Oneesanismywaifu said: I don't know about atheist parents, as I said, my family is Catholic. When I told my mom I don't believe in god she called me a "satanist". Give her a fucking break then. According to Christianity anyone who is not with God, is with Satan by default. You are the intolerant one here for refusing to understand your own mother. I just feel bad for parents who have kids who turn out to be Atheists, who then go on to treat their own parents like shit. |
| Shoot first, think never. |
Open-Dice said: Being with Satan does not default to being a "Satanist" though seeing as how he doesn't really cult Satan, so she misused the term, but other than that, she has all the reasons to be extremely worried.Oneesanismywaifu said: Give her a fucking break then. According to Christianity anyone who is not with God, is with Satan by default. You are the intolerant one here for refusing to understand your own mother.I don't know about atheist parents, as I said, my family is Catholic. When I told my mom I don't believe in god she called me a "satanist". |
 |
Oneesanismywaifu said: Good for you. Years ago, I went to catechism classes, and I did The First Communion, just because my family and other people around me told me that's the right thing, but it was when I grew up that I was able to think by myself if that was the path I wanted to follow. Riki_Oh said: Atheist parents can be guilty of the same thing. And it seems unrealistic to teach a young child every religion and belief in existence. I don't think religious families force beliefs on their children as much as anti-thiests claim, i think they're providing them with a set of values that they think is best for their child I don't know about atheist parents, as I said, my family is Catholic. When I told my mom I don't believe in god she called me a "satanist". I know that not all parents are like that, I'm just giving my point of view, I'm not telling you that you shouldn't believe in god, I will be just happy if most parents give their children the opportunity to choose. I think pushing your child in a certain direction is okay, but i agree demonizing them if they decide it's not for them is wrong. |
Oneesanismywaifu said: Open-Dice said: Give her a fucking break then. According to Christianity anyone who is not with God, is with Satan by default. You are the intolerant one here for refusing to understand your own mother. I just feel bad for parents who have kids who turn out to be Atheists, who then go on to treat their own parents like shit. I don't know where did you get that I treat her like shit, don't make assumptions out of nowhere. "According to Christianity anyone who is not with God, is with Satan by default." That's a pretty ignorant thought btw since Satan in Christianity is related to evil, so you're telling me that people that's not with god are evil. Everyone of us has done evil... NO ONE, not even Christians are perfect. The difference between you and me is that I admit it. |
| Shoot first, think never. |
Oneesanismywaifu said: There's a clear difference between atheism and satanism. Satanism isn't really a concept that exists biblically, so he has a right to be annoyed by his mothers hysterical reaction. Maybe you should explain what he did to treat his parents like shit, all he said is that he told his mom he didn't believe a god. Does that count in your book? Should he lie to his parents instead?Open-Dice said: Everyone of us has done evil... NO ONE, not even Christians are perfect. The difference between you and me is that I admit it. Sure, everyone has done evil, I do not deny that. |
Open-Dice said: Going to bed soon but I'm gonna throw out a quick short reply cos your astounding ignorance is just too painful looking to ignore, I feel I have to help you as a neighbor. Wow, I post three sentences and you form an entire opinion and make incredible assumptions about me despite literally not knowing anything about me. I'll respond to your post piece by piece. Open-Dice said: What a narrow world view you have then. Basing your entire world view on "science" and then acting smug and superior is one of the most sheep minded, illogical and faith based* things you can do, and makes me see you as one of them fat reddit neckbeards (your pic doesn't help). First of all, using the term "sheep minded" in a serious manner really just makes you look like a conspiracy theorist. (Also, the neckbeard comment was un-necessary and makes you sound like an internet troll.) Second, who said I was acting smug or superior? I have my opinions and you have yours, and I agree that a belief on science, based on facts or not, is still based on faith. Open-Dice said: Here are two reasons why your world view is extraordinarily narrow. First, you cannot get all the science details, it's just impossible. All the information you have is filtered to you through other