I don't believe you

[Alchopwn]

On 6/9/2019 at 10:12 PM, Pettytalk said:

O fearless one! I can see that you will be one of those rabbits running for your hole when that day comes. So now you are saying that those who are atheists are more courageous in facing death than believers? We'll see who will be singing or who will be doing it all over themselves.

LOL, as if.  If your phoney sky tyrant, against all evidence, actually proves to exist, then what on earth makes you think you aren't going to hell?  Is there a more disgusting character in all of human literature than the God of the Bible?  Jealous, petty, vengeful, narcissistic, violent, genocidal, dictatorial, completely illogical, demanding of worship, utterly emotionally insecure.  Based on the evidence of scripture, heaven will be every bit as much of a gulag as hell. 

Edited June 11, 2019 by Alchopwn

[Habitat]

10 minutes ago, Alchopwn said:

Based on the evidence of scripture

Well, I wouldn't take much notice of scripture, very much the work of men. What did that bloke say, "do not place your faith in the son of man"

[Alchopwn]

On 6/10/2019 at 12:16 AM, DieChecker said:

Depends. If they have honestly "looked the nihilistic reality of the oblivion that their consciousness faces when they die", then no. But, if I am right, a LOT of "atheists" haven't ultimately done that, or if they have, maybe they've considered that they actually didn't seriously consider their oblivion. For one thing, a lot of people consider the Non-Religious to be atheist. So, those people could very well not have stared at death and come to terms with it deliberately. 

I think you're wrong about that.  I think that all atheists have done exactly that.  I don't know a person who calls themselves an Atheist who hasn't.  As for these non-religious people, I don't consider them to be proper atheists.  They are probably agnostics, and who cares about those fence sitters?  I hope they get splinters for their lack of conviction.

On 6/10/2019 at 12:16 AM, DieChecker said:

For another, most money given to a church doesn't stay there. It doesn't go into the leaderships pockets. It often goes to charity, or to fund missions around the locality, such as woman's shelters, food banks, clothing collection. Just because a handful of Televangists have gotten rich and buy multimillion dollar cars and houses does not mean the local church leadership of that church on the corner is eating off gold plates. If you believe that, then you are obviously too far gone to discuss with.

Basically making a living off of religion is parasitism.  Each and every one of those so-called charities is in effect a ground for preying on the insecurities of emotionally and economically vulnerable people and trying to trick them into the cult.  Remember too that every good deed done by a Christian is also an act of utter hypocrisy that is aimed at getting them into heaven because they fear hell, and there is nothing pure motivating the charity at all, only naked superstitious self interest.  You can't be altrustic and a Christian, as every good deed ultimately has the selfish motive of getting in good with god to avoid hell.  When an atheist chooses to be altruistic it is genuinely motivated by a love for their fellow humans,as they actually stand to gain nothing but a little gratitude, and often, when they donate anonymously (as is normal), not even that.  And yeah, televangelists.  There do seem to be a lot of them, no?  Even you local chuch leader will be getting tax breaks.

On 6/10/2019 at 12:16 AM, DieChecker said:

A lot of atheists I've spoken with have not said they became atheist because they faced down death, they say they became atheist due to lack of evidence is favor of religion/God. You're making a strawman arguement that no one else has made here so far. That atheists do not fear death. I'd imagine plenty of them fear death, and because they don't believe in God, they do what they can, by way of exercise, medicine, good food, and other lifestyle choices to try to stay alive.

Do you seriously think that anyone who says the evidence for god is non-existent hasn't also contemplated the implications of that statement vis no afterlife?  If so you're very naive.  And yes, it is perfectly natural for an atheist to admit a fear of death.  Facing that fear isn't the same as overcoming it, and nor does it have to be.  All you need to do is accept you are afraid and persevere regardless.  Now lets talk about all those Christians who are supposed to be saved from death and unimperilled by judgement who are also scared of death...  So much for faith, huh?

[Alchopwn]

On 6/9/2019 at 10:58 PM, XenoFish said:

To the bold. It carries it's own bleakness. Once you realize it though, there is no turning back. You're stuck with it. It can lead to it's own despair. Not too dissimilar to a believers fear of death or hell. Once you realize life is meaningless, pointless, and ultimately futile, what exact is the worth of living since none of it matters?

