out of your mind.

Electromagnectic immaging of "spirits" is bullshit sci-fi fantacy crap, just like big foot and Loc Ness.

 

Wait.... no transporters... and all this time I've been waiting..  So sad.. i was hoping to do The Enemy Within thing and get split into my good and evil halves. 

With my luck, I'd wind up splitting into Apathy Ren, Evil Ren, and Hideously Evil Ren.

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


daedalus
daedalus's picture
Posts: 260
Joined: 2007-05-22
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:I have yet to

caposkia wrote:
I have yet to see how I've been pwned.

I know. That's why you are so utterly mediocre.

Imagine the people who believe such things and who are not ashamed to ignore, totally, all the patient findings of thinking minds through all the centuries since the Bible was written. And it is these ignorant people, the most uneducated, the most unimaginative, the most unthinking among us, who would make themselves the guides and leaders of us all; who would force their feeble and childish beliefs on us; who would invade our schools and libraries and homes. I personally resent it bitterly.
Isaac Asimov


Kevin R Brown
Superfan
Kevin R Brown's picture
Posts: 3142
Joined: 2007-06-24
User is offlineOffline
Cap: Did you finish watching

Cap: Did you finish watching the videos I posted yet? If so, do you now feel more confident about:

 - Evolutionary theory

 - Your own understading of the above

and

 - What the term 'theory' implies in scientific doctrine

 

...And why or why not?

Quote:
"Natasha has just come up to the window from the courtyard and opened it wider so that the air may enter more freely into my room. I can see the bright green strip of grass beneath the wall, and the clear blue sky above the wall, and sunlight everywhere. Life is beautiful. Let the future generations cleanse it of all evil, oppression and violence, and enjoy it to the full."

- Leon Trotsky, Last Will & Testament
February 27, 1940


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
Hi Kevin, I bet not. Most of

Hi Kevin, I bet not. Most of the religious don't like serious thinking, the truth scares them. Yeah, you know. Cool videos, science, the study of truth.


KSMB
Scientist
KSMB's picture
Posts: 702
Joined: 2006-08-03
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:With my luck,

jcgadfly wrote:
With my luck, I'd wind up splitting into Apathy Ren, Evil Ren, and Hideously Evil Ren.

Holy fuck I love that episode! Not my Ren!


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2599
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
The links

Hambydammit, I reviewed the links finally from your initial post.  The first link just thoroughly goes through what we've already been discussing in this forum.  It ultimately comes down to again, what source that would be sufficient for the topic would be acceptable?

The 2nd and 3rd links...  Were they simply examples of explanation that you will not accept?  I otherwise dont' see the connection to the forum topics. 

I'm sorry, maybe I didn't read them thoroughly enough.  What am I missing there.  Summarize it for me if you will.  If that's asking too much, then forget it, just tell me, I'll reread them more carefully. 


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2599
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote:they study

jcgadfly wrote:

they study the immaterial with something that's material? How does that work, I wonder?

I don't fully understand their practice, but as you said, life energy is understood by electrical currents running around our bodies.  They take that understanding of electrical currents and look for it in places that don't have physical bodies to explain the "life energy". 


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2599
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
MattShizzle wrote: Science

MattShizzle wrote:

 

Science is the only way to prove anything. If there was a non-physical world science could prove it. Otherwise it's bullshit.

Then it's definitely bull that the Universe is expanding at an ever increasing rate even though all who have studied it have observed it.

It ends up being bull because it goes against any logical scientific conclusion of what the Universe should be doing.  Science says, that the universe should be slowing down if it's expanding still, either that or contracting at an ever increasing rate.

What say you?


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2599
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
Fish wrote:So your argument

Fish wrote:

So your argument actually is "lots of people believe in X, therefore X must be true"?  So then you also believe in astrology, right?  Many people believe in that independenlty.  You must also believe that the sun revolves around the earth, right?  Many people came to that conclusionn on their own (from observations, no less).  Do you believe that dolphins are fish?  Lots of people believed that on their own, and not because "someone told them so." 

