Is it an observation, or is wordpress infested with a bunch of atheists? The arguments are all the same on most pages, I have yet to find anything of substance.
I find atheism irritating, especially amongst the pack of wolves that blog here. Their own god, Darwin, couldn’t deny some sort of deity. Yet, these, who are greater then Darwin, jumped the ship and claim that God does not exist. No proof is given to the claim, except obscure arguments.
Moral relativism. Atheists have the unfortunate duty of believing that we are not moral beings. There is no code of ethics, and so, as an atheist, it is fine to murder, pillage, and rape. When they try to weasel their way out of that argument, it usually results in circular logic (a paradox). It is hilarious, seriously, because the most common answer I get, is “we have laws for the better good of humanity”. Good? Can there be good when we are all an accident? No.
The war argument. This pathetic argument is used to show how bad Christians are. Religious people have killed more people then atheist. Wrong. We all know the terrible numbers that atheistic dictators presented to the world. Most wars are not religious, but over territory disputes, etc. If it is a battle of who killed more, the atheist leader has won hands down. After all, they are true atheists, for there can be no evil.
No proof of God’s existence. If you look at the world, you’ll notice design. Time and time again, atheist scientists will remark at the design of something. Well, to have design, you need what? A designer. I conclude that the design of creation is remarkable. The leatherback sea turtle is designed to know when to go to shore and store her eggs. She smartly hides them under the sand using her valuable fins. These animals survive primarily off of jelly fish. They have a notch on their beak that is designed to puncture their favorite food.
Now, how probable is it that this animal was able to know ahead of time that burying her eggs would help to protect from predators? Without the design of instinct, this animal would have quickly come to extinction.
How about the beak? Can an animal bring itself to grow its beak in such a way that it can eat its favorite food? The answer is no. We have yet to see any examples of macro evolution. The turtle relies on the jellyfish to survive. Without the notch, the turtle would not be able to pierce its food. It would eventually starve to death, and therefore: extinction.
So far atheism has not presented a reasonable argument to its religion. No example of speciation, no spontaneous generation witnessed, and even minor changes in evolution (such as growing a beak notch) have never been seen. Maybe this young religion needs another 2000 years to prove itself worthy. Maybe it needs another 100,000,000,000 years.
Arrogant New Englander 
June 13, 2007 at 7:46 pm |
“Is it an observation, or is wordpress infested with a bunch of atheists? ”
The more the merrier.
“Their own god, Darwin, couldn’t deny some sort of deity.”
That’s just silly, Darwin is no God, just a scientist.
“Yet, these, who are greater then Darwin, jumped the ship and claim that God does not exist. No proof is given to the claim, except obscure arguments.”
No proof is needed. I think you’re getting the burden the wrong way around. In any case, we don’t say he definitely does not exist. We suggest that it’s highly unlikely, and there is evidence for that. Plenty of it.
“Moral relativism. Atheists have the unfortunate duty of believing that we are not moral beings”
Not true.
“There is no code of ethics,”
Not true.
“and so, as an atheist, it is fine to murder, pillage, and rape.”
not true
“Can there be good when we are all an accident? No”
You’re playing some philosophical acrobatics here. You ought to know better than that.
“The war argument. This pathetic argument is used to show how bad Christians are”
Yet you used the same argument as a negative for atheists. consistency please…
“No proof of God’s existence. If you look at the world, you’ll notice design.”
You’re arguing from design? Really? That’s pretty poor but as you’ve heard the arguments before and have obviously ignored them I won’t bother.
“The leatherback sea turtle is designed to know when to go to shore and store her eggs. She smartly hides them under the sand using her valuable fins. These animals survive primarily off of jelly fish. They have a notch on their beak that is designed to puncture their favorite food.”
Oh, and perhaps you want to take a quick biology 101 before inferring a creator in the actions of a turtle.
“How about the beak? Can an animal bring itself to grow its beak in such a way that it can eat its favorite food?”
Incredible. You’ve shown an amazing misunderstanding of evolutionary biology here.
“So far atheism has not presented a reasonable argument to its religion.”
Eh? That makes no sense at all. Atheism is not a religion. You know this, come on.
Seriously, your entire posts really needs to be reconsidered and re-written into something at least somewhat more intelligible. Currently it’s full of fallacy and misunderstanding.
June 13, 2007 at 11:33 pm |
I have to agree with the above comment. The blog entry displays a considerable misunderstanding of both Atheism and the Theory of Evolution, getting many aspects of both rather incorrect.
