Being an Atheist in Ireland is a Cnut

Terry

Sam Vimes wrote: »

I believe that the simplest solution is usually the most likely. It is entirely likely that there is some mechanism that we don't yet understand that can create matter from non-matter. Science makes new discoveries every day and such a discovery is not beyond the realms of possibility.

However, the existence of a divine being breaks the known laws of nature. It is also the most complex possible solution to the problem of where the universe began because such a being is infinitely complex. It also suffers from the problem of what created god and if he can come from nothing, why is it so hard to believe that matter can come from nothing?

Also, the existence of a creator does not come anywhere near to proving the Christian God, which is the whole point


So, again, we have one solution that does not break the laws of nature and another one that does. In any other area of inquiry, if I was given one solution that fit with the laws of nature and another one that didn't, I would choose the former and I don't see why the creation of the universe should be any different.

Well there's the difference.
Scientists will say that a theory is just a theory.
Christians will tell that the existence of god is a fact.

Sam Vimes

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RRNpUFcP39g

Terry

pablomakaveli wrote: »

If you were ringing from the Antartic i would.

There is evidence showing that the sea of Galilee regularly froze over during the winter 2,000 years ago.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ke74HbmEvhE

OK,


will some of ye religous folk watch the youtube video and explain to me what god was at creating all those gigantic stars please?

what day did he create them on? i missed that part at mass.

Timmaay

An Fear Aniar wrote: »

Let's all stop arguing and enjoy a nice song joke:
.

Christianity: One woman's lie about having an affair that got seriously out of hand.

Sam Vimes

personally I believe in Ceiling cat.
http://www.lolcatbible.com/

for example John 3:16

16 So liek teh Ceiling Kitteh lieks teh ppl lots and he sez 'Oh hai I givez u me only kitteh and ifs u purrz wit him u wont evr diez no moar, k?

or the ten commandments:

1 Then Ceiling Cat spoked all them werds:


2 I iz Ceiling Cat An I iz Top Cat, An I broughted u out of hawt lend wit no cheezbrgrs for hard werk at all


3 No can has other ceiling cat!! U gotz other Ceiling Cat, I shoot yous wit mah lazer eyes.


4 If u try be Ceiling Cat of any of mai creayshunz up in floaty skai, down in erth or in watr or I shoot yous wit mah lazer eyes.

5 If u think faek Ceiling Cat iz Ceiling Cat, I mek u ded An ur kittens ded An if yur kittenz have kittenz, dey be ded too, for being stupid.

6 If not I wuv u An all ur lotz uf kittenz!


7 U sez Ceiling Cat bad, I shoot yous wit mah lazer eyes, cuz I dun liek it. Srsly.


8 Remembur caturday An keep holy.

9 U werk 6 dais An finish werk, K?

10 Caturday, u no werk. U An all ur peepz go wrship me. And, if yu beez gudd, I maks it so yu can stays home and do alla stuffs yu wanted tu doos.

11 I maded heavenz An erth An see An the stuff that does teh funney hoppey stuffz in An on it - so I make it holy cuz I no werk.


12 Bez u good to papa An mama so u has long lief.


13 U no maek peepz ded! Srsly!


14 U no maek sexxes wit other gurlz or menz than ur wief (so no awsum treesum alowed!).

Disease Ridden

Timmaay wrote: »

Christianity: One woman's lie about having an affair that got seriously out of hand.

If you're going to rob a joke off sickipedia you should at least mention that that's where you got it!

m@cc@

Upward Spiral wrote: »

My mam is up in my house for the weekend and it being Sunday morning, she tried to make me go to mass with her. I refused, using the old "but I'm an Atheist" reasoning to broach the subject. So off she went, noticeably indifferent to my proclamation of faithlessness.

She returned an hour later with some of her friends for tea and a Chocolate Kimberley in my kitchen. I went in to feed the dog and mam said to her friends "he says he's an Atheist, so he wouldn't go to mass with me". The other women laughed, and basically dismissed that such a thing existed.

