Forkheads :: Forkheads : Atheists and Agnostics : ./General No Spam

CarsitoPyg wrote:

Obviously you don't know what it's like to be an atheist/agnostic black sheep in a family filled with religious people. I mean, a true atheist, someone who has already gone through the skepticism of religion and had periods of understanding and then finally decided "fuck it, it's not real".
If I come out as not a believer, I'm fucked (mainly because I have to live with her for another year). I love my mom, and the last thing I need is a constant guilt trip of how I'm ruining my "soul" just because I need evidence before I can form a belief.

Agnosticism (what I believe in) is just that. The need of evidence to form a belief. Real evidence, not "see this wafer? it's God, lol". Atheists, to me, believe there is no God. I know that we're not smart enough to form a belief like that, so I remain Agnostic. I remain in the world of skepticism and I stick to philosophy. If I actually had a religion, I would call it Logic. I follow logic, and logic has led me to that the answer that if there is an answer, we sure as hell aren't going to figure it out. I do have a problem with Atheists and Theists, but I have a bigger problem with Atheists usually because for people who don't have faith, they still take a leap of faith in believing that it was all an accident. It may be an accident, but that's just as likely as a supreme being doing it all.

Christianity itself defies Logic. Theism could express it better, but a mass religion like Christianity holds too many contradictions and retarded stories to possibly be "logical". The believers themselves don't even wonder how all of the stories in the bible were actually possible. They just think to themselves "because God made it that way". Jesus walks on water "because he's the son of God". Jesus resurrects the dead and heals wounds "because he's the son of God". Why should we believe in the scrolls written on that matter and why should we believe that the scrolls chosen for the testaments were the right ones? "Because God led the write stories to be chosen". Why is Christianity correct and not Hinduism or Islam? "Because Jesus is God, and Christianity worships Jesus, while Hinduism does not and Islam only sees him as a prophet".

How do you KNOW that Jesus is God? "because the bible said so". Is that it? "The bible is like a History book". Well, at least History books have events that are believable... the Bible has things that are non-existent. Someone can not be brought back from the dead after a few days of being dead from a mere 'touch'. A man can not walk on water. A man can step on a stone and look like he's walking on water, but in all actuality, he can not WALK ON WATER. Rain can not flood the entire Earth. Water doesn't just turn to wine, it requires other ingredients. Lets say the man Jesus did exist and people witnessed these 'miracles'. Lets say it wasn't just stories written in sequence for some purpose, but actual eye witness accounts. Why couldn't Jesus just be an illusionist? We see people like Chris Angel and David Blaine and we all accept that they're illusionist. They don't explain their tricks and everyone believes it's real (even though they know it's somehow a really good trick). Why couldn't Jesus have been an illusionist (if he actually did exist and people actually saw him do, which can never be proven)? That would be much more likely than him actually being the 'son of God'.
"..., the bible said he was the Messiah... not an illusionist".

I see, you've totally missed my point.

Author:	rosie [ Thu Aug 27, 2009 6:16 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Atheists and Agnostics
No offense, but that's pretty extreme and rather stupid views that the people around you have.

Author:	CarsitoPyg [ Thu Aug 27, 2009 7:38 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Atheists and Agnostics
My family isn't that extreme. To me, the belief itself is part of humanity's natural stupidity. Just how man naturally falls for the Celebrity with cult of personality. Not to mention all the other psychological experiments done to show how fucked we truly are (Milgram Experiment, Stanford Prison Experiment, etc.). No matter how much we learn and how much knowledge we get, we will always have the basic flaws of the fear of abandonment, faith, conformity, and always obeying authority.

Author:	n0th1n [ Fri Aug 28, 2009 10:40 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Atheists and Agnostics
So, what I'm hearing is, rather than respecting your mother and/or her faith, you lie to her and do disgrace what she holds dear without her knowing it. Seems like either cowardice or false kindness. And of course some terrible things come from religion. The Higher and Greater a thing can be, the Lower and more terrible it can be. A very strong man can help many people, do great work, save lives. Or he can destroy many people in various ways which a weaker man could not do so effectively. A genius can use his mind to improve the world tremendously or to harm the world tremendously, while an idiot will generally not do too much good with his mind nor too much bad. Indeed, religion can be, and has been, used to enlighten and cultivate minds and bring people higher than they are, including make them think far more critically of everything around them and seek to understand things properly, both questioning and finding answers at times. On the other hand, it can also be used to turn off the mind and keep people in darkness and false light, crawling when they should be running, infants when they should be men. But don't think atheism and agnosticism aren't religions, or at least creeds, of their own. Some are further from this than others, but plenty turn it into a religion, with more or less the same effects, though I have yet to see so great of heights as from elsewhere. I read the arguments from the supposed great minds on both sides, from both there are often (or seem to be) misunderstandings of the other to some extent and of themselves to an extent. But, on the whole, I find the atheists to contradict themselves and defy logic in favor or emotion and personal desire. I see the various things from other religions. I see the most grounded and intelligent logic, reason and beauty on the sides of Christianity and in most particular in the Church. This is not an argument to convince you of my finding, but simply to tell you your arguments (or rather statements without argument) can just as well be thrown back at you or tossed aside. They are equally as ignorant and dead as the ideas and behaviors of the ones you accuse of being ignorant and dead.

