GOD is VERY REAL
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
@PJ Re: "I just don’t want to miss any of the demons and shit!"
WHAT??? There's gonna be demons?.... *surprised look on face*.... FUCKING AWESOME!... I've never seen real demons before. This should be exciting!... *briskly rubbing hands together in anticipation*... Hey, hurry up with those beers! Oh, and put it no my left side, please. My right hand is a little oily at the moment.
@ God AIN'T nothing (sure as 7734 ain't awesome)
If you are going to fling your shit on our home, then please clean it up.
Get the cleaning equipment in the closet, first door on the left.
And I did not read this whole thread. Sorry. Brand new and over 150 replies. 40 is my limit.
EDIT: fixed gender reference
Yeah me too, once replies hit over 100 I just quick scan them for responses to early post I have made in the thread, or maybe a quick reply to a short post. (Kind of like this one.)
Oh lovely, we have another tiresome preacher to deal with ...
Let's take a look at the assorted bollocks being dumped here out of his soiled intellectual nappies, shall we?
So do tell us, what reliably repeatable method exists, allowing this entity to be detected? "Talk to my magic man and my magic man will talk back" doesn't count, because it's about as reliable as a politician's promises.
You seem to be unaware of the fact that we've heard all these assertions from your ilk before. And, lo and behold, they've all turned out to be nothing more than unsupported assertions.
Indeed, your favourite mythology is, in effect, nothing more than a large collection of unsupported assertions, some of them fatuous and absurd.
The heart is an organ for pumping blood. Slept through basic biology classes did you?
Oh, please, spare us the synthetic excuses for your magic man failing to provide an atom of genuine evidence for its existence.
Funny how, in an era when the only observers present were a bunch of superstitious piss-stained nomads who couldn't count correctly the number of legs that an insect possesses, your magic man apparently engaged in all manner of spectacular Pixar-style pyrotechnics, but now that the planet is littered with cameras, scanned by civilian and military radars on a daily basis, observed by satellites, and we have space based telescopes peering into the depths of the observable universe, your magic man is apparently reduced to occasional acts of food vandalism.
Bollocks. Actually, the reason we treat the merely asserted magic man of your favourite mythology, as nothing more than the product of the rectal passages of the authors of said mythology, is because we've examined that mythology in depth, and found it to be replete with absurd nonsense.
NOT treating unsupported mythological assertions as fact isn't "evil", it's the only proper course of action to take for anyone possessing a proper level of respect for the rigorous rules of discourse. Speaking of which, do you know what these are?
Yawn. Once again, do learn some basic biology.
Really? Then why did your magic man exhort his piss-stained followers to fill their mythology with known and demonstrable falsehoods?
Attitudes are products of the brain. Once again, learn some basic biology.
Apparently this imaginary entity of yours attaches terms and conditions of a sort that are more the product of megalomania than love. Your mythology is quite explicit, for once, about asserting this.
No it won't, because your magic man is imaginary.
Moving on ...
Now I know you're talking shit. Fucking demons? Excuse me, you think this mediaeval fantasy is fucking real?
The existence of this entity is another of those supernaturalist assertions we've been waiting 5,000 years for supernaturalists to support with genuine evidence, as opposed to apologetic fabrications and rhetorical spells. Got any?
Here's a clue for you. Those of us who exerted some intellectual effort in this vein, dispense with belief altogether. Not least because people like you conttinue to add to the already large body of observational evidence, to the effect that belief, as practised by supernaturalists, consists of nothing more than uncritical acceptance of unsupported mythological assertions. Those of us who paid attention in class tossed this drivel into the bin a long time ago.
Oh, not, not ANOTHER supernaturalist who has the rules of discourse ass backwards.
YOU are the one asserting that your magic man is real, therefore YOU are required to support this assertion. All we have to do is sit back and enjoy the spectacle of you failing.
Oh, this will be a first ...
