Atheism

@glitterbag,

glitterbag wrote:

Gluttony is considered one of the seven deadly sins.

Indeed. The seven deadly sins, also known as the capital vices, or cardinal sins, is a grouping and classification of vices within Christian teachings, although it does not appear explicitly in the Bible. (source: wiki)

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

In the Catholic Church (EST, AD 32) Cardinal sins are not defined at all as the 7 deadly sins....it's very different. Perhaps in a language other than Latin...I don't know.....I doubt it.

1 Reply

@glitterbag,

Scripture, as always, is a bit of a mess there. The 7 deadly sins are a post-factum categorization by the Catholic Church. I'm sure there are other similar (or not so similar) categorizations of the same scripture.

There are also several versions of the 10 commandments in the Bible, by the way. I guess consistency was not Moses' forte.

1 Reply

@Olivier5,

To answer Sturgis' original question, atheists tend to believe in science, so if the science of nutrition says that such and such food can be bad for you in excessive doses, then I suppose quite a few atheists will tend to follow the advice.

0 Replies

@chai2,

Quote:

I don't think most Christians even look at the platter.

True in a way. They accept the 'curated' version preached from the pulpit. What is preached is actually the words, but rarely the context, and always 'cherry picked'.

And yes, I have seen people who I am sure were internally screaming as they figuratively left the room when on those rare occasions that someone gave them the unfiltered truth of what was in the Bible. They ran in fear that they could not make sense of it all, so they 'ran'. Most of the rest sat uncomfortably in their pews pretending that they didn’t hear anything. I left organized religion the last time I saw this happen.

0 Replies

https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-IlqmaGHE4LY/Ul1qwb0tLbI/AAAAAAAAOP0/tUnb_j29G9I/s400/atheist-evangelism-pamphlet.jpg

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

But myself I can't deceive
I know it's only make believe

My one and only prayer was that some day you're there,
My hopes, my dreams come true, my one and only you.
No one would ever know how much I'd love you so
My only prayer would be someday you're there for me
But it's all only make believe.

1 Reply

@laughoutlood,

If these lyrics are referring to whether there is a God or not, do you agree that one can only GUESS that it is only make believe.Just as a believer can’t prove that their is a God,similarly,an atheist can’t prove that there isn’t.Both are just belief systems at the end of the day.Neither side of the debate has any burden on them to provide proof of anything.

2 Replies

@Jasper10,

I guess you’ve never heard of burden of proof.

I believe that magical bison are responsible for the fluctuations in the stock market.

Prove to me that’s not the case.
You don’t have to.

I have to prove it’s the bison.

2 Replies

@chai2,

Btw, why is it that so many people who want you to agree with at best a shaky proposition seem to have taken a Dale Carnegie sales seminar?

0 Replies

@chai2,

I am merely pointing out that the problem with dualism is that “burden of proof” works both ways.It isn’t just a case that a believer has to provide evidence for a God.An unbeliever needs to provide evidence that there isn’t.There is no burden on either party to provide any evidence.

1 Reply

@Jasper10,

Jasper10 wrote:

If these lyrics are referring to whether there is a God or not, do you agree that one can only GUESS that it is only make believe.Just as a believer can’t prove that their is a God,similarly,an atheist can’t prove that there isn’t.Both are just belief systems at the end of the day.Neither side of the debate has any burden on them to provide proof of anything.

NOW YOU ARE GETTING CLOSER TO THE TRUTH. GOOD FOR YOU.

But...you miss the boat a bit on the "burden of proof" thing.

Anyone making an assertion...bear the burden of proof for the assertion.

On the issue of whether there are any gods or not....

...neither can meet the burden, not that there is no burden.

1 Reply

@Jasper10,

Jasper10 wrote:

I am merely pointing out that the problem with dualism is that “burden of proof” works both ways.It isn’t just a case that a believer has to provide evidence for a God.An unbeliever needs to provide evidence that there isn’t.There is no burden on either party to provide any evidence.

That is not the way things work.

If a person asserts there is a GOD...that person bears the burden of proof for the god.

Stop using the "believe" and you will see it.

Not everyone who asks for proof of the assertion, "There is a GOD" is saying "there are no gods." Some are just saying, "Okay, you asserted there is a god...now, prove it."

1 Reply

An assertion that there is no god from an atheist is almost always in reaction to deists and agnostics pushing their belief on atheists. In general an atheist does not go around saying there is no god, because it's not necessary, like noticing butterflies in the landscape it's not necessary to point it out. Let a believer come along the first thing they do is not tolerate this lack of belief. It's human nature to strike back because those who believe including those who guess they might believe are driven nuts by the thought somebody may not share their belief. And once a Frank Apisa gets started he has more fervor than a Baptist preacher in a Sunday sermon to prevent an atheist from being an atheist. Get a new shtick, dude.

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Nobody can prove there is or isn’t a God..one can only HOPE that there is or isn’t.There is no burden therefore on anyone to prove either way whether there is or isn’t.

2 Replies

@Jasper10,

If you make an assertion, the burden of proof is yours.
What do you not understand about that?

Why are you making the idea about the existence of a god exempt from this?

You assert their is a god, it’s your thing to prove.
Atheists in general are not asserting there is no god, just that there’s no evidence in one.

Hope has nothing to do with it, and as far as faith, see my signature line below.

Funny how many believers, in trying to prove themselves, have to jump through so many hoops.
While the atheist just keeps asking for proof that can be tested and verified.

2 Replies

@chai2,

Hope has got everything to do with it if neither you or I or anyone else for that matter can prove one way or the other whether there is a God or not.

1 Reply

@chai2,

As I have tried to say, the warrior agnostics are the same as the deists. It kills their souls that we can't accept their belief systems.

1 Reply

@Jasper10,

Why do you keep ignoring the word assert?

Pay attention

Assert
Assert
Assert

You assert something exists. You have the burden of proof.

I hope you understand that now, but in no way do I assert you do.
But that hope is unfounded, because you’re too busy avoiding the point.

0 Replies

@Jasper10,

Jasper10 wrote:

Nobody can prove there is or isn’t a God..one can only HOPE that there is or isn’t.There is no burden therefore on anyone to prove either way whether there is or isn’t.

Nonsense. When an assertion is made...a burden of proof ensues.

If you assert there are no gods...as EdgarBlythe has on many occasions...there is a burden of proof that ensues. It is a burden that cannot be met, so the assertion ought never to be made.

If you assert there is a god...as you have done on many occasions...there is a burden of proof that ensues. It is a burden that cannot be met, so the assertion ought never to be made.

Meet that burden...or don't. That is your prerogative. But if you value integrity and truthfulness...better not to make the assertion.

And if that god of yours values truth and integrity...you really should stop using "I believe there is a god" when you actually mean "I guess there is a god"...just in case your guess happens to be correct.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know