If everyone was atheist...

[Chavi]

Looking at the first bolded section.

I attended a Maths colloqium by your logic Maths is a "religion".

You are very, very smart. That's precisely my definition

Now for the next.

I am not a spiritual person.

One hypothesis suggesting why some people see ghosts in 'haunted' houses is that there may be a high level of carbon monoxide that is causing hallucinations. As for the soul, a perfectly normal person can get brain damage and never be the same person again.

If it is any consolation I do believe that life exists in other parts of the universe and I wouldn't be surprised if they also believed in some god. More to the point, how could there not be anything else than us? It would be an awful waste of space (contact).

If the atheist is prepared to believe in supernatural agents that can't be proven, rationally discerned or that don't comply with the scientific method - why is the belief in an omnipotent, all-knowing force any less of a taboo is the his mind?

If you are truly in a quest to find the absolute truth on God's existence, why being with presumption that He doesn't exist? That would place the onus on you to prove his non-existence (in the same way that someone attempting to convert you must first prove His existence). If you admire the scientific method as a means of developing a logical model for the origin of the universe, the natural place to start would be from an agnostic position, rather than an atheist one. Or a religious one for that matter. AS the French model states - guilty until proven innocnet, or to paraphrase and keep in with the religious status quo - God exists until proof is found otherwise.

I actually agree. I think that atheism is essentially a religious belief and can't really be backed up that well. Atheism isn't a lack of belief, it is a strong belief that no god exists. That being said, I really do find it grating when people say religion is stupid and then have really irrational superstitions and the like. Most people believe in something, and atheists can be as spiritual and irrational as religious people.

They also have a tendency to declare themselves everyone's moral compass, to instantly reject all positions they disagree with, and to bask in a false sense of complacency and a belief that they won't screw everything up like the church did during the Dark ages.

Religious dogma at it's worst.

[QuantumJG]

Looking at the first bolded section.

I attended a Maths colloqium by your logic Maths is a "religion".

You are very, very smart. That's precisely my definition

Now for the next.

I am not a spiritual person.

One hypothesis suggesting why some people see ghosts in 'haunted' houses is that there may be a high level of carbon monoxide that is causing hallucinations. As for the soul, a perfectly normal person can get brain damage and never be the same person again.

If it is any consolation I do believe that life exists in other parts of the universe and I wouldn't be surprised if they also believed in some god. More to the point, how could there not be anything else than us? It would be an awful waste of space (contact).

If the atheist is prepared to believe in supernatural agents that can't be proven, rationally discerned or that don't comply with the scientific method - why is the belief in an omnipotent, all-knowing force any less of a taboo is the his mind?

If you are truly in a quest to find the absolute truth on God's existence, why being with presumption that He doesn't exist? That would place the onus on you to prove his non-existence (in the same way that someone attempting to convert you must first prove His existence). If you admire the scientific method as a means of developing a logical model for the origin of the universe, the natural place to start would be from an agnostic position, rather than an atheist one. Or a religious one for that matter. AS the French model states - guilty until proven innocnet, or to paraphrase and keep in with the religious status quo - God exists until proof is found otherwise.

I actually agree. I think that atheism is essentially a religious belief and can't really be backed up that well. Atheism isn't a lack of belief, it is a strong belief that no god exists. That being said, I really do find it grating when people say religion is stupid and then have really irrational superstitions and the like. Most people believe in something, and atheists can be as spiritual and irrational as religious people.

That is why atheism is split into two areas, weak atheists (I don't believe in god) and strong atheism (I say there is no god).

I personally consider myself a weak atheist who just doesn't like people who use their religion as a means to doing stuff that otherwise seems out of the ordinary or potentially dangerous. Do I have friends that are religious? Yes. Does that bother me? No. Would it if they forced it upon me? Definitely.

By the way, I know some Jewish people pretty well, having said that, they aren't nearly as self-righteous as Yitzi or Chavi. It seems that the problem is more the person than their religion.

[Chavi]

Looking at the first bolded section.

I attended a Maths colloqium by your logic Maths is a "religion".

You are very, very smart. That's precisely my definition

Now for the next.

I am not a spiritual person.

One hypothesis suggesting why some people see ghosts in 'haunted' houses is that there may be a high level of carbon monoxide that is causing hallucinations. As for the soul, a perfectly normal person can get brain damage and never be the same person again.

If it is any consolation I do believe that life exists in other parts of the universe and I wouldn't be surprised if they also believed in some god. More to the point, how could there not be anything else than us? It would be an awful waste of space (contact).