Did this case ever appear in the medical journals? Because it's exactly the sort of case that the medical journals would be interested in, not least because they would be interested in determining if there were any detectable organic changes compared to the state of this individual before the purported "miracle".
Here's a clue for you: anecdote does not equal data, even if the anecdote isn't, as many here suspect, the product of fabrication.
The existence of myself and several others here refutes this tiresome, preachy assertion. Furthermore, those of us who paid attention in science classes, know more about the observable universe and its contents at 11 years of age, than the authors of your mythology were capable of knowing throughout their lives.
Indeed, the authors of your mythology were incapable of even <>em>fantasising about vast classes of entities and phenomena, that have since been alighted upon by scientists, and placed by said scientists within usefully predictive, quantitative frameworks of knowledge. The authors of your mythology knew nothing about the existence of three major continental land masses on this planet, which should be a source of embarrassment to adherents thereof residing on those land masses.
Meanwhile, it seems another one has joined the party ... oh this is going to be fun ...
Still waiting for that existence assertion to be supported with something other than apologetic fabrications and rhetorical spells ...
Why do I have a nagging sense of deja vu here, with respect to the suspicion that this is going to be nothing more than tiresome preachy bollock totally bereft of anything worthy of being called 'data'?
If you mean that fatuous tale about the stool pigeons being set up to walk into a prepared trap, I've already addressed this risible fairytale in depth here. Read that post and learn something.
Funny how the people who are most "messed up" tend to be religious believers. See: Catholic priests implicated in child rape, money vampire televangelists screwing the poor to finance private jets, charlatans peddling lies about science via such nonsense as the "Creation Museum", acting as a drag anchor to scientific and medical progress ... need I go on?
Which rather refutes the assertion that the "creation" of this entity was purportedly "perfect", if the same entity deliberately introduced therein manifestly imperfect entities. Speaking of which, why is it OUR fault that this entity made us imperfect? Which is what you are asserting here ...
Er, if your magic man hadn't fabricated Adam with this "sin gene" in the first place, none of this shit would have been necessary. Or didn't you think of this elementary concept before posting your laughable preaching?
You mean, like a good few of those children who starve to death in Africa every year?
And we've seen the outcome of this in the real world ... namely, lots of people who think that all they have to do is say the right magic words about your magic man, and any atrocity they commit is immediately declared null and void. See: those Catholic priests implicated in child rape, etc ...
I perceive that you are very logical and enjoy that kind of thinking. But you don’t understand that there is a spiritual realm that exists to your detriment.
Actually, this is one of the supernaturalist assertions we're still waiting to see supported with something other than apologetic fabrications and rhetorical spells. Got any substance here, as opposed to yet more appeals to mythological assertion?
I'd decompose. Next?
I notice supernaturalists NEVER ask themselves the same question about their attachment to mythological assertions. Care to try that sometime?
Well, we have a slight problem here with your hypothetical scenario. That problem centres upon the fact that supernaturalists cannot agree among themselves on a global scale, which of our extant mythologies is purportedly the "right" mythology, and adherents of a particular mythology cannot agree among themselves what that mythology is purportedly telling us. Now, in the face of this vast display of anti-consilience, why should we treat any supernaturalist assertion as fact, when supernaturalists themselves cannot agree among each other which of the available assertions being peddled is purportedly "true"?
Once again, take your time on this one. Start by asking yourself why it is, that supernaturalists are all so convinced that their favourite choice of mythology and their choice of assertions to treat as fact, are purportedly the "right" mythology and the "right" assertions, yet NONE of them can achieve anything even remotely approaching a consensus?
When you've deliberated that one for a while, you'll be in a position to realise why we regard the tiresome resurrection of this banal question of yours in the light that we do.