June 14, 2007 at 3:54 pm |
Unfortunately, both comments presented as a counter to my original entry show no meat. Simply saying “no, no, not true” etc, does not prove anything.
It is stated that I have a misunderstanding of atheism. Simply defined, atheism is the belief that there is no God. Not the belief that there may not be a God (which can be more aptly defined as agnosticism). The burden of proof lay upon the atheist. Prove there is no God.
Please, if you’re going to counter my points, at least use some substance. Even a microscopic amount of detail to prove your perspective would be admirable.
If I am misunderstood, I would like some demonstrations as to how I am.
June 14, 2007 at 11:57 pm |
You are not misunderstood, you misunderstand.
I’m interested why you think I need to prove there I no God? There’s no obligation on my part to do so. In any case, you are the one claiming the extraordinary, if you know God exists then surely you have some proof? Don’t bother answering, I’m not interested in adding anything else to your blog, there’s no point in giving you any kind of credibility. You do not understand your own arguments never mind the positions of your opponents and thus, I don’t think my time is well spent here. Intelligent debate is obviously not on the menu. Goodnight and good luck. I hope yo find whatever it is you are looking for.
June 15, 2007 at 12:06 pm |
Bravo for not proving your point. You backed out of this engagement because you have no way of proving your “solid” belief.
God has found me. I hope He finds you well.
August 2, 2007 at 12:04 am |
I am anew here in this poll post, but I will try to intelligently and comprehensively dispute any supposition of the inquiry belief in atheism or the like. Thence fore, Atheism, a believable notion in that reality is by far a skeptic chance of any existence of the supernatural being. Or either, an intelligent design. Atheist also have a stand-point in broad and explicit supposition of this idea in no God(s) and a need of evidence. Evidence are horrendous but is feasible. Also, atheist believe in the notion of the “Why?”. For instance, “If there is a God and is all benevolent (but rather “malevolent” in a sense) and all omni-potential, “why” is that there is suffrage, violence, malevolence, immorality, pessimism, delays or hindrance of his return, diseases, drama, argumentation, debate of his presence, and nurturements or healing, miracles, and his “creation”, and other increments of existence that made people wonder with intricate. The question for this is the big “why?” and perhaps “How?” along with who and where. Basically the focus-point is on the “why”. Going straight the point, in what I think “why” this had to eventuate: According to the bible, mankind had sinned by eating from the forbidden tree of Eden(Adam and Eve) that brought out more actuations of sins and evil and depression. But if you want to take the stab on the reality of this is simply this of what I think, hence secluding the bible. When you are conspicuously aware of the unlikeliness of misconstrued, you’ll be surprised of what your conscience may tell you. But if you’re an atheist, the awarenesses internal and externalities are out of the mentality of your perception(s). Simply because atheist believe in blind reality that one is just there and is there to self-support or perhaps do the likeliness that comes to mind. But this is intriguing because atheists deliberately knows right from wrong (somehow)….Excluding the notion of right or wrong thinking, atheist will deliberately choose an alternative way of perceptional perceiving, and are persevered to that notion (somehow). But if in fact the refutation of a God existence is at hand…It still will intervene the knowledge in their mind. Somehow, many atheist fluctuates to “agnosticism”…(somehow). Because the proclamation of theologians states is an all compelling notion to convert. An atheist reading this…How in fact, do you know you are here reading and thinking of interpretations for this matter at all? Good point? Wrong for atheistic notion because they somehow have the mentality of per-saying this state of thought in giving a reply. (Somehow???) An atheist view-point of the, “I think it matters but it really doesn’t concern me…”…But “somehow” it matters!? That is the implication that I get with many atheists and or agnostics I meet and socialize with in reality and reading, and watching them. Thus, if in fact a God truly need credible articulative evidence for one to inherit compelling notion within, one would strive to find it overwhelmingly. But as a Christian myself, evidence for our God are pretty much facetious in many ways but is a conclusive evidence for the presence of God. Since I am trying to explicatively prove points and alternatives onto the dissension of atheistic and agnostics view thereby, evolution doesn’t meet the appliance of this matter. And if indeed it did, it wouldn’t matter, because our existence is only a feign animation of our existence, an illusion of hallucination…If in fact this universal existence and planets filled within without God or the right God whatsoever, matters of reason to mean doesn’t mean a thing to anyone who is in particular of the notion atheism. That if there is no God, there is no purpose of life in it itself. Wait, but atheist state of argument(s) may inevitably alter. That the idea of purpose seems to sink in to them and express their “emotions”, “feelings”…What “feelings” and “emotions”? Why does it even matter to atheist? Atheist supposition cease to utter conclusive but rather, inconclusive perceptions that express the mind and release its utterly tangibility with compelling thoughts. In another sense and implication that I have been perceiving is that, atheist also, do not want to be held accountable to a higher being, God. And atheist will deliberately be more anguish or the like of being use more of the “why” sense. Please, be more authentic atheist. It seems too obvious that atheist are lost internally and externally.
