92
   

Atheists... Your life is pointless

 
 
fresco
 
  1  
Wed 12 Sep, 2012 08:36 am
@spendius,
Quote:
Not only is there no God, but try getting a plumber Sundays.


Woody Allen.
0 Replies
 
Foofie
 
  1  
Wed 12 Sep, 2012 11:08 am
@Frank Apisa,
Frank Apisa wrote:

Thank you for that information, Foofie. And that sounds reasonable for kids of age 10 or 13.

If I may, a question:

Quote:
IQ is a measure of precociousness. Meaning if a ten year old scores the average score of 13 year olds, 10 is divided into 13, and moving over the decimal place gives us a 130 IQ. It just means that this ten year old thinks like the average 13 year old. Well, the average 13 year old is not usually a genius, but usually smarter than a ten year old. The assumption is that a ten year old that scores the test like a 13 year old will continue to accumulate knowledge at a precocious rate, and since schooling is a "race," can achieve success in school, in the alloted time.



What happens when we have a 20 year old person scoring a 140? How about a 40 year old scoring a 180?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient

My explanation was an approach likely for mass consumption understanding. It is not the official way to calculate. Plus, there are many controversies.

spendius
 
  1  
Wed 12 Sep, 2012 12:53 pm
@Foofie,
It might be worth noting that it is impossible to increase intelligence. But it is possible to delude people that it is. There is a wide range of techniques available to achieve the mirage and because there is a popular demand for it, for various reasons, there are a large number of business organisations catering for it.

This explains why there is such a large number of people who are far more intelligent than the average. From my personal experience I would say about 95% of the population.

Anybody who wishes to feel that they are the owners of an enhanced intelligence is well advised to imitate those who have proved themselves to be in that group as they will be marking the tests.
spendius
 
  1  
Wed 12 Sep, 2012 01:53 pm
@spendius,
Actually Foof, those of us of average intelligence are starting to get a little protective of our uncommonness. Not to say a touch snooty about it.

I don't suppose Stan Laurel would be snooty though is because he needed three meals a day and Oliver obviously had a decent larder.
0 Replies
 
Dopey goat
 
  1  
Sun 7 Oct, 2012 04:26 pm
@John Creasy,
I still feel good about myself for doing something kind, I don't associate it with god or any other deity I truly believe I'm a good person and being kind is a reward in itself if you do good acts exclusively in the name if a god are you actually good or are you just covering your own ass
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Sun 7 Oct, 2012 04:37 pm
@ Dopey goat,
There were always good and bad humans before the christian religion took over this planet. Good deeds are good deeds, and it is not based on crediting religion for them, on the same token that bad deeds are not based on religion. It's based on human nature. Both have happened with our without religion, and it will continue on regardless of any religious belief.
spendius
 
  1  
Sun 7 Oct, 2012 05:09 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Do you know how bad the bad humans were before Christianity? Being bad was not even considered bad in those days. Your concept of bad is entirely conditioned by Christianity you silly old fathead.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Sun 7 Oct, 2012 05:12 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
There were always good and bad humans before the christian religion took over this planet.


This does seem true but without the bible how would we know how to properly deal with our slaves, daughters, wives and so on. I do not recall any other book instructing us on how we should attend to our property.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Sun 7 Oct, 2012 05:17 pm
@spendius,
Quote:
Do you know how bad the bad humans were before Christianity? Being bad was not even considered bad in those days. Your concept of bad is entirely conditioned by Christianity you silly old fathead.


Are you making the claim that there were not many others that came before Christianity "such as the therapeutea" that were not moral teachers? That were not physicians of the mind or souls?
spendius
 
  1  
Sun 7 Oct, 2012 05:19 pm
@reasoning logic,
Nope--I am not making that claim.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Sun 7 Oct, 2012 05:28 pm
@reasoning logic,
Yea, don't forget slavery and the place of women in the bible.
reasoning logic
 
  1  
Sun 7 Oct, 2012 05:39 pm
@spendius,
Quote:
Your concept of bad is entirely conditioned by Christianity you silly old fathead.


