Why are you here?

ax
Theist
ax's picture
Posts: 86
Joined: 2012-02-10
User is offlineOffline
Why are you here?

Why are you here on this website?

If you are trying to discover yourself, kudos, but this post is not necessarily for you. Search, ask and research until you are satisfied or bored...

 

This post is a theist attack on atheism:

If the atheist view and/or your personal view on the "purpose of life" is essentially survival or defined (anything else), then why choose to spend time on something like this website that is not necessary for your survival or personal gain? <-- you could be more focused and get rich like zuckerberg!

If the atheist view and/or your personal view on the "purpose of life" is undefined, then why continue to live? <-- if you're contemplating suicide, don't do it!

Is part of your purpose in life simply to discredit theism?

 

The questions are loaded. If you respond, then they served their purpose. If you read it and don't respond, they still served their purpose. If the topic is deleted, they still served their purpose.


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
English muthafucka... do you

English muthafucka... do you speak it

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


Jean Chauvin
Theistard
Jean Chauvin's picture
Posts: 1211
Joined: 2010-11-19
User is offlineOffline
Hello

Hey Brian, in an earlier post you said this:

Quote:
If you believe in a non material thinking being, it is quite on topic. Because everything you argue is intended to lead to the conclusion that a god exists.

Your argument does not lead to the conclusion of God, that is false. Your argument starts with God and you conclude with man.

But atheistts do not attack. Atheists well, they're really agnostics on here just have temper tantrums. Rarely anymore are these pagans courageous enough to actually have the balls to argue with me.

The only reason to be an atheist, the only reason, is the attempt to justify a life of evil and immorality. Of Sin and Sex with animinals and murder and theft and liars.

Since the agnostics on here are chrisitanophobes, they hate anything consistent to Christianity (me) because it knaws on their conscious that their lifestyle is indeed evil and it bothers them. So instead of arguing, they throw ad hominems instead.

Ax, you have no argument against Chrisitanity you Xianphobe, nor do you have any logical justification for being an agnostic conceptually that calls himself an atheist semantically. Just pesonaly subjective excused for being a little brat and a dirty prideful ego=centric human being.

Respectfully,

Jean Chuavin (Jude 3).

 

A Rational Christian of Intelligence (rare)with a valid and sound justification for my epistemology and a logical refutation for those with logical fallacies and false worldviews upon their normative of thinking in retrospect to objective normative(s). This is only understood via the imago dei in which we all are.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13759
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Quote:Your argument does not

Quote:
Your argument does not lead to the conclusion of God, that is false. Your argument starts with God and you conclude with man.

No, my argument starts with YOUR CLAIM IS BULLSHIT.

If projection were a multiplex you'd be the CEO of fantasy.

You believe in an invisible super hero, not me. You are trying to sell an invisible super hero, not me.

 

"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


Jean Chauvin
Theistard
Jean Chauvin's picture
Posts: 1211
Joined: 2010-11-19
User is offlineOffline
Hi Brian

Hi Brian,

Brian, Brian, Brian, I'm trying to help you and correct in via the proper way to logically argue regarding God's Being. In order to argue logically, you start with God and argue down. God is your first principle, not a tooth brush.

You cannot lead to God at all if you start with a tooth brush or the telielogical argument for the existence of GOd.

This is how there heretic who si probably going ot hell WILLIAM LANE CRAIG argues.

Brian, you should be thankful, I correct you and educate you and I never charge you. It's always free. You should be thankful. Alll inductive arguments fail when it comes to "proving" God. They are all fallacious. You must argue deductively and axiomatically from God.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).

A Rational Christian of Intelligence (rare)with a valid and sound justification for my epistemology and a logical refutation for those with logical fallacies and false worldviews upon their normative of thinking in retrospect to objective normative(s). This is only understood via the imago dei in which we all are.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13759
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote:ax

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

ax wrote:

 

 Many individuals allow themselves to be manipulated. It is quite possible that many "religious leaders" may not truly believe in their religion at all, or may even be atheist. Historically, there have been many leaders willing to abuse the naivety of individuals who follow them blindly. This may be done purely for personal gain or some other twisted religious misunderstanding. Either way, these leaders and followers have lost sight of their purposes.