If the atheist is prepared to believe in supernatural agents that can't be proven, rationally discerned or that don't comply with the scientific method - why is the belief in an omnipotent, all-knowing force any less of a taboo is the his mind?

If you are truly in a quest to find the absolute truth on God's existence, why being with presumption that He doesn't exist? That would place the onus on you to prove his non-existence (in the same way that someone attempting to convert you must first prove His existence). If you admire the scientific method as a means of developing a logical model for the origin of the universe, the natural place to start would be from an agnostic position, rather than an atheist one. Or a religious one for that matter. AS the French model states - guilty until proven innocnet, or to paraphrase and keep in with the religious status quo - God exists until proof is found otherwise.

I actually agree. I think that atheism is essentially a religious belief and can't really be backed up that well. Atheism isn't a lack of belief, it is a strong belief that no god exists. That being said, I really do find it grating when people say religion is stupid and then have really irrational superstitions and the like. Most people believe in something, and atheists can be as spiritual and irrational as religious people.

That is why atheism is split into two areas, weak atheists (I don't believe in god) and strong atheism (I say there is no god).

I personally consider myself a weak atheist who just doesn't like people who use their religion as a means to doing stuff that otherwise seems out of the ordinary or potentially dangerous. Do I have friends that are religious? Yes. Does that bother me? No. Would it if they forced it upon me? Definitely.

that's weak.

[QuantumJG]

Looking at the first bolded section.

I attended a Maths colloqium by your logic Maths is a "religion".

You are very, very smart. That's precisely my definition

Now for the next.

I am not a spiritual person.

One hypothesis suggesting why some people see ghosts in 'haunted' houses is that there may be a high level of carbon monoxide that is causing hallucinations. As for the soul, a perfectly normal person can get brain damage and never be the same person again.

If it is any consolation I do believe that life exists in other parts of the universe and I wouldn't be surprised if they also believed in some god. More to the point, how could there not be anything else than us? It would be an awful waste of space (contact).

If the atheist is prepared to believe in supernatural agents that can't be proven, rationally discerned or that don't comply with the scientific method - why is the belief in an omnipotent, all-knowing force any less of a taboo is the his mind?

If you are truly in a quest to find the absolute truth on God's existence, why being with presumption that He doesn't exist? That would place the onus on you to prove his non-existence (in the same way that someone attempting to convert you must first prove His existence). If you admire the scientific method as a means of developing a logical model for the origin of the universe, the natural place to start would be from an agnostic position, rather than an atheist one. Or a religious one for that matter. AS the French model states - guilty until proven innocnet, or to paraphrase and keep in with the religious status quo - God exists until proof is found otherwise.

I actually agree. I think that atheism is essentially a religious belief and can't really be backed up that well. Atheism isn't a lack of belief, it is a strong belief that no god exists. That being said, I really do find it grating when people say religion is stupid and then have really irrational superstitions and the like. Most people believe in something, and atheists can be as spiritual and irrational as religious people.

That is why atheism is split into two areas, weak atheists (I don't believe in god) and strong atheism (I say there is no god).

I personally consider myself a weak atheist who just doesn't like people who use their religion as a means to doing stuff that otherwise seems out of the ordinary or potentially dangerous. Do I have friends that are religious? Yes. Does that bother me? No. Would it if they forced it upon me? Definitely.

that's weak.

Pun intended?

[Spreadbury]

If you are truly in a quest to find the absolute truth on God's existence, why being with presumption that He doesn't exist? That would place the onus on you to prove his non-existence (in the same way that someone attempting to convert you must first prove His existence). If you admire the scientific method as a means of developing a logical model for the origin of the universe, the natural place to start would be from an agnostic position, rather than an atheist one. Or a religious one for that matter. AS the French model states - guilty until proven innocnet, or to paraphrase and keep in with the religious status quo - God exists until proof is found otherwise.

I have posted this before, and seeing this post, I see the need to post it again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wV_REEdvxo

[Chavi]

If you are truly in a quest to find the absolute truth on God's existence, why being with presumption that He doesn't exist? That would place the onus on you to prove his non-existence (in the same way that someone attempting to convert you must first prove His existence). If you admire the scientific method as a means of developing a logical model for the origin of the universe, the natural place to start would be from an agnostic position, rather than an atheist one. Or a religious one for that matter. AS the French model states - guilty until proven innocnet, or to paraphrase and keep in with the religious status quo - God exists until proof is found otherwise.

