Questions atheists are sick of answering. Aaaand Biscuits again, of course.

lazygal

Why does it always, always descend into food related shenanigans?

endacl

lazygal wrote: »

Why does it always, always descend into food related shenanigans?

Do you like biscuits?

lazygal

endacl wrote: »

Do you like biscuits?

Meh, they're no Hawaiian pizza.

Sulla Felix

The atheist/theist gnostic/agnostic thing really bugs me. They're answers to two very different questions.

endacl

Sulla Felix wrote: »

The atheist/theist gnostic/agnostic thing really bugs me. They're answers to two very different questions.

You know, I don't even think about it. I know my position. If somebody else feels a need to plot me on a graph, that grand.

ShowMeTheCash

ShooterSF wrote: »

AGAIN, I'm still typing from the POV that the god of the bible exists. Outside of that, of course I believe humans wrote the bible and made it all up along the way, well not all of it, they also stole plenty of it from earlier religions.

Are you suggesting that a god could exist, that he communicated his message to his followers and that they manipulated and twisted his message to suit their own wishes, he then sent himself to earth in human form and never bothered to sit down and go over all the lies and incorrect passages in the old testament? On top of all that he still remains silent on these issues to us humans in modern times and yet threatens to judge us based on his laws without ever pointing out which are really his laws and which are human constructs.

If you want narrow minded look to people who believe in a god but know that their morality is the true morality of their god and anything else that contradicts that is interference of other human beings. That they are right on everything because their god agrees with them and even when he doesn't that is simply misunderstanding by other human beings.

I am not trying to suggest anything, other than on one hand we have hardline Christians that will take everthing litterally from the bible and not dare question its origin or validity.
On the other hand we have hard line discrediters who will look at the bible in exactly the same way but to the opposite effect....

It's like listening to two idiots!

Right wing Christian : God hates gay people!
Left wing Atheist : Your god hates gay people!

I just find it funny although polar opposites I see ignorance at both ends of the spectrum that are using the same passages to support their argument....

lazygal

Its like people who like Hawaiin pizza and those who don't. They'll never be able to agree.

CerebralCortex

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

I am not trying to suggest anything, other than on one hand we have hardline Christians that will take everthing litterally from the bible and not dare question its origin or validity.
On the other hand we have hard line discrediters who will look at the bible in exactly the same way but to the opposite effect....

It's like listening to two idiots!

Right wing Christian : God hates gay people!
Left wing Atheist : Your god hates gay people!

I just find it funny although polar opposites I see ignorance at both ends of the spectrum that are using the same passages to support their argument....

What's more annoying is someone misrepresenting a position so they can point the finger and take the moral high ground. There's one correct way to interpret the bible and it's the reason atheists exist.

endacl

lazygal wrote: »

Its like people who like Hawaiin pizza and those who don't. They'll never be able to agree.

This again?!?

Look. I really don't care what you have on your pizza, once it doesn't come out of a freezer. That's not pizza. That's stodge. Hawaiian or otherwise.

ShowMeTheCash

CerebralCortex wrote: »

What's more annoying is someone misrepresenting a position so they can point the finger and take the moral high ground. There's one correct way to interpret the bible and it's the reason atheists exist.

I maybe taking the moral high ground, but in some cases it is difficult to do anything but this!

There's one correct way to interpret the bible?
And it's the reason atheists exist?

OK thanks for clearing that up, I guess we can all go home now!

lazygal

A frozen Dr Oetker pizza can be a thing of great beauty.

endacl

lazygal wrote: »

A frozen Dr Oetker pizza can be a thing of great beauty.

Can be indeed. The picture on the the box always looks great. Then you open the box and...

Religion is like frozen pizza. Discuss!

SpaceTime

I always turn the 'so how do you know right from wrong' one around with:

So, you only behave 'morally' because you're terrified that some supernatural being will punish you if you misbehave and you're questioning *my* morals!?

ShowMeTheCash

lazygal wrote: »

Its like people who like Hawaiin pizza and those who don't. They'll never be able to agree.

Pineapple is the King of all fruits, it can go with sweet and savory!
Anyone that thinks otherwise is wrong!

