The Athiest thread - Page 14 - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 12-21-2004, 04:21 AM   #196
Blue Crack Addict
 
beli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In a frock in Western Australia
Posts: 15,464
Local Time: 09:12 PM
My ponderings:

1. Doesnt matter whether the riddle of the origins of the universe has been solved. NotAnEasyThing your definition did not assist my understanding. No offense.

2. Doesnt matter if there are holes in the fossil record as long as the holes are acknowledged. I simply say "I dont know about that bit". Not an issue.

3.
Atheist = no god
Jesus = not a god
therefore Jesus is irrelevant to the discussion on atheism (to me, the others may well disagree. )
__________________

__________________
beli is offline  
Old 12-21-2004, 04:29 AM   #197
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 11:12 PM
Well I do know about the gaps in the fossil record and I will just say that they do exist, the different species that we have discovered are no doubt a fraction of what has existed in history and there are certain periods for which our understanding is very slight but this in itself does not disqualify the vast finds that have been made over the last two centuries. We have found plenty of transitional fossils - forms of life that are intermediate, literally a stage in the evolution of new species, for instance a creature like ambulocetus is an aquatic mammal, the intermediate between land based mammals and whales etc. to explain these finds of species that do not exist today, have similarities to animals that existed before and after macroevolution is the most logical and scientific solution.
__________________

__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 12-21-2004, 04:37 AM   #198
The Fly
 
NotAnEasyThing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Central Coast, NSW, Australia
Posts: 146
Local Time: 12:12 AM
My ponderings to yours:

Quote:
Originally posted by beli
1. Doesnt matter whether the riddle of the origins of the universe has been solved. NotAnEasyThing your definition did not assist my understanding. No offense.
Did you really say it doesn't matter? If it has been discovered that an intellegent Creator does indeed exist... wouldn't that be something that you'd be interested in? Given you don't believe it at present, but hyperthetically don't you think that if the universe has a purpose and you are designed for a reason- isn't that something you would be vaguely interested in?

Quote:

2. Doesnt matter if there are holes in the fossil record as long as the holes are acknowledged. I simply say "I dont know about that bit". Not an issue.
My only point here Beli was that it is not a water tight theory? It is not even something I necessarily disagree with - just don't accept it blindly (which is something people in this thread say they value).

Quote:

3.
Atheist = no god
Jesus = not a god
therefore Jesus is irrelevant to the discussion on atheism (to me, the others may well disagree. )
If you are just going to dismiss Jesus' claim to deity out of hand then it is not really possible to have an intellegent conversation. It is not like it is just some insignificant annonymous person making this claim- he has had a profound impact on the course of history and around 2 billion people claim to follow him as God. So I can't see how you can have a discussion about Atheism without at least examining his claims
__________________
NotAnEasyThing is offline  
Old 12-21-2004, 04:40 AM   #199
The Fly
 
NotAnEasyThing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Central Coast, NSW, Australia
Posts: 146
Local Time: 12:12 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
Well I do know about the gaps in the fossil record and I will just say that they do exist, the different species that we have discovered are no doubt a fraction of what has existed in history and there are certain periods for which our understanding is very slight but this in itself does not disqualify the vast finds that have been made over the last two centuries. We have found plenty of transitional fossils - forms of life that are intermediate, literally a stage in the evolution of new species, for instance a creature like ambulocetus is an aquatic mammal, the intermediate between land based mammals and whales etc. to explain these finds of species that do not exist today, have similarities to animals that existed before and after macroevolution is the most logical and scientific solution.
No not necessarily- could just be another species. Just like there are many different species today that have similar characteristics but still very different species.

Just edited to add this: Wouldn't there be many more very incremental changes in individual species that should be still around today?

Again- I am only saying it isn't a water tight theory not that I necessarily disagree with it.
__________________
NotAnEasyThing is offline  
Old 12-21-2004, 04:44 AM   #200
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 11:12 PM
Simmilar characteristics within different species can be indiciative of common ancestry; human beings, bats, dogs and whales all have simmilar bone structures and and cell types; the evidence in the fossil record of early mammals would lend to the hypothesis of there being common ancestry.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 12-21-2004, 04:51 AM   #201
The Fly
 
NotAnEasyThing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Central Coast, NSW, Australia
Posts: 146
Local Time: 12:12 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
I see that you have read your Pascal's wager well, the infinite benefit vs. negligable loss as a basis to believe, this seems to be a rather pragmatic approach to faith. As far as my point about infinite - you approach the universe in terms of it being created, but that may not be the case and mankind must learn to accept the universe as it is - even if that includes the possibility of a static universe that has always existed and was never created - hardly dodging the question because your question is predicated upon the assumption that there was a time when the universe did not exist.
What's wrong with pragmatism? Yes it may not be the case that the universe was created- but it may be? How is your asertion not an assumption (ie. that this is a static universe that has always existed)?
__________________
NotAnEasyThing is offline  
Old 12-21-2004, 04:53 AM   #202
Blue Crack Addict
 
beli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In a frock in Western Australia
Posts: 15,464
Local Time: 09:12 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by NotAnEasyThing
My ponderings to yours:
Did you really say it doesn't matter?
Yes.