As for "what if I'm wrong", well the first thing I'll want to know, is why I was denied access to the evidence allowing me to make the requisite choice, and why all the people telling me about this beforehand were manifest charlatans. Indeed, this is something I'd like you to try and answer while you're here - why is it, that if your magic man is real, your magic man has somehow arranged for its representatives to be a mixture of the stupid and the duplicitous, whilst the representatives of the scientific worldview, by stark contrast, are by comparison models of diligence, honesty and erudition? Please explain that one to us all, as I've never seen a supernaturalist even acknowledge the existence of that question, let alone try to answer it.
Excuse me, do you honestly think none of us here has encountered your mythology, or read it?
Several of the other posters here live in places where they're subjected to 24/7 refried Jesus wheezing and proselytising. It's impossible for them to escape from non stop fucking bleating about Jeebus. In addition, when they've managed to find some quiet time away from the mouths on sticks that populate your religion, they've expended diligent effort examining your mythology in detail, and found it wanting. They've found it to be replete with assertions about the world that are not merely wrong, but fatuous and absurd, and as a corollary of finding this, rightly question the idea that this mythology can be considered in any way reliable, as a purported source of "knowledge" on the subject of the fantastic entities asserted therein to exist. Once again, spend time on this one.
Er, that's one of the absurdities we've found in your mythology - purported "prophesies" that turned out to be wrong. You forget, we've read this in detail.
Military might. You do realise that Israel is one of the few export customers allowed to buy certain categories of top-level American military hardware? And which receives financial aid packages facilitating said purchases? Oh, and Israel has been a regional nuclear power since the 1980s. Israel was one of the very few countries allowed to purchase and operate the Patriot surface to air missile system, it's a preferential customer for the F-35, and its own indigenous arms industry has been prolific. Israel has powerful military and financial backers in the USA, and a ruthlessly efficient lobbying system to perpetuate this.
Let's see if any of our resident preachers have any substance to offer in response to the above, shall we? Or whether I'll be subject to more tiresome fact-free proselytising, along with claims that I'm "possessed by demons" or some other fatuous mediaeval excrement of this sort?
One day, you will see
Oh please, bring it fucking on.
I've been seeing this sort of wibble and garbage from supernaturalists for over a decade now, and none of them ever produce anything other than the same tiresome collection of repeated parrotings of previously destroyed assertions, apologetic fabrications, rhetorical spells and manifest canards, usually declared as being the product of "logic" in ALL CAPS, not to mention demonstrable instances of outright lies.
Here's a question for you. Pick up your beloved mythology, and turn to Genesis 30:37-39. Read it carefully. Do you understand what it is telling you? Come back and let me know when you've spent some time on this. A quick fire piece of apologetic puffery will tell me you haven't exerted proper intellectual effort on this one. Let's see if you can work out what you're being sold in this mythology, shall we?
God also said, Cast not your pearls before swine.
HA HA HA HA HA HA!
Your evasion is duly noted.
Afraid that accepting my challenge will shatter your cosy, complacent and infantile notions about the world?
I'll take your failure to provide a substantive response, as yet more evidence that all you have to offer is the usual supernaturalist hot air. Care to disabuse me of that notion?
So...... God is now plagiarizing Jesus? That asshole! He takes credit for everything. I'm betting Jesus is pissed!
@God-Awfu-...(Shit!)... God-Awesome Re: "God also said, Cast not your pearls before swine."
...*looking up from mud*... Yet.... Here you are in on an atheist site..... *returns to rooting snout in the mud*.... *grunt-grunt-grunt*... *looking toward corner of pen*... Hey, Cog, get away from that pail of slop! That is MINE!... OINK OINK OINK, dammit!.....
God is AWESOME,
"God also said, Cast not your pearls before swine."
In biblical speech swine and dogs = Gentiles. So do you prefer being referred to as a pig or a dog?
Well I guess you told him!!!! You go girl!!!!!
Hehe. Had to get tough with that one!
Apparently you don't recognise sarcasm when you see it. Typical supernaturalist - smug, complacent and stupid with it. Guess that's why you evaded my challenge, because you don't have enough functioning neurons to take it on.