people (unless you test EVERYTHING), who are almost always complete strangers. And your mommy should have told you not to trust strangers!! Even if we assume those people are honest which they haven't met their burden of proof to prove so, there is STILL the fact that they could just be mistaken... They are human beings after all and they aren't any smarter than the rest of us. Either way, the "evidence" you have is a distorted, sloppy mess that no serious intellectual could possibly take seriously (unless they were dishonest, delusional liars, Dawkins). This is why science has "laws" and not "facts", and it's why putting your trust in scientific evidence is still a form of belief. However, do not mistake me, I absolutely do NOT trust all of the scientific studies that have been done. Many experiments are fueled by bias, and can be done in a certain way to make a certain theory seem reasonable. That being said, there is much science that has been tested thousands upon thousands of times with the same result each time. These are very easy to believe in and make logical sense within the world that we live in. Open-Dice said: The second reason is much more grave for your theory, and that's that Science cannot support itself. It cannot stand on its own legs. In order to prove something is correct, you need "evidence". So, how do you prove evidence is correct? With more evidence? If the answer is yes then you are using circular reasoning, science doesn't work. If the answer is no then you are admitting that there is no logical justification for what you are believing in. Maybe there's a third answer, if so I'd like to here it. I've put this problem to Atheists hundreds of time online and not a single one was able to give me a good answer without resorting to blubbering adhoms or dismissing me as dishonest and then ending the convo. Well, I can kind of see what you're talking about. I feel like this is similar to something like Plato's theory of forms. That theory basically says that we are unable to prove that the world around us, and everything within it, is actually existent. Plato states that perhaps the entire world is actually simply a construct within our own minds, and that we've essentially been hallucinating since the day we were born. (Think of it kind of like The Matrix, but without the being hooked up to a computer part.) It's an interesting theory, but one that is not able to be tested for or proven. Open-Dice said: Another thing, I bet you thought it would be smart to say something like "it would be a great world to live in" without religion. That's not a very smart thing to say. One of the most widely used "GOTCHA"s by Atheists is something like this (some nerd used it earlier in this thread too, guy sounded like a 12 year old): Religion has been responsible for more deaths than anything else in history. Here is the problem and it relates to the burden of proof which Atheists commonly misunderstand. The thing that Atheists cannot prove, even tho they dishonestly act like it's a certain fact, is that these events were religiously inspired. So, according to them, the Crusades were inspired by God. The same God who said "thou shalt not kill". The same one who taught about being a good Samaritan and helping the poor. In reality, these things were inspired by people pretending to be religious, then using their power to manipulate the ignorant masses who were uneducated at the time about the Bible because they couldn't read. Well, sure. I'm sure those people were not "actually" religious, but what does that actually mean? They were still inspired by religion to kill, yes? People who are against gay marriage and other forms of equal rights, were inspired by the bible to be against it, yes? At some point saying they're "not religious", is just arguing semantics. However, I will grant you this: Perhaps the inspiration for those things could have came from anywhere for those people, and perhaps it is simply wired within their being to be terrible people. My argument for why the world would be a better place without religion isn't based on the theory that it would lessen violence, though. No, no. I'm simply anti-religion because I prefer that more people would think logically, with reason and rationale. Currently, not enough people do, instead choosing to blindly follow the rules in a book, because of the promise of a reward. Open-Dice said: I posit that it is much more reasonable to believe that these people (Stalin, Mao, whoever caused the crusades) were in fact Atheists. A common claim from Atheists is that all priests are pedophile Atheists taking advantage of the stupid. Well I'd say that's partially true: there are pedophile Atheists in the CATHOLIC church committing atrocities, abusing people every day. But as soon as they smugly say "Atheists are controlling you sheeple!" they immediately turn it around