The bottom line is your argument fails spectacularly.  The entire population could believe something, and that would not make it true.  I guess at least in this case you're actually admitting that you're relying on a faulty argument, as opposed to trying to deny it.

Again

1. You're taking the assumption that this is my only justification for my belief.  I've already said it's one among many.

2.  Let's tear the examples apart

    a.  Astrology - this gets on a whole other playing field.  Let's just keep it simple and say that astrology is real, but I don't believe in it.  It works on the basis of diseption versus anything legitimate.  Also, spiritually, depending on whether the person is a legit astrologist or not, it uses the manipulation from the spiritual world. 

    b. Sun revolves around the earth.  Those people came to the conclusion from observation alone and against the teachings of the Bible and Church at the time. 

       Also, how long did the belief that the Sun revolved around the Earth last?  I mean the people of the Bible understood that the Earth wasn't the center.  It was previous understanding and not just science that dissolved that understanding.  If my belief is likened to that, then it should be easy to disprove me.   Most who believed in that followed the understanding of others who told them that's how it was.  It wasn't mostly an individual discovery.

     c.  Most people I've talked to who believe that dolphins are fish leanred that because someone else told them.  I guess they could come to the conclusion through reasoning. A fish lives in the ocean, therefore, dolphins must be fish. anyone who actually takes the time to get to know what a dolphin is easily concludes otherwise.  Again making no comparison to people taking the time to research the Christian God and coming to the same conclusion on their own. 

(To seek out God with your heart, mind, soul, and strength isn't to see something miraculous and say "WOW!!!! God!!!!! or to conclude through observation alone that God is real)

Bottom line, you ignore that it is only one of many aspects of my understanding and that  it's hard to come to such a complex conclusion such as this particular God with your own understanding and no outside influence to sway you. 

Do you honestly feel it was a complex conclusion to say that the sun revolves around the Earth?  This belief didn't last for thousands upon thousands of years because someone saw that it made sense like the sun around Earth. 


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2599
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:You are an

Brian37 wrote:

You are an idiot. Scientific method and the people who are objective in using it EXPECT TO BE CHALLENGED!

I wouldn't be on here unless I expected to be challenged.

Brian37 wrote:

And when proven wrong scientific method says that you go where the evidence leads you, not where you want it to go. YOU want a god to be real so bad you'll believe any crackpot claim in order to justify it.

...and so far my challenges... heh... haven't been so challenging

Brian37 wrote:

That crap you see on A&E AND Sci-fi is just that, sensational garbage to get gullible people like you to watch.

"Ghost Hunters" and "Paranormal" claims have been around in popular media since the days of black and white TV and radio. And every generation has had crackpots making the same stupid claims, including today.

Do you really believe there is a giant green dino living in Loc Ness? Do you really believe that Vampires exist? Do you really believe that aliens anally probed you?

You need to stop sniffing glue when watching the X-Files.

 

Thank you again for challenging my understanding.  Man, I had so much hope in the X-files too. 


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2599
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:There is a

Brian37 wrote:

There is a difference between scientific method being challenged, which scientific method DEMANDS, because it helps as a form of quality control, and fictional crap which apologists do, which is nothing but bastardizing scientific method to suit their fantasy.

I'm not sure where this idea of scientific method started getting blown away, but I never said that "scientific Method" shouldn't be used.  My challenge was using the Physical Sciences to explain a non-material world... (this now assuming it exists)

Brian37 wrote:


You want to believe that absurd garbage, that is up to you. Your claims are as valid as any other naked assertion any other theist in human history has made, be they pantheists, or Scientologists, or believers in Thor or Allah.

 

You are so assertive.  Man I believe you understand that you're right, I just want to logically come to the conclusion on my own.  Please please please give me your source for research!


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2599
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
I AM GOD AS YOU

I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:

"Category as Pantheists", is an especially hard one for me make a sweeping damning generalization.

