Atheism

[idontgivenames]

What non-mutual original doctrines that have contributed to the well being of anything have come directly from atheism, and atheism only. Now remember, this can't include buddhism, because if you know your history buddha was from a royal line. I know damn well his family had religion just like every other culture. So, from a sociological point of view; his ethics were influenced by the ethics of others who were ultimatley influenced by religion at one point or another.

Now, I know the popular counter arguement in this case would be, "Look at how much destruction has come out of religion." WRONG. Look at how much destruction has come out of corruption. The ten commandmants are not corrupt in anyway, and as for other polytheistic and "pagan" religions I can't speak much. But, all of our "good" non-mutual ethics are ultimatley influenced by religion.

Yay, nay? Why?

[Hamlet]

Ethical behavior isn't an exclusive of religion.

I always think about the Holy Roller and the Biker, two guys I work with. The Jezoid will do a good deed because he thinks God is watching him. (and he makes sure everyone else is watching him do it too). The crusty old biker will do a good deed just because it's the right thing to do. I'll take the latter as the quality ethic every time.

[FireyBudBurner]

Yea I mean this really emphasizes the fact that religion was really brought about as mind and behavioral control of the masses. It offers a reward for those whom are good citizens and obey brotherly laws. It is a good thing in that I scares the non-thought provocting inside the box people into good behavior and practices. The problem most people have with atheism, and probably the reason 50% of the world or more isn't atheist is that it doesn't offer these 'perks' the other religions offer, like heaven, nirvana whatever it may be. At this point most of them see the evidence mounting against and simply cling to there religion as a 'safety net' which is deffinately the worse position to be in. Your neither a Christian or an Atheist or anything else and your wasting your time in church etc.

That was just my little blurb, as to your question I don't think that religion is the only reason for mutual and non-mutaul positive human interaction and if it is your only motivation to be kind to your fellow man that is sad.

[turquoise70]

"The ten commandments are not corrupt in anyway"

What exactly do you mean by this? Can you define "corrupt" as you've used it here?

I would argue that ethics do not derive from religion. I would argue that ethics are ingrained somewhere deeper and more primal within man's mind and therefore influence religion. You will be hard pressed to find a religion anywhere that takes itself seriously and pushes messages such as "harm everyone you can" or "do as you please, the hell with any consequences" exclusively. Native American socieities operate on roughly the same fundamentals (don't kill people just for the hell of it, that's bad...help your family...that's good) and yet their religions are rather sparse and quite diverse. They definitely did not have a thing to do with the ten commandments.

I know this example violates your rule of not wanting a response charged with examples from -other religions-, but then again I'm not sure what the focus of your arugment is. "What good have atheists ever done us?" I'm not sure what you're asking; I suppose that that is the impression I get. If so, I would say that if atheists have done anything for society in terms of ethics, it's simply that by existing and by not becoming hideous degenerate murderers, they generally quell the misconception that no religion means no ethics. It may not be a mind-blowing revelation, but it's something.

[JaggedEdge]

Abraham Lincoln (maybe not an athiest but...)
"The Bible is not my book nor Christianity my profession. I could never give assent to the long, complicated statements of Christian dogma."

Einstein

Issac Asimov

Charles Darwin

Ben Franklin

I'm not sure if this answers your question, but there have been many great men in history who were athiests. But mainly as others have said, good deads should come from a person having morals, not because god told them too. I help people in need because... well hell it's our nature to help our brother. Why do people need to be scared into doing good. It's sad.

[Breukelen advocaat]

This book, published 1941, completely deconstructs the Ten Commandments, and offers many explanations as to the real meaning of these rules in the context of the time, and culture, that they were written - as well as the implications of applying them to the modern day and age. It should be read by believer and nonbeliever alike. It's was a daunting task to research and write, but Joseph Lewis did a fine job. The entire book is online.
http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/lewis/lewten0c.htm#000

THE TEN COMMANDMENTS: A BOOK BY JOSEPH LEWIS

An Investigation into the Origin and Meaning of
The Decalogue and an Analysis of its Ethical and
Moral Value as a Code of Conduct in Modern Society

To the Memory of
Luther Burbank
and
Thomas Alva Edison
Who Were Members of the Organization of
Which I Have The Honor to Be President,
And Whose Encouragement Was a Continual
Source of Inspiration

"It has often been said that anything may be proved from the Bible; but before anything can be admitted as proved by the Bible, the Bible itself must be proved to be true; for if the Bible be not true, or the truth of it be doubtful, it ceases to have authority, and cannot be admitted as proof of anything."
Thomas Paine

[©1946]
Freethought Press Association
New York 1, N. Y.

