I have a theory that I think explains a lot of things.

I think that people who believe in god (or gods) do so because have an eternal soul. They are eternal beings who have attached themselves in some way to human bodies. They believe in a spiritual world because they have experienced it.

Atheists, on the other hand, do not have a soul. They are the true humans and when they die they cease to exist. For them, there is nothing beyond this physical world.

So everyone is right. Now can't we all just get along?

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

So everyone is right. Now can't we all just get along?

You have a theory with absolutely no evidence to back it up and you expect everyone accept it and get along?

Atheists, generally speaking, are atheists because of their skeptical nature. Why would they accept your theory without evidence?

Religious people, generally speaking, believe what their holy books tell them. No holy book that I'm aware of makes such a declaration. They believe that God gives everyone opportunities throughout their lives to convert and/or that even unbelievers have souls that will burn in hell for their disbelief. Why would they accept your theory without evidence?

Even if your theory were correct, it would not result in everyone getting along. It would not cause some religious people to become tolerant of homosexuals, to not kill unbelievers because their god wants them to, etc.

What are we supposed to believe of religious people that become atheists and vice-versa? That souls pop in and out of their bodies?

How does you baseless model explain religious people who become atheist and vice versa.

Did they find or loose their eternal soul?

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

I have a theory that I think explains a lot of things.

I think that people who believe in god (or gods) do so because have an eternal soul. They are eternal beings who have attached themselves in some way to human bodies. They believe in a spiritual world because they have experienced it.

Atheists, on the other hand, do not have a soul. They are the true humans and when they die they cease to exist. For them, there is nothing beyond this physical world.

So everyone is right. Now can't we all just get along?

That's so horribly foolish I don't even know where to start.

First of all, it's ridiculous from a theological standpoint. Why would a god give some people souls and others none?

Secondly, it's insane from a scientific standpoint. Belief in a supreme being is based upon a person's interpretation of evidence.

So you're saying people are prematurely born athiest, and other's already have their religion chosen before they were born?

So, in your logic, a unborn athiest never recieved a soul.

While a religious person does?

What if someone's born an athiest and then has a revelation, and believes in god.

Do they recieve a soul upon believing?

There's alot of flaws, but.. I give you Kudos for trying to think something up. Keep working at it http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/biggrin.gif).

quote:Originally posted by Martini:

You have a theory with absolutely no evidence to back it up and you expect everyone accept it and get along?

What are we supposed to believe of religious people that become atheists and vice-versa? That souls pop in and out of their bodies?

[/B]

Neither Atheists nor religious people base their beliefs on evidence. It is impossible to prove whether or not God exists. Atheists have no proof there is no God, yet (because as you say they are "skeptical") they vehemently deny and often ridicule the thought of his existence. That doesn't sound like skepticism, it sounds more like faith in the non-existence of god.

Holy books can be written by prophets just as well as they can be written by charlatans. Religious people also have no real proof that god exists, yet they have been known to die for their faith in their god.

Atheism and Theism both require faith, since evidence cannot confirm nor can it debunk either one.

Maybe souls can pop in and out of bodies. Maybe people can develop a soul as part of "evolution".

Why would a god give some people souls and not give souls to others? The answer could be because they are god and their wisdom is beyond human comprehension. Or it could be because there are simply more people than there are souls, since souls are eternal and there may be a finite number of them. As a god, you would not necessarily want to stop humans from breeding just because you ran out of souls.

This guys an idiot

quote:Neither Atheists nor religious people base their beliefs on evidence. It is impossible to prove whether or not God exists. Atheists have no proof there is no God, yet (because as you say they are "skeptical") they vehemently deny and often ridicule the thought of his existence. That doesn't sound like skepticism, it sounds more like faith in the non-existence of god.

There's a giant pink dildo floating around space that gives us all of our morals. Don't believe me? Well, you're relying on faith as much as I am!

quote:Originally posted by boozehound420:

This guys an idiot

This thread makes me laugh. I'm a Christian for the record, but I'm pretty damn sure atheists have souls. I mean, atheists just like everyone else, (can, there will always be bad people) live good lives, and if there's a God, I'm pretty sure he won't deny someone who has lived a good life access to Heaven just because they didn't believe in him.

I'm an atheist, and I'm quite confident that I have a soul...

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

Neither Atheists nor religious people base their beliefs on evidence.



My point about atheists is that they generally don't accept beliefs without evidence. You gave none for your theory, therefore, for the atheist, your theory is gonna be a hard sell.

Religious people generally have beliefs in some extraordinary claims within their religion, but they generally don't believe any old extraordinary claim outside of those beliefs, especially ones that go against their religion. Convincing these religious people of your theory is therefore going to be a hard sell.

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

Atheists have no proof there is no God, yet (because as you say they are "skeptical") they vehemently deny and often ridicule the thought of his existence.

There are some that ridicule those who believe that extraordinary claims reflect reality without evidence, but I find that most don't vehemently deny that He exists. They generally just lack belief in His existence because there is no evidence for it.