I tried my best to explain my position on the whole religion thing, and even quoted Darwin. It had little effect on them.

One of the women is a real Jesus freak, and part of the parish brigade. She looked visibly shocked at what I was saying and didn't even crack a smile.

Do any of you experience such rejection of your views by family or friends?

If it keeps your mother happy, why not just do it. She has made plenty of sacrifices for you, going to some place for a hour is not a lot. Furthermore, quoting Darwin in front of her friends says as much as you as it does about them. I mean, it's like trying to sell ice to the Eskimos, what did you think you were going to achieve?

keano_afc

I propose that After Hours be moved in Athiesm and Agnosticism as a sub forum. Thats all it seems to be these days.

Dennis the Stone

I think Catholicism, Protestantism, Islam, Judaism, etc. etc. are all nonsense. I look forward to the day when religion will finally be a private affair and we have a true secular state, with no segregation in schools or elsewhere. It would be great if people stopped raising their kids to hate other kids because their fictional story is different to your fictional story. Religion is passed on from one generation to the next, young children have no choice, it all depends on the religion of their parents.

I don't go out of my way to force my opinions on anyone. I hate the way a lot of religious people I have met want to discuss their religion with me and even try to project their idea of morals or values onto me and other people. (See signature pic) I hate this because I don't ever talk about religion to people's faces. In fact, nobody, apart from one very close friend, knows anything about my lack of religious belief.

My mother is religious and I would never be in-her-face about my opinions of religion. I try not to be annoyed when I see her come running with a little bottle of Lourdes holy water to bless me before I leave for Dublin, even though I find it highly ridiculous. I even let her fill me in as a Catholic on the census.

I worked for a year with immigrants and often played along with them whenever they asked me to pray for them. I don't respect their beliefs, but that's their business and it wouldn't do any good to argue. I just wish people could keep their beliefs to themselves. Religious people get so offended when athiests speak their mind, even though they expect to be able to interfere with everyone else and shout their beliefs from the rooftops. I don't believe religion deserves respect any more than political affiliation. It is great to discuss this on the internet, as people are geared for discussion.

philologos

Tago Mago: I'd say the same in respect to offence could be said to athiests and agnostics too. It's hardly a one way street.

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

...

I see your sig now points to your 7 reasons for believing in Christianity. I don't really see the point tbh. The only people who will accept those reasons as valid are people who are already religious and they don't need convincing. The people who need convincing are the non-believers and as you've seen from several people responding to your 7 reasons on this thread, non-believers see large flaws in your reasoning.

You might argue that the non-believers are wrong to see flaws but regardless, they see them and aren't going to be convinced. Any non-believers would have seen and rejected those arguments long ago. So who is the link for?

And why don't you add to your sig links to the responses people gave to your reasons here and let them make up their own mind?

philologos

Sam Vimes wrote: »

I see your sig now points to your 7 reasons for believing in Christianity. I don't really see the point tbh. The only people who will accept those reasons as valid are people who are already religious and they don't need convincing. The people who need convincing are the non-believers and as you've seen from several people responding to your 7 reasons on this thread, non-believers see large flaws in your reasoning.

Many have yet to respond to my counter points. The OP actually said it was a decent enough argument if you look back. So meh. It merely saves time actually, so I can give my reasoning behind adopting Christianity as my personal faith without having to continually repeat it.

Actually Sam, would you mind giving some reasons as to why you are an atheist, that could be rather interesting. Most would evade the topic, however I don't think people should. People on either side should know why they believe what they do about certain things.

Sam Vimes wrote: »

And why don't you add to your sig links to the responses people gave to your reasons here and let them make up their own mind?

I've explained that the purpose of it was to give my reasons for believing what I believe. People can discern for themselves. I don't doubt peoples intelligence.

Dudess

m@cc@ wrote: »

If it keeps your mother happy, why not just do it. She has made plenty of sacrifices for you, going to some place for a hour is not a lot.