Sure, lots of New Age silly "ghost spirit believers" grab that label, but for many others it's a science hypothesis regarding "nature" and placement of consciousness in the incomplete material, energy matter physics models we have. I relate many pantheists as those trying to come up with a "theory of everything". In this sense, pantheism is a dry humble philosophy, scientifically questioning the not yet answered. Not at all like I.D. Creation Science quackery.

I believe in God, only I spell it Nature. - Frank Lloyd Wright (atheist / pantheist ?)

I believe in god, I am god. ~ me 

I can universally accept only one best label for myself, I am 100% god. I reject theism theology, so indeed I am atheist. I'll pass on pantheism, the label is to undefined, and misunderstood. Agnostic, nope, I am god.

To be god, is to be atheist. Some say that is an oxymoron, a contradiction, and that's ludicrous, but is it ?!!!  

   Here's an oxymoron, "Holy War".

  Cool quotes to "compliment a pantheistic outlook"

http://home.utm.net/pan/quotes.html

         

Honestly, If i didn't believe what I do, I'd hold your point of view.  I like your logic.


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2599
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
Kevin R Brown wrote:Cap: Did

Kevin R Brown wrote:

Cap: Did you finish watching the videos I posted yet? If so, do you now feel more confident about:

 - Evolutionary theory

 - Your own understading of the above

and

 - What the term 'theory' implies in scientific doctrine

 

...And why or why not?

Honestly, I haven't looked at them yet.  i just about had enough time at this point to finally check out hambydammits' links he posted so long ago.  I apologise.  I have a life outside this site that prevents me from taking adequate time for all the feedback I get in a given period.  I will check them out contrary to popular belief.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13549
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:Brian37

caposkia wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

There is a difference between scientific method being challenged, which scientific method DEMANDS, because it helps as a form of quality control, and fictional crap which apologists do, which is nothing but bastardizing scientific method to suit their fantasy.

I'm not sure where this idea of scientific method started getting blown away, but I never said that "scientific Method" shouldn't be used.  My challenge was using the Physical Sciences to explain a non-material world... (this now assuming it exists)

Brian37 wrote:

 

You want to believe that absurd garbage, that is up to you. Your claims are as valid as any other naked assertion any other theist in human history has made, be they pantheists, or Scientologists, or believers in Thor or Allah.

 

You are so assertive.  Man I believe you understand that you're right, I just want to logically come to the conclusion on my own.  Please please please give me your source for research!

Ok, find the tallest building you can find. Climb to the top. And step on to the ledge. When you get there, step over the ledge without any man made aid to retard gravity and tell me as you fall how much faith you have.

I am quite sure that Thor will step in to prevent you from becoming road pizza.

Ok, I can see you are still on the fence. Becoming road pizza isn't convincing enough.

Alright. Since daddy can do anything, get a friend to saw off your arm with a chainsaw and regrow it back.

BUT, who the fuck am I? I guess when Muslims claim they can have an orgy in heaven, I must sumbmit to your absurd claims because you shout louder in my ear because you are closer?

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


daedalus
daedalus's picture
Posts: 260
Joined: 2007-05-22
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:ple came to

caposkia wrote:

ple came to the conclusion from observation alone and against the teachings of the Bible and Church at the time. 

       Also, how long did the belief that the Sun revolved around the Earth last?  I mean the people of the Bible understood that the Earth wasn't the center.  It was previous understanding and not just science that dissolved that understanding.  If my belief is likened to that, then it should be easy to disprove me.   Most who believed in that followed the understanding of others who told them that's how it was.  It wasn't mostly an individual discovery.

...


Do you honestly feel it was a complex conclusion to say that the sun revolves around the Earth?  This belief didn't last for thousands upon thousands of years because someone saw that it made sense like the sun around Earth. 

I have to laugh a little here.  I just happen to be reading a book on the history of science.  One of the biggest problems for humans to figure out was the idea of Inertia.  A lot had to do with the beliefs of the ancients regarding the patterns of the planets.