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

That doesn't sound like skepticism, it sounds more like faith in the non-existence of god.

Lack of belief in gods takes no faith.

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

Holy books can be written by prophets just as well as they can be written by charlatans. Religious people also have no real proof that god exists, yet they have been known to die for their faith in their god.

Absolutely. Good luck trying to convince the world of your theory.

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

Atheism and Theism both require faith, since evidence cannot confirm nor can it debunk either one.

See above. Lack of belief does not require faith.

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

Maybe souls can pop in and out of bodies. Maybe people can develop a soul as part of "evolution".

Maybe. Maybe flying pigs live in the center of the Earth. So?



[This message has been edited by Martini (edited 01-19-2007).]

quote:Originally posted by Sick_Boy:

I'm an atheist, and I'm quite confident that I have a soul...

How can you not believe in god but then say that you do believe you have a soul?

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

How can you not believe in god but then say that you do believe you have a soul?

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

Maybe people can develop a soul as part of "evolution".

quote:Originally posted by Martini:



Lack of belief in gods takes no faith.





Yes it does take faith. Faith is a belief that is not based on proof. You cannot prove that god does not exist. Therefore, Atheism is based on faith that god does not exist.

Atheism is not a "lack" of belief. It is a belief that there is no god.

If you are unsure, or if you "lack belief" because you haven't stumbled accross the right evidence, then you are agnostic not atheist. An atheist says there is no god, regardless of the evidence.

quote:Originally posted by Martini:



Good catch, Martini. Like I was saying, maybe she's an atheist who is evolving and becoming an eternal being.

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

Atheism is not a "lack" of belief. It is a belief that there is no god.

While it is true that one who believes absolutely that no gods exist would correctly be labeled an atheist, in my experience, most atheists merely lack belief in God or gods.

Theism is belief in a god. The prefix "a", means without. An atheist is one without belief in gods.

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

If you are unsure,

A fence sitter is generally not the accepted definition of 'agnostic'. The more accepted definition is "one who believes that God's existence can neither be proved nor disproved, on the basis of current evidence".



quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

or if you "lack belief" because you haven't stumbled accross the right evidence, then you are agnostic not atheist.

Incorrect. One who lacks belief in gods for any reason whatsoever, is an atheist.

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

An atheist says there is no god, regardless of the evidence.

I am an atheist, and it is based on my lack of belief in God or gods. It is also the same reason every atheist I personally know is an atheist. I don't deny that anything is possible, regardless of how remote I believe that possibility may be.



Read the link below for more info:

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mathew/intro.html

quote:Originally posted by Martini:



Read the link below for more info:

http://w ww.infidel s.org/library/modern/mathew/intro.html (http: //www.infi dels.org/l ibrary/mod ern/mathew /intro.htm l)

You know what, I have read that before and I find it interesting that it's so often quoted on this forum. It's almost as if it's become the internet "bible" of atheism.

What is it with this "lack belief" crap? You're just playing with words. Either you believe that there is a god or "spiritual" existence, or your not sure, or you don't believe. Saying "lacks belief" is like hedging your bet. Grow some sack and say what you believe.

Regardless of what the website says, if you are open in any way to the remote possibility that there is a god then you are not an atheist. An atheist believes that there is no god. They don't think there is any possibility whatsoever of god existing.

Unless, perhaps that website really is like a "bible" to atheism?

If you and your atheist pals call yourselves atheists because you lack sufficient proof, then you need to call yourselves something else.

An atheist is never going to say "I don't deny anything is possible" when it comes to god. An atheist says there is NO possibility. If you think there is a possibility, however remote, then you are not an atheist.

Atheist = accepting the doctrine that god does not exist.

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

What is it with this "lack belief" crap?

I think I explained it pretty well.



quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

You're just playing with words. Either you believe that there is a god or "spiritual" existence, or your not sure, or you don't believe.

I don't believe. I lack belief. Not believing is not the same as "believing that there is no god". Atheism is about not having a belief, not having a belief.



quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

Saying "lacks belief" is like hedging your bet. Grow some sack and say what you believe.

How am I hedging any bet? What god do you know of that I'm playing it safe with?

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

Regardless of what the website says, if you are open in any way to the remote possibility that there is a god then you are not an atheist.

I get my definition from plenty of sources. I can cite plenty of them if you wish. Why don't you cite some that says an atheist can not be open to the possibility of God or gods existing?



quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

An atheist believes that there is no god. They don't think there is any possibility whatsoever of god existing.

Cite?

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

If you and your atheist pals call yourselves atheists because you lack sufficient proof, then you need to call yourselves something else.

We do? If we did, don't you think that that word would exist by now? 'Atheist' works just fine for my atheist pals and me. A- without, theist - one who believes in God or gods. It works just fine for us. http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

An atheist is never going to say "I don't deny anything is possible" when it comes to god.

I'm proving you wrong right now by saying it. There are many more on this very site that will say the same thing.