"Some of the old laws of Israel are clearly savage taboos of a familiar type thinly disguised as commands of the deity." -- Sir James G. Frazer

http://www.positiveatheism.org/hist/lewis/lewten0c.htm#000

[Hamlet]

hhmm, going through what I can remember of the ten commandments in my head. All seems pretty simple and straightforeward stuff. Any excerpts from Joseph Lewis's book that would make it a compeling read? I can't think of any commandments that would need much interpretation...except maybe 'Thou shall not kill'.

[Hamlet]

I'm not sure if this answers your question, but there have been many great men in history who were athiests.

Einsten said he believed in Spinoza's God. lol...just playing the devil's advocate.

[Oneironaut]

The ten commandmants are not corrupt in anyway,
"But the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God; you shall not do any work—you, your son or your daughter, your male or female slave, your livestock, or the alien resident in your towns."

"You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or male or female slave, or ox, or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor."

So slavery is not corrupt?

"You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I the Lord your God am a jealous God, punishing children for the iniquity of parents, to the third and the fourth generation of those who reject me,"

So it's not corrupt to punish people for the wrongdoings of their parents, grandparents, great-grandparents and great-great-grandparents? That's a lot of dead people's actions I'm responsible for!

[Wintersweet]

Abraham Lincoln (maybe not an athiest but...)
"The Bible is not my book nor Christianity my profession. I could never give assent to the long, complicated statements of Christian dogma."

Einstein

Issac Asimov

Charles Darwin

Ben Franklin

I'm not sure if this answers your question, but there have been many great men in history who were athiests. But mainly as others have said, good deads should come from a person having morals, not because god told them too. I help people in need because... well hell it's our nature to help our brother. Why do people need to be scared into doing good. It's sad.

I'm pretty positive he was actually a christian.
I still completely agree with your point, though! :o

[Oneironaut]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin's_views_on_religion

Charles Darwin had a Non-conformist background, but attended a Church of England school. He studied Anglican theology with the aim of becoming a clergyman, before joining the Voyage of the Beagle. On return, he developed his theory of natural selection in full awareness that it conflicted with the teleological argument. Darwin deliberated about the Christian meaning of mortality and came to think that the religious instinct had evolved with society. With the death of his daughter Annie, Darwin lost all faith in a beneficent God and saw Christianity as futile. He continued to give support to the local church and help with parish work, but on Sundays would go for a walk while his family attended church.

In his later life, Darwin was frequently asked about his religious views. He went as far as saying that he did "not believe in the Bible as a divine revelation", but was always insistent that he was agnostic and had "never been an atheist".

[Krogith]

Explain to me this please. If there is no god and everything is a random happening. Everything we see could make it self your saying. All the atoms are there so anything is possable. So heres my question.

Why have you never found a Working Car? or a toaster? That came from nothing. All the atoms exsisted. and in your random world anything is possable. If a complex thing such as life just happen to form why not everything else? Why do things need a creator?

[Ignatius]

That's just a silly question.

It's possible to see how mankind evolved from apes. But if you leavea pile of nuts and bolts lying around they won't suddenly turn into a car or a toaster.

You don't really need anyone to explain why this is do you?

Or maybe you do... if so then please seek help.

[Oneironaut]

Explain to me please. If everything complex has to have a creator, then surely the creator of the universe (i.e. the MOST COMPLEX THING IN EXISTENCE) must logically also have a creator too right? I mean, something as complex as a superintelligent universe-creator can't just pop out of nothingness for no reason, can it? Something that complex surely must be designed!

[mrdevious]

Explain to me this please. If there is no god and everything is a random happening. Everything we see could make it self your saying. All the atoms are there so anything is possable. So heres my question.

Why have you never found a Working Car? or a toaster? That came from nothing. All the atoms exsisted. and in your random world anything is possable. If a complex thing such as life just happen to form why not everything else? Why do things need a creator?

Krogith, this has been said a billion times before in a billion other threads. Just because god isn't the catalyst, that doesn't mean everything is one big random one-in-trillion-chance super-lucky accident. As has been explained countless times already, cars and toaster do not have genetic mutation. All life has a genetic code, and all genetic codes are subject to mutation and natural selection. Further, cars and toaster are the result of human interferrence, not natural processes. Just because natural processes can create planets, solar systems, and lifeforms, doesn't mean that they should also create cars, toasters, and accidental Iron Maiden albums, or whatever else human beings have created out of the already formed universe. Instead of just assuming that a lack of god means infinite atoms just randomly falling into place, maybe you should actually do a little research. And as I've said countless times before (yet again), lacking a current explanation for certain aspects of the world does not mean god can just get the credit by default. It means we haven't explained it yet, just like we couldn't have possibly explained the chemical reactions that create thunder 30,000 years ago, yet now we can. Though I suppose we should have just attributed thunder to god moving his furniture until we did have an explanation.