  

.....and how does that play into Christian attitudes toward suicide ?  Suicide is universally condemned within Christianity and only the "eternal" consequences of a Christian killing one's self is debated.  I see no influence of atheist thought when the presence of spiritual issues are still being considered.  What atheist would concern themselves with that ?

 

 

ax wrote:
Do you truly know why you follow atheism?
 

 

  Because I no longer believe in a supernatural realm. 

 

ax wrote:
How does it relate to your purposes - the past, present and future?

 

  Purposes ?  the past is irrelevant to me, the present is simply where I'm at now and the future is unknown. 

 

ax wrote:
If our primary purpose is survival, how long do you think humanity will continue the cycle of life and death before attempting to unite all of our secondary purposes to achieve immortality?

            

Such issues are meaningless to me.  I consider the human race to be evolution's most successful failure.  If I were still a Christian I would seriously doubt the competence of a god who allowed such a pathetic race to exist. The extinction of humanity is much more appealing to me.  Humans are disgusting.

I don't think we are all disgusting. I simply think that since evolution has never been about perfection every species is going to produce actions that benefit and harm an ecosystem. I also think that no species is above consuming itself into a corner.

I think life is imperfect, but I do not thing all humans are disgusting. I simply think we are not above nature and we'd do better to accept that. The ride for all life on this planet is finite, even if we go extinct and other life outlasts us, which is probable. I do think that we ARE the most harmful to the global ecosystem. But I am not willing to say that all 7 billion of us have our heads up our asses. I do think some of us want to do better for our species.

"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: 13759
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Jean Chauvin wrote:Hi

Jean Chauvin wrote:

Hi Brian,

Brian, Brian, Brian, I'm trying to help you and correct in via the proper way to logically argue regarding God's Being. In order to argue logically, you start with God and argue down. God is your first principle, not a tooth brush.

You cannot lead to God at all if you start with a tooth brush or the telielogical argument for the existence of GOd.

This is how there heretic who si probably going ot hell WILLIAM LANE CRAIG argues.

Brian, you should be thankful, I correct you and educate you and I never charge you. It's always free. You should be thankful. Alll inductive arguments fail when it comes to "proving" God. They are all fallacious. You must argue deductively and axiomatically from God.

Respectfully,

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).

You have a 2,000 year old claim of a magic man in the sky. No way am I going to start from a position of ignorance. Your claim is as stale as a hot dog on a 7-11 grill.

"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


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
(No subject)

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3683
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:I don't think

Brian37 wrote:

I don't think we are all disgusting.

 

   I guess I just have higher expectations from humanity than you do.  I am less forgiving of human character flaws than you are.  I frequently look for the good in others, I rarely find it.  Most people are superficial and shallow but of course they don't see themselves that way because people are naturally narcissistic.   When people stop acting in disgusting ways then I won't feel compelled to be disgusted with them.  It's not my fault people act the way they do.  I wasn't born with this attitude; it came from dealing with and being around other humans ( read my signature ).

  You needn't remind that there are "good" people out there. They are as rare as diamonds and don't reflect human nature as it is usually manifested.  Consequently I find it foolish to trust other people unless of course you like pulling knives out of your back.  Sorry, that's not for me.

"Most people are ass holes." Jesus of Nazareth


ax
Theist
ax's picture
Posts: 86
Joined: 2012-02-10
User is offlineOffline
Atheistextremist wrote:

Atheistextremist wrote:

You're an interesting person, IP Man. I would agree that humans will extend their lives organically and perhaps might extend biological consciousness into digital consciousness in some way. My opinions are tempered by the knowledge the human brain is made up of 120-odd billion neurons communicating in ways currently beyond our detailed comprehension. Applying the connectome to clunky transistors will likely be a task for future generations. 

I assume from your comments above you are a deist rather than a backwards or forwards baptist of some type. If so, while I don't think your arguments are provable in the normally accepted way, I can understand why it may make sense to attempt to 'lock' the impossible nature of reality into a subjective human framework. The alternative is to make an uncomfortable bed on the cognitive noise floor, never really sure you understand anything much at all.