ShowMeTheCash

SpaceTime wrote: »

I always turn the 'so how do you know right from wrong' one around with:

So, you only behave 'morally' because you're terrified that some supernatural being will punish you if you misbehave and you're questioning *my* morals!?

I think morals, or the idea of right and wrong come with our intellegence.
As a species we are fairly innovative, we build on the knowledge of others, they only way we could actually do this is by having some kind of social structure in place... Our social structure has evolved over time...

I think after the point we become selfware we then become socially aware... I think morality is a natural evolution of this.

Else we would just be running around with a stick taking things from people.... Just another point to note, we are not the only species on the plannet that demonstrates this behaviour... Apes, are selfaware and usually have a complex social structure.

SebBerkovich

Guys i think we're getting off track with with talking about what fruit to put on pizza.

It's important to start by choosing your base meat, personally i like to go for some ham or chorizo before i can make an informed choice about what fruit/veg to add.

lazygal

SebBerkovich wrote: »

Guys i think we're getting off track with with talking about what fruit to put on pizza.

It's important to start by choosing your base meat, personally i like to go for some ham or chorizo before i can make an informed choice about what fruit/veg to add.

Is this backseat modding??? :eek:
What about non meat pizza?

ShowMeTheCash

lazygal wrote: »

Is this backseat modding??? :eek:
What about non meat pizza?

Non meat?? You could get stoned for that type of blasphemy...

But you want real good pizza a stoned baked pizza.... Now your talking!

seamus

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

If you want to beleive it is madey-uppy, cool your arguement however to why you believe this hold absolutly no more weight than someone that wants to believe it is the written word of god!

Wait, what? I can't believe this statement was allowed go lightly.

All points of view/beliefs are not equal. This is the problem with the modern world. Being "open minded" does not mean that you give everyone's point of view equal weight. The validity of a point of view is determined by the weight of evidence which supports it. You give equal weight to all evidence, not to the views that they support.

If I say that I believe my computer was put together by leprechauns using fairy dust and lucky charms and you say that you believe it was constructed in a factory by Dell employees, does that mean our two beliefs hold equal weight? Of course not, because that would be absurd.

The belief which has more supporting evidence is the one which is more likely to be valid because it is the one which makes the least assumptions.

Thus, the belief that the bible is the written word of God holds far less weight than the belief that the bible is a man-made construct of various origins, some probably with historical roots, others completely fabricated from the air. Because the latter has more evidence to support it.

ShowMeTheCash

seamus wrote: »

Wait, what? I can't believe this statement was allowed go lightly.

All points of view/beliefs are not equal. This is the problem with the modern world. Being "open minded" does not mean that you give everyone's point of view equal weight. The validity of a point of view is determined by the weight of evidence which supports it. You give equal weight to all evidence, not to the views that they support.

If I say that I believe my computer was put together by leprechauns using fairy dust and lucky charms and you say that you believe it was constructed in a factory by Dell employees, does that mean our two beliefs hold equal weight? Of course not, because that would be absurd.

The belief which has more supporting evidence is the one which is more likely to be valid because it is the one which makes the least assumptions.

Thus, the belief that the bible is the written word of God holds far less weight than the belief that the bible is a man-made construct of various origins, some probably with historical roots, others completely fabricated from the air. Because the latter has more evidence to support it.

Well your argument is flawed, you could probably prove that Dell employee's made your PC, however I do not know too many 2000 year old people or anyone that knows anyone that wrote the bible....

If you read back I have already made the point that it is very unlikely that the bible is a true reflection of any real events maybe in part but unlikely in full, that being said if people choose to believe in it, that's their parogative!

The idea of faith or anything Spiritual resides in the "I cannot prove any of this column" my point being no one can really disprove it either...

You also make the statement that "the latter has more evidence to support it."

No it doesn't, you seem to be mixing up the lack of any real evidence as evidence.

Sarky

While I'm glad you found a way to feel superior to both sides, you're, eh, kind of all over the place in doing it.

Pherekydes

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

On the other hand we have hard line discrediters who will look at the bible in exactly the same way but to the opposite effect....