I have posted this before, and seeing this post, I see the need to post it again.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wV_REEdvxo

Very humorous video. It just doesn't account for the fact that we are predisposed to to believe in irrational things (which mayor may not be true). We are conditioned from a young age to believe certain truisms or accept illogical statements (Santa climbs through your chimney, the tooth fairy will give you $2 tonight). The simple fact is therefore that religion is our status quo, so it is the starting base for every argument on faith, and it is the reality that you must contend with first prior to accepting or discarding other positions.

What I should add (the video covers everything very logically), is that faith is in most cases, is based on factors other that logic. It's just that: faith, belief. It defies reason. This is why you will probably not succeed in convincing someone to discard their religion based on facts alone. Faith transcends logic.

[Spreadbury]

I just watched this, and found it rather interesting (just thought i'd share):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNDZb0KtJDk

[letsride]

back it up with examples.

Ironic how you always insist for something to be reliable it needs evidence, yet you believe a religion that states the world was made 4000~ years ago.

[Chavi]

back it up with examples.

Ironic how you always insist for something to be reliable it needs evidence, yet you believe a religion that states the world was made 4000~ years ago.

You have no idea what I believe, you can only guess.

On a side note, if you want a scientific explanation to reconcile the universe's age of 13 billion years with the ~5770 years enunciated by biblical texts, check out:
"The science of God" http://www.amazon.com/Science-God-Convergence-Scientific-Biblical/dp/076790303X
The physics and maths behind it is relativistic, Einstein, Minkowski and bateman (if you can handle them). The basic premise is that time becomes a vector quantity as the universe stretches, thus making Earth time, in effect relative to the movement of space-time in physical centre of the universe (big-bang origin). Just like with a rubber band, the local cluster (incl the milky way galaxy) moves father apart from other elements within the universe, and in doing so, our time and physical reality morphs.

[letsride]

Do you agree that Religion was made by MAN in an era that wouldn't fit in today's world?
How long have people been predicting the Messiah is coming?

Why can't evolution and God co-exist? why does it have to be one or the other?

[Chavi]

Do you agree that Religion was made by MAN in an era that wouldn't fit in today's world?
How long have people been predicting the Messiah is coming?

Why can't evolution and God co-exist? why does it have to be one or the other?

1. In the non-religious community that question is widely disputed. Some scholars claim multiple-authorship for biblical texts (i.e. man made), some maintain that the bible (5 books of Moses) is the word of God and the later Prophets and Writings that make up the Old testament (bible) are written by man. A further group claims that the entire bible was divinely inspired and written by man. A necessary presumption of all monotheistic faiths is that the bible is the word of God. Pure and simple. The debate continues, and my perspective is irrelevant for the purposes of your argument

2. The fact that the Messiah hasn't appeared yet is not conclusive proof that he doesn't exist. You can only speculate either way.

3. Who stated evolution and God can't co exist? Surely if a being is omnipotent and almighty, He can accommodate any form of biological evolution - regardless of how literally you interpret religious texts.

Now a question for you: If you were to meet 3 Atheists and all of them were snobs, could you conclusively assume the corollary that all Atheists are snobs?

[letsride]

still about the snob comment?
I was relating to the fact that your school is so exclusive, ie belief the same faith/ most students are well off.
How would I know? i spent 3 years at sholom Aleichem and half a year @ yeshivah before moving to public schools.   

[Chavi]

still about the snob comment?
I was relating to the fact that your school is so exclusive, ie belief the same faith/ most students are well off.
How would I know? i spent 3 years at sholom Aleichem and half a year @ yeshivah before moving to public schools.  

And your personal bad experience makes you an expert on the entire faith-based education system in Melbourne.
I thought you had a vendetta against religion. Now I see that you are purely shallow.

[Spreadbury]

*sigh* Please don't take the thread to a point where it will be locked

[letsride]

still about the snob comment?
I was relating to the fact that your school is so exclusive, ie belief the same faith/ most students are well off.
How would I know? i spent 3 years at sholom Aleichem and half a year @ yeshivah before moving to public schools.   

And your personal bad experience makes you an expert on the entire faith-based education system in Melbourne.
I thought you had a vendetta against religion. Now I see that you are purely shallow.

I was actually raised atheist, except upon coming to Australia and renting a cheap flat, those schools where the only ones available. I'm shallow? lmao, I'm sorry but when teachers tried to explain to me the world was made 4000~ years ago, jews built the pyramids as slaves, Noah's Ark and the messiah, i constantly lol'd. surprisingly there were quite a few kids @ sholom who were christian/athiest at the time aswell.
What's wrong with living by your experiences? explain to me why you have this vendetta against muslims then? do you even have any muslim friends? no. you're surrounded by your kind. you're the shallow person here.