Ok, Martini, there you go again with this "lack faith" stuff. During this entire thread, you have not typed the words "I don't believe in god". You have said repeatedly that you "lack faith". When you say you "lack faith", it sounds as if maybe at some point in the future, you will have enough faith to believe in god. Why not be straight forward and simply say "I don't believe in god?" Why do you choose the phrase "lack faith"? Is it that "lack faith" sounds less threatening or definitive than "I don't believe in god"?

Or do you want to believe in god?

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

Ok, Martini, there you go again with this "lack faith" stuff. During this entire thread, you have not typed the words "I don't believe in god".

Actually, I did write, "I don't believe" You know it was God I was talking about, right? That's not the same as "I believe that gods don't exist. My atheism is about an absence of belief, not a belief.



quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

You have said repeatedly that you "lack faith". When you say you "lack faith", it sounds as if maybe at some point in the future, you will have enough faith to believe in god.

Maybe you are not understanding what I mean by "lack". When I say I lack belief in gods, I am saying that I am without any belief in gods, as in totally absent of any such belief.



quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

Why not be straight forward and simply say "I don't believe in god?" Why do you choose the phrase "lack faith"? Is it that "lack faith" sounds less threatening or definitive than "I don't believe in god"?

I don't believe any gods exist. I am without belief in gods. I lack belief in gods.

All those sentences are equal.

in for teh lols

+1 atheists

What is a soul?

quote:Originally posted by Viraljimmy:

What is a soul?

It's an unsubstantial substance - i.e. a contradiction in terms.

quote:Originally posted by MidnightRambler:

This thread makes me laugh. I'm a Christian for the record, but I'm pretty damn sure atheists have souls. I mean, atheists just like everyone else, (can, there will always be bad people) live good lives, and if there's a God, I'm pretty sure he won't deny someone who has lived a good life access to Heaven just because they didn't believe in him.

As a Christian, do you follow the Bible? It says clearly in there No man comes to the Father but by Him. That kind of sounds like "you believe in me or I never knew you." Just FYI.

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

How can you not believe in god but then say that you do believe you have a soul?

Haha, is that not allowed?

Soul = the principle of life, feeling, thought, and action in humans, regarded as a distinct entity separate from the body, and commonly held to be separable in existence from the body; the spiritual part of humans as distinct from the physical part.

You can be spiritual without believing in a god.

quote:Originally posted by Viraljimmy:

What is a soul?

I love this question!

Here's Bertrand Russell's take on it:

http://tinyurl.com/34ku5z

Although Hare_Geist put it nicely, too http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

Gotta love simplicity.

quote:Originally posted by Sick_Boy:

Haha, is that not allowed?

Soul = the principle of life, feeling, thought, and action in humans, regarded as a distinct entity separate from the body, and commonly held to be separable in existence from the body; the spiritual part of humans as distinct from the physical part.

You can be spiritual without believing in a god.

For the purposes of this thread, when I say "god" I don't necessarily mean the God of Abraham. I mean a supernatural being or force.

If you are spiritual, you are not an atheist and if you call yourself an atheist then you are just a kewl trying to be different.

quote:Originally posted by Masero:

As a Christian, do you follow the Bible? It says clearly in there No man comes to the Father but by Him. That kind of sounds like "you believe in me or I never knew you." Just FYI.

I don't think that God would punish those that led good lives for such a reason, if he does, well then, he's no God. Also, I mix my own beliefs about God with Catholicism to create a kind of contemporary "folk-Christianity" belief. My belief is that God would allow all who led good lives to enter Heaven.

How about my theory:

Atheists are smart enough to evade religious bullshit.

quote:Originally posted by Gorcrow:

How about my theory:

Atheists are smart enough to evade religious bullshit.

I like it.

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

I have a theory that I think explains a lot of things.

I think that people who believe in god (or gods) do so because have an eternal soul. They are eternal beings who have attached themselves in some way to human bodies. They believe in a spiritual world because they have experienced it.

Atheists, on the other hand, do not have a soul. They are the true humans and when they die they cease to exist. For them, there is nothing beyond this physical world.

So everyone is right. Now can't we all just get along?

It is hard to know who is right, so thanks for helping us by letting us know of one more person who is completely wrong.

I think he is a troll though. I know, I know, maybe I have too high an opinion of some of these religious nuts, but I don't think anyone could be that stupid.

It's ironic, though, that he asked why we couldn't all just get along, and then started fighting with people about their own beliefs, and telling them what they could or couldn't believe and what name to call themselves.

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

An atheist says there is NO possibility. If you think there is a possibility, however remote, then you are not an atheist.

Atheist = accepting the doctrine that god does not exist.

Wrong. There are so many types of atheism (strong and weak and everything inbetween) that you can't lump them all together in a single category. Some atheists will say they are 100% sure god does not exist and some won't. You seem to think that agnosticism and atheism are mutually exclusive, when they are not. One can be an atheist as well as agnostic at the same time.

For example, I define myself as an agnostic atheist in that I don't believe in any gods, and I believe that the possibility of god existing is very small, but I also admit that one can never entirely know if god does or does not exist based on what we currently know today and the current state of the universe.