Theists who are removed from the middle eastern monotheist doctrinal technique of assertion supported by insult and eternal threat are perfectly agreeable to me, whether I accept their thinking or not.

Based on the current exponential growth of various technologies, an intelligence explosion may occur within the century.

If the singularity does not occur in my lifetime, I will buy a waterbed.

I wonder which of our ganglia fire differently.


Ktulu wrote:

As a side note, I agree with what Atheist Extremist has written.  I genuinely enjoy your posts.

Still a work in progress; not all scenarios have been tested. Simulations can be created with variables that can be adjusted prior to and during execution. Code takes advantage of multi-core CPUs to allow you to quickly emulate long periods of time.

http://code.google.com/p/humanpurposemachine/


neptewn wrote:

Do I need to point out that your “theistic” attack has no theism?

The aforementioned perspective in this matter is based on a presupposed generalization of atheist belief. This intentional provocation has elicited the desired results.


Brian37 wrote:

What better way to create more division and and death through this utopia bullshit that never existed.

AT BEST, humans are survived in the memory of those still living after one dies. But this bullshit above is merely a childish evolutionary hiccup placebo reflection of our natural desire to want to continue. But NOTHING and no one lasts forever.We do not survive because we are immortal or because of a fictional god. We survive because of evolution. I am sorry nature isn't sexy enough for you, but reality is far better than superstition.

5 billion years from now no friend or foe, poor or rich, no human we like or hate, will be remembered. Life before we evolved will be just like it is after our species goes extinct.

There is no heaven, no hell, and no invisible super hero pulling the strings. There are simply gullible, or willfully ignorant people who dont want to face our finite existence. There is no mystery to life, this is it. It is not my baggage or my fault that you are unwilling or afraid to face that.

As previously mentioned, there is already science supporting the likelihood of life extension.

I never suggested anyone is pulling your strings.

I do not fear death any more than you fear your favorite (american) football team losing a game. Death is simply undesirable.


Old Seer wrote:

(post 80)

You refer to a choice between two states, but do not say what these states are.. I will guess, and continue..

An interesting statement is made - "No God can be found in the material sciences". Before continuing down a path of logical assertions built upon this assumption, you must first address the bias in the absence of empiricism.

Personage is a figment of human imagination. Both you and your pet, if you have one, (dog, cat, fish, bird, etc) all have neural signals that direct your actions - albeit yours are more complex.

One of the ending statements you make regarding Christianity is that it teaches you the difference between "animal and human" decisions. This is vague, but you may be alluding to the problem of evil. If this is the case, I encourage you to research this further and you will clearly see your sense of morality is internal to your being.

Your purpose is unclear.


Jean Chauvin wrote:

I think you're putting words in the mouth of these pagans. Even if an atheist were to say, their purpose to be on here is whatever, you cannot then say they admitted that EVERYTHING has a purpose.

And you have'nt defined purpose. What is this purpose you speak of?

Redskin guy's purpose is to be an angry as possible and have tempers. And when a theist kicks his ass in logical and intellectual thinking, he yells and screams.

I'm here for entertainment. Often time's just to laugh and other times help these freaks be the best possible atheists they can be. If you're gonna be an atheist or whatever, you outta be consistent, and virtually most atheists steal from Christianity or buddhism or whatever for their thinking.

Keep trying, but kind of a week thread. But unless these atheists are robots they have purpose. They eat on purpose, they do not drive over the bride into ice water on purpose. They don't study logic or critical thinking on purpose. and they're very evil pathetic humans, on purpose.

If you have a purpose, and I have a purpose, and we are the only two people that exist (god forbid), then all people have purpose. Purpose is hidden in causality.

I defined purpose earlier using dictionary.com.

I can see why you find it entertaining. It seems your purpose for being here is similar to Kapkao.

To call the atheists here "evil" or "freaks" discredits you. This hints at intolerance which often suggests ignorance.