[Krogith]

so the process for genitic mutation was there and the laws for these things just happen to be? but no where could other random things take place like. why isn't everything teamming with some form of life. wheres the moon things and wheres the other forms of life that all have the same chance to come to be. your saying that life finds and makes it own way. where are the things that have made them self able to live in the sun or things that breath not oxygen and fromed on a comet. wheres the life that has found a way to live in space and off sun energy. O thats right life can only live as you know it. If your right we would see endless life from endless atoms and bacteria and be able to watch it create new life today. what caused life to stop why can we not make a new life or watch something elvolve today?

Do you even understand how complex bacteria is? These things just don't pop out of no where. or could even be recreated today. You have no proof of life formming it self.

[mrdevious]

so the process for genitic mutation was there and the laws for these things just happen to be?

Your assuming that every law, like human laws, MUST be designed. But natural selection doesn't "just have to be", it simply makes logical sense. Those who have a disadvantageous genetic structure will be removed from the gene pool. No design necessary, just common sense.


but no where could other random things take place like.

You've really got to stop using the term "random" so much. No proposed process, proven or unproven, claims that things come into being by random. Random mutations, chemical reactions, and so forth, may occure all the time, but they are not the cause for developement, only the material that's being worked with.


why isn't everything teamming with some form of life. wheres the moon things and wheres the other forms of life that all have the same chance to come to be. your saying that life finds and makes it own way. where are the things that have made them self able to live in the sun or things that breath not oxygen and fromed on a comet. wheres the life that has found a way to live in space and off sun energy.

Once again, you're assuming that a process which applies to one aspect in existence, must apply to ALL things (aspects) in existence. Life as we know it, or wherever it may exist, exists because the conditions were right for life to form. No evolutionist or any other theorist claims that absolutely every circumstance in any way, shape, or form must produce life. It is only claimed that life will arise, where circumstances are ideal for life to form, based on the available material. So far as I know, the center of a sun, or rings of saturn, or wherever, do not have the proper resources and conditions to create cellular life or proteins and gentic codes.


O thats right life can only live as you know it.

I don't recall claiming that.


what caused life to stop why can we not make a new life or watch something elvolve today?

I see no evidence that life has stopped, new species are arising and being discovered all the time. And no, we can't make a new life, yet, but there was a time when we couldn't fly too.
And you're right, we can't watch something evolve today. But what exactly do you think evolution is, X-men? an little wingless birdie didn't just walk along one day and suddenly grow wings and fly away. Evolution can't be directly observed, but only observed through fossil records, and potentially through human records assuming we can keep them a few million years. When we talk about evolution we're not talking about the creature that suddenly grows a new flibblejib that gives him an edge, we're talking about microscopic advantageous changes that occure over millions (or billions) of years. I can't even explain the immensely complex system of evolution just through these boards, go out and get a good book on it, or find a good website.


Do you even understand how complex bacteria is? These things just don't pop out of no where. or could even be recreated today.

Exactly, NOTHING pops out of no where, not through evolution or god or the theory flibblejibbledynamics. I don't know how to make it any clearer, NOTHING is the result of "poping out of nowhere".


You have no proof of life formming it self.


I don't, though I'm not an expert in evolutionary biology. I can guarantee you there's plenty of evidence out there however. But this is all moot, disproving one theory does not automatically prove another. So far every argument for god I've heard relies on providing a lack of evidence for something, so god can get the credit by default. There isn't one piece of empiracle evidence that god had anything to do with anything.

btw, why did our "intelligent designer" give women a reproductive system that required 4 days of bleeding, pain, and mood swings? not to mention I'm wondering why he gave men such sensitive testicles, gave us all such sensitive and delicate eyes, gave us wisdom teeth which have to be yanked out (almost as if they're left over from a sub-human species with wider jaws), plus he gave us millions of little cancer cells ready to activate, joints that develope arthritis when we get old, brains that deteriorate at old age.

How about viruses like ebola that liquify our organs and make you shit them out, or HIV that remain's dormant for up to 24 years before giving you a slow painfull death, or leprosy that deforms you and eventually kills you. You'd think if god needs some population control he would just send down a virus that kills you quickly and painlessly.

And why wouldn't this world have all worked out by now? God has infinite wisdome and infinite power. Surely he would know that the holy scriptures he sends down wouldn't be enough, that the intelligence and critical thinking skills he gives us would lead heathens like myself to disbelieve his rather vague system of "faith". Why even bother to send down his word through Jesus when it's obviouly not enough to convince us. Freedom of will you say? Well he designed us, he designed out nature, he designed the processes going through our brains that make our will the way it is today. He should know exactly how this free will, and it's nature, will turn out.