I think in this case though, the OP's mother was able to handle him/her not going to mass so I don't think the OP did anything wrong by refusing to go... if it was, for instance, his/her grandmother though, it would probably be a different story. My gran is in her 90s - I'll just go to mass if she's around as it would upset her if I didn't and there's really no point in arguing the score with her at this hour of her life.

Sam Vimes

Jakkass wrote: »

Many have yet to respond to my counter points. The OP actually said it was a decent enough argument if you look back. So meh. It merely saves time actually, so I can give my reasoning behind adopting Christianity as my personal faith without having to continually repeat it.

Fair enough. It actually will save time.

Jakkass wrote: »

Actually Sam, would you mind giving some reasons as to why you are an atheist, that could be rather interesting. Most would evade the topic, however I don't think people should. People on either side should know why they believe what they do about certain things.

It's really simple actually:

1. It has always been human nature to attribute things which we don't understand to a higher power of some sort. Back in Jesus' day, pretty much everything was attributed to God but as science (ie knowledge) has progressed, fewer and fewer things have been because we understand them. So the fact that people wrote down that God did something doesn't mean he did. It just means they didn't understand what was happening. It's the same nowadays with alien sightings etc. People see what they want to see.
   
   
2. People have the aforementioned tendency to attribute things to a higher power of some sort but separate peoples all came up with separate ideas of this higher power. This means that thousands of different religions have popped up throughout history. Religions that developed near each other often share similar traits but ones that developed completely independently are often very different. The only thing they really share in common is the idea of a higher power. This says to me that the religion exists only in the minds of the people who built it up around the basic idea of a higher power. If the Christian God had actually created the whole universe and all its people you would think that separate people would independently develop the same religion but that did not happen
   
   
3. Even if one of the thousands of religions is correct, there is no logical way to determine which one is correct, so the only logical choice is to choose none.
   
   
4. God is an extremely complex solution to the problem and there is a far simpler one available which does not require supernatural powers
   
   
5. There is not a scrap of hard evidence for the existence of the Christian God, despite your 7 reasons which actually don't even begin to imply anything supernatural ever happened
   
   
6. The bible has been proven to be wrong countless times. There are dozens of errors and contradictions and even different translations that have quite different meanings. One single error in this book eliminates the possibility that it is the perfect word of God, and there are many
   
   
7. The only point where science currently fails is the actual creation of the matter for the universe. Everything after that can be easily explained through natural processes. This is why I leave some room for some form of "creator", the same as all the other people who built a religion around the same idea, but believing in a creator is not the same as believing in a God or a religion. Based on the above 6 reasons, I reject all religions
   

ntlbell

Terry wrote: »

ntlbell, stop trolling.

oh change the the bloody record

The term "crazy" (from Middle English meaning cracked) and insane (from Latin insanus meaning unhealthy) came to mean mental disorder in this period. The term "lunacy", long used to refer to periodic disturbance or epilepsy, came to be synonymous with insanity. "Madness", long in use in root form since at least the early centuries AD, and originally meaning crippled, hurt or foolish, came to mean loss of reason or self-restraint. "Psychosis", from Greek "principle of life/animation", had varied usage referring to a condition of the mind/soul.

I don't see how pointing out believing in something as "foolish" as some higher being can not be seen as potentially a mental illness of some form

Terry, by all means engage me, but don't blindly dismiss the point as trolling.

ta.

BnA

Upward Spiral wrote: »

My mam is up in my house for the weekend and it being Sunday morning, she tried to make me go to mass with her. I refused, using the old "but I'm an Atheist" reasoning to broach the subject. So off she went, noticeably indifferent to my proclamation of faithlessness.

She returned an hour later with some of her friends for tea and a Chocolate Kimberley in my kitchen. I went in to feed the dog and mam said to her friends "he says he's an Atheist, so he wouldn't go to mass with me". The other women laughed, and basically dismissed that such a thing existed.