 

Basically, Aristotle was the biggest influence on why people were wrong for so long.  He established the idea of the characteristics of the elements and that the Earth was the center of everything.  Ptolemy came by and basically 'proved' that there were some 60 spheres spinning around the Earth of different diameters.  It wasn't until Copernicus came along and suggested that putting the Sun at the center reduced the number of rotating spheres to a mere 13 or so, but got him into problems, especially with the Church.  It was between Copernicus and Galileo that people started getting rid of the ideas of the spheres.

 

Yes, Cap, the Bible writers ABSOLUTELY believed the Earth was the center of the universe and that spheres of elements rotated around it.  It was the ONLY way people understood the Universe at the time.  The few dissenters were NOT the Bible writers and certainly didn't come close to the current view of the Cosmos.

 

I say again: NO ONE knew that the Sun was at the center of the Solar System, or that there weren't spheres of elements.

 

BTW< they believed that the elements (in explaining gravity) were compelled to "go home" and come to rest in their sphere. Hence, earth (the most base element) would fall to Earth, Air and Fire (more 'noble' elements) would try to rise or move.  Fire, especially, because it was most noble and was trying to get to its sphere which was closer to the sphere of Heaven than the others.

 

I know Xians try to rewrite history to make themselves look good but guess what?  It gives the opposite impression.

Imagine the people who believe such things and who are not ashamed to ignore, totally, all the patient findings of thinking minds through all the centuries since the Bible was written. And it is these ignorant people, the most uneducated, the most unimaginative, the most unthinking among us, who would make themselves the guides and leaders of us all; who would force their feeble and childish beliefs on us; who would invade our schools and libraries and homes. I personally resent it bitterly.
Isaac Asimov


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2599
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Ok, find the

Brian37 wrote:

Ok, find the tallest building you can find. Climb to the top. And step on to the ledge. When you get there, step over the ledge without any man made aid to retard gravity and tell me as you fall how much faith you have.

I am quite sure that Thor will step in to prevent you from becoming road pizza.

Ok, I can see you are still on the fence. Becoming road pizza isn't convincing enough.

Alright. Since daddy can do anything, get a friend to saw off your arm with a chainsaw and regrow it back.

funny, people in the Bible who didn't believe in Jesus said the same thing to him:

"...And those passing by where hurling abuse at Him wagging their heads and saying, 'You who are going to destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days, save Yourself! If you are the Son of God, come down from the cross.'" Mt. 27:39-40.

question to you.  If I was dumb enough to get a friend to saw my arm off or to jump off a tall building, why would God save me or grow my arm back?  It is my job to take care of my own body.  If I mess it up, it's my fault.

Do you want to think logically yet?


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13549
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:Brian37

caposkia wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Ok, find the tallest building you can find. Climb to the top. And step on to the ledge. When you get there, step over the ledge without any man made aid to retard gravity and tell me as you fall how much faith you have.

I am quite sure that Thor will step in to prevent you from becoming road pizza.

Ok, I can see you are still on the fence. Becoming road pizza isn't convincing enough.

Alright. Since daddy can do anything, get a friend to saw off your arm with a chainsaw and regrow it back.

funny, people in the Bible who didn't believe in Jesus said the same thing to him:

"...And those passing by where hurling abuse at Him wagging their heads and saying, 'You who are going to destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days, save Yourself! If you are the Son of God, come down from the cross.'" Mt. 27:39-40.

question to you.  If I was dumb enough to get a friend to saw my arm off or to jump off a tall building, why would God save me or grow my arm back?  It is my job to take care of my own body.  If I mess it up, it's my fault.

Do you want to think logically yet?

 I already tried your "POOF" logic and outgrew it. Maybe if you really wanted to, someday you can outgrow your fictional security blanket and use REAL logic.

"The people in the bible" HA HA HA HA HA

Circular reasoning abounds in all the holy books. "My god claimed this, my book says that" YAWN! You honestly think you and your pet fiction is the only claim out there? It honestly never occures to you that just because billions of people believe the same thing, you think that an ancient myth is true, just because it was printed in ink?

Your goat herders are no different than  the morons who prayed to the sun thinking it was more than a giant ball of gas, and that it cared about the trials of humans.