This explains it pretty well: http://tinyurl.com/2kd8en

And this explains agnostic atheism a little better: http://tinyurl.com/qu9nr

[This message has been edited by bung (edited 01-21-2007).]

This guy's name is THUNDERCOCK in all caps, he produces a "theory" (I hate when people use the word theory, it undermines the real definition of scientific theory) out of his own ass based on hate and prejudice with no corroborating evidence. He knowingly ignores simple response and proceeds to hammer his shit with arguments out of his ass. Either he is a troll or he's beyond repair. In either case stop wasting your intelligence on him.

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

I have a theory that I think explains a lot of things.

I think that people who believe in god (or gods) do so because have an eternal soul. They are eternal beings who have attached themselves in some way to human bodies. They believe in a spiritual world because they have experienced it.

Atheists, on the other hand, do not have a soul. They are the true humans and when they die they cease to exist. For them, there is nothing beyond this physical world.

So everyone is right. Now can't we all just get along?

That is the fewest words I have seen what I believe explained in. AWESOME! AWESOME! AWESOME!

Thank you Thundercock, wow that is something I could never imagined myself saying. PEACE TO ALL



[This message has been edited by The Violent Pacifist (edited 01-22-2007).]

WOW! that caught more flak than I thought it would oh well

can't his, mine, and everyone's for that matter be solved claiming existenialism.

I am pretty sure it can be. Life is what you make it and believe to be.

At least he tried to bring peace to the argument, but of course the forum is called

"My God can be the Shit Out of Your God"

The longest on going argument in the world.

There's no such thing as a soul, this is all childish nonsense.

quote:Originally posted by Lamabot:

This guy's name is THUNDERCOCK in all caps, he produces a "theory" (I hate when people use the word theory, it undermines the real definition of scientific theory) out of his own ass based on hate and prejudice with no corroborating evidence. He knowingly ignores simple response and proceeds to hammer his shit with arguments out of his ass. Either he is a troll or he's beyond repair. In either case stop wasting your intelligence on him.

I am not a troll.

I never said anything hateful.

I never resorted to name calling, unlike some people who responded.

All I'm trying to say is that I think atheists are correct to say that for them there is no god because they have no soul. When they die, they cease to exist.

quote:Originally posted by bung:

Wrong. There are so many types of atheism (strong and weak and everything inbetween) that you can't lump them all together in a single category. Some atheists

will say they are 100% sure god does not exist and some won't. You seem to think that agnosticism and atheism are mutually exclusive, when they are not. One can be an atheist as well as agnostic at the same time.

For example, I define myself as an agnostic atheist in that I don't believe in any gods, and I believe that the possibility of god existing is very small, but I also admit that one can never entirely know if god does or does not exist based on what we currently know today and the current state of the universe.

This explains it pretty well: http://tinyurl.com/2kd8en

And this explains agnostic atheism a little better: http://tinyurl.com/qu9nr



Wow, not ONE PERSON responded yet who will definitively say there is absolutely no god and there is absolutely no chance of a god existing! If there is someone out there who can say that, I would like to hear your response to my theory and to the pseudo-atheists who have been responding to my post.

This is a great example of how there are a lot of people who are confused about their own beliefs. Atheism and agnosticism are conflicting beliefs. You cannot combine the two. It would be like saying "I'm an Atheist Catholic" (though this is an extreme example).

If you don't believe in the God of Abraham or the bible, that does not necessarily make you an atheist.

Who are these people trying to convince that they are atheists? Are you trying to convince me or are you trying to convince yourself? Just so we are clear, I really don't care if you are an atheist. In fact, to further expand my theory, I believe it is wrong for Christians or other religious people to try to convert atheists. Atheists have no soul and cannot have eternal life.

The "wanna-be" atheists here who can't entirely let go of the idea of a god need to re-examine their beliefs a little deeper and strengthen their convictions one way or the other. It's ok if you are an atheist, and it's ok if you are not. However, you can't be atheist and at the same time be open minded about the possibility of a god existing.

quote:Originally posted by Masero:

As a Christian, do you follow the Bible? It says clearly in there No man comes to the Father but by Him. That kind of sounds like "you believe in me or I never knew you." Just FYI.

it says no man comes to the Father, but through Jesus.

because the only reason any of us are getting to heaven is because Jesus died for our sins

quote:Originally posted by The Violent Pacifist:

At least he tried to bring peace to the argument, but of course the forum is called

"My God can be the Shit Out of Your God"

The longest on going argument in the world.

or maybe we could call it "my lack of god can beat the shit out of your god"

FAGGETCOCK

There is no chance the god layed out in the christian,jewish,muslim myths is real. There I said it.

I'm an atheist to those gods and EVERY other god layed out in history, you are just an atheist to one less god then me.

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

Atheists, on the other hand, do not have a soul. They are the true humans and when they die they cease to exist. For them, there is nothing beyond this physical world.

So everyone is right. Now can't we all just get along?