July 10, 2008 at 12:17 am |
“We have yet to see any examples of macro evolution.”
Endogenous retroviruses. Whale atavisms. Human wisdom teeth. Tribolium castaneum. That is barely scratching the surface. But, of course, all this evolution stuff is a big lie that the Evil Atheist Conspiracy cooked up to deceive the good Christians into sin. Don’t believe a word of it.
July 10, 2008 at 3:52 pm |
Tom,
How are those large changes and/or species formation? Please stop using the talkorigins.org site to gain your “knowledge” about evolution. That site has been proven time and time again to be unscientific.
July 10, 2008 at 5:11 pm |
Funny, so you say that TalkOrigins is unscientific. And on the other hand the Smithsonian Institute, the National Academy of Sciences, Scientific American and hundreds of scientists say it is an excellent resource. Guess they are all just minions of Satan. Perhaps you’d like to recommend an alternative source of information on evolutionary biology. Maybe Conservapedia or CreationWiki or Answers in Genesis is more to your liking.
You asked for evidence of macroevolution. We do not directly observe macroevolution, because it happens rarely – a hundred years of science for four billion years of history means that there is lots we don’t see. Evolution does not deny that. There are plenty of things in science we don’t observe directly, but we have evidence for them. The genetic evidence for macroevolution, and the experimental evidence showing how speciation happens, is knock-down. You’ll find plenty of good books about it in your local libraries and bookstores.
July 10, 2008 at 6:11 pm |
Tom,
Not for nothing, but isn’t science something that can be observed? You do admit that the macroevolution theory is based on something that cannot be proven through basic scientific methodology.
I realize that I, as a Christian, cannot 100 % prove creation, but I nonetheless see the evidence of it through historical studies and scientific analysis pointing to a common artist. I have no inclination to predict the world as millions of year old, so the proof lies in the old-earth evolutionist.
I’ll take the argument to the end: If macroevolution happens to be fact, then where did the infinitesimal dot come from the caused the big bang?
July 10, 2008 at 7:06 pm |
There are so many things… off about this post (hey, freedom to post though of course).
let me list them:
1) atheists are not an infestation. they exist much like christians do. they are not vermin. they have a different viewpoint than you. so do muslims. and mennonites. and small animals.
2) atheists are probably looking at the theists pages thinking the same thing “their arguments never change!”. since you cannot prove that God exists and i cannot prove definitively that God doesn’t exist, we are at an impasse.
3) i find blind theism pretty irritating to. i would explain why but apparently you’ve heard all the arguments.
4) darwin is not a God. he was just a scientist. i’m glad he was intelligent enough to make some observations that has led to great breakthroughs.
5) since when do atheists believe in moral relativism? this is just silly. a myth. most humans have a code of ethics, most got that code from their parents. some see this code in the bible, some in the book of mormon, some in the qu’ran. some do not care about any of these books and believe that everything in life should be respected.
6) i’m not sure that “good” can only come from God. that’s kind of disturbing. but hey i’ve seen plenty of “bad” coming from religion (and yes, even from atheists and communists etc. it’s almost as though humans can be good or bad regardless and it’s more dependant on each person.)
7) war is never over something as simple as territory. oh yes, George Bush Jr was only interested in promoting democracy. we never saw black gold shimmering in his eyes at all. nope.
8) design. it’s often hard to look beyond what we are and what we see and think of what could be. people say humans are designed perfectly. i say humans have an adequate design (marvelous yes, amazing yes, but ponder for a few moments how we COULD be designed). i think it is arrogant to think that things couldn’t be better. am i complaining? no, because i have life and i am grateful for that, but it seems short sighted to think there isn’t something better.
9) the turtle would have had to learn this behaviour, learn that this was the “smartest” way to do things. much like humans, who come to realize new things all the time, because of a desire to survive, to explore, to eat and so on. we innovate. necessity is the mother of invention (oh how cliche).
10) atheism is not a religion. to call it a religion is silly, since it means an absence of belief in Gods. religion is a belief in the supernatural. religion involves rites. religion involves faith and tradition.