Not to mention. Haven't all the holy profits had rather lame explanations? I mean they explained disease with demons, obviously oblivious to causes like viruses, bacteria, chemical imbalances. Why couldn't god explain things beyond the current scope of understanding? Like "hey you guys, just so you know, when the industrial revolution starts you're going to horribly pulute your planet, so be carefull of that. and btw, the reason you get sick is because there's microscopic organisms making you sick. and since I know you're going to twist my word in such-and-such a way to justify war, let me clarify...".

and might I say, it would have been really nice if Jesus performed some miracles that would leave some empiracle evidence. "and so Jesus removed the great mountain, placed it accross the lake, and turned the area into furtile farmland".

[Krogith]

don;t you get it were proveing the fact that we need god right now. This debate is bigger than Mankind. All creation is being put to the test. There is a grater Issue being proved than what you see.

All your ideas about the prophets saying deamons caused all sickness is misslead.

[mrdevious]

don;t you get it were proveing the fact that we need god right now. This debate is bigger than Mankind. All creation is being put to the test. There is a grater Issue being proved than what you see.



To each his own Krogith, to each his own...

I'm afraid with the way my mind works, I can't believe something because I should, I need some real evidence to believe it. Otherwise I don't see why it's any more valid than the countless other gods and mythologies from long ago that people were so certain were correct. If we're "proving the fact we need god right now", that tells me you've already made your conclusion before taking the steps. Tell you what, when the end of times (or whatever's coming) comes, you can come here and say "I told you so" to me and I'll concede you were right.

[Krogith]

Science has now advanced enough to have uncovered the foundation level of life. And much to our suprise, scientists have found functional, complex machinery at the molecular level of life. For instance, within living cells there are little molecular "trucks" that carry supplies from one side of the cell to the other. there are tiny molecular "sign posts" that tell these "trucks" to turn left or right. Some cells have molecular "outboard motors" that propel the cells through liquid. In any other Context, when such functional complexity is evident, People would conclude that these things were Designed.

[Krogith]

Explain to me please. If everything complex has to have a creator, then surely the creator of the universe (i.e. the MOST COMPLEX THING IN EXISTENCE) must logically also have a creator too right? I mean, something as complex as a superintelligent universe-creator can't just pop out of nothingness for no reason, can it? Something that complex surely must be designed!


this is awsome. Good point. Now heres where you are allowed to decide. Ither A: you decide it came from nothing and your god of your exsistance.
Or B: you except design and Not knowing everything and just humbol your self and except the Driection given to you.

Thing is A will lead no where. B will get the benfit of that vast knoladge and direction and purpose.

A means nothing matters. But B means there more to it. and a chance to live forever following this Awsome Creator. Doing things the right way and most benifical, and haveing a better life.

All God wants is people to draw close to him and aply his teachings and listion to his wise ways. This will lead to a everlasting life of happyness.

[mrdevious]

Science has now advanced enough to have uncovered the foundation level of life. And much to our suprise, scientists have found functional, complex machinery at the molecular level of life. For instance, within living cells there are little molecular "trucks" that carry supplies from one side of the cell to the other. there are tiny molecular "sign posts" that tell these "trucks" to turn left or right. Some cells have molecular "outboard motors" that propel the cells through liquid. In any other Context, when such functional complexity is evident, People would conclude that these things were Designed.

Well, creationists would conclude these things were designed. But, one could also interpret this in a way that cells which had molecular supply transports would be more prone to become dominant. Cells with trucks that work better than others, would become more dominant than the others. and cells that have signs telling them where to stop, would be more efficient and therefor have a better survival rate than those without. and even within the stop-signs, those with stop-signs in the wrong places would die out, leaving only the cells with the stop-signs that work. To me, concluding that it's the work of design speaks of laziness. Rather than explore the cause, rather than accept we may not be able to yet, we attribute it to a designer because we can't come up with an answer right now. This is what I've been trying to get at this whole time, god is just being credited for everything we haven't yet explained. And when we do explain it, we move on to the next thing.

I used to believe you know. Till I was 18 I was firmly convinced there was a god, I prayed to him frequently, I even argued for his existence a few times. But at some point, I suppose I reached some point of mental developement, and I started asking all the questions. I realized that all my logic for supporting god was based on a system where his existence is already assumed, then we interpret the world in a way that matches up to his existence. Eventually though, I started to analyze things in way where I took neutral ground, then examined the evidence to see where it pointed. Never once did it point to god, because it only worked when I interpreted it to match up with god. In which case, I could make up any crazy story and interpret EVERYTHING to match up with my imaginary explanation.

EDIT:


this is awsome. Good point. Now heres where you are allowed to decide. Ither A: you decide it came from nothing and your god of your exsistance.
Or B: you except design and Not knowing everything and just humbol your self and except the Driection given to you.

Thing is A will lead no where. B will get the benfit of that vast knoladge and direction and purpose.

A means nothing matters. But B means there more to it. and a chance to live forever following this Awsome Creator. Doing things the right way and most benifical, and haveing a better life.