Quote:
Originally posted by NotAnEasyThing

My only point here Beli was that it is not a water tight theory? It is not even something I necessarily disagree with - just don't accept it blindly (which is something people in this thread say they value).
What has evolution got to do with atheism? Some people can be atheists and also into evolution but its not automatic.

Quote:
Originally posted by NotAnEasyThing

If you are just going to dismiss Jesus' claim to deity out of hand then it is not really possible to have an intellegent conversation. It is not like it is just some insignificant annonymous person making this claim- he has had a profound impact on the course of history and around 2 billion people claim to follow him as God. So I can't see how you can have a discussion about Atheism without at least examining his claims
I didnt say Jesus is an anonymous person, just that hes not a god. The Jews don't believe in Jesus. Does that mean its not possible to have an intelligent conversation with a Jew?

Im trying to keep my discussion to the bigger picture, the "no god" issue. A Wanderer and others are doing a fine job of discussing the micro issues.
__________________
beli is offline  
Old 12-21-2004, 04:54 AM   #203
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 11:12 PM
I am not assuming that, I am making a point that it is a possibility and it would be premature to say that it is definitely one thing or another. I am open to all the possibilities if the evidence supports the claim.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 12-21-2004, 04:56 AM   #204
The Fly
 
NotAnEasyThing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Central Coast, NSW, Australia
Posts: 146
Local Time: 12:12 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
Simmilar characteristics within different species can be indiciative of common ancestry; human beings, bats, dogs and whales all have simmilar bone structures and and cell types; the evidence in the fossil record of early mammals would lend to the hypothesis of there being common ancestry.
Could be too! Could also be evidence of a common creator! All I'm trying to get at is deciding to adopt evolution as a fact is still an act of faith (or if you don't like that term, then lets just call it playing the odds). It's not conclusive.
__________________
NotAnEasyThing is offline  
Old 12-21-2004, 04:58 AM   #205
The Fly
 
NotAnEasyThing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Central Coast, NSW, Australia
Posts: 146
Local Time: 12:12 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer
I am not assuming that, I am making a point that it is a possibility and it would be premature to say that it is definitely one thing or another. I am open to all the possibilities if the evidence supports the claim.
So what about the evidence for the Christian claims about God?
__________________
NotAnEasyThing is offline  
Old 12-21-2004, 04:59 AM   #206
ONE
love, blood, life
 
A_Wanderer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: The Wild West
Posts: 12,518
Local Time: 11:12 PM
It is a scientific fact, a scientific fact is
Quote:
an observation that has been confirmed repeatedly and is accepted as true (although its truth is never final)
http://www.cogsci.princeton.edu/cgi-bin/webwn?stage=1&word=scientific+fact

Evidence for Christian claims about God are basically coopted Jewish sacred texts which record a tribal history and collective knowledge, a creation myth of the Hebrews which may be based off a grain of truth regarding end of the ice age. On top of this you have Jesus Christ, a man born to prophesy of whom the "good news" is a collection of very neat propaganda written by those who desperately wanted to believe. A historical figure no doubt but a man God I think not. His philosophy bears more than a slight resemblance to that of Budha and the trade roots that led to the Greco-Buddhist fusion may well have provided such a young upstart with the right tools to forge his place in his religion, along with a few fisherman and whores. All of his exploits were recorded with a few embelishments, he was supposedly crucified and then rose from the dead - I think it is more likely that he somehow survived that fate, rising from the dead is not something that happens very often and when it does there is usually a more reasonable explaination than divine intervention.

Jesus was a man, a man who represented a philosophy that was eventually adopted by the greatest empire in tbe world. There have been many minor cult leaders in history who performed miracles to their followers but didn't manage to achieve the notoeriety of Jesus. However I would agree with beli - no god means that Jesus was not divine which basically eliminates the purpose of debating about Jesus - I do not spend nearly enough time reading the bible to make reasoned argument about about.
__________________
A_Wanderer is offline  
Old 12-21-2004, 05:10 AM   #207
The Fly
 
NotAnEasyThing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Central Coast, NSW, Australia
Posts: 146
Local Time: 12:12 AM
So you are NOT interested if it has been discovered that an intellegent Creator does indeed exist. Given you don't believe it at present, but hyperthetically you DON'T think that if the universe has a purpose and you are designed for a reason- isn't that that's something you would be vaguely interested in?

You have an interesting (read frustrating) way of discussing a topic beli. You have misrepresented what I have said and then argue against a straw man.

