Craytonic

wow, great news!

a person of science and math would ABSOLUTLY say that if there is no evidence of a perfect circle one doesn't exist.

Not only is there no evidence of a higher being, but - the evidence that does exist would point against any intelligence designing the world.

While soo easy to define, all the points equidistant from a fixed point on a plane (or something to that effect), as we have both pointed out, it is not known to exist. But that doesn't mean I don't believe in it; I visualize it so easily! And without our definition and concept of a perfect circle, we would not be able to define all the non-perfect ones that exist in reality and merely approximate the perfect one. Harkens back to Aristotle, the forms, and perfection.

I really think you chose your conclusion and then found some things you agreed with to justify it. You mix religion, religions, religious leaders, belief, God, faith, and man in a big jumble to condemn them all. For one, we are talking about God - not religion.

I think the only way to go about this, as some other members appear to have done, is from A --> B --> C (I exist (y/n). If I exist, how did I come about? How did what/whom created me come about (and all the way back to square one)? If I exist, do I exist for a purpose (y/n), if I exist for a purpose, what is that purpose?, etc) (I realize those aren't the best questions or the best order, but you get the idea). That is the only way you can really discuss this because it is very logical and you can analyze each step independently. Otherwise it is just a jumble everyone skims and if they like the conclusion shakes head yes.

A writer & movie making money off religion by talking about how others make money off religion? Irony?

It isn't weak why? I don't see how you can go either way on this on "evidence" argument outside of people that don't believe because of some great tragedy (perhaps there was a reason they don't understand) or people that believe because they see evidence in math, nature, beauty, etc. It is just a clever little thing to say, not something to base your beliefs on.

By analogy there is no "evidence" that a perfect circle exists or has ever existed - take it to a high enough level of precision and any circle will be off. I can represent it conceptually and mathematically, and I don't think I would say I don't believe in a perfect circle because there is no actual evidence of one.

You two aren't alter egos of the same person? When you started saying you were god I put a little more stalk into that theory (kidding!!!! and running and hiding)

Yeah, should have made that more clear. I just think that particular argument is a moot point either way. Sure there is no evidence God exists, but there is no evidence he doesn't (as in something you can put next to "God" in the dictionary sense of the word)

What are you getting at, I was responding to ratchpot that he was making a weak argument... I guess thanks for re-inforcing that?

You have considered me a heretic for a long time

I don't believe in god, but for different reasons to you. I don't believe in god because there's no evidence that a supernatural being created everything.

Technically, there is no scientific evidence he didn't either...

I see what looks like evidence to me all the time. Although not "scientific proof," it says a lot to me. Different people see God in different places. Math, nature, etc.

You have made your purpose your children because you chose to do so (internal). You have no reason to do so other than your own (internal) processes. With athism everything is internal (the individual), with God there is an external factor. I don't believe it is arrogant to point out this difference.

Christians are the ones that are selfish IMO. It is quite selfish to believe that you are the only group that is right and everyone else is wrong. It is selfish to push your beliefs on everone else. It is selfish to teach your children things that you cannot prove and are contradicted by science. It is selfish to expect 10% of your earnings for "tidings".

Religion is all about being selfish. Atheism is about having free thought. All atheists gather their own conclusions about the universe and life based on fact not fairy tales. It is selfish to expect everyone to think the same way. I believe that is what Hitler wanted.

Off topic, we are discussing the existence of God, not the +/- of christianity. Although you raise some points that may merit response, that would be more appropriate in a different thread.

..so choosing to do good for others makes me a selfish person..

I can live with that.

People can't choose religion with an acceptance of everything implicated?

It is prideful to say you exist for whatever purpose you choose. Making that purpose helping others is not however, selfish. You are moving to the second point to get away from the first.

Obviously you can choose to do good. I know plenty of athiests (probably yourself included) that are "good" people that do "good" things.

But you do good because you choose to do so, not because you should. You chose your purpose and made it to do good. There is no "should" behind it other than your personal justifications for it. You would be justified similarly if you chose to build sand castles on the beach all day as to help others. Your purpose is what you choose it to be, which I find the selfish part of athism.

I will bite. How am I implying an athiest can't love?

There is a difference between "being governed by" and "serving." Subtle, I know - but I believe you neglected it.

If you are an atheiest your only purpose can be your own. If you existed to serve anyone other than yourself, it would imply you were created for a reason, and that someone created you for that reason. Regardless of its validity, it is at a minimum a very selfish proposal.

Which is more prideful: believing you are a tiny part of some other master plan or believing you are your own master plan?

You think claiming to be a "speck of dust" in the entire universe is prideful? I find it very humble.

I merely post the quote because it is interesting that Sarte would say such things before he died given his volumous writing to the contrary.

Athiesm always seems to involve a little too much wallowing in your own pride and thinking about how smart you are to have it all figured out for my taste. Pride / Hubris is a terrible thing (considered one of the 7 deadly sins)

"I do not feel that I am the product of chance, a speck of dust in the universe, but someone who was expected, prepared, prefigured. In short, a being whom only a Creator could put here; and this idea of a creating hand refers to God." - Jean-Paul Sarte before he died

Nevermind, won't feed the troll.

If there was a personal monotheistic god. Believers like to give all the credit and none of the blame to god. Evil man for all the bad and good god for all the good (kind of the opposite of a referee). Using logic, s/he could be only one of three possibilities... 1) evil 2) absent or 3) powerless.

God is a make believe friend for grown ups.

I consider myself a spiritual atheist.

"You ever hear girls say that? "I'm not religious but I'm spiritual." I like to reply with "I'm not honest, but you're interesting!"" - Daniel Tosh (very funny guy).

Speaking of discussion, who wants a Steve McQueen rep

In the simplest terms: I believe there is a God. If I am right, I win and the other side is screwed. If they are right, we all are screwed and it doesn't matter. Easy bet, no? There is a fancy name for this one, but I forgot it.

I have read most of the classic/historical works on both sides; I still believe and pitty those that do not.

Google Bukkake chicken. Is work safe.

Wow so many people need a copy of Emily Post's etiquette slammed into their skull. several times.

If this cuts down on 1/2 the jibbrish (sp?) posts over there I may start reading it again; I got tired of scrolling through his random haikus to find other people's posts.

Picture of my BBD (big black dic)

The ladies love it!