All God wants is people to draw close to him and aply his teachings and listion to his wise ways. This will lead to a everlasting life of happyness.

This sounds more like you're believing because it's the nicer idea, not the more logical one.

[Ignatius]

There is no empirical evidence for the existence of God.

People who believe in God do so despite the evidence to the contrary, not because of it.

[Stedric]

Good deeds are good deeds, and atrocities are atrocities. Religion is not behind them, no matter what a person says.

A good person can be any religion, an atheist, a jew, a christian, muslim, anything. Behaviour is not exclusive to a person.

Religion is open to interpretation. An immoral person may interpret religion in order to explain his own actions, but that is only an excuse. Conversely a good person may use religion as a reason to do good things, but at the basic level that person really did a good deed because they are a good person.

I don't believe religion is behind the biggest atrocities of the world, or most destruction. I have issues with organized religion however, and the ignorance that often accompanies it. This is not an absolute.

[mrdevious]

Lets all keep in mind though, nobody here is the "bad guy" really. We can argue on logic and philosophy, but we all think we're doing the right thing. From my point of view, I see an obligation to stop the spread of ignorance and fallable logic, in the hopes of inspiring more to bring this world into an age of reason.
From Krogith's point of view, he feels an obligation to discourage us from turning our backs on the most important aspect of our existence, and the solution to all our troubles. and indeed, if I were so certain of god I would most likely debate just as passionately to save the souls of billions.

[Krogith]

Lets all keep in mind though, nobody here is the "bad guy" really. We can argue on logic and philosophy, but we all think we're doing the right thing. From my point of view, I see an obligation to stop the spread of ignorance and fallable logic, in the hopes of inspiring more to bring this world into an age of reason.
From Krogith's point of view, he feels an obligation to discourage us from turning our backs on the most important aspect of our existence, and the solution to all our troubles. and indeed, if I were so certain of god I would most likely debate just as passionately to save the souls of billions.
awsome
Love to all Humankind.

[Oneironaut]

this is awsome. Good point.
Uhh, I was being sarcastic. But whatever...

Now heres where you are allowed to decide.
No! The truth is the truth. I don't get to decide the truth. If there's no God, there's no God, and believing in one doesn't make it true. If we can't determine whether or not there is a God, and if we are to remain intellectually honest, we have to say "I don't know". And until there is actually some evidence that God exists, I'm going to go as far as to say "most likely not".

[Stedric]

Uhh, I was being sarcastic. But whatever...

No! The truth is the truth. I don't get to decide the truth. If there's no God, there's no God, and believing in one doesn't make it true. If we can't determine whether or not there is a God, and if we are to remain intellectually honest, we have to say "I don't know". And until there is actually some evidence that God exists, I'm going to go as far as to say "most likely not".

You're here, aren't you? There's so much in this universe we don't understand, so while God cannot be proven, neither can God be disproven. Religion is a choice, its called making "a leap of faith" for a reason. Faith is not a logical operation, but I think that is often the beauty of it.

Keep in mind your talking to an atheist/agnostic (yes I can oscillate between the two).

[rebgirl420]

.....is a proud atheist...

[Oneironaut]

You're here, aren't you? There's so much in this universe we don't understand, so while God cannot be proven, neither can God be disproven. Religion is a choice, its called making "a leap of faith" for a reason. Faith is not a logical operation, but I think that is often the beauty of it.
I don't think that's beautiful at all. It's just illogical. It's saying "I don't know, so I'm going to make up an answer and pretend it's true anyways".

Keep in mind your talking to an atheist/agnostic (yes I can oscillate between the two).
They are not mutually exclusive terms. An atheist is someone who does not hold a positive belief in a God. An agnostic is someone who does not claim to know whether God exists or not. An agnostic atheist, such as myself, is simply someone who lacks a positive belief in a God and who does not claim to know whether God exists or not.

[Krogith]

Your faith proves that atoms came outta no where and your live is just chance, with no meaning.

My faith is god has always been and has created all that we see. What I find to be funny is my proof is the accerate bible prophecys that have come true. The Fact that 3500 years ago a man had insight into things that were not found true untell recently, and Said it was inspired of God.

The 1st 1/2 of the Bible ( the hebrew scriptures) all Came true and told about Jesus's life long befor he arived. The 2ed 1/2 of the Bible ( the Greek Scriptures) Is about Jesus life and what he was going to do in the future when he returned. And about how these lasts days would be. All these things are comming true. I'm not baseing a belief on just in case, i'm baseing it on what I see compaired to what was fortold. Do Not be Asleep Keep on the Watch.

[Ignatius]

Just because something happens by chance it does not follow that it has no meaning. My life is full of meaning, and I'm an atheist. Your rather arrogant assumption that life without faith is meaningless is exactly the kind of thing that annoys me about religion. You assume so much, none of it true.