Your problem is not what the bible "says" your problem is that your ego wont allow you to consider that it is just a fictional story sold as fact,

It is all in your head, you just don't realize it and by proxy of using an old and 101 tactic, you are proving to me that you really buy this crap. I feel sorry for you. Just as I feel sorry for anyone who thinks rabbits feet work.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2599
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
daedalus wrote:  I just

daedalus wrote:

  I just happen to be reading a book on the history of science....  spheres to a mere 13 or so, but got him into problems, especially with the Church.  It was between Copernicus and Galileo that people started getting rid of the ideas of the spheres.

obviously you don't know much about your church history do you?  Churches during that time were understood to be corrupt.  (ergo the denominational standards I've been talking about were in play to the extreme)

daedalus wrote:

Yes, Cap, the Bible writers ABSOLUTELY believed the Earth was the center of the universe and that spheres of elements rotated around it.

why, because the church at the time said so?  c'mon, since when do you believe in the church? 

The church didn't consider the context of the passages and made all of it according to how they wanted it.

If the Bible writers absolutely believed the Earth was the center of the universe, then they must  have also believed the Earth was flat due to popular understanding at the time and future.  However, Isaiah 40:22 references to the Earth as a circle. 

daedalus wrote:

I say again: NO ONE knew that the Sun was at the center of the Solar System, or that there weren't spheres of elements.

no one knew for sure about any of that, but followers didn't sell the belief that Earth was the center.  The churches may have.  It's actually quite irrelevant.  In fact, the Bible writers could have cared less I imagine. 

daedalus wrote:

I know Xians try to rewrite history to make themselves look good but guess what?  It gives the opposite impression.

that way your understanding that there no God has to be real, because Xians... though I"m not sure if I fall in that category... try to rewrite history. 

Is that your basis for unbelief?


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2599
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote: I already

Brian37 wrote:

 I already tried your "POOF" logic and outgrew it. Maybe if you really wanted to, someday you can outgrow your fictional security blanket and use REAL logic.

"The people in the bible" HA HA HA HA HA

Circular reasoning abounds in all the holy books. "My god claimed this, my book says that" YAWN! You honestly think you and your pet fiction is the only claim out there? It honestly never occures to you that just because billions of people believe the same thing, you think that an ancient myth is true, just because it was printed in ink?

Your goat herders are no different than  the morons who prayed to the sun thinking it was more than a giant ball of gas, and that it cared about the trials of humans.

Your problem is not what the bible "says" your problem is that your ego wont allow you to consider that it is just a fictional story sold as fact,

It is all in your head, you just don't realize it and by proxy of using an old and 101 tactic, you are proving to me that you really buy this crap. I feel sorry for you. Just as I feel sorry for anyone who thinks rabbits feet work.

you keep making those circular points that really have no basis for understanding.  I've asked you for your sources, but you don't give me any.

Let me know when you have something that's going to challenge me.  If you think your ranting is going to change my mind, ask yourself if the same effect from me would work on you.


I AM GOD AS YOU
Superfan
Posts: 4793
Joined: 2007-09-29
User is offlineOffline
Geezz most all you religious

Geezz most all you religious folks, define time, or even the dirt and I might begin to take you seriously .... In a general summary, religion is so childishly dangerously ungodly.  


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13549
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:Brian37

caposkia wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

 I already tried your "POOF" logic and outgrew it. Maybe if you really wanted to, someday you can outgrow your fictional security blanket and use REAL logic.

"The people in the bible" HA HA HA HA HA

Circular reasoning abounds in all the holy books. "My god claimed this, my book says that" YAWN! You honestly think you and your pet fiction is the only claim out there? It honestly never occures to you that just because billions of people believe the same thing, you think that an ancient myth is true, just because it was printed in ink?

Your goat herders are no different than  the morons who prayed to the sun thinking it was more than a giant ball of gas, and that it cared about the trials of humans.