and use pedophile priests as evidence that Christianity is evil. That's a fucking double standard and anyone who uses that argument after reading this is just completely dishonest and ignorant. Christianity is not inherently evil, I agree with you there, but it can inspire evil in people just like it can inspire good. Saying that the ones who became evil have suddenly become "atheist" is kind of insulting, though, and inaccurate. They may not follow their faith anymore, but that doesn't mean they've stopped believing in it. They're simply misguided individuals. Also, holy shit, please, please please, stop using the world "sheeple" in a serious manner, it discredits your entire argument and makes you look like a joke. Open-Dice said: To claim Hitler was following the orders of God (Hitler citing the Bible is not evidence of anything; I can cite the quran and that doesn't make me a Mooslim) when 99% of your country, likely your family and friends are Christians, is offensive and insulting beyond belief. If you truly think Hitler was following the orders of God, don't you think Christians of today would be a little more nasty (...nazi?) than they actually are? Christians tend to be the nicest people btw, just check any website for proof. Yep, it's much more likely that they DON'T care what God thinks. That's just how it is. Do you think if Jim Kong Un of North Korea thought for one second that God was watching him and murder was a sin, that he would kill his uncle for beating him at basketball (or whatever silly reason it was)? No, it is much more likely that they don't care what Christianity teaches and more likely that they see themselves as God. Yes, both of those men are insane. I haven't even heard about anyone saying that they were "following the orders of god"... and I didn't even claim that myself. So, uh, why are you having this conversation with me? Open-Dice said: I can also explain why and how the crusades, witch hunts, book burnings etc were caused by Atheism if anyone wants the full story. Please, don't, I've read enough for one day. Open-Dice said: Also to the people saying babies born are Atheists, wrong. Babies are born as blank slates. Atheism = There ain't no God. So it is more accurate to describe them as Christians, as a self professed former Atheist. Even if what you said was true, it's ilrevent. Who cares what babies believe? That's why the Bible exists. no, it's not accurate to describe babies as Christians... or atheists. Like you said, they're a blank slate, free to choose to believe whatever they'd like, as they grow up, through their own experiences and ideas. Open-Dice said: You know, I may have well been an Atheist when I was a clueless, ignorant baby. I have since grown up. With a patronizing statement like that one, I have some serious doubts about your maturity. Anyway, as we've already discussed, babies are not atheists, so this final point of yours is entirely inaccurate (despite also being somewhat insulting). Open-Dice said: God bless. Have a lovely day. ^_^ Open-Dice said: *faith based = According to Atheists, this means belief without evidence and I was using it in that sense. In reality that's just a slanderized definition of faith which means trust, "putting your faith into" etc, for some reason it has been given negative conotations which I guess is exactly what Atheists wanted, doesn't mean it isn't dishonest tho. I don't think it has a negative connotation, and I also don't think atheists are out to get you. Look, I agree that there's many people out there, spewing a bunch of quotes that they heard on the internet to make themselves seem important and in turn making atheism look bad. Hell, many of their talking points I don't even agree with. However, the fact that you randomly typed up this whole rant to me, despite not really even being provoked really tells me something about your character. It tells me that you're angry and lashing out at anybody. You're lashing out at me, because you claim that I'm the same as every other atheist on the planet, and that you already know all of my views and opinions. Instead of treating me like an individual, you're treating me like a group that you hate, and you're projecting that hate onto me... and, well, that's just not very nice. :/ I really think that you need to look deep down inside yourself and think... "is this worth the effort?" Why don't you spend your time spreading peace & joy? I think it would be much more beneficial than us sitting here arguing on an internet forum on an anime website. |
vigorousjammerJul 4, 2015 9:36 PM
::End of Transmission:: What have I been watching? Click here and find out on my viewing blog, "Vigorous Viewing" |