I tried my best to explain my position on the whole religion thing, and even quoted Darwin. It had little effect on them.

One of the women is a real Jesus freak, and part of the parish brigade. She looked visibly shocked at what I was saying and didn't even crack a smile.

Do any of you experience such rejection of your views by family or friends?

Would it have killed you to take a walk down to mass with your Ma on a Sunday morning when she was over to stay. It probably would have made her week. And what would it have cost you.....???? Maybe 30 minutes out of your life ????

But No...!!!!! You couldn't spare that 30 minutes out of your ever so important life.

My advice : Grow up

JC 2K3

You shouldn't need to give reasons why you're an atheist really.

If I were to give reasons, they'd be the following:
-No one has ever given me a satisfactory definition of a God.
-I can't see how any question regarding life, the universe or anything could possibly be answered satisfactorily by attributing it to God.

@Jackass
I found this interesting:

Jakkass wrote: »

A necessary being doesn't have to be created.

Why then does the universe need to be created?
Why can't the universe be the "necessary being" in itself?

Jakkass wrote: »

Well the same could be asked of a purely naturalistic definition of the world. A higher power should certainly be seen as a real possibility, far from the ridiculous if a naturalistic explanation of the world is as improbable as it is.

But if you're going to argue from a position of probability, you're arguing in the naturalistic domain. The probability of a higher power is zero in this domain

Horsefumbler

zeppe wrote: »

Do you know what really cracks me up? The f**kin "immaculate conception". WTF! It sounds like something Mary made up on the spot to Joseph, as a bare arsed sandal salesman legs it out the back window..Oh yeah, it probably was.

ATHEIST and proud

that sounds a bit too witty to be of your own creation, did you here a comdedian say it or something by any chance?

Dudess

Stercus Accidit wrote: »

Jesus was a man, thats it.

And a fairly hot one too, if movies are anything to go by...

BnA wrote: »

Would it have killed you to take a walk down to mass with your Ma on a Sunday morning when she was over to stay. It probably would have made her week. And what would it have cost you.....???? Maybe 30 minutes out of your life ????

But No...!!!!! You couldn't spare that 30 minutes out of your ever so important life.

My advice : Grow up

Meh, his mam seemed all right with it.

partyatmygaff

Tago Mago wrote: »

I think Catholicism, Protestantism, Islam, Judaism, etc. etc. are all nonsense. I look forward to the day when religion will finally be a private affair and we have a true secular state, with no segregation in schools or elsewhere. It would be great if people stopped raising their kids to hate other kids because their fictional story is different to your fictional story. Religion is passed on from one generation to the next, young children have no choice, it all depends on the religion of their parents.

I don't go out of my way to force my opinions on anyone. I hate the way a lot of religious people I have met want to discuss their religion with me and even try to project their idea of morals or values onto me and other people. (See signature pic) I hate this because I don't ever talk about religion to people's faces. In fact, nobody, apart from one very close friend, knows anything about my lack of religious belief.

My mother is religious and I would never be in-her-face about my opinions of religion. I try not to be annoyed when I see her come running with a little bottle of Lourdes holy water to bless me before I leave for Dublin, even though I find it highly ridiculous. I even let her fill me in as a Catholic on the census.

I worked for a year with immigrants and often played along with them whenever they asked me to pray for them. I don't respect their beliefs, but that's their business and it wouldn't do any good to argue. I just wish people could keep their beliefs to themselves. Religious people get so offended when athiests speak their mind, even though they expect to be able to interfere with everyone else and shout their beliefs from the rooftops. I don't believe religion deserves respect any more than political affiliation. It is great to discuss this on the internet, as people are geared for discussion.

Im sure you dont

philologos

JC 2K3 wrote: »

@Jackass
I found this interesting:

Why then does the universe need to be created?
Why can't the universe be the "necessary being" in itself?