Are you kidding?  The truth sets you free.  When you realize the fact that you make your own meaning, that is the start of living your real life.  When you realise that when you die, there is nothing, becomes the impetus to drive you.

[Habitat]

3 minutes ago, Alchopwn said:

When you realise that when you die, there is nothing,

You surmise as much, but are wrong, from my sober observation and assessment. But, when we are "outward bound" in life, it is possibly best to not dwell on such matters.

[Rlyeh]

On ‎1‎/‎06‎/‎2019 at 5:16 PM, DieChecker said:

I think this is an interesting point. The common belief by many of the atheists here on UM is one that Believers operate out of fear. Fear of dying, mainly. And they should look inside themselves and see why they argue so strongly here in these threads. That some argue so strongly to convince themselves of their beliefs.

But, the point raised is if atheists, here on UM, who likewise argue strongly, are not themselves in fear? Fear, I would imagine, that they perhaps are wrong? That they argue their points strongly to convince THEMSELVES of their atheist viewpoint? Just as it is argued believers might argue strongly to convince their own self.

I, myself, believe people will identify with whom they want to identify, regardless of what they might rationally, or irrationally, fear.

But, I thought it an interesting thought.

Because it's exactly what you do.  You've admitted you reject any evidence that runs contrary to your beliefs.

[Alchopwn]

1 minute ago, Habitat said:

You surmise as much, but are wrong, from my sober observation and assessment. But, when we are "outward bound" in life, it is possibly best to not dwell on such matters.

LOL, have you ever met a Jewish carpenter?  Of course not, nobody has.  Don't you find that suspicious? 

[Habitat]

11 minutes ago, Alchopwn said:

LOL, have you ever met a Jewish carpenter?  Of course not, nobody has.  Don't you find that suspicious? 

That is an interesting retort, but I doubt has any relevance to the big picture.

[Alchopwn]

Just now, Habitat said:

That is an interesting retort, but I doubt has any relevance to the big picture.

I was just pointing out that you're a cultist and gently making fun of your beliefs.

[Habitat]

10 minutes ago, Alchopwn said:

I was just pointing out that you're a cultist and gently making fun of your beliefs.

I'm not a Christian, except in the loosest of interpretations. ( you had to be something, when we went to school) I am not a cultist of any kind.

[+Pettytalk]

On 6/9/2019 at 2:30 PM, Harte said:

Atheism is disbelief or lack of belief in any god.

The position does not impact on any belief or lack of belief in some form of afterlife. That was my point.

The fact that some (possible a great majority) of Atheists don't believe in an afterlife is beside the point.

Harte

Sorry, just getting around to the posts.

Now I can say that I understand more for what atheism means to you. What I'm understanding is that an atheist is not strictly one that does not believe in a supernatural phenomenon/condition, but only are strict atheists when it comes to believing in a supernatural power over them, such as God. In other words, an atheist is a strict supernatural anarchist, as meant by the Greek word, anarkhos. Now I see why you reference the book, since it dealt with atheistic compromising, because a few claiming to be atheists will entertain a belief in some sort of afterlife, but not one necessarily governed by an entity identified with having super, supernatural powers over the rest of the inhabitants of the afterlife realm, the one mostly, or nearly all, beyond science. But I suppose that these few exceptional atheists still refuse to believe that our natural physical world of this life came about from a powerful being, or beings? For not believing there existing any God or gods, is the number one reason why one would identify as an atheist, correct?

I suppose that we have a few soft atheists and many hard ones, the way I see it now. I suppose these soft ones do not use hard science, and perhaps the reason for their softness, or rather, as the hard ones would say, lack of scientific reasoning.

Still, I do not quite understand your position as an agnostic, because I recall you questioning yourself, or was it just a show of humor? It would seem to me, that you are perhaps a soft agnostic, and not a hard one, if you expressed your true sentiments, and not just wanting to be humorous, as usual.