Brian37 wrote:

Atheists don't steal shit from anyone jackass. Human behavior is not dependent on being a christian or a Buddhist or Hindu or Jew. Our species has been around 500,000 years and was evolving long before any of our modern superstitions were invented. You're just pissed that we are telling the truth that religion is man made.

This is off topic, but he may be referring to the origins of law. Historically, laws and religion contained many co-dependencies.

Brian37 wrote:

And as much as I loath him, he does serve a very good purpose being here. He shows other theists how theism can be viewed to the point of hate and bigotry. He serves the purpose of being a zoo animal we put on display. So yea, in the sense of the popular use of the word "respect" he certainly has no clue what that means to most people. But more importantly to me than having someone like me, or only say nice things about me, is my own right to bitch about things I don't like.

Chauvin stated his purpose here is for entertainment. If his manner of entertainment is sadistic, then your responses are only feeding the flames.


Old Seer wrote:

If you're a Christian you wouldn't be calling these floks, freaks. You showed my previous point- there are no proper Christians on the planet. You can quote the bible all day around here but it will get you no where. I'm neither Theist,Deist, Atheist, or Christian, or any known religion. But, I do know what a Christian is supposed to be, which is a religion that cannot be sustained at this time.  Christianity is one's "Human side opposite one's animal  side. These floks believe they are a human animal which we (the bunch of guys I'm with) say doesn't exist. Each are a combinatio0n of human and animal traits. Put away the animal as relationship values and you become a Christian, at least basically anyways. Being the world runs on this animal idea it's pretty darned hard to maintain one's self in a Christian manner. You have to keep jumping in and out of it according to the situation. There-fore, there isn't any real Christians on this planet, not us either. There won't be until the world we live in changes it's values to "Human" and gets rid of this idea of superiority and predatorism. If you are civilized then you are made up according to State mandates that you were forced to go to school to become---just like they. Christianity and civilization are at differnet ends of the universe (so to speak). But- being unknowing doesn't make one a freak. A Christin is made by going back to how one is naturally formed by nature, A civilized person is one invented by the State (man made) for the purposes it (they) mandates.

You may already realize this, but if you cannot define your beliefs in the broadest sense of terms, but do indeed share these beliefs with others, you now have the beginnings of a cult.

Truth is seemingly absolute; your beliefs on what is true on the other hand, are certainly relative.


Brian37 wrote:

People make a multitude of claims on a multitude of issues. We are never as simple as the labels we hold.

Well said.


Jean Chauvin wrote:

(post 95)
Oh and the "theist guy," lol, you're working on a theory of Chrisitan knowlege? Most likley it will be wrong, ut let me know what your epistemology turns out lol.

Not sure if you're referring to me, however, the posts have taken a largely off topic turn so I withhold any direct comment.


Old Seer wrote:

(post 171)

I agree with Ktulu's following post in its entirety. It is irrelevant to my purpose, but I would be interested to see a compilation of the conclusions your group has come to, especially a treatise on your "forces" theory.


Jean Chauvin wrote:

Ax, you have no argument against Chrisitanity you Xianphobe, nor do you have any logical justification for being an agnostic conceptually that calls himself an atheist semantically. Just pesonaly subjective excused for being a little brat and a dirty prideful ego=centric human being.

It seems you are confused.


Jean Chauvin wrote:

Alll inductive arguments fail when it comes to "proving" God. They are all fallacious. You must argue deductively and axiomatically from God.

Deism disagrees with you. I will be curiously looking to see in other topics where you have proved this statement to be true.


ProzacDeathwish wrote:

I guess I just have higher expectations from humanity than you do.  I am less forgiving of human character flaws than you are.  I frequently look for the good in others, I rarely find it.  Most people are superficial and shallow but of course they don't see themselves that way because people are naturally narcissistic.   When people stop acting in disgusting ways then I won't feel compelled to be disgusted with them.  It's not my fault people act the way they do.  I wasn't born with this attitude; it came from dealing with and being around other humans ( read my signature ).

You needn't remind that there are "good" people out there. They are as rare as diamonds and don't reflect human nature as it is usually manifested.  Consequently I find it foolish to trust other people unless of course you like pulling knives out of your back.  Sorry, that's not for me.