Problem: Aren't physicists now suggesting that there may be a repetition of the Big Bang again in billions of years time. If so that would make the universe contingent rather than necessary. Necessary meaning that it is a prerequisite for the universe to exist currently as it does.

However a more obvious point, and one that is somewhat easier, is how can the creator be the creation itself? That's the key problem I have with a naturalistic explanation of the universe it fails to make sense.

JC 2K3 wrote: »

But if you're going to argue from a position of probability, you're arguing in the naturalistic domain. The probability of a higher power is zero in this domain

Fair enough, however, under what basis do you rule that the existence of a God is zero. The possibility hasn't been considered or explored. It seems a bit rash to dismiss it off the cuff.

Mind you if God doesn't exist within the universe, it would be a supernatural cause rather than a natural one. I've already explained based on the probability why I believe the Creation to be a supernatural act.

Natural concerns what is frequently observable, or what we can know from observing the universe. We despair to observe what has happened within the universe concerning cosmology. We can't possibly observe what stands outside of the universe so perhaps you are right concerning a purely natural assessment. I consider such an assessment to be inaccurate as it's not a full consideration of what things are.

SoWatchaWant

Zillah wrote: »

Don't you see how inconsistent this is? You don't believe in fairies, vampires or unicorns; you're taking an 'absolutist' stance there, why not with God? I'd suggest that the reason you're making the God question special is because belief in God is very popular, which says nothing about how likely it is to be true.

A reasonable atheist does not say "There is definitely no God", a reasonable atheist says "I see no reason to believe in a God", in just the same way you say "I have no reason to believe in unicorns".

There's nothing "absolutist" about it, and it's certainly hugely unfair to equate it to the absurd faith of a theist.

The reason we didn't consider fairies or vampires or unicorns is because there is a fundamental difference in the reason why people would believe in such things, and a God.

Fairies and Vampires are pure fabrication, no doubt about it.

But the reason that a "God", in its most general term, holds the right to be seriously considered is because it's an attempt to explain the origin of our universe, which science may not fully explain in a way satisfactory to us: like "why".

I am agnostic because I think it's a distinct possibility that a God started the universe. I'm not scientifically illiterate, mind you: I know evolution to be true.

Dennis the Stone

partyatmygaff wrote: »

Im sure you dont

Apologies for hurting the sensibilities of any religious people who came into an atheism thread and became genuinely shocked that some people disagree with their blinkered outdated belief system.

As I said, if I meet someone face to face I tend not to seek confrontation, even though I do not respect their beliefs. I wish people had the same manners and stopped pushing their religion in my face. If these people are truly convinced then they can be content with their expectations of spending eternity in the clouds in wonderful bliss, while people like me, along with every other species of animal, burn in agony in the lakes of hellfire for not accepting the loving, caring all-powerful God.

philologos

How exactly is it outdated in any sense? Give some reasons, I thought you guys were meant to be the champions of logic

Dennis the Stone

There are seventeen pages of eloquent argument thataway my friend

<

---

philologos

Not specifically dealing with how Christianity is outdated though?

musicmonky

and God thought, "what shall these people do with their lives?"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2111174/Intelligent-people-less-likely-to-believe-in-God.html

philologos

musicmonky: There are also studies that suggest that in Christian congregations in the USA and Australia there are a higher rate of graduates than in the general population. It's not exactly a convincing argument given the amount of contesting figures on the subject.

Nehaxak

The thing that I find gets right up the noses of religious folk who just "don't get it" that you're an Athiest is that, instead of saying you don't believe in God - say you don't believe in man made religion nor the God that they might believe in, then progress on to your belief system that the human race, nay, Earth itself, was a terra-forming <sp?> project initiated by an Alien race.

There may well be a "God" or "Gods" that created the human race, but, I think there'd be a lot more science behind it rather than myth, legends and feeble minded bible stories.

If we as a human race initiated a terra-forming project of even smaller proportions on another planet in the future, are we then the Gods of all created and all to come on that planet ?