[Stella LaForte]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

Hogwash! The guidelines for morality did not come through so-called, satan worshippin' philosophers.The guidelines came from Jesus!

Look at a historical timeline. Socrates, Plato, and Democritus all lived before Jesus did. Socrates: 469 BCE–399 BCE. Jesus: 5 BCE-30 CE.

We are not to be partakeers with you for the Lord's Wrath is kindled against you!

Oh, really? Go on, prove that "the Lord's wrath is kindled against me"... using a source other than the Bible. Go on.

Beware! This one may have a case of hemorrhoids-a sure sign of God's Wrath.

In reality, haemorrhoids are caused by obesity, enlargement of haemorrhoidal vessels, aging, abnormal bowel habits, and other such things that increse strain - and it's a genetic predilection. As usual, God has nothing to do with it.

What utter nonsense is this? Twenty heavens? Brahmla-cuckoo seems more like it. I suppose this is just the kind of religion that you get from horrible nutrition, powerful hallucinogens and backwards savagery.

Just because the Hindi faith seems foreign to you doesn't make it make any less sense than your own religion.

Hitler was not Christian. He was a devout atheist who merely used the tools of religion to advance his cause. In Hitler's Table Talk, he explicitly revealed his hatred of Christianity, calling it all a lie and a disease. If anything, I think Nazism is far more closely linked to Paganism. Hitler's full support of Himmler's decidedly-fierce pursuit of such things is proof enough.

You can also pull a number of quotes that say otherwise: For instance, Hitler saying "I am now as before a Catholic and will always remain so," "Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord," "I confess that I will never ally myself with the parties which aim to destroy Christianity," and "We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out."
Hitler was Christian and against atheism.

Of course religion wasn't important in them, because they were atheists! And excuse me if I find it hard to keep track of what the point was, since you seem to change it every time you post, and sometimes more often than that.

*sighs* See above for the example in Naziism.

Because you believe in karma.

If you're referring to the nonsense in my introduction post, that was just to see the reactions from the people here. You'll see that nowhere else have I mentioned such things. Oh, and by the way, that wouldn't make me a false atheist.

Karma is a higher power.

No, Karma is thought to be an underlying rule of the universe.

Kill yourself.

Explain why you think so, please.

But it's not an inevitable part of existence, because we have morals. It sounds like you're just trying to deny the existence of morals, and claim it's impossible to have them, to give yourself an excuse for being a selfish, uncaring, lying misanthropic scumbag.

But what are morals, in reality? Vague concepts with no real definition. Just what's in accordance to the conduct expected. And of course I'm denying the existence of objective morality, that was my entire point - one second it's "Thou shalt not kill," the next it's "Burn witches," for an example.

By this point, I'm finding it difficult to keep track of what you're yammering lies about.

Sounds like an excuse to me.

Prove it.

I can prove the existence of Brahma with Hindi holy texts in the same way that I can prove the existence of God with Christian holy texts. Actually, seeing as you prove God with the Bible, I can prove Harry Potter's existence based off the Harry Potter books. I can prove that Legloas and Frodo exist with the Lord of the Rings! Think about your logic.

Yes it is. Think about it, how could God have created the universe if He didn't exist before it began? You're a bit dim.

I meant, prove to me that God did create the universe... without using the Bible. Again, just try.

If I tried to "look at it from the spiritual and intellectual perspectives" of a bunch of demon-worshippers, God would probably send me to Hell for blasphemy, and rightly so. They were trying to be Christians and they got it wrong, end of story.

What a grand excuse for ignorance that is. And how could they be Christians when there was no Christ yet?

So you admit that the New Deal was an atheist plot against God? And please provide proof that Hitler's pagan Catholic beliefs influenced the essential atheist character of the Nazi project (which, by the way, you cannot condemn).