And let me tell you that I really do appreciate not being ignored by you, and thank you for taking time to exchange the word, as they say. I say this because, simply, around this forum's section I'm on the cusp between ignore and ridicule, mostly. And it boils down to my old question, is it "bitter" to have never been born, or to have been born and made bitter?

[Harte]

There is an accepted definition of atheism. That's what I'm going by.

I can't tell the difference between a hard agnostic and a soft agnostic, but I hesitate to ask for clarity there in the face of the walls of text you put up.

Harte

[+Pettytalk]

On 6/9/2019 at 9:20 AM, jmccr8 said:

Hi Diechecker

I would think most of us understand our mortality and know that it is unavoidable. Sure people try to live healthy so that their life is comfortable and with some enjoyment and that may not be because they fear death, I have no memories of anything before this life and see death in the same way so there is nothing to fear for me personally. I am neither religious or atheist as I have a concept of god that makes no promise of any kind, I have potential to change this life that I have and no more than that and I am content to accept that for what it is. I did not choose to live nor do I choose to die I just am for whatever amount of time I have.

jmccr8

That's incorrect. One can choose to checkout, die, prematurely, "ask" any suicide victim. And since the universe is universally one of opposites, if one can choose to die prematurely, then one can choose to be born prematurely. "Ask" any seventh month baby. Obviously, it would seem, that if we are physically born, then we have no choice in dying, as prematurely or otherwise, we all go. Such is the natural physical law, and like all physical laws governing the physical, it's absolutely necessary that we die, but only to be reborn. Because, if there is a beginning, birth, then there must needs be an end, death. And the end and the beginning, in a circle, is a moot point since they touch each other. And once one gets into a vicious circle it takes something outside the circle to take us out of it. And, I keep repeating the same thing, as any good parrot does, the soul is not subject to physical laws, since soul is before the body, the physical universe, and before these physical laws. 

Perhaps, this vicious circle can be seen from the perspective of the lyrics of one of my old favorite songs. Once God sends our souls for a stay at the Hotel California, we can check out anytime we like, but we can never leave. In other words, unless we are able to grow back our fallen wings, we will stay here, in this vicious physical world of births and death cycles.

[+Pettytalk]

5 hours ago, Alchopwn said:

LOL, as if.  If your phoney sky tyrant, against all evidence, actually proves to exist, then what on earth makes you think you aren't going to hell?  Is there a more disgusting character in all of human literature than the God of the Bible?  Jealous, petty, vengeful, narcissistic, violent, genocidal, dictatorial, completely illogical, demanding of worship, utterly emotionally insecure.  Based on the evidence of scripture, heaven will be every bit as much of a gulag as hell. 

Sounds as if are describing that picture you hide behind. Good old Al had all those excellent qualities, and perhaps a few more you forgot to list. But as far as finding all those "characteristic" features within the pages of human literature, have you ever read Shakespeare? Not the only one though! Try the book of mother nature. And I would guess that you yourself could wear some of those titles, as you seem to have a perfect fit to some, I would say.

Go smoke your cigar in peace, until death do us part.

[+Pettytalk]

18 minutes ago, Harte said:

There is an accepted definition of atheism. That's what I'm going by.

I can't tell the difference between a hard agnostic and a soft agnostic, but I hesitate to ask for clarity there in the face of the walls of text you put up.

Harte

Not a wall, just a steps to climb. You are a chef of sorts with chickens, can't you tell the difference between a soft and hard boiled egg? It's a matter of timing from when the water starts to boil.

Now you are asking me to go and dig up and cite the post you showed your humor or your feelings. But going by my bad memory I believe it was something in parenthesis, something of this nature more or less, (don't know if I believe any of it)

[+Pettytalk]

4 hours ago, Habitat said:

That is an interesting retort, but I doubt has any relevance to the big picture.

He's obviously a carpenter's union card holder. A union where, also obvious, they discriminate by not hiring Jewish carpenters. That would explain the relevance to the big picture, and his lack of knowledge with carpentry as a whole, would it not. He does not see the big picture that the Bible is mostly symbolic. Why even Jesus' earthly profession is just to show that, like his Father, he constructed physical things. Why it's a representation that His Father contracted the universe from a lifeless stump of dead wood, to give it life and use to those chairs, and tables, etc. But go and explain that to someone who is infatuated with Chicago's old rabbit, Al, "scareface," Capone.