Author:	CarsitoPyg [ Sat Aug 29, 2009 11:19 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Atheists and Agnostics
Obviously you don't know what it's like to be an atheist/agnostic black sheep in a family filled with religious people. I mean, a true atheist, someone who has already gone through the skepticism of religion and had periods of understanding and then finally decided "fuck it, it's not real". If I come out as not a believer, I'm fucked (mainly because I have to live with her for another year). I love my mom, and the last thing I need is a constant guilt trip of how I'm ruining my "soul" just because I need evidence before I can form a belief. Agnosticism (what I believe in) is just that. The need of evidence to form a belief. Real evidence, not "see this wafer? it's God, lol". Atheists, to me, believe there is no God. I know that we're not smart enough to form a belief like that, so I remain Agnostic. I remain in the world of skepticism and I stick to philosophy. If I actually had a religion, I would call it Logic. I follow logic, and logic has led me to that the answer that if there is an answer, we sure as hell aren't going to figure it out. I do have a problem with Atheists and Theists, but I have a bigger problem with Atheists usually because for people who don't have faith, they still take a leap of faith in believing that it was all an accident. It may be an accident, but that's just as likely as a supreme being doing it all. Christianity itself defies Logic. Theism could express it better, but a mass religion like Christianity holds too many contradictions and retarded stories to possibly be "logical". The believers themselves don't even wonder how all of the stories in the bible were actually possible. They just think to themselves "because God made it that way". Jesus walks on water "because he's the son of God". Jesus resurrects the dead and heals wounds "because he's the son of God". Why should we believe in the scrolls written on that matter and why should we believe that the scrolls chosen for the testaments were the right ones? "Because God led the write stories to be chosen". Why is Christianity correct and not Hinduism or Islam? "Because Jesus is God, and Christianity worships Jesus, while Hinduism does not and Islam only sees him as a prophet". How do you KNOW that Jesus is God? "because the bible said so". Is that it? "The bible is like a History book". Well, at least History books have events that are believable... the Bible has things that are non-existent. Someone can not be brought back from the dead after a few days of being dead from a mere 'touch'. A man can not walk on water. A man can step on a stone and look like he's walking on water, but in all actuality, he can not WALK ON WATER. Rain can not flood the entire Earth. Water doesn't just turn to wine, it requires other ingredients. Lets say the man Jesus did exist and people witnessed these 'miracles'. Lets say it wasn't just stories written in sequence for some purpose, but actual eye witness accounts. Why couldn't Jesus just be an illusionist? We see people like Chris Angel and David Blaine and we all accept that they're illusionist. They don't explain their tricks and everyone believes it's real (even though they know it's somehow a really good trick). Why couldn't Jesus have been an illusionist (if he actually did exist and people actually saw him do, which can never be proven)? That would be much more likely than him actually being the 'son of God'. "..., the bible said he was the Messiah... not an illusionist". I see, you've totally missed my point.