... When on Earth did I say that about the New Deal? I said just the opposite. Please stop making up things I say.
And again with Hitler? This is such a pointless argument. But I'll play along. In Mein Kampf, Hitler's autobiography, he stated that he thought the Aryan race was created by God, and that it was a sin against God to dilute that heritage through racial intermixing. This led him to want to exterminate everyone outside the "Aryan" race - Jews, Romani, Soviets, etc.

You're an idiot on several counts. Do you even know who Jeff Luers is?
1) According to your stupid, inconsistent beliefs, no-one is ever right or wrong about anything ever, so if I, as an individual, arbitrarily choose to decide that environmentalism is immoral, that is every bit as objectively valid as any other definition of morality. Do you agree with that, or are you even more of a hypocrite than I thought you were?
2) Environmentalism leads directly to terrorism. Do you agree with Utah Phillips' famous quote, "The Earth is not dying - it is being killed. And the people who are killing it have names and addresses"? Do you see how this quote leads directly to terrorism - not just in theory, but in the practice of the ELF, Earth First!, Sea Shepherd, the Coalition to Save the Preserves, the Unabomber, Jeff Luers, Eric McDavid, Daniel McGowan, and many more? Do some reading.
3) Global warming is a lie.

Yes, I know of Jeff Luers - he was an environmentalist that tried to bring attention to the unsustainability of the extreme capitalist system of America. And are you familiar with the events occuring in the Dark Ages? If not, the peasants created a revolutionary agricultural technique then. You see, every year, they planted the same amount of crops in the same fields. Year after year, the productivity dwindled lower and lower until nothing grew. The peasants realised this, and worked hard to preserve their fields, restoring nitrogen and oxygen to it. You see... peasants in the European Dark Ages came to a conclusion that not even "civilised society" came to: You can't take a limited amount of resources and exploit it infinitely and expect it to continue to yield the same results year after year. Yet, that's just what we're doing to the planet.
1) I agree completely! I'm glad you got that.
2) Depends on how you define terrorism. Are not all revolutionaries considered terrorists? Jesus was considered a terrorist, you know, for having philosophies that differed from the norm.
3) ... No... No, it's not... Please do some research on that topic.

These theories, unlike Christianity, were internally inconsistent, and so did not provide usable objective standards of good and evil.

Oh, come off it. The Bible contradicts itself too many times to count.

Alright then, what does the Freedom of Information Act have to do with survival?

Another step in preventing revolutions and internal dissent.

Prove these false gods existed. You're just proving Bobby-Joe's point about how they're all imitations of the real God.

Again, I can prove them with the holy texts of those religions in the same way that I can prove that God exists with the holy texts of Christianity. "This anthology says this guy exists." Well gee, then he must!

Islam and Judaism are both splinter factions from Christianity. They are every bit as Christian as, say, Catholicism. Zoroastarianism is just a sinful, devil-inspired mockery of Christianity, and so can be safely discarded.
So it's just an accident that Stalin, Mao and FDR were all atheists, right?
You have shown once again that, as Bobby-Joe claimed, atheists are blind to the willful tough love of God manifested in these events. Therefore, you are wrong.

WHAT. Judaism and Zoroastrianism both existed before Christianity, sorry to say!
Yeah, they were atheists and communists. And? Communism requires atheism because they put the Party in place of a god.

You're an idiot. Apart from the fact that your fellow hateful atheist scumbag, Stella, has just copied and pasted numerous essays proving that atheists have no morals, to say that "people have different standards of morality" proves nothing.

Excuse me, but I wrote that. I emailed the website that plagiarised it from me, and they took it down. See? http://www.xkaw.com/Arts_Humanities/...asp?id=1498376

[Gabriel Reproba]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

This is Bakaisyou.

We can read your forum name, thanks.

Why do you keep on stereotyping people by their beliefs? People are not like that.

Oh really? Show me a muslim who doesn't think that pedophilia is OK. (Their god married a seven year old and consummated the marriage when she was NINE!) Show me an atheist who doesn't believe in evilution.

Also, when criticizing another religion, look up their rituals, facts about that religion, etc etc etc. Use actual, reliable evidence.

We have the only evidence we need