[+Pettytalk]

On 6/9/2019 at 2:21 PM, Guyver said:

Petty talk.....good stuff.  It’s just so much.....I’m working on this lame little iPad....anyway....I like what you have to say and I’d like to respond in several different posts.  Let’s begin with your Trinity.  I also once accepted the Trinity,  and was baptized and confirmed Catholic.

i became a “born again” at the age of seventeen and went Pentecostal Evangelical.  Preacher.

Anyway....you’ve expressed by you reject it, and I agree with you rejection.  Mine was different, I came to the conclusion that the Bible was false after so many years of study.  I first came to understand that Revelation was a false prophecy and that the Bible was wrong about the end of the world.  That, plus the evil of the Old Testament, attempting to passed off as God made me abandon all of it.....except for the writings of Solomon, which I place on a high level with the greatest of philosophers.

In conclusion, your willingness to reject the trinity as a true makes you and I brothers.  I think this is the first step towards truth.

One must be willing to sacrifice everything believed before to attain it.

I can always use a brother around here, but I'm afraid that I'm no Solomon when it comes to wisdom. I would never have thought to propose slicing the baby in two. I would have proposed a slice in three parts, so that I could have taken my cut too, for having to make the decision.

[+DieChecker]

9 hours ago, Alchopwn said:

I think you're wrong about that.  I think that all atheists have done exactly that.  I don't know a person who calls themselves an Atheist who hasn't.  As for these non-religious people, I don't consider them to be proper atheists.  They are probably agnostics, and who cares about those fence sitters?  I hope they get splinters for their lack of conviction.

Ok. So atheists... proper atheists... are all self knowing realists. All of them.

You're allowed a opinion even if it appears to be outright bias. But I think you are wrong. But then, to prove your point, all you have to do is claim anyone different isn't a real atheist. That has all the makings of a zealot.

Quote

Basically making a living off of religion is parasitism.  Each and every one of those so-called charities is in effect a ground for preying on the insecurities of emotionally and economically vulnerable people and trying to trick them into the cult.  Remember too that every good deed done by a Christian is also an act of utter hypocrisy that is aimed at getting them into heaven because they fear hell, and there is nothing pure motivating the charity at all, only naked superstitious self interest.  You can't be altrustic and a Christian, as every good deed ultimately has the selfish motive of getting in good with god to avoid hell.  When an atheist chooses to be altruistic it is genuinely motivated by a love for their fellow humans,as they actually stand to gain nothing but a little gratitude, and often, when they donate anonymously (as is normal), not even that.  And yeah, televangelists.  There do seem to be a lot of them, no?  Even you local chuch leader will be getting tax breaks.

So every Christian acts out of fear, in everything, but atheists act out of love? Uhh huh.... sure... more zealotry on your part IMHO.

Quote

Do you seriously think that anyone who says the evidence for god is non-existent hasn't also contemplated the implications of that statement vis no afterlife?  If so you're very naive.  And yes, it is perfectly natural for an atheist to admit a fear of death.  Facing that fear isn't the same as overcoming it, and nor does it have to be.  All you need to do is accept you are afraid and persevere regardless.  Now lets talk about all those Christians who are supposed to be saved from death and unimperilled by judgement who are also scared of death...  So much for faith, huh?

Yes, I do. But, then I didn't know I was dealing with a radical zealot when I wrote that. Now that I do, in can deal with you in the method most likely to be productive.

Ignore you.

[+DieChecker]

8 hours ago, Rlyeh said:

Because it's exactly what you do.  You've admitted you reject any evidence that runs contrary to your beliefs.

So you agree, or disagree, or just pointing out my question is framed by my beliefs?

[XenoFish]

9 hours ago, Alchopwn said:

Are you kidding?  The truth sets you free.  When you realize the fact that you make your own meaning, that is the start of living your real life.  When you realise that when you die, there is nothing, becomes the impetus to drive you.