[Krogith]

if life came from soup and lighting and every liveing thing is just there by chance and location. Then what meaning is there? What would it do for you to be a good person verses a bad person? nothing has judgement over you so there fore what is the differnce of good and bad? doesn't it all become the same path? I'm asking you, because im courious . Not an attack.

[Polymirize]

silly krogith... the meaning would have to be life itself, of course.

[mrdevious]

Krogith, seriously... how many times does it need to be reiterated? Evolution or any non-god theory is NOT DEPENDANT ON "JUST CHANCE". You're repeatedly distorting the possition of the opposition.

[afghooey]

I don't know how people assume that evolution is dependent on random chance, when in fact it's just the opposite. Look at the stones at the bottom of a stream. Do you think god made them round and smooth and put them there? If not, then does it follow that the round, smooth stones got there randomly? It's the same with evolution. There's a reason that we're here. We're not an accident, but nor does that mean that we were necessarily created by some outside force.

And I believe life can have meaning in and of itself, without fear of being Judged by a wrathful god.

This judgement has always perplexed me, since if god is omnipresent and omnipotent and our creator, he must know each of us inside and out, our pasts, our present and our futures. If he created some of our characters as such that we would so doubt and question and reject belief in a deistic god, why would he then judge us? For if he is our creator and breathed life into us, and shaped our anatomy and our incredibly complex minds with all the nuances of personality and psychology, aren't we merely an extention of god ourselves? Why would a perfect god need to judge itself?

I don't claim to be perfect myself, but I do believe strongly in exercising tolerance and respect for other people. One doesn't need to believe in god to believe that they should treat people the way they want to be treated.

[Krogith]

yes your own life would be your soul purpose. Good or bad what ever makes you happy. there fore in this world what ever path you choose to live your life is fine. Eat and drink and be marry for tommaro we die. Self indulged and makeing your self god.


Knowing good and bad you will choose and thus sin's wage is Death. How sad you choose as adam and eve. Tossed about as sheep without a shepherd, lost you have become.

[Krogith]

Explain how the sun just happend to be the right distance to suport life.

Explain to me how the earth is set to clean it self with the water cycles and Plant life That came outta no where. And all the laws of physics that make it all work in sink.

All these things and millions more just happend to form and be here and come to be here by it self. But thats not Chance? Do you understand how increadibly small chance all this is? Even a simple cell, science can;t explain how these things got set in motion or how it just came about. The CHANCE for all this to happen and all be around for you to Enjoy. Do you realise that just simple ENJOYMENT isn't explain in evolution? How do we need that to survive?

The fossele records can;t show you evolution, they prove things came about and did NOT change dramaticly and just dissapeared. Natural seliction has NEVER created a NEW form of life. A Dog will allways be a Dog, it might look a little differnt from others but the DNA code has not changed.

[Oneironaut]

Explain how the sun just happend to be the right distance to suport life.
Uhh, there are waaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more stars and waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay more planets in the universe than you could possibly conceive. And I can assure you, there are a LOT of planets orbiting Sun-like stars at distances of around 90 million miles.

Explain to me how the earth is set to clean it self with the water cycles and Plant life That came outta no where.
Don't just say "explain to me". That's a lot of geology and meteorology we're talking about there. Go read what the geologists and the meteorologists say about it. Refusing to educate yourself about it is no excuse for not believing it.

I can assure you, what they've found so far is all pretty standard chemistry.

All these things and millions more just happend to form and be here and come to be here by it self. But thats not Chance? Do you understand how increadibly small chance all this is? Even a simple cell, science can;t explain how these things got set in motion or how it just came about. The CHANCE for all this to happen and all be around for you to Enjoy. Do you realise that just simple ENJOYMENT isn't explain in evolution? How do we need that to survive?
And WHAT, pray tell, are the chances that one day POOF out of nowhere: A SUPERINTELLIGENCE CAPABLE OF DESIGNING ALL THAT! I'd say the chances are so slim that it's impossible. What sort of thing could cause that to happen?

And you seem to think that Darwinian processes are the result of chance. They aren't. Natural selection is the complete opposite of chance. Sure, each individual mutation is a chance occurrence, but only the beneficial mutations survive in the population, those mutations which improve the organism's ability to survive in its environment and propagate its genes. The mutations that survive are not random at all. Once you get things that are reasonably good at copying themselves, this non-random process is unavoidable.

Do you have any idea how simple enjoymest is to explain via evolution? Enjoyment is a survival mechanism; our bodies have this one emotion that we're driven to pursue, usually when we do things that help our genes propagate. Things like eating food and having sex bring us enjoyment, so we are driven to pursue them.