That's both ignorant and insulting.

quote:Originally posted by boozehound420:

FAGGETCOCK

There is no chance the god layed out in the christian,jewish,muslim myths is real. There I said it.

I'm an atheist to those gods and EVERY other god layed out in history, you are just an atheist to one less god then me.

Boozehound,

You need to learn how to spell, faggot.

Also, I am very disappointed in your post. I thought I could count on you to enlighten these kewls who claim to be atheists. Why do you limit your atheism to the myths of organized religions? Do you think there is a possibility of a supernatural being?

I personally agree with you that organized religion misleads mankind (for the most part). However, that is not a good enough reason to forsake the idea of a god.

I am not an atheist.

The idiocy of major religions, the contradictions, the illogical presence of there mythical god doesnt make sense. THerefor its not possible it exists.

My atheism stops there because theres nothing for me to base a belief or lack of belief that something could have evolved to some point somewhere that it was capable of creating our universe. And thats where my belief on that stops, such a being wouldnt want to be worshipped by little pueny humans. If it did it wouldnt have created such a large universe http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HKPUYZZbWxs

(this shows you how small and insignificant we really are)

And why do I not care about the semantics of the word atheist, well because i dont care. I could catagorize myself under atleast 12 defenitions. I say atheist most often just because its easy.

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

However, you can't be atheist and at the same time be open minded about the possibility of a god existing.

Yes, you can. I have no belief that there is a Loch Ness Monster, but I am open minded about the possibility and if I am provided with enough evidence, I will believe. The same can be said regarding evidence for God, gods, flying pigs, etc.

You stated earlier "if you are open in any way to the remote possibility that there is a god then you are not an atheist", and also "An atheist believes that there is no god. They don't think there is any possibility whatsoever of god existing".

Since this is a declaration of a word definition on your part, why don't you cite where you find such a word definition? I asked you to do this earlier and was ignored. I'm assuming it's because you realize that this is a definition that resides only within your own head.

quote:Originally posted by systemshock:

or maybe we could call it "my lack of god can beat the shit out of your god"

HAHAHA!! This is not a bad idea as the debates turn out to be atheists vs. (insert theology here), which usually is based on some god.

This will always be an endless debate because no amount of proof is ever going to change some people's minds, much less the opinions or "facts" of another person. HAHAHA!!

They could name it, "Come Here If You Are Bored and Want to Argue About Meaningless Shit"

At least it keeps the posts for the most part intelligent, and not a bunch of HB and SG threads. Totse is fucking awesome.

quote:Originally posted by boozehound420:

The idiocy of major religions, the contradictions, the illogical presence of there mythical god doesnt make sense. THerefor its not possible it exists.

My atheism stops there because theres nothing for me to base a belief or lack of belief that something could have evolved to some point somewhere that it was capable of creating our universe. And thats where my belief on that stops, such a being wouldnt want to be worshipped by little pueny humans. If it did it wouldnt have created such a large universe ht tp://www.y outube.com /watch?v=H KPUYZZbWxs (http: //www.yout ube.com/wa tch?v=HKPU YZZbWxs)

(this shows you how small and insignificant we really are)

And why do I not care about the semantics of the word atheist, well because i dont care. I could catagorize myself under atleast 12 defenitions. I say atheist most often just because its easy.

Boozehound,

I don't like you but I do respect you. This is the only honest response so far from someone claiming to be an atheist.

It's hard to not use the (overused) term "Atheist" when trying to describe to people what you don't believe in.

Secular Humanist is my preference, but most people look at you as if you've just announced that you were a Hare Krishna if you choose that phrase.

THUNDERCOCK, I have to beg the question:

How on earth did you come up with your theory? I can't tell if you're a sympathizer, an antagonist ... or just a troll.

boozehound420, I had been informed of this information before, your link, but not video. It was very good. I am interested as what you think the goal of humanity ought to be then. To self preserve? I think so at least, and if the human race manages to travel at the speed of light, I would really to like to see the human race 3000 years down the line.

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

Boozehound,

I don't like you but I do respect you. This is the only honest response so far from someone claiming to be an atheist.

How have you determined that my response was dishonest?

I see you've glossed over my questions again.

quote:Originally posted by AngryFemme:

It's hard to not use the (overused) term "Atheist" when trying to describe to people what you don't believe in.

Secular Humanist is my preference, but most people look at you as if you've just announced that you were a Hare Krishna if you choose that phrase.

THUNDERCOCK, I have to beg the question:

How on earth did you come up with your theory? I can't tell if you're a sympathizer, an antagonist ... or just a troll.



Another good response! Thank you.

I came up with this theory as a way to explain why someone would feel no spirituality. The reason I call it a "theory" is because I'm not really sure what the reason could be.

In my beliefs, everything comes from God and God exists everywhere and in all things. Mankind has created religion to explain different phenomena, control the masses, and consolidate power by replacing the connection we feel to God with a connection to Government (often a theocractic government).