I love it when the mythology fetishists make my life this easy ...
Don't you love the little dear's habit of hitting "agree" on his own posts?
I am so impressed.
That is the reason I plan on coming back clicking Disagree on all her posts just to even the score.
God Ain't Nothing: "Hehe. Had to get tough with that one!"
This one did a Space Shuttle on you didn't it. Was going to say did a 747, but, DAMN! it really flew over.
GIA, its so obvious that these unbelievers love to curse and debase in a supposedly intellectual style that only proves their ignorance and hatred. So sad for them. You walked into a group of adolescent bullies whose best idea is pulling the wings of of flies. They try to hide their lack of any spiritual knowledge with puffed up speeches about things which they have no grasp upon whatsoever. It’s like trying to explain the concept of love to an empty suit of armor. All you will get is ... well nothing. Same here.
Thick skinned with nothing inside. This has been quite the experience. I never knew there was so much anger and hatred about other people’s beliefs. I do not hate them nor am i angry. I just feel ... sad for them. Your pearls have been trampled. Cast them somewhere else and shake the dust off of your feet. But pray for them anyway. God is bigger than they are. He sees and hears and can still tend to them individually and within their own lives. And that will be my prayer.
Awwwww, that's soooo sweet. I got a divine erection from reading such sweet prose.
Meanwhile, addressing this pathetic attempt at amateur psychology ...
This blatant attempt at well poisoning does not even rise to the level of competence required to be considered "wrong", because the presence of honest error at least implies some connection with observable reality. Your above screed is so utterly idsconnected from the requisite reality, that the only reason I'm addressing it, is to demonstrate precisely how disconnected from reality it is.
First of all, the idea that those of us who spent decades studying a range of scientific topics are "ignorant", is an assertion only a supernaturalist could erect. Furthermore, it's an assertion that is not merely flatly contradicted by those decades of learning, but manifestly erected as part of the all too frequently observed supernaturalist practice of demonising those who don't conform to doctrine, which in the past was a practice pursued by earlier supernaturalists with sadistic and homicidal glee. It's also an entirely typical supernaturalist evasion, a smokescreen behind which supernaturalists try to hide the fact that they have no substantive answers to relevant objections.
As for "hatred", oh please. The number of times I and others here have seen this tiresome canard, would finance our retirements if we were paid $10 every time we saw it being deployed. The assorted pre-scientific mythologies treated uncritically as fact by supernaturalists, are too comically risible to be objects of hate in themselves, replete as they are with assertions that are not merely wrong, but absurd and fatuous. Most of the time, we regard adherence to these mythologies as a sad joke, except when said adherence results in malign perversion of policy decisions and education, with observably deleterious consequences for all affected, and only in those instances does our response become more vigorous. That you are unable even to contemplate the aforementioned elementary concepts, speaks volumes about the palsying effects of supernaturalist adherence to mythology.
Let me inform you of another elementary fact, one that you would do well to learn quickly. Those of us who paid attention in the requisite classes, were taught right from the start, that assertions exist to be subject to ruthless discoursive bombardment, in order to determine whether or not those assertions were true or false. Those assertions failing said tests are discarded except for pedagogical purposes, whilst those assertions passing said tests become the evidentially supported postulates upon which we build genuine, substantive knowledge. This is how science works - by being utterly merciless with bad ideas. Being merciless with bad ideas, is the process underpinning every substantive instance of scientific progress our species has made, and the requisite ruthlessness with assertions not only works in the field of science - it's been found to be a reliable means of advancing genuine, substantive knowledge in every properly constituted, rigorous academic discipline. Being ruthless with bad ideas is central to the learning process itself, and failure to be ruthless with bad ideas constitutes a dereliction of epistemological duty, for those of us who value genuine knowledge and understanding. Learn this foundational concept quickly in order to spare yourself further embarrassment here.