The fossele records can;t show you evolution, they prove things came about and did NOT change dramaticly and just dissapeared. Natural seliction has NEVER created a NEW form of life. A Dog will allways be a Dog, it might look a little differnt from others but the DNA code has not changed.
This paragraph makes no sense. Try learning a thing or two about speciation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speciation

[Krogith]

There is debate as to the rate at which speciation events occur over geologic time. While some evolutionary biologists claim that speciation events have remained relatively constant over time, some palaeontologists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palaeontologist) such as Niles Eldredge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niles_Eldredge) and Stephen Jay Gould (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Jay_Gould) have argued that species usually remain unchanged over long stretches of time, and that speciation occurs only over relatively brief intervals, a view known as punctuated equilibrium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punctuated_equilibrium).

this is from your link they have ideas and no proof of anything. they can't even find these so called missing links of the result from Puncatuated equilibrium.

Science can not explain evolution but there trying Real hard.... just as much a strech to belive the bible is right, your faith in man gives you reason to choose evolution, it has never been proven. My faith in God Has a book called the bible backing all that science has found True and in sink with it.

[afghooey]

There is debate as to the rate at which speciation events occur over geologic time. While some evolutionary biologists claim that speciation events have remained relatively constant over time, some palaeontologists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palaeontologist) such as Niles Eldredge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niles_Eldredge) and Stephen Jay Gould (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Jay_Gould) have argued that species usually remain unchanged over long stretches of time, and that speciation occurs only over relatively brief intervals, a view known as punctuated equilibrium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punctuated_equilibrium).

this is from your link they have ideas and no proof of anything. they can't even find these so called missing links of the result from Puncatuated equilibrium.

Science can not explain evolution but there trying Real hard.... just as much a strech to belive the bible is right, your faith in man gives you reason to choose evolution, it has never been proven. My faith in God Has a book called the bible backing all that science has found True and in sink with it.

I find it a bit hypocritical that you disregard all evidence of evolution, offer no concrete evidence in creation's favor, and then demand proof of evolution. A huge scientific consensus agree with the tested theories of evolution, and you claim that the bible backs all science and is in sync with it? Look at the huge mountain of evidence, man. Here's a good place to start:

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/

[Krogith]

This in-depth, multi-part course takes you through evolutionary theory and mechanisms, from definitions to details, natural selection to genetic drift, mutations to punctuated equilibrium


DID YOU CATCH THAT? Theory? They have no proof all of it is Ideas. Lots of people have idea that are wrong. Theres no Proof.

My proof is the acceracy of the bible.

[afghooey]

First of all, you have no "proof" of the accuracy of the Bible.

Secondly, you seem to have a misunderstanding of the word 'proof' in the first place.


Author: Dr. R. Topper
Text: First let me say that I am not a biologist, but a chemist. So I
do not have a very detailed answer to your question. I first want to say that
scientists have a very special meaning for the word "proof." In fact, it is
so difficult to "prove" a scientific theory that I can honestly say that there
are NO pieces of scientific knowledge that have actually been "proved."
Scientists come up with a theory, and then they test it in as many ways as
they can, looking for evidence or information which will either prove the
theory to be impossible, or maybe verify some of the theory's predictions, or
change the theory a little. Most theories start out because someone has done
a lot of experiments, or a lot of studies, to look at something, and then they
make a general guess as to how that thing works. This is called a "theory" in
science. However, if we guess how things are based on what someone else tells
us, or based on what we read, that is not a "theory" to a scientist but a "guess." After all of that, I guess you would like to hear some EVIDENCE
supporting evolution. One piece of evidence is based on our DNA molecules.
Every single cell in our bodies contains DNA, a special molecule which
literally makes us what we are. Our DNA is almost EXACTLY the same as gorilla
DNA, and is even closer to DNA obtained from fossils of ancient ancestors of
human beings. There is much more evidence, but I will let the biologists take
over.
(Source: http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/newton/askasci/1993/biology/bio039.htm)

[Krogith]

No proof about the bible? There are ocean organizums found at the tops of mountains and there are fossle records of animals from differnt ecosystems in the same area unexplained... O wait thats right noah and the flood...

Science has found that animals just seem to appear and not change for millions of years, and then there gone. They can;t link up evolution as hard as they try.

[Ignatius]

Krogith I find your suggestion (that if not for a wrathful God then man would have no reason to do good instead of bad) to be quite risible. Is that what you're basing your faith on? Fear?

Here's just one "fact" from The Bible which I find hard to swallow.

Methuselah lived to be 969 years old.

Do you believe that to be true? Or do you think the age is meant to be symbolic?

[Krogith]

the people back towards adam and eves day were closer to prefection, and also consider this..

If the earth was a paradice would not our oxygen suply be alot higher than today? Oxygen is anti bacteria and with such a oxygen rich envryoment I do not think it impossable to live a life of 900. Science today has yet to explain why we grow old and what causes our cells to start sucideing.