As demonstrated by the responses above, there are very few true atheists. In fact, I have never encountered one. There always seems to be a hesitation to fully and completely sever away from the possibility of a god. I believe that almost all atheists fall into three categories:

1. Kewls who want to be nonconformists

2. people who are afraid of the possibility that god exists because they cannot understand it or explain it in scientific terms. They just can't deal with it in their mind.

3. People who want to replace God with the State and become gods themselves (Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot).

If there are any people who feel absolutely no spirituality, then perhaps they really are only physical beings. That's why I said they have no soul, just like a rock or a skyscraper.

quote:Originally posted by The Violent Pacifist:

boozehound420, I had been informed of this information before, your link, but not video. It was very good. I am interested as what you think the goal of humanity ought to be then. To self preserve? I think so at least, and if the human race manages to travel at the speed of light, I would really to like to see the human race 3000 years down the line.

Well we are in a state of artificial evolution, with science and technology. Its also going at a speed of some million times faster then biological evolution as dawkins explained it.

For humanity as a whole the goal should be to stretch the bounds of science and technology as far as we can go.

Ow and the speed of light isnt fast enough, its a good start though. The universe is just so vast. Just exploring our speck of our galaxy is going to be a big challenge. But a challenge we should all be up for. Religion will have to change or be left in the dust. Especially the people who take the books as literal fact.

Hers another video, the one i posted earlier shows on 1 scale, This one takes it to the next level http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GOnxcHYYYFw

If your ever bored and wanna learn some things abotu science, google video is the best way. Im never went on to post secondary education, If i did it would have been for a science. But i'm still intrested enough to support science and learn what I can. That entire BBC domumentary is on googlevideo . plus alot of other good

[This message has been edited by boozehound420 (edited 01-23-2007).]

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

I came up with this theory as a way to explain why someone would feel no spirituality.

And Thor was an explanation of where thunder comes from. Pulling a crazy idea out of your ass and assuming that souls exist isn't how intelligent people go about explaining things.

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

As demonstrated by the responses above, there are very few true atheists. In fact, I have never encountered one.

First of all, you can't come to Totse, get a few responses on a forum, and come to the conclusion that there are very few atheists.

Secondly, how do you know how many of the people that responded are atheists are not? I'm betting at least half of us in this thread are.



quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

There always seems to be a hesitation to fully and completely sever away from the possibility of a god. I believe that almost all atheists fall into three categories:

1. Kewls who want to be nonconformists

2. people who are afraid of the possibility that god exists because they cannot understand it or explain it in scientific terms. They just can't deal with it in their mind.

3. People who want to replace God with the State and become gods themselves (Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot).

And you don't include that there are rational people out there that don't believe in anything supernatural because they've never seen any evidence for anything supernatural existing? Get a fucking clue!

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

If there are any people who feel absolutely no spirituality, then perhaps they really are only physical beings. That's why I said they have no soul, just like a rock or a skyscraper.

Or maybe demons suck their souls out. Your belief has nothing concrete to back it up and is no better then any other silly little fairy tale.



You want to tell everyone what the definition of 'atheism' is, but as Martini pointed out about three times, you won't give us one cite that corroborates your definition. Put up or shut up!

quote:Originally posted by Martini:

Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

However, you can't be atheist and at the same time be open minded about the possibility of a god existing.

Yes, you can. I have no belief that there is a Loch Ness Monster, but I am open minded about the possibility and if I am provided with enough evidence, I will believe. The same can be said regarding evidence for God, gods, flying pigs, etc.

You stated earlier "if you are open in any way to the remote possibility that there is a god then you are not an atheist", and also "An atheist believes that there is no god. They don't think there is any possibility whatsoever of god existing".

Since this is a declaration of a word definition on your part, why don't you cite where you find such a word definition? I asked you to do this earlier and was ignored. I'm assuming it's because you realize that this is a definition that resides only within your own head.





Oxford English Dictionary, Second Edition

Here is how the OED defines atheism:

atheism Disbelief in, or denial of, the existence of a god.

disbelieve 1. trans. Not to believe or credit; to refuse credence to: a. a statement or (alleged) fact: To reject the truth or reality of.

deny

1. To contradict or gainsay (anything stated or alleged); to declare to be untrue or untenable, or not what it is stated to be.

2. Logic. The opposite of affirm; to assert the contradictory of (a proposition).

3. To refuse to admit the truth of (a doctrine or tenet); to reject as untrue or unfounded; the opposite of assert or maintain.

4. To refuse to recognize or acknowledge (a person or thing) as having a certain character or certain claims; to disown, disavow, repudiate, renounce.

http://tinyurl.com/2b8a6b

The link is to a site that does go into the idea that some atheists are open to the idea that a god exists. However, I disagree with that because if you are open to the idea then you are not renouncing or denying the existence of god (notice I use a small "g"). You have some sense of spirituality and therefore cannot bring yourself to fully denying or fully renouncing the idea of the possibility that god exists. If you said you are "sort of" atheist or "leaning towards" atheism, then I can accept that.

It's as if you are saying you are Catholic but you think Jesus was a prophet and not really the son of God. If you don't believe a fundamental tenet of Catholicism, then you are not really a Catholic are you?