Having introduced you to this elementary concept, it's now time to explain why we treat supernaturalist assertions in the same manner as we treat other assertions suspected of being wrong, useless or harmful. We do so because our view is that NO assertion is "sacred", no matter what its source. Treating assertions as beyond question has been a source of much human suffering and misery through the ages, human history is littered with the corpses of those who found themselves on the receiving end of bad ideas treated uncritically as fact, and imposed by nefarious enforcers of conformity to doctrine. We pay attention to the vast body of observational data from history, to the effect that bad ideas, if allowed to persist, end up destroying good people. Not only, therefore, does ruthless detection and elimination of bad ideas constitute an epistomological imperative, from the standpoint of the pure pursuit of knowledge, it also constitutes an ethical imperative for those of us who share relevant human concerns. And it is precisely because we possess those human concerns, and wish to leave behind us a better world than the one we found ourselves in, that we regard it as entirely proper to be relentless with respect to the matter of ridding ourselves and the world of bad ideas, especially when incontrovertible observational evidence tells us that a given set of ideas is inherently malign.
The single most important reason why we regard supernaturalism as a bad idea, is because its entire modus operandi is diametrically opposed to the concepts presented above. Supernaturalism teaches people to accept uncritically unsupported assertions, no matter how much observational reality tells us that those assertions are wrong, just because those assertions are deemed to be "sacred" and the product of a fantastic and merely asserted mythological entity. The irony of seeing a supernaturalist label us "ignorant", when the entire supernaturalist process constitutes an enshrinement of ignorance, really does stand out as a breathtaking piece of gargantuan hubris. Especially when we routinely observe all manner of abuse of proper discourse emanating from the supernaturalist camp, in pursuit of hegemony for their assertion-laden, evidence-free mythologies and the doctrines associated therewith. The diagnosable fallacies, canards, fabrications, evasions, misrepresentations and ad hominems we see emanating from the supernaturalist camp are legion. Consequently, it should come as no surprise to discover that we consider said abuse of proper discourse to leave a bad taste in the mouth whenever it appears, especially when accompanied by supernaturalist pretensions of "moral superiority".
If our exasperation at seeing this tsunami of dreck shows through in our output, it should hardly be surprising, because our basic human endurance is finite. Eventually, patience runs out when yet more supernaturalist discoursive malfeasance rears its ugly head.
What you're seeing isn't "hatred", it's exasperation. What you're seeing isn't "ignorance", it's the result of decades of hard learning. As a corollary, you are hereby invited to drop the specious amateur psychology, and the underlying duplicity that manifestly drives it.
See all of the above for why this is merely another duplicitous piece of well poisoning. DROP IT.
Oh, and as an invertebrate zoologist, I assure you that the LAST thing I do is pull the wings off flies, not least because the articulation thereof with the thorax is sometimes of utility value in species identification.
Ahem, that there even exists such as thing as "spiritual knowledge", is precisely one of the supernaturalist assertions we as a species have been waiting to see supported with genuine evidence, instead of apologetic fabrications and rhetorical spells, for 5,000 years. We're STILL waiting for people like you to deliver on this.
There goes another irony meter ...
Oh please, pull the other one, it's got fucking bells on.
Some of the people here spent decades learning about topics you don't even know the existence of. Let me put this one to the test, shall we? Here's a question I can answer straight from memory, having spent time in the requisite classes, but which you almost certainly never even knew the existence of before my presentation thereof to you. What is the difference between a covariant and a contravariant tensor?
All too often, explaining even elementary concepts to people like you, is like trying to teach spinor calculus to my tropical fish. Two can play at this game.
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!
I'll now watch you dismiss everything I've posted above as "nothing", and note the bitter irony thereof.
Oh, the projection ...
You have yet to demonstrate that you have the perceptiveness required to understand what's happening here.