11) things evolve all the time. as a lay-person unversed in most science, i can easily see how we change. and yes, that’s just social evolution.
12) i’m still not sure how evolution affects religion, except to say… uhm, yeah, the earth is older than 6000 years. evolution does not answer where we originally came from. did something create us? or do we just have no ability to understand the concept of things like time or that something could always exist.
evolution is no better than creationism at describing how it all began. believing that a creature much stronger than us created us all, or that we are all just formed from a burst of energy… well, both seem like a strange sci-fi movie.
believe in creation if you want. i’ll believe in what i want to believe in. atheists and theists CAN co-exist (i know, crazy thought) because we’re all just people looking for an answer. if your beliefs don’t affect me or others negatively, then power to you for finding something that makes you happy and comfortable about the mystery that surrounds every day. but other people just can’t take comfort in the concept of creation. it feels like a fairytale placebo. they are allowed to feel that way, being that there isn’t definitive ultimate evidence either way.
July 10, 2008 at 8:02 pm |
metaljaybird
That a human doesnt live long enough to observe a lot of speciation does not mean there is no evidence.
Shared DNA and the fossil records give us overwhelming evidence that evolution occurs.
Where did you learn your science and what evidence have you that talk origins is wrong in any way what so ever?
I suspect some one has been feeding you stories if you think that evolution has anything to do with the big bang. Evolution is the change in allele frequencies over time. This is observed now, and can be traced back in time with fossils and laterally when we compare the dna of a housecat to a lion, and to other mammals.
July 10, 2008 at 9:39 pm |
While I do believe atheists and Christians can coexist, I have yet to see an example where a society primed on the theory of atheism permitted free open worship of the Christian God.
Cuba
China
USSR
Cambodia
…just to name a few. Anyway, welcome to my blog. This post is rather old, and I didn’t intend it to come off as meaning all atheists were an infested bunch 😉
Suzanne, welcome also. I would say that the fossil record is incomplete and based on circular logic. Of course, maybe that has changed in the last 2 years when I was more heavily involved in this study.
Where did you learn your science and what evidence have you that talk origins is wrong in any way what so ever?
I learned my science like most folks. Raised in the Public School system in a well-to-do New England ‘burb. I then began my own studies, self studying and engaging in intellectual discussions with like minded folks. Since I have the educational background required of a public schooler (evolution taught as fact) I have seen both sides of the argument.
TalkOrigins has time and time again posted inaccurate information regarding science and evolution.
While I’m at it, what do you think of the Big 3 of the New Atheist movement? Also, have checked out Vox Day’s TIA book?
And I will admit to you that as my life has taken a different turn in the last year or so, my primary focus of study has gone back to music and technology, hence, I am simply a layman.
July 11, 2008 at 8:46 pm |
“Is it an observation, or is wordpress infested with a bunch of atheists? The arguments are all the same on most pages, I have yet to find anything of substance.”
Same could be said of theist pages. *cough cough*
“Is it an observation, or are cities infested with a bunch of blacks?”
Would you say that out loud, or even think it without feeling just a little bit bad? If you heard someone ask that question, wouldn’t you call them ignorant or bigoted?
“I find atheism irritating, especially amongst the pack of wolves that blog here.” Their own god, Darwin, couldn’t deny some sort of deity. Yet, these, who are greater then Darwin, jumped the ship and claim that God does not exist. No proof is given to the claim, except obscure arguments.’
How DARE we speak our minds!
Did you know that the only requirement for having a blog is internet access and an email address?
“Their own god, Darwin, couldn’t deny some sort of deity.”
Perhaps you are confused about what the word atheist means. An atheist, by definition would not regard Darwin as a deity. Darwin said that evolution and belief in gods are not mutually exclusive. My girlfriend is Xian and she rejects creation myth.
“Yet, these, who are greater then Darwin, jumped the ship and claim that God does not exist. No proof is given to the claim, except obscure arguments.”
In general it is impossible to prove a negative. Most atheists get that. Atheism is NOT the position of “there are no gods”. But rather, the absence of a belief in gods.
“Moral relativism.”
All people(s) have moral relativism. Xians change their morality over time (see New vs. Old Testament). Shellfish are abomination. Have you ever eaten shrimp? 100 years ago the idea of a black president would have been a joke, and today we have grown and thus have a black candidate on the ballot. There are no planetwide moral absolutes. Our views of right and wrong change over time and from situation to situation. That’s part of living in the real world.