In all reality our bodys should run and renew them selfs. After noah's day most vegation would of been wiped out cept a few higher places. So the earth would be working differntly, because befor noah's day it didn't rain, a mist went up from the earth to water all, Thats why no one belived him it was going to rain and flood everything.

With all the water added to our earth the atmisphear must of dramaticly changed.

(sorry for spelling, Hope you get my points)

[Stedric]

Krogith I find your suggestion (that if not for a wrathful God then man would have no reason to do good instead of bad) to be quite risible. Is that what you're basing your faith on? Fear?

Here's just one "fact" from The Bible which I find hard to swallow.

Methuselah lived to be 969 years old.

Do you believe that to be true? Or do you think the age is meant to be symbolic?

The Bible was not mean to be taken literally. Fundamentalism is a relatively recent movement. The Bible was meant to be a collection of stories which have relevance to modern life, and I think some of them (i.e. the Good Samaritan) do.

[Ignatius]

I agree with you Stedric.

Kothrig thinks that Methuselah could easily have lived for 900+ years because the oxygen was better.

I needed to get a handle on his grasp of science, and now I know.

[Mud Dauber]

The Bible was not mean to be taken literally. Fundamentalism is a relatively recent movement. The Bible was meant to be a collection of stories which have relevance to modern life, and I think some of them (i.e. the Good Samaritan) do.
Surely you're not suggesting that the entire New Testament should not be taken literally and is just a collection of sotires ? :confused:


Ignatius, are you ignoring me ? ;) :D

[Krogith]

The people who wrote the bible didn't even live as long as we do today.

[Krogith]

Point being... That just because people die when there 80 er so now does not mean that if the world was perfectly working they would still die at 80 . who knows if you were born in a pure world that worked the way it was ment to, that your life span would increse? Could you of convinced people in midevil times that if they did this or that they would live to 80+ like we do today? Stop being blind. There are things possable out side of your box.

[Ignatius]

Possible, but unlikely.

Verging on the impossible that man can live for 900+ years.

I'm going to try though Kogrith, you betcha!

[idontgivenames]

sorry, i forgot i posted this. im not gonna read through all of the replies, but some of them i did read. the bottom line is, it doesnt matter if you're religious or not. you're still influenced by religion. because your influenced by society. and a godles society or not, that society was still influenced by religion because religion set a general status quo for human behavior. yet many people bash it as the problem for everything. aside from brain capacity, i think religion is what mostly seperates us from animals.

[mrdevious]

Point being... That just because people die when there 80 er so now does not mean that if the world was perfectly working they would still die at 80 . who knows if you were born in a pure world that worked the way it was ment to, that your life span would increse? Could you of convinced people in midevil times that if they did this or that they would live to 80+ like we do today?

Not really, the average person has a maximum potential life span of 124 years. At the end of every strand of DNA, which is found in all our cells, are a protein chain called telomeres. Telomeres are essential for cell reproduction to continue, and every time our cell divides the telomere gets shorter. The DNA within each cell can only shorten its telomeres so many times before it can not be split in half and replicated again. When this happens, the cells which have run out die.


Stop being blind. There are things possable out side of your box.

You may want to consider this philosophy yourself. There are many meanings in life to be found outside of your god, and I consider it just as "blind" to accept arguments like 900 year old men just because the book you agree with tells you so.

[MegaOctane12]

sorry, i forgot i posted this. im not gonna read through all of the replies, but some of them i did read. the bottom line is, it doesnt matter if you're religious or not. you're still influenced by religion. because your influenced by society. and a godles society or not, that society was still influenced by religion because religion set a general status quo for human behavior. yet many people bash it as the problem for everything. aside from brain capacity, i think religion is what mostly seperates us from animals.

Not really, some people are born in the World never knowing what to fear, tribes in far off places have no need of a belief system, they are not influenced by any higher power whatsoever, they still manage to exsist and co-exsist along side one another. Your right religion isn't responsible in itself but it is way too open to mis interpretation and the nieve like krogith.Its also true to say a gun only becomes a weapon when it is used against someone.

[rubbers0ul]

a want to "do good" is a passed on trait. apes who helped each other survived better, having a group to rely on, than solitray apes. i mean think about it

[MastaChronic]

this is awsome. Good point. Now heres where you are allowed to decide. Ither A: you decide it came from nothing and your god of your exsistance.
Or B: you except design and Not knowing everything and just humbol your self and except the Driection given to you.

Thing is A will lead no where. B will get the benfit of that vast knoladge and direction and purpose.

A means nothing matters. But B means there more to it. and a chance to live forever following this Awsome Creator. Doing things the right way and most benifical, and haveing a better life.

All God wants is people to draw close to him and aply his teachings and listion to his wise ways. This will lead to a everlasting life of happyness.

if you believe in option 'b' then why cant you spell a simple word like knowledge?
vast "knoladge" indeed, hah!