First, I refer you to my above comments about exasperation. Second, as a corollary of my exposition above on the proper treatment of bad ideas, I and others here dispense with belief itself. Another elementary concept you will probably be incapable of understanding. But, in the hope that there are sufficient functioning neurons remaining to register this concept, I'll tell you why I and others here dispense with belief, and this is because belief, as practised by supernaturalists, consists of nothing more than uncritical acceptance of unsupported assertions, a practice I have already demonstrated above is a direct and egregious violation of the conduct of proper discourse. Indeed, once one has evidence to support a given postulate, belief is superfluous to requirements and irrelevant by definition.
And many here in turn will regard you and your ramblings, as not even worthy of indifference, and I understand why.
He never had any. The illusion that made up tinsel in the television in one's head counts for more than properly established postulates, is a notion only a supernaturalist could entertain.
Furthermore, GIA was apparently so afraid of having his smug, complacent notions subject to complete and utter annihilation, that he deliberately evaded an elementary challenge I presented to him, a challenge that, if he was genuinely confident of the rectitude of his ideas, he would have taken on and regarded as addressable with ease. That he failed to do this speaks volumes of both the vacuity of his ideas, and his own inability to deploy something resembling integrity.
Translation: "Keep up the smug, self-satisfied pretence of superiority, whilst evading even elementary questions" ... which is frequently observed here to be standard supernaturalist practice ...
Don't bother wasting your time talking to your imaginary magic man. Because it won't change anything. Least of all, our commitment to proper discourse.
@Cali Re: "Meanwhile, addressing this pathetic attempt at amateur psychology ..."
Once again, always a pleasure reading your work... Brilliant...
It's clear that you believe in your God. The God you believe in is your opinion. If there were no books on any God, what would your God be then? If we take the time to understand atheists, we would not be preaching to them. That is the respect they demand and deserve. Judgement is reserved by your God is it not? In my opinion, any judgments on them made by anyone is merely a response of the ego to disconnect from them as if there is an Us vs Them. Religion is very good at doing that. I have seen my fair share of believers curse and debase as you say. I have seen believers pump up their spiritual knowledge while they are also thin skinned with nothing inside. Seems to me that people are people regardless of what label suits them.
Last but not least.... it is written to never pray in public. Question your beliefs and actions,
@Grace: spiritual knowledge
I like to nominate this for the oxymoron of the week award.
God is AWESOME,
"One day, you will see"
As it says in Job 13:7 ~~
Job 13:7 (NLT) = “Are you defending God with lies? Do you make your dishonest arguments for his sake?"
I believe my demon is showing!!! Oh wait, never mind, it’s just a boner!
Hey guys, what do y'all think of all the Messianic prophecies Jesus fulfilled? We have manuscripts, mostly from the Dead Sea scrolls, dating from before the time of Christ, and there are some very specific things that could not have been a coincidence or that Jesus could not have just "decided" to fulfill: that he would be of the tribe of Judah (Gen. 49:10, fulfilled Luke 3:23, 33) and the house of David (Jeremiah 23:5, fulfilled Luke 3:23, 31) born at Bethlehem (Mic. 5:2, fulfilled Matt. 2:1) body pierced in crucifixion (Zech. 12:10, fulfilled John 19:34) just to name a few. There are many many more. I would appreciate your honest thoughts on this. Thanks!
Why are you impressed that one work of fiction agrees with another work of fiction? Now I'm sure you don't think it is fiction, but you must realize that we (many of the atheists here) think it is a work of fiction. Which is why we don't understand why you would post something like that here, it isn't going to convince anyone.
"Hey guys, what do y'all think of all the Messianic prophecies Jesus fulfilled? We have manuscripts, mostly from the Dead Sea scrolls, dating from before the time of Christ,..."
The Dead Sea scrolls are hokum.
Actually the Hebrew Pentateuch (Dead Sea Scrolls) were copied from the Greek Septuagint. Dead Sea Scrolls only date back to 450 BCE. Some Greek Septuagints date back to 500, 550, even 650 BCE.