Quote:
Originally posted by beli

What has evolution got to do with atheism? Some people can be atheists and also into evolution but its not automatic.
I never said atheism is directly connected with evolution, in fact I have said it is possible to have an evolutionary view of the formation of life and still believe in a creator- of course if you do believe that God created people naturally the topic of evolution has to be broached.
Quote:

I didnt say Jesus is an anonymous person, just that hes not a god. The Jews don't believe in Jesus. Does that mean its not possible to have an intelligent conversation with a Jew?
I never said that you said jesus was an annonymous person, only that you dismissed Jesus' claims out of hand in a discussion that is about the topic of God's existence. Surely if we are talking about that we should look at any serious claims that have been made to Godhood.
__________________
NotAnEasyThing is offline  
Old 12-21-2004, 05:30 AM   #208
Blue Crack Addict
 
beli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In a frock in Western Australia
Posts: 15,464
Local Time: 09:12 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by NotAnEasyThing
So you are NOT interested if it has been discovered that an intellegent Creator does indeed exist.
I am interested in evidence but I havent seen any evidence to prove that a creator exists.

Quote:
Originally posted by NotAnEasyThing

You have an interesting (read frustrating) way of discussing a topic beli. You have misrepresented what I have said and then argue against a straw man.
I dont mean to be frustrating. I also have no idea what a "straw man" is. Im unfamiliar with this term. I just googled it and it looks like its a USA term. For the record I was raised in the outback with very little media. I still rarely watch the tv now. I do adore the internet though. So TV, movie references and USA English usually sink on me. Not that I want to stop you from using them. Just so you know where Im coming from.



Quote:
Originally posted by NotAnEasyThing

I never said that you said jesus was an annonymous person, only that you dismissed Jesus' claims out of hand in a discussion that is about the topic of God's existence. Surely if we are talking about that we should look at any serious claims that have been made to Godhood.
I dismissed Jesus as a god.

Argggh, seriously this goes back to the kettles boiled argument. Different ways of thinking. Please dont jump to conclusions. I havent actually said a whole lot during this thread as Im enjoying listening to A Wanderer. This is quite possibly my most silent postings.
__________________
beli is offline  
Old 12-21-2004, 05:31 AM   #209
The Fly
 
NotAnEasyThing's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Central Coast, NSW, Australia
Posts: 146
Local Time: 12:12 AM
Thanks A_W! I think that's the first time I have actually read someone on this thread give a reasoned answer to why they don't accept the Christian claims about God. As you can imagine though I do have some clear objections to what you have said.

Quote:
Originally posted by A_Wanderer

Evidence for Christian claims about God are basically coopted Jewish sacred texts which record a tribal history and collective knowledge, a creation myth of the Hebrews which may be based off a grain of truth regarding end of the ice age. On top of this you have Jesus Christ, a man born to prophesy of whom the "good news" is a collection of very neat propaganda written by those who desperately wanted to believe.
I wonder if you would be willing to suffer a painful life and death for a collection of very neat propaganda? That is what many of those first believers experienced and many still do today.
Quote:

A historical figure no doubt but a man God I think not. His philosophy bears more than a slight resemblance to that of Budha and the trade roots that led to the Greco-Buddhist fusion may well have provided such a young upstart with the right tools to forge his place in his religion, along with a few fisherman and whores.
That's an interesting take. Actually you'd be hard pressed to find 2 more divergent ideas about life than christianity and buddhism. One is about Karma and one is about Grace - different ends of the spectrum.
Quote:

All of his exploits were recorded with a few embelishments, he was supposedly crucified and then rose from the dead - I think it is more likely that he somehow survived that fate, rising from the dead is not something that happens very often and when it does there is usually a more reasonable explaination than divine intervention.
Hmmm, have you ever read anything about the roman practice of crucifixion? This idea of Jesus somehow reviving just doesn't fit with the facts. You try getting crucified, have a spear thrust in your side, spending 3 days without food or drink, and then mustering the strength to push a massive bolder and take on a roman security detatchment- and then trying to convince your followers you have been resurrected. The fact that resurrection is not something that happens very often is the very reason why this incident is so profoundly crucial to it all.
Quote:

Jesus was a man, a man who represented a philosophy that was eventually adopted by the greatest empire in tbe world. There have been many minor cult leaders in history who performed miracles to their followers but didn't manage to achieve the notoeriety of Jesus.
I know! -the exact reason why his claims require a thorough investigation not an out of hand dismissal because it doesn't fit neatly with your world view
Quote:

However I would agree with beli - no god means that Jesus was not divine which basically eliminates the purpose of debating about Jesus - I do not spend nearly enough time reading the bible to make reasoned argument about about.
This is the most telling statement you have made, and I thank you for your honesty. This is what I am saying is the point- check out the facts with impartiality as I have done, and then draw your conclsuions.
__________________
NotAnEasyThing is offline  
Old 12-21-2004, 05:33 AM   #210
you are what you is
 
Salome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 22,016
Local Time: 02:12 PM
only thing the evolution theory proves is that you can't take the bible literally (which isn't a problem for me since I wouldn't even know where to find a bible )

in an ironic way there is about as much 'evidence' that god can't exist as that he does exist
hardly any

it also amuses me that nowadays there seem to be more people who believe in intelligent alien life forms (mostly because it would explain some stuff that we don't understand) than people who believe in god
__________________

__________________
“Some scientists claim that hydrogen, because it is so plentiful, is the basic building block of the universe. I dispute that. I say there is more stupidity than hydrogen, and that is the basic building block of the universe.”
~Frank Zappa
Salome is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com