What's a hardline discreditor? If the bible is full of BS then it discredits itself.

Zombrex

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

Well your argument is flawed, you could probably prove that Dell employee's made your PC, however I do not know too many 2000 year old people or anyone that knows anyone that wrote the bible....

If you read back I have already made the point that it is very unlikely that the bible is a true reflection of any real events maybe in part but unlikely in full, that being said if people choose to believe in it, that's their parogative!

The idea of faith or anything Spiritual resides in the "I cannot prove any of this column" my point being no one can really disprove it either...

You also make the statement that "the latter has more evidence to support it."

No it doesn't, you seem to be mixing up the lack of any real evidence as evidence.

If something has no evidence, but people still assert it is true, they have probably made it up.

That is just simple logic. The idea that you cannot disprove it ignores the point that it is a claim being made by someone. That claim has to originate from some where, and the most likely explanation for a claim with no evidence is that it is made up. And simply by virtue of odds made up claims tend to not be true.

ShowMeTheCash

Sarky wrote: »

While I'm glad you found a way to feel superior to both sides, you're, eh, kind of all over the place in doing it.

Having 5 different arguments at once will do that....

And your passive aggressive quip to belittle my points of view are probably no different to my own, so well done and welcome to the club you too are now an @$$#01#!

ShowMeTheCash

Zombrex wrote: »

If something has no evidence, but people still assert it is true, they have probably made it up.

That is just simple logic. The idea that you cannot disprove it ignores the point that it is a claim being made by someone. That claim has to originate from some where, and the most likely explanation for a claim with no evidence is that it is made up. And simply by virtue of odds made up claims tend to not be true.

Well you abviosuly not a scentist!

Usually people have theories... No matter how radical.... Even in science very few are proven so they remain theories, usually at some point in time all one can do is dissprove them....

Also the Bible I doubt is "made up", the bible is a collection of books not just one, there is a lot of evidence to support at least some of the events talked about... It is no more or reliable in say the history of the Peloponnesian war but people still read it and use it as a source depicting the events of around 400BC...

People are saying BS or maddy uppy... What exactly do you think the bible is? Do you think any of the events in the bible happened at all? Or just the parts that show some kind of super natural events?

Sarky

I'm a scientist. Whatever you think you're saying, it's not very scientific.

seamus

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

People are saying BS or maddy uppy... What exactly do you think the bible is? Do you think any of the events in the bible happened at all? Or just the parts that show some kind of super natural events?

Given that the bible proclaims itself in its entirety to be the divine word of God, then simply proving one part of it to be made up completely destroys that proclamation.

"I believe the parts of the bible which haven't been disproven, to be the word of God", or "It's up to you to decide what parts to believe", is just another God of the Gaps argument. You cannot decide that one part of the book is the divine word of God and ignore the parts which clearly cannot be. It's logically inconsistent and basically an admission that you yourself* are just making it up as you go along and picking and choosing things just because you like them.

*By this I mean "one", rather than you personally

kylith

ShowMeTheCash wrote: »

Also the Bible I doubt is "made up", the bible is a collection of books not just one, there is a lot of evidence to support at least some of the events talked about...

Such as?

People are saying BS or maddy uppy... What exactly do you think the bible is? Do you think any of the events in the bible happened at all? Or just the parts that show some kind of super natural events?

I think that any parts of the bible which are not outright fabrications are massively exaggerated. For example, there is some evidence for a flood at about the time Noah might have been around, if he existed, but it certainly wasn't global.

endacl

kylith wrote: »

I think that any parts of the bible which are not outright fabrications are massively exaggerated. For example, there is some evidence for a flood at about the time Noah might have been around, if he existed, but it certainly wasn't global.

Of course, to a bronze age farmer who had never been more than a few miles from where he was born and had no conception of the size of the globe, or even that he lived on a globe, it might have seemed pretty global...

lazygal

kylith wrote: »

I think that any parts of the bible which are not outright fabrications are massively exaggerated. For example, there is some evidence for a flood at about the time Noah might have been around, if he existed, but it certainly wasn't global.

That talking serpant sounds a bit fishy too.