mike2h

you have yet to show me any critical thinking on your part on this subject. the same goes for 'evidence'.
you claim there is no evidence of god/'supernatural' beings, or whatever things people derive there faith from. you also claim to have come up with 'evidence'(wich you have yet to do) that these things do not exist. how do you prove something that may not exist actually doesnt? if these people didnt actually exist in some form there would be nothing to disprove.
you keep saying that christ & his apostles, mohammed, buddah never existed. yet there is much written evidence to the contrary. the only so called evidence you come up with is from people that are our contempories. why dont you find some actual, real evidence from times contemporous to christ & mohamed(who acknowledged christ as a living person centuries after christs death) & buddah,etc.
everything you hav posted or linked to is opinions. period. & while religion is bascically opinions to, it also has a base in historical writings that are way older & more widly accepted by researchers & scientists than anything you have come up with.
something you just dont get, is that the bible & any number of old/ancient religous documents are historical. you dont have to believe in their teaching to realise this. or should i say, anybody that is capable of critical thinking & not on some sort of silly mission to tear down peoples belief systems would realise this.
bty there are all sorts of things going back to prehistoric times that have been & are beyond our knowledge. but this changes constantly, at least for people whos viewpoint isnt so narrow they cant see out of the box they have put themselves in.
thank god for the people that dont limit their viewpoint & are willing to believe in something that they cant see or prove at that particular moment.
im done here.

__________________

OmegaRED

The Burden of Proof is on the believer in God not the other way around. When you make a fantastical claim you'll need some fantastic evidence to back it up otherwise it's just imagination.

There is no evidence for or against the existence of God (despite that you think a book written by men counts) although many Atheists have pointed out there could not be a God because if he exists who created Him? This is a question I've been unable to answer.

Wrong again, I said there's no historical evidence that Jesus existed. The Bible is not historical evidence. Let's say Jesus, Muhammed and Buddah were all real people, fine, that doesn't make them prophets anymore than David Koresh.

I've never been in a history class that taught Bible verses as fact and all the History Majors I know laugh at the Bible. I'll tell you what, Mike, if you can prove to me that Harvard or Princeton teaches the Bible in their History department I will be willing to change my mind. Otherwise, shut your mouth. I'm tired of repeating myself and you not summoning the energy to find even one link to support any of your claims.

This is a logical fallacy, I believe it's called "gap theory". In scientific knowledge there is always going to be major gaps which will be slowly filled in; the gaps are being filled in all the time with new discoveries. The religious man sees these gaps as proof of divine intervention, if there is no explanation then "God did it". This is not scientific and unacceptable to most people.

Mike, in order to prevent you wasting either of our time why don't you check out this video.

YouTube - How not to Argue with Atheists

I'm probably guilty of number 7 but I'm trying

__________________

SFOSOK

If a father punishes his child does he necessarily hate him?


Edit: No

__________________
*Warning* - Explicit Content Preceeding

mike2h

while these sites arent sources i would prefer(more from the secular side than not) they will do - bible archaeology - Google Search
wished you would really try to at least be consistent. you have claimed before that those religous leaders did not exist. now you are saying that they did but that they werent prophets & besides werent historical. were is this famed critical thinking you keep laying claim to?
by definition they are 'historical' figures. & since their only real claim to existence is the fact that they were prophets, if they in fact existed, they were prophets. you dont have to believe what they were saying, but you cant get away from the facts that their function was to teach/preach & that their words were recorded & believed by many people while they were living.
so which is it, did they live or didnt they? i think you are confused about what you think is real & what isnt as far as religion goes. well, more than most people anyway.
as far as that link goes it is obviously a self seving plug setup by an atheist. he obviouisly is a big source for your 'way' of thinking. you should try using some critical thinking on some of his statements. im not saying that a lot of wha the says isnt true as far as some of those bozoz thah go around telling everbody what to believe. it is just that it is a self serving clip. & you should know that.
you really dont understand much of what i say or more likely just havent bothered to read it. i have no use for people that use that 'going to hell' thing nor do i believe in throwing scripture around, that type of stuff is for whatever preacher you choose at whatever place you call your church. yet you keep assuming that i do/believe these things, wich is a direct consequence of taking that silly clip at face value. its assetion that the burden of proof that proving the existence of any spiritual being or religous historical figure & for there to be no burden of proof on the nay sayer is ridiculous. i wished i could remember my logic classs from back in college, there is a name for the type of argument he & you use & it is erroneus.
you really need to get your facts straight. holy scriptures are by definition holy scriptures. has nothing to do with wether you believe them or not. the ones used by christianity, islam, buddhism, etc, are also historical documents in that they were written record of events that happened long ago. & like a large percentage of historical documents you have to use common sense & some intelligence to get what is real & relevant out of these documents. & know that what is relevant & real could change due to any number of reasons.
emotion in both religion, belief in a higher being, atheism, etc, is where we all run into problems.
bty, the form of atheism you seem to practice could be deemed a religion of sorts(i dont really believe that) becuase there is a group of that is unified in its belief/purpose, shares info & support, thinks everyone else is wrong, & actually has a title that they use to refer to themselves with pride.
one of my best freinds is an atheist, she doesnt refer to herself as that, but it will simply state she doesnt believe in god. she doesnt push her views on anybody - unless you start preaching at her(i love it when some zealot tries this) then she will discuss until the person(invariably) gets emotional at wich point she ends it/walks away. bty i have seen her do the same thing wih a couple of atheist- zealot(this would be you) types.
while she was raised a catholic(her parents are devout) & has gone to several other churches, she has not, nor does not need to do any research into being an atheist/agnostic. she is very, very intelligent & i respect her immensly & as i said, she is one of my 2 best freinds.
she is also one of the kindest most generous persons that i know(almost to a fault). she is a firm believer in many of the bibles teachings, just doesnt believe they are divine in source but recognises inherent goodness when she sees it. i also believe 'god' will determine her to be an excellent human being.
as i am not sure you will get it(&not sure if i got it across), this is somebody that does not believe in the existence of god & does so in a positive way. you on the other hand, along with many other who share your belief system do so in negative way.
she is also completely hot
anyway, im done with you in this thread. know i said it before, but mean it this time.