“Atheists have the unfortunate duty of believing that we are not moral beings.”
How is that a duty? Says who? All atheists have in common is no belief is gods. Some of us are pro-choice, some pro-life. We don’t have any manifesto, organization or spokesmen. Dawkins doesn’t represent me any more than the pope represents you.
Morality is a feature of self and species preservation. Social animals have rules of what is and is not acceptable. Intelligent people understand the value of laws and morality, atheist or not.
“There is no code of ethics, and so, as an atheist, it is fine to murder, pillage, and rape.”
There is no OBJECTIVE or UNIVERSAL code of ethics. What is considered ethical/moral depends on the society in question. i don’t know of anyone, atheist or otherwise, who says those things are fine. You’re claim here is insulting and illogical. It’s the slippery slope fallacy writ large. Just because i acknowledge the fact that there are no objective or universal codes of morality does not mean i condone such activities. If you want know about who thinks those things are fine, give the bible or koran a read.
“When they try to weasel their way out of that argument, it usually results in circular logic (a paradox). It is hilarious, seriously, because the most common answer I get, is “we have laws for the better good of humanity”. Good? Can there be good when we are all an accident? No.”
Sure there can. It’s not a circular argument at all, you’re pinning morality to deities. It’s YOUR assumption that they go hand in hand, which is not the case. A nation of atheists would have laws that would be pretty much the same as any secular nation. Morality comes from what individuals feel and what society agrees upon. “I don’t want to be killed. Let’s make a law that says that killing is illegal.” Read up on the idea of Social Contract.
“The war argument. This pathetic argument is used to show how bad Christians are. Religious people have killed more people then atheist. Wrong. We all know the terrible numbers that atheistic dictators presented to the world. Most wars are not religious, but over territory disputes, etc.”
Hitler was a devout Xian. He’s one of yours, not ours. You can deny it all you want, but head over to your favorite quotation web page and look him up. Stalin you say? Stalin’s problem with religion was about removing a rival powerbase. The gunmen were all Xian. Saddam and bin Laden had Allah on their side. Bush thinks Jesus told him to invade Iraq. Even if the wars were territorial, each side vehemently proclaimed that their god was on their side.
“If it is a battle of who killed more, the atheist leader has won hands down. After all, they are true atheists, for there can be no evil.”
i dealt with the first sentence above. i don’t speak for all atheists, but this one has a strong sense of good vs. evil.
“No proof of God’s existence. If you look at the world, you’ll notice design.”
No. Not design. Systems adapt to the systems around them. Some birds migrate because there is a bigger, more powerful system that will kill them or make them miserable if they don’t. Not because of a watchmaker. Pigeons didn’t exist before cities, a previous species found human settlements protecting and providing. They get free food and shelter. Grey feathers help them blend in.
If there is a design, it’s a crap design. Our bodies are rubbish, far from optimal design. If i designed a universe, it would be a damn sight better this this mish mash. It’s a kludge.
“Time and time again, atheist scientists will remark at the design of something. Well, to have design, you need what? A designer.”
The designer was necessity, opportunity and limitation. If we had a designer, it short changed us on wings, night vision and so on.
“I conclude that the design of creation is remarkable. The leatherback sea turtle is designed to know when to go to shore and store her eggs. She smartly hides them under the sand using her valuable fins. These animals survive primarily off of jelly fish. They have a notch on their beak that is designed to puncture their favorite food.”
It’s not a matter of smart, it’s instinct. She doesn’t think “oh, I should hide my eggs, but how? Ah, I’ll bury them”. She gives it about as much thought as your leg gives to twitching when the doctor taps your knee. Her species figured it out eons ago.
If she didn’t have the fins, she’d have to eat whatever floated by. Eons ago, some species figured out that movement was valuable… over time they got better at it. Those that did better passed traits on to their offspring. Read up on what evolution actually IS before you talk about it.
“We have yet to see any examples of macro evolution.”
This statement is a lie. Take an 8th grade biology class. Do some research on a subject. Macro evolution happens all the time. The time scale just happens to be far longer that our attention span or existence on this planet.
“So far atheism has not presented a reasonable argument to its religion.”
Atheists, by definition, don’t have a religion. Do some research on what atheism is and is not.
“No example of speciation, no spontaneous generation witnessed, and even minor changes in evolution (such as growing a beak notch) have never been seen.”
Speciation happens. You are a minor, albeit backward, step in speciation. And no, i’m not going to do your Bio teacher’s job. Do your own research.