I respect you too, Martini, and I like you more than Boozehound. Fortunately for you, in Atheism they don't burn you at the stake for heresy.

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:



Oxford English Dictionary, Second Edition

Here is how the OED defines atheism:

atheism Disbelief in, or denial of, the existence of a god.

disbelieve 1. trans. Not to believe or credit; to refuse credence to: a. a statement or (alleged) fact: To reject the truth or reality of.

deny

1. To contradict or gainsay (anything stated or alleged); to declare to be untrue or untenable, or not what it is stated to be.

2. Logic. The opposite of affirm; to assert the contradictory of (a proposition).

3. To refuse to admit the truth of (a doctrine or tenet); to reject as untrue or unfounded; the opposite of assert or maintain.

4. To refuse to recognize or acknowledge (a person or thing) as having a certain character or certain claims; to disown, disavow, repudiate, renounce.

It says disbelief in or denial of. The definition of 'disbelief' you supplied includes "Not to believe". Martini already explained that he disbelieves in God/gods and is an atheist by the definitions that you yourself just supplied.

There is nothing in that definition that says that an atheist can't be open to the possibilities of God/gods existing if given the evidence.

You can't claim that atheists that are without belief in God/gods have to come up with a different word and expect to be taken seriously. THEY ARE ATHEISTS!

QUOTE: Originally posted by Me:

You stated earlier "if you are open in any way to the remote possibility that there is a god then you are not an atheist", and also "An atheist believes that there is no god. They don't think there is any possibility whatsoever of god existing".

Not only am I an atheist according to the definitions you supplied, you have shown nothing to prove your assertion that atheists can not be open to the possibility of God/gods existing.

As sure as I am that flying pigs don't live in the center of the Earth, I would not close my eyes to evidence showing that they do.

quote:Originally posted by xray:



There is nothing in that definition that says that an atheist can't be open to the possibilities of God/gods existing if given the evidence.

You can't claim that atheists that are without belief in God/gods have to come up with a different word and expect to be taken seriously. THEY ARE ATHEISTS!

xray, you are a feisty one. You are right that the definition does not expound on the idea of an atheist being open to the existence of god. I am saying that you cannot have it both ways. Either you have spirituality or you do not. If you have just a little tiny bit then you have it.

You say there are atheists who are just rational people who have not seen sufficient evidence of the supernatural. The evidence they want will never come because things that are supernatural are not rational. You cannot order proof of the existence of God the same way you order a Whopper at Burger King. It will not come customized to your personal needs.

Have any atheists here actually looked for evidence? Have you actually tried to connect with anything spiritual? If so, what happened?

quote:Originally posted by Martini:

QUOTE: Originally posted by Me:

You stated earlier "if you are open in any way to the remote possibility that there is a god then you are not an atheist", and also "An atheist believes that there is no god. They don't think there is any possibility whatsoever of god existing".

Not only am I an atheist according to the definitions you supplied, you have shown nothing to prove your assertion that atheists can not be open to the possibility of God/gods existing.

As sure as I am that flying pigs don't live in the center of the Earth, I would not close my eyes to evidence showing that they do.



Have you looked for the evidence that god exists?

What would you do if you found it? How would you feel?

Let me just say, what he has put forward is not a THEORY, its an idea. A retarded one at that.

A theory is way to explain gathered facts from a variety of sources. He has no facts.

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

xray, you are a feisty one. You are right that the definition does not expound on the idea of an atheist being open to the existence of god. I am saying that you cannot have it both ways. Either you have spirituality or you do not. If you have just a little tiny bit then you have it.

Where did anyone in this thread say that he who has a little spirituality has none?

I'll answer for you: Nowhere!

I am a very scientific, rational, show me the evidence type of person. If you believe that me being open to the possibilities of anything being possible makes me spiritual, I don't follow your logic.

I know many Buddhists who are atheists and they consider themselves very spiritual. Theism does not have a foothold on spirituality.

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

xray, you are a feisty one. You are right that the definition does not expound on the idea of an atheist being open to the existence of god.

You forgot to mention that your own definitions prove that Martini and I are atheists.

quote:Originally posted by xray:



You forgot to mention that your own definitions prove that Martini and I are atheists.

[/QUOTE]

You and Martini can call yourselves whatever you want. I do not have the power to define your faith. You should never give that power away to anyone.

I still disagree with you that you can be spiritual and atheist at the same time. They are, in practice, conflicting and mutually exclusive.

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

You and Martini can call yourselves whatever you want. I do not have the power to define your faith. You should never give that power away to anyone. You're coming off like a real punk! If you believe this, why did you write, "If you and your atheist pals call yourselves atheists because you lack sufficient proof, then you need to call yourselves something else."? None of us gave that power to anyone, but thanks for the advice http://www.totse.com/bbs/rolleyes.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/rolleyes.gif)

You're not defining our faith. It takes no faith to be absent of belief in gods/Gods, but maybe we still haven't gotten through to you.

