Atheists, smarter than religious people

@john2054,

john2054 wrote:

Hi Intrepid,

you asked me for proof of God and I suggested that you look up in the sky after it has rained and look for his promise (proof) in the rainbow. Infact probably the since best evidence for His existence as Christ, is in the Bible. I'm not going to quote large swathes of it to you now here. Just read 1 corinthians 13 of the new testament, if you want to read a nice bit to yourself. Of course if you need proof of the Hindu deity please read the epic Bhagavada Gita where Krishna tries to persuade his nephew Arjuna of the arguments for going to war (against his kinsmen). Equally if you want persuasion of Buddha check out Buddhist scriptures by Edward Conze (Penguin Classics). More then that I cannot give you. God is a manmade image, of colours and details filled by stories. but just because he is manmade doesn't mean to say that he doesn't exist. Far from it. His is the greatest power ever imagined and the greatest love surely. His is the answer to our problems, and his faith is the greatest love imaginable. The best place to study him is infact not in some scholarly classroom or lecture theatre, but infact his temples, be it mosques/churches or whatever. There you can find the genuine convictions of true believers, which is sadly lacking by the scholarly inbred ignorance of Dawkins and his ilk. That is my take on it anyway. Thanks, John.

You don't have to justify God to me. I believe. It seems that you have incorrectly attributed a post to me that I did not make. We believers are not beyone mistakes. Wink

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

Memorizing something somebody else wrote or said, and believes what they read, shows they have no idea about the contradiction stated.

Joyce's expression isn't memorised in the sense you mean. Once read, it cannot be forgotten. It isn't a question of believing it. It's a fact. It is Leopold (Joyce) admitting defeat in the face of the complexity.

And a man like you thinks it's oh so simple. And the man who wrote Chapter 6 of Ulysses doesn't.

What contradiction?

1 Reply

@spendius,

spendi, It's not surprising at all that you can't see the contradiction. I'm not your teacher.

2 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Blather.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Your's is all blather; no meaningful content.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Very funny.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

spendi, It's not surprising at all that you can't see the contradiction. I'm not your teacher.

A very honest, humble and profound realization, if you think about it. If it is indeed a realization, and not just a jab at the artful dodger Wink

0 Replies

@Intrepid,

Intrepid wrote:

HexHammer wrote:

Cyracuz wrote:

o really?

Do you believe an atheist is any less inclined to believe in fairytales just because he dismisses the concept of deities?
Yes? That's usually the whole point in being an atheist.

I thought the point in being an atheist was to not believe in God. I guess I was wrong, according to HexHammer.

It's NOT beliveing in ANY god/diety.

1 Reply

@Cyracuz,

Cyracuz wrote:

Hex, that you see contradictions in another's faith doesn't mean your own is free of them when seen from yet another point of view. Do you think that none of the theories you believe in may possibly be false? If so, I think that you are now displaying a good deal of the arrogance and ignorance that we humans continuously strive with.

(edited, used wrong word :p)

Yes, you are right, my counter argumentation was very flawed and faulty, very arrogant of me.

0 Replies

@HexHammer,

Quote:

It's NOT beliveing in ANY god/diety.

Which is fair enough. What's your justification for trying to persuade others to the same viewpoint?

1 Reply

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

Quote:
It's NOT beliveing in ANY god/diety.

Which is fair enough. What's your justification for trying to persuade others to the same viewpoint?

I have no clear goal or reason other than I like to engange i debates.

1 Reply

@HexHammer,

In which case it is necessary to conduct the debate respectfully.

2 Replies

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

In which case it is necessary to conduct the debate respectfully.

Your are right, but what are your guy's goal, if I may ask?

0 Replies

@spendius,

spendius wrote:

In which case it is necessary to conduct the debate respectfully.

Maybe it's you who are overly sensetive?

3 Replies

no .. Christians are MUCH smarter than atheists .. ( no knowledge of God )
http://www.freeratio.org/member.php?u=46624

1 Reply

@HexHammer,

Quote:

Maybe it's you who are overly sensetive?

Yes--I have a reputation in that respect.

My "guy's" goal is to maintain the Christian tradition whilst taking advantage of what the scientists can find. To use science rather than allowing it to manifest itself as Big Brother which it will if we drop our guard.

1 Reply

@HexHammer,

Quote:

Maybe it's you who are overly sensetive?

"Either I'm too sensitive or else I'm getting soft."

Bob Dylan. If You See Her Say Hello.

0 Replies

@HexHammer,

Quote:

Maybe it's you who are overly sensetive?

I do not mean to be rude to you Hex, but during my brief interaction with you here on a2k I have gotten the impression that you tend to express yourself with a type of language that emphasises the adversity of the discussion rather than the subject of it. You are from Denmark, ye? If so, our native languages are very similar. I have observed regarding norwegian and english that certain ways of expressing yourself in norwegian can sound extremely arrogant when directly translated to english, and vice versa. (Can't think of an example though :/ )

In discussion, adversity is a means to an end. Productive discussion can only be made between people who understand that disagreement is a good chance to learn something that you can't learn on your own. The goal isn't victory, but mutual gain.
So now you know my reason for participating. I love a good challenge. But if I am not prepared for the eventuality that my take on something is wrong, all discussion is just a waste of time and energy.

In my opinion Wink

1 Reply

@spendius,

A fine goal to have in my opinion. I share it, but instead of christian tradition I would say perhaps the morally noble human tradition. To avoid contamination from everything else christianity also is.

1 Reply

@Cyracuz,

Quote:

To avoid contamination from everything else christianity also is.

But it is a totality cyr. You seem to be assuming that those things you claim are contaminating have no role in the totality and are un-necessary. That is a wild assumption in my opinion and I hope you don't hold it just for your own convenience.

1 Reply

Atheists, smarter than religious people

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know