__________________

Sandok

But he might...

And Omega, I whole heartedly agree with what you have to say, but this is a useless debate. We believe what we want, they believe what they want.

There is no proof for or against "God" but believers will find it if they want. A good example is a very christian person who told me: Look at nature, there is your proof of God!!!

Actually everything around us, including my disbelief of God was proof of him... He's got some mighty arugments

This is pointless and you know it

OmegaRED

That's unfortunate the such a hot bright young lady will be going straight to Hell (with me). You see, she's committed the unforgivable sin:

Do I have your permission to put the moves on her while we're roasting in Hell?

Fine

__________________

Sandok

You don't have to stop though, you are VERY entertaining

Judas

I don't beleive in god.... he or she.. whatever..

nor can i say that they don't excist... even in science.. there is always the chance/possibility... even with the improbability being rediculiously high.... still being probable..

mike2h, what your described of your friend seems to follow similare traits and values of what i do. While i do beleive that some of the most basic of rules.... such as the 10 commandments... are an excellent reference. But there also alot that i find simply rediculious....

I find full on athiests way to much closed/narrow minded.... course i don't really give a rats ass about it.. they can go on thinking whatever.... and so can the religious people..

I'm also born within a heavily catholic family... my father is pretty much a preist.. (more years then most preists have taken lol )... and his grand father was from england and apparently was a "high" ranking preist.... as i'm unfamilare with the terminology of what that might be.

However i was not baptised.. even though my father was fairly upset by this and continues to ask me as well as my sisters to get baptised.... unfortuneately for him... it'll likely never happen.


The concept of a god is interesting... but nothing more then that to me..... the concept of there not being a god in the form that most people would think of a god.... doesn't phase me at all..

I beleive in possibility, endless in all directions and forms.... I also beleive and KNOW that while science is an very useful.. there will always be errors made.... mistakes made.... inconsistancies.. or misunderstandings..... Rules broken and rules changed. New discoveries made that will make previous records and history make much more sense....

Science is far from perfect and true..... but i find religion while may not be anywhere close to accurate.. may have a few things right... or possible... just not in the way that it's discribed.... or how things are "to be"

__________________

mike2h

well i know she isnt going to hell. & i thought, according to your mentor in that link that quoting scrips is a no-no. oh thats right, it is only a no-no if a non atheist is doing it. or is this another one of those hypocrisy things.
i have no idea why you keep quoting scrips at me as i have told you my view on the bible several times - if you bothered to read & comprehend.
unless you are more of an asshole than you come across in here(&thats pretty big) & have commited some egregious crimes we dont know about i dont think you are going to 'hell'.
i think you would get shot down in flames as far as she goes. she dislikes any sort of zealot.
anyway, why dont we gang up on sandok, he needs a good thrashing

__________________

mike2h

crap, now i got to dump one of my 2 best freinds. that sux. thx judas

__________________

Judas

why .. what'd i say!?

__________________

mike2h

that she might have some similarities to you

__________________

Judas

Run Away!

__________________