I understand your sense of pessimism. I haven't been here long, but I noticed you have changed your image a few times. What makes you choose the images that you do? I am curious if there is a purpose behind this.


ProzacDeathWish
atheist
ProzacDeathWish's picture
Posts: 3683
Joined: 2007-12-02
User is offlineOffline
ax wrote: I haven't been

ax wrote:

 

 

I haven't been here long, but I noticed you have changed your image a few times. What makes you choose the images that you do? I am curious if there is a purpose behind this.

                                                    

 

                                                                                          Surely you aren't serious ?

"Most people are ass holes." Jesus of Nazareth


Anonymous_ (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
probably going to hell . . .

Brian37 wrote:

Jean Chauvin wrote:

Hi Brian,

Brian, Brian, Brian, I'm trying to help you and correct in via the proper way to logically argue regarding God's Being.

You cannot lead to God at all if you start with a tooth brush or the telielogical argument for the existence of GOd.

This is how there heretic who is probably going to hell WILLIAM LANE CRAIG argues.

Jean Chauvin (Jude 3).

 Your claim is as stale as a hot dog on a 7-11 grill.

  Could you say how to deal  with  heretics  ?

 

John Hus or John Huss was burned at the stake for heresy against the doctrines of the Catholic Church I googled pbs secrets of the dead the bible. Results reformer william tyndale labeled a what :"heretic". William Tyndale was also burned at the stake. Am I the only one that thinks Jean Chauvin would have kept this practice up til today ? To be fair, never claimed Jean was a Catholic but I still cant shake the feeling

 


JeanChauvinSOCK...
TheistTroll
JeanChauvinSOCKPUPPET's picture
Posts: 11
Joined: 2012-03-03
User is offlineOffline
Prozac

Prozac he is serious and don't call him Shirley. Airplaine, 1980.


neptewn
Silver Member
neptewn's picture
Posts: 296
Joined: 2007-06-25
User is offlineOffline
ProzacDeathWish wrote:ax

ProzacDeathWish wrote:

ax wrote:

 

 

I haven't been here long, but I noticed you have changed your image a few times. What makes you choose the images that you do? I am curious if there is a purpose behind this.

                                                    

 

                                                                                          Surely you aren't serious ?

It's a condition of his probational release.

Your mind will answer most questions if you learn to relax and wait for the answer. - William S. Burroughs


Jeffrick
High Level DonorRational VIP!SuperfanGold Member
Jeffrick's picture
Posts: 2404
Joined: 2008-03-25
User is offlineOffline
*shrug*

Joachim Vadian wrote:

Prozac he is serious and don't call him Shirley. Airplaine, 1980.

 

 

 

                      Don't worry Joachim they've all had their shots,  I hope.  

"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."

VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"

If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
"Stike her!"

I haven't seen that movie in the longest time...

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


Reverend Wells
Reverend Wells's picture
Posts: 36
Joined: 2012-08-17
User is offlineOffline
  Quote:Why are you here

  

Quote:
Why are you here on this website?

I'm here for the beer and the bitches. 

Quote:
If the atheist view and/or your personal view on the "purpose of life" is undefined, then why continue to live?

Two reasons -

1) The only alternative is suicide, and since I'm going to die eventually anyway, why be in hurry to do so?

2) Why not?

Quote:
Is part of your purpose in life simply to discredit theism?

Not intentionally. I don't go looking for theists and try to convince them of the errors of their ways, but if I happen to see a theist making incredulous or erroneous statements either about their own religion (I am well versed in the Bible), or about the sciences (evolution, etc.), then I feel obligated to correct them.

Quote:
The questions are loaded. If you respond, then they served their purpose. If you read it and don't respond, they still served their purpose. If the topic is deleted, they still served their purpose.

So, in other words, we just lost THE GAME?

 

"Now this ... is the noble truth of the origin of suffering: it is this craving which leads to renewed existence, accompanied by delight and lust, seeking delight here and there, that is, craving for sensual pleasures, craving for existence, craving for extermination." - Buddha, the 2nd Noble Truth