Aostonishing said: Cant you atheists see that something cant come up without something creating it. You cant create a grain of sand without nothing. That's more than enough to answer your questions. Energy cannot be destroyed or created it just changes form, the universe was in a different form devoid of all current logic that we can comprehend but after the expansion of space and time the LAWS took shape and thus our reality is born. A higher entity must be living OUTSIDE those laws that we cant prove using our LOGIC. Therefor anything outside of our reality's logic should be just that, illogical. |
Dezra said: Everything in the universe has a beginning and end, even energy. Try again.Aostonishing said: Cant you atheists see that something cant come up without something creating it. You cant create a grain of sand without nothing. That's more than enough to answer your questions. Energy cannot be destroyed or created it just changes form, the universe was in a different form devoid of all current logic that we can comprehend but after the expansion of space and time the LAWS took shape and thus our reality is born. A higher entity must be living OUTSIDE those laws that we cant prove using our LOGIC. Therefor anything outside of our reality's logic should be just that, illogical. |
| Sadly, I don't think religion will ever die. Good people will continue to fall for the scams to have their own hearts comforted. Let's face it, most people can't accept the fact that their super awesome mom/girlfriend/whatever that was butchered in cold blood or died of cancer is rotting and will never experience life or love again. People believe very hard that they are with Jesus/Odin or whatever, in a much better place. You can't really convert someone like that, because to give up on their religion is to give up on their loved one |
 |
IWubYou said: Dezra said: Everything in the universe has a beginning and end, even energy. Try again.Energy cannot be destroyed or created it just changes form, the universe was in a different form devoid of all current logic that we can comprehend but after the expansion of space and time the LAWS took shape and thus our reality is born. A higher entity must be living OUTSIDE those laws that we cant prove using our LOGIC. Therefor anything outside of our reality's logic should be just that, illogical. You mean when the universe invented time? On-wards the expansion of TIME and SPACE? Time as you know is just another dimensional layer to our universe. After a civilization has reached the technological advancements able to perceive and influence the events outside of time is when they could have ultimately created our existence but i do not think any human idea or thought or opinion is the truth unless its an outside element like for instance a star, as we know stars explode and their guts spew throughout the universe and we can trace back our elements like carbon and hydrogen back to those said stars. I do not doubt the idea of higher beings i just doubt whatever religions existing today are copies because they were not the original thinkers so their message has been personified with whoever the leaders of the time wanted to add to the message. That's why as i said its more logical to believe in Hinduism or any religion 2 thousand years earlier to at-least assure ones faith as being more authentic. |
DezraJul 4, 2015 10:48 PM
| Imagine responding to open dice seriously. |
PoeticJustice said: nahEducation. People who are more educated, are less likely to be religious. we hav examples in history that are well educated and still are religious like Fr. Gregor Mendel and Fr. Georges Lemaitre |
| Twitter and it's consequences had been a disaster for the human race |
Deus-Vult said: PoeticJustice said: nahEducation. People who are more educated, are less likely to be religious. we hav examples in history that are well educated and still are religious like Fr. Gregor Mendel and Fr. Georges Lemaitre He said that educated people are less likely to be religious, not that an educated person can't be religious. |
 |
ixra said: oooohhhhhh Deus-Vult said: nah we hav examples in history that are well educated and still are religious like Fr. Gregor Mendel and Fr. Georges Lemaitre He said that educated people are less likely to be religious, not that an educated person can't be religious. thanks for correcting me :3 my mistake |
| Twitter and it's consequences had been a disaster for the human race |
More topics from this board
» how do you guys feel about summer?JessicaKari - 10 hours ago |
22 |
by LenRea
»»
1 minute ago |
|
» How much IQ points do you lose when you interact with people in real life?LenRea - 3 minutes ago |
0 |
by LenRea
»»
3 minutes ago |
|
» how to get into world history?FruitPunchBaka - May 17 |
25 |
by traed
»»
1 hour ago |
|
» Most painful experience in your lifeST63LTH - 9 hours ago |
11 |
by vasipi4946
»»
2 hours ago |
|
Poll: » Do you think the revolution of robots, machines and AIs will happen this century?Absurdo_N - 11 hours ago |
16 |
by Zettaiken
»»
2 hours ago |