“This post is rather old, and I didn’t intend it to come off as meaning all atheists were an infested bunch”
‘No offense, but your mother is a smelly slut.’
‘I don’t mean to hurt your feelings but I’ve been cheating on you with your sister.’
If you didn’t mean it, you shouldn’t have said it. You should have said what you meant. Either you meant to be insulting, or you’re incompetent at saying what you mean. i’m going to bet it was the former.
“I would say that the fossil record is incomplete and based on circular logic.”
It was very inconsiderate of the dinosaurs to not preserve themselves better. It’s not circular logic, it’s logic that would require you to change your world view.
You don’t understand what atheism is, and more importantly, what it is not. You don’t understand evolution. You are quite ignorant about history as well.
July 11, 2008 at 9:13 pm |
Look, stop trolling. I’m not racist, I’m not ignorant, and I’m not a bigoted person who opposes free speech. Quite obviously you have never read any other of my posts. You’ll notice, unlike certain major New Atheists, I don’t feel the need to censor most comments. In fact, I’ll keep your insults up. They just make me smile and affirm my belief that most atheists are socially autistic. 🙂
July 11, 2008 at 9:15 pm |
And BTW,
Hitler was no devout Christian. (Xtian is not an insult numnuts, btw.)
He was a follower of darwinism that brought his evolutionist belief to a final conclusion that whites are the supreme race.
Since I work for a living, I don’t have time to fully digest all of the idiotic remarks you made in your reply.
July 12, 2008 at 11:30 pm |
It’s been awhile since I’ve heard someone get called numbnuts- in new england it was quite common, like “wicked”, or “pissa” [big when I was growing up in Mass.] thanks for making me laugh. These atheists are a pissed off bunch.
July 14, 2008 at 3:35 am |
Just for clarity’s sake, the holocaust was a practice in eugenics, which is an attempt at artificial selection derived from lessons learned in animal husbandry, not from Darwin’s theory of natural selection.
Hitler seems to have been a Christian of some type. He professed a belief in Jesus Christ and admiration for the work of Martin Luther, especially Luther’s work, “On the Jews and their Lies”. Of course, many others have believed in Jesus Christ and not tried to exterminate people of other races. I don’t think all Christians are responsible for the atrocities of Hitler. Those who were complicit in the holocaust were tried and punished a long time ago.
July 14, 2008 at 12:51 pm |
Hi John K,
Thanks for stopping by and for your refreshing perspective. While I respect Martin Luther, I do disagree with his thoughts on the Jewish people.
The fact is, like the Australians, through the use of evolution theory, he thought the white race was the superior race and sought to eliminate other races preaching their inferiority to the masses.
July 14, 2008 at 6:35 pm |
“…he thought the white race was the superior race and sought to eliminate other races…”
Artificial selection by breeding animals with preferred traits and slaughtering animals without the preferred traits is what animal husbandry is all about and animal husbandry was practiced for millennia before Darwin noticed how natural selection brought about the origin of the species. Hitler was attempting to do with people what people have done with domestic animals since the dawn of civilization.
July 15, 2008 at 4:20 pm |
As an atheist I must say people are running scared, frightened to lose their hold on many who know no better or cannot think for themselves.
Why is it those who believe in a god, I believe there are many of them, are clinging on to something just because they are taught to believe in a god.
The state of the world, with children being raped and turned in to soldiers, sold by their families for slavery, and abused by priests, by people who believe they are doing their god’s work, and just putting it down to a god’swill.
Atheists do not let off bombs to try to prove their beliefs.
July 15, 2008 at 4:59 pm |
Atheists do not let off bombs to try to prove their beliefs.
That is irrelevant and highly debatable. How many supposed envirofreaks from ALF are atheists? How many bombs were dropped on Cambodian children because of a certain atheist?
I am not scared of losing my hold on my beliefs. To the contrary. Actually, I was in the book of Corinthians and recently came across a part of scripture about the wisdoms of this world being foolish before God. There’s also some scripture that reference people who say there is no God as fools. God finds them “laughable.”
July 15, 2008 at 7:27 pm |
“The burden of proof lay upon the atheist. Prove there is no God.”
Did you sleep through science class? The burden of proof always lies with the positivist statement.
Prove unicorns _don’t_ exist. Go on, do it, dipshit.
July 16, 2008 at 12:54 am |
Call it my phenomenonal secular public school education. Why don’t you prove the big bang theory.
Anyway the wife is in labor…
July 22, 2008 at 3:57 am |
“Anyway the wife is in labor…”
Very cool.