Realizing the truth can and does for some of us, leaves a void. And it can and does consume some of us. Even when you know that you must invent your own meaning, you also have the knowledge that the meaning you give is also meaningless. Just another illusion. In some cases such knowledge robs all drive and determination. 

[jmccr8]

9 hours ago, Pettytalk said:

One can choose to checkout, die, prematurely, "ask" any suicide victim.

Hi Pettytalk

It is a given that we die and my comment was intended that it comes as a package no one can choose not to die. I have known many that have committed suicide and that was their choice, not mine nor would I expect an answer from a dead man.

9 hours ago, Pettytalk said:

but only to be reborn. Because, if there is a beginning, birth, then there must needs be an end, death. And the end and the beginning, in a circle, is a moot point since they touch each other. And once one gets into a vicious circle it takes something outside the circle to take us out of it. And, I keep repeating the same thing, as any good parrot does, the soul is not subject to physical laws, since soul is before the body, the physical universe, and before these physical laws. 

I don't have a problem with you having this perspective and it is yours not mine but you projecting your perspective on my existence is pointless. I am not saying you are incorrect or wrong just that neither one of us can prove any of this so I am content to die when it is my time and accept that it was all there was.

9 hours ago, Pettytalk said:

Perhaps, this vicious circle can be seen from the perspective of the lyrics of one of my old favorite songs. Once God sends our souls for a stay at the Hotel California, we can check out anytime we like, but we can never leave. In other words, unless we are able to grow back our fallen wings, we will stay here, in this vicious physical world of births and death cycles.

If that is what you believe, okay go with it and I never had wings just a lead foot and a love of cars makes me fly.

jmccr8

[Rlyeh]

11 hours ago, DieChecker said:

So you agree, or disagree, or just pointing out my question is framed by my beliefs?

I agree it applies to you.

[Alchopwn]

17 hours ago, Pettytalk said:

Sounds as if are describing that picture you hide behind. Good old Al had all those excellent qualities, and perhaps a few more you forgot to list. But as far as finding all those "characteristic" features within the pages of human literature, have you ever read Shakespeare? Not the only one though! Try the book of mother nature. And I would guess that you yourself could wear some of those titles, as you seem to have a perfect fit to some, I would say.  Go smoke your cigar in peace, until death do us part.

LOL, yes, please make that comparison.  In fact make it often.  It makes Al Capone sound godlike and your God sound like a syphilitic crime boss.  

Edited June 12, 2019 by Alchopwn

[Alchopwn]

13 hours ago, XenoFish said:

Realizing the truth can and does for some of us, leaves a void. And it can and does consume some of us. Even when you know that you must invent your own meaning, you also have the knowledge that the meaning you give is also meaningless. Just another illusion. In some cases such knowledge robs all drive and determination. 

Speak for yourself.  My meaning is my meaning.  I made it, and it works for me.  I don't need an external source of meaning, in fact I worry that such would be a hang-over from childhood dependencies on parents and authority figures.  To claim that your own meaning is somehow illusory just because you made it and are responsible for it is unhealthy.  It is like saying, for example, that the car you built yourself  is worthless because you built it cheaply from scrap and salvage, with your own hands and didn't spend thousands of dollars at a car dealership buying a status symbol.  Now when you build your own car from scratch, if you have the skills, you can design every part of it to your own expecations and specifications and use your own skills to do the work.  Your own hand built car may in fact be superior to the shop bought models in every way, being your own, one of a kind, custom car.  I would argue that the car you make yourself is intrinsically more meaningful, even if it is worse than a shop bought car.   So too with personal meaning.  You can buy a religion, or a self help book from the Oprah book club list, or you can DIY. I have always liked the punk DIY attitude.

Edited June 12, 2019 by Alchopwn

[XenoFish]

I am speaking for myself. There is no true defining meaning to our existence, there are meaningful things and moments, those are brief, fleeting. 

While the "car" you might build is great. It won't last, it'll need constant maintaining and work. Yet, underneath the hood there's no engine. 

All meanings are artificial in nature thus the absurdity of it all.