I think that you have a point here spendius. Do you think that it may be past time to revise our concept of morality? Just think about it, you were talking about a time before Christianity when all we had was the old testament teachings.
We must have seen that it was not good enough, "could it be possible that the New Testament is not good enough today?
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 8 Oct, 2012 04:03 am
@reasoning logic,
Quote:
We must have seen that it was not good enough, "could it be possible that the New Testament is not good enough today?


Yes. That might well be possible. Many think it is probable but few of them are ready to embrace the implications.
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 8 Oct, 2012 04:34 am
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
Yea, don't forget slavery and the place of women in the bible.


That's a rather sweeping statement.

You have got it into your head that Christianity is anti-woman for your own purely misogynistic reasons. And you're talking through the front of your pants. And anachronistically.

Explain how Jesus was anti-woman. Your agenda is anti-woman. Goodstyle.
BillRM
 
  1  
Mon 8 Oct, 2012 07:04 am
@spendius,
Quote:
You have got it into your head that Christianity is anti-woman for your own purely misogynistic reasons. And you're talking through the front of your pants. And anachronistically.

Explain how Jesus was anti-woman. Your agenda is anti-woman. Goodstyle.


LOL Jesus if he exist as a leader of an offshoot of a Jewish cult, he most likely had the same view as the culture and time he grow up in so that is not the issue.

The issue is the history of the church from the days of Paul forward that had been both anti-woman and anti-sex.

Take note one of the church charges against Joan of Arch was that she acted as a man instead of a woman.
spendius
 
  1  
Mon 8 Oct, 2012 07:36 am
@BillRM,
Quote:
LOL Jesus if he exist as a leader of an offshoot of a Jewish cult, he most likely had the same view as the culture and time he grow up in so that is not the issue.


So why was he executed? Isn't it precisely because Jesus did not have the same views as the culture he was in.

You just take the history you have read about Joan as a fact and any other history you find not suitable to your purposes as bullshit. You just believe what you want to believe out of a vast mass of information in order to save your case. And you select it for the same reason. And you can't verify any of it.

People can be charged with things in order to avoid charging them with what the real offence is. It might not be politic to hear evidence on the real offence. You have no way of knowing.

What was the real offence of the victims of Stalin's show trials?

You won't even admit why the Church offends you. But you have provided a strong hint. So you go all around the houses to discredit the Church because you are not up for discrediting it for a proper reason which is that it is a complete bloody nuisance to those who want to treat women like ****.
BillRM
 
  1  
Mon 8 Oct, 2012 07:46 am
@spendius,
Quote:
So why was he executed? Isn't it precisely because Jesus did not have the same views as the culture he was in.


As there is no proof the man exist there is also no proof that he was executed either.

If a cult leader by that name and living in that time period was executed it would be for the same reason that such people had been executed throughout history as a threat to the then power structure both civil and religion ones.

spendius
 
  1  
Mon 8 Oct, 2012 08:21 am
@BillRM,
That means nothing to me Bill.
izzythepush
 
  1  
Mon 8 Oct, 2012 09:55 am
@spendius,
Doesn't mean much to him either.
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Mon 8 Oct, 2012 12:04 pm
@spendius,
Quote:
So why was he executed? Isn't it precisely because Jesus did not have the same views as the culture he was in.


Not sure if that was included just for its laugh value.

Many people in the culture were also executed for their views in the culture. To suppose Jesus was executed because he opposed that culture is absurd, because nobody opposed the culture any more than the Romans who executed him.

If a single individual called Jesus actually existed and was executed by the Romans, more than likely he was executed for a variety of reasons...and not simply because his views clashed with the prevailing views of the culture being subjugated.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Atheism - Discussion by littlek
American Atheists Barred from holding Office - Discussion by edgarblythe
Richard Dawkins doesn't exist! - Question by Jay2know
The New State Religion: Atheism - Question by Expert2
Is Atheism the New Age Religion? - Question by Expert2
Critical thinking on the existence of God - Discussion by Susmariosep
Are evolution and the big bang true? - Discussion by Johnjohnjohn
To the people .. - Question by Johnjohnjohn
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.7 seconds on 12/28/2024 at 05:42:40