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

I still disagree with you that you can be spiritual and atheist at the same time. They are, in practice, conflicting and mutually exclusive.

I don't think you'll find many people who will agree with you that Buddhists are not spiritual because they don't believe in God/gods.

Enlighten yourself:

Here (http://tinyurl.com/2dba57) ,

here (http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=12516) ,

here (http://www.helium.com/tm/103067/religion-spiritual-religion-title) ,

and

here (http://atheism.about.com/od/atheismquestions/a/Spirituality.htm) .

quote:Originally posted by xray:



You're not defining our faith. It takes no faith to be absent of belief in gods/Gods, but maybe we still haven't gotten through to you.



It takes faith to be an atheist. You cannot prove that god does not exist, so believing god does not exist is a belief based on faith, not evidence.

There is no conclusive evidence that god does not exist and there is no conclusive evidence that god does exist.

It takes an ENORMOUS amount of faith to deny the existence of god and at the same time acknowledge the remote possibility that you may one day have to face him.

You claim to be rational? Where is YOUR evidence that god does not exist? How in YOUR personal experience did you come to the enlightened conclusion that there is no god?

Don't bother posting your links, I want to hear YOUR thoughts not some asshole who has a website.

Can you not think for yourself, xray?

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

It takes faith to be an atheist. You cannot prove that god does not exist, so believing god does not exist is a belief based on faith, not evidence.

Sorry kid, but your arguments aren't sound.

Being unable to disprove the existance of anything does not support it's existance. It requires no faith to disbelieve in that which has no evidence of existance.

Do you believe in and have faith that invisible gnomes reside on an invisible, massless planet on the far side of our galaxy? You cannot possibly prove that they do not exist. By your reasoning, you must have faith that they do not exist. Such an idea is rediculous.



quote:There is no conclusive evidence that god does not exist and there is no conclusive evidence that god does exist.

Without conclusive evidence to support the existance of anything, be it a god or invisible gnomes, it is irrational to consider their existance as anything more than a remote possibility.

quote:It takes an ENORMOUS amount of faith to deny the existence of god and at the same time acknowledge the remote possibility that you may one day have to face him.

Not at all. It is quite easy to deny the existance of the biblical god along with every other god invented by man. I hardly feel the need to worry about facing a mythical creation.

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:

Don't bother posting your links, I want to hear YOUR thoughts not some asshole who has a website.

Can you not think for yourself, xray?

What a little prick!

I proved to you a few times in this thread that I'm quite capable of thinking for myself. I showed you how you made the ridiculous mistake of providing dictionary definitions to prove yourself right, when that actually ended up proving you wrong. I thought that was quite an amusing bumble on your part! http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)

You have a habit of ignoring questions. You wrote, "You and Martini can call yourselves whatever you want. I do not have the power to define your faith. You should never give that power away to anyone. "

If you believe that, why did you write, "If you and your atheist pals call yourselves atheists because you lack sufficient proof, then you need to call yourselves something else."?

so if you are religious in any way, shape or form you have a soul? what about theistic devil worshipers?

also, i am agnostic. what about me? i accept the possibility of a god, because we can't prove otherwise but i strongly believe all religions are wrong and doubt there is a god is the sense of earthly religions. no god, just a creator. if there was a god to me, it would just be the god the new age people believe in, the energy of the universe of that crap.

You kids and your endless bickering.

quote:Originally posted by THUNDERCOCK:



As demonstrated by the responses above, there are very few true atheists. In fact, I have never encountered one.

Just a tip: I would not allow a handful of responses to a very short thread demonstrate to you that there are very few "true" atheists. Secondly, keep in mind what kind of BBS you are gathering facts on, and keep in mind the nature of this forum, which is hardly a good measuring tool to get an accurate view of ALL atheists and their viewpoints.

quote:There always seems to be a hesitation to fully and completely sever away from the possibility of a god.

Have you ever hesitated in your convictions, asked yourself the hard questions, really thought about the mind/body problem? If so, one could accuse you of not being a "true" believer, much like you've accused the non-believers of being "true" atheists.

quote: I believe that almost all atheists fall into three categories:

I believe you are trying to condense a very wide array of viewpoints that conflict with spirituality into three very limited categories. I also believe that you are biased in your "research" by your own affinity to the supernatural.

quote: I came up with this theory as a way to explain why someone would feel no spirituality. The reason I call it a "theory" is because I'm not really sure what the reason could be.

As you stated before, you firmly believe that everything comes from God. You believe God exists everywhere and in all things.

Your *theory* isn't a way to explain why people feel no spirituality. Actually, it would take an atheist, a materialist, one who does not subscribe to dualism or the supernatural to explain why they feel no spirituality. Feeling is subjective, remember?

Your *theory* better explains why YOU feel spirituality, and also explains why you can't wrap your mind around the idea that there may be conflicting viewpoints, and there is a possibility that yours is not correct.

I still can't stop going back to the beginning of this thread, where you called Atheists "the true humans". That tickles my ribs every time I read it. http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif (http://www.totse.com/bbs/smile.gif)