Author:	n0th1n [ Sun Aug 30, 2009 1:05 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Atheists and Agnostics
CarsitoPyg wrote: Obviously you don't know what it's like to be an atheist/agnostic black sheep in a family filled with religious people. I mean, a true atheist, someone who has already gone through the skepticism of religion and had periods of understanding and then finally decided "fuck it, it's not real". If I come out as not a believer, I'm fucked (mainly because I have to live with her for another year). I love my mom, and the last thing I need is a constant guilt trip of how I'm ruining my "soul" just because I need evidence before I can form a belief. Agnosticism (what I believe in) is just that. The need of evidence to form a belief. Real evidence, not "see this wafer? it's God, lol". Atheists, to me, believe there is no God. I know that we're not smart enough to form a belief like that, so I remain Agnostic. I remain in the world of skepticism and I stick to philosophy. If I actually had a religion, I would call it Logic. I follow logic, and logic has led me to that the answer that if there is an answer, we sure as hell aren't going to figure it out. I do have a problem with Atheists and Theists, but I have a bigger problem with Atheists usually because for people who don't have faith, they still take a leap of faith in believing that it was all an accident. It may be an accident, but that's just as likely as a supreme being doing it all. Christianity itself defies Logic. Theism could express it better, but a mass religion like Christianity holds too many contradictions and retarded stories to possibly be "logical". The believers themselves don't even wonder how all of the stories in the bible were actually possible. They just think to themselves "because God made it that way". Jesus walks on water "because he's the son of God". Jesus resurrects the dead and heals wounds "because he's the son of God". Why should we believe in the scrolls written on that matter and why should we believe that the scrolls chosen for the testaments were the right ones? "Because God led the write stories to be chosen". Why is Christianity correct and not Hinduism or Islam? "Because Jesus is God, and Christianity worships Jesus, while Hinduism does not and Islam only sees him as a prophet". How do you KNOW that Jesus is God? "because the bible said so". Is that it? "The bible is like a History book". Well, at least History books have events that are believable... the Bible has things that are non-existent. Someone can not be brought back from the dead after a few days of being dead from a mere 'touch'. A man can not walk on water. A man can step on a stone and look like he's walking on water, but in all actuality, he can not WALK ON WATER. Rain can not flood the entire Earth. Water doesn't just turn to wine, it requires other ingredients. Lets say the man Jesus did exist and people witnessed these 'miracles'. Lets say it wasn't just stories written in sequence for some purpose, but actual eye witness accounts. Why couldn't Jesus just be an illusionist? We see people like Chris Angel and David Blaine and we all accept that they're illusionist. They don't explain their tricks and everyone believes it's real (even though they know it's somehow a really good trick). Why couldn't Jesus have been an illusionist (if he actually did exist and people actually saw him do, which can never be proven)? That would be much more likely than him actually being the 'son of God'. "..., the bible said he was the Messiah... not an illusionist". I see, you've totally missed my point. For one, you missed my point. As a Catholic I would rather you full on denounce and oppose or anything else the Faith than assault this which we find most sacred even without our knowledge. I would rather my own children do so, I would rather my own child or anyone kill me than do so, though I've never had to be in that position. I know people do all the time, and it is one of the greatest insults anyone can make. My brother was the only atheist and was very vocal about it and even tried every once in a while to make my siblings and I that way. My parents and family are what some would call 'very, very religious', my dad even went to a seminary for a while to become a priest. He did everything knowing it was what would probably hurt my parents the most, but they accepted it and were patient with it. I think it was better he did this than continue to 'just go along'. It was at least far more honest no matter how you look at it. In any case, from your statements its clear you never actually studied the Catholic faith on anything more than a small child's level, if that, nor does it seem you have studied too high of philosophy in general. Had you, you would know that is not really the way we believe, that some of these questions are actually something we usually find others say against us but are the things we proclaim ourselves (for instance, one of the most common stresses in basic Christianity is: "Either He is what He says He is, the Son of God, or he was a liar and deceiver of demonic proportions, or insane." In refutation of the idea that he could be called simply a "good moral teacher", particularly since if that was all he was he broke the greatest moral code of all and could even be called justly Crucified for his crime). Neither are the stories so shallow nor accepted so bluntly nor for the simple reasons you present (accept when speaking to a child). Nor do we say the bible is at all a history book as you have said, I myself have stated otherwise many times on this very forum. Catholicism in particular has extreme esteem for logic and reason and demands it. One of the only documents that came out of Vatican I (which hold a similar level, or higher authority, to that of the Bible), was our proclamation on Faith and Reason. Even without that, one of the Gospel names/terms for Christ is Logos, particularly in the beginning of John's Gospel, which has tremendous depth to it in the Greek and in the context. Why do I believe? Because THIS is the most logical conclusion. Because this is the Truth which I cannot deny. For many more reasons. Others have their own reasons and ways, like one of the doctoral students I worked with originally came to Catholicism after having nothing and looking at and studying every other religion he could find in the world for many years. But I am not trying to convince you to believe right now, I'd settle for now with you respecting your mother enough to be honest with her rather than stab her with a subtle dagger. And, if you really want to put on start putting on some though and have an idea what you are talking about, read something quick and basic like C.S. Lewis' Mere Christianity, and Miracles if thats a big hang up for you. Won't necessarily convince you of anything, and he'll admit that often as he goes along, but you'll at least get some decent philosophy out of it and learn what you are talking about a bit better. He wasn't not even a Catholic and would tell you more about Catholics than you seem to know.

Forkheads http://www.forkheads.net/

Atheists and Agnostics http://www.forkheads.net/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=3538	Page 3 of 3

Author:	CarsitoPyg [ Sun Aug 30, 2009 8:59 am ]
Post subject:	Re: Atheists and Agnostics
Okay, so we're straight. You don't believe the bible to be a historical document... which means you don't even believe the bible to be historically accurate (if it's not a history document, it's just filled with stories, or even better, lies). I know you're just trying to make me focus on stupidity "lol, you don't study us OBVIOUSLY LOLOLOL", but it won't work, you can't spin this argument. You didn't address any shit that I said. Why is it that you do that ALWAYS? Is your lack of evidence too much of a weakness in your argument? You're a fan of philosophy, try using that (that's usually what I use, but i decided to go all facty on you instead, except for that illusionist part, that's philosophy tied in with the idea of evidence).

Author:	n0th1n [ Sun Sep 13, 2009 11:46 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Atheists and Agnostics
To note: We've now lost I believe both my reply to this, which outlined that Carsitos assesment of the previous post was indeed inaccurate to the point along with probably lots of other stuff, and his continued response to that. At this time it does not seem worth it to redo all that to me.

Author:	CarsitoPyg [ Mon Sep 14, 2009 3:18 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: Atheists and Agnostics
aw fuck... you're never gonna answer my 3 questions, which I fuckin' forgot.

Page 3 of 3	Time zone: Pacific/Galapagos
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/