Your problem is not what the bible "says" your problem is that your ego wont allow you to consider that it is just a fictional story sold as fact,

It is all in your head, you just don't realize it and by proxy of using an old and 101 tactic, you are proving to me that you really buy this crap. I feel sorry for you. Just as I feel sorry for anyone who thinks rabbits feet work.

you keep making those circular points that really have no basis for understanding.  I've asked you for your sources, but you don't give me any.

Let me know when you have something that's going to challenge me.  If you think your ranting is going to change my mind, ask yourself if the same effect from me would work on you.

You want sources? How about putting down your babble and picking up a biology textbook? Is Biology not a source?

Biology= A  sperm and egg make a baby. Not a naked assertion, but provable fact!

Bible= "Poof, my fictional being did it" Naked assertion with nothing but prior naked assertions to back it up.

Biology= The cells in a human body die after lack of bloodflow and oxygen. Provable fact!

Bible="Poof, my fictional being reanimated it's fictional son" Naked assertion through self serving circular writings.

Lets look at the scoreboard.

Biology=2

Myth=0

And that only adresses 2 of myth's absurd claims in human history.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2599
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
I AM GOD AS YOU wrote: In a

I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:

 In a general summary, religion is so childishly dangerously ungodly.  

I couldn't agree with you more.


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2599
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:You want

Brian37 wrote:

You want sources? How about putting down your babble and picking up a biology textbook? Is Biology not a source?

Biology= A  sperm and egg make a baby. Not a naked assertion, but provable fact!

Bible= "Poof, my fictional being did it" Naked assertion with nothing but prior naked assertions to back it up.

Biology= The cells in a human body die after lack of bloodflow and oxygen. Provable fact!

Bible="Poof, my fictional being reanimated it's fictional son" Naked assertion through self serving circular writings.

Lets look at the scoreboard.

Biology=2

Myth=0

And that only adresses 2 of myth's absurd claims in human history.

 

yea, I know.  You're in love with the whole God impregnating a girl thing.  You mention it a lot. 

Let's take this one step at a time.  I won't even consider explaining that story to you until we can get past the initial stage of whether there is a spiritual world or not.  One step at a time.  Tunnel vision will prevent us from doing it any other way. 

What source do you have for that topic first. 

BTW, biology does support the Bible or vise versa, but we're a long way away from that conversation.  There's no point in talking about that if you can't even grasp a spiritual world. 


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13549
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
caposkia wrote:I AM GOD AS

caposkia wrote:

I AM GOD AS YOU wrote:

 In a general summary, religion is so childishly dangerously ungodly.  

I couldn't agree with you more.

Right and since you were the one lucky person out of the 6 billion on this planet, we'd all be wise to listing to you, since you got it right.

LISTEN UP EVERYONE, CAPPY FOUND THE ONE TRUE INTERPRETATION OF THE MAGICAL BEARDED MAN IN THE SKY, WE MUST NOT QUESTION HIM!

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13549
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
WillieBop wrote:Brian37

WillieBop wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Cappy, You are in the same category as pantheists and Star Trek fans who believe that transporters will be possible. You are wacked out of your mind.

Electromagnectic immaging of "spirits" is bullshit sci-fi fantacy crap, just like big foot and Loc Ness.

 

Wait.... no transporters... and all this time I've been waiting..  So sad.. i was hoping to do The Enemy Within thing and get split into my good and evil halves. 

DAMN IT JIM...I AM A THEIST.....NOT A DOCTOR!

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


caposkia
Theist
Posts: 2599
Joined: 2007-05-15
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Right and

Brian37 wrote:

Right and since you were the one lucky person out of the 6 billion on this planet, we'd all be wise to listing to you, since you got it right.

LISTEN UP EVERYONE, CAPPY FOUND THE ONE TRUE INTERPRETATION OF THE MAGICAL BEARDED MAN IN THE SKY, WE MUST NOT QUESTION HIM!

Yup, I'm the only one in the world that knows this way!  Please disregard me saying that there are millions others like me in the world and that I'm on here to talk to people who want to challenge my understanding.   Now who's living in a fantasy? (obvious sarcasm intended)

I would just like to point out, it's the thought process you expressed above that has caused religion in the first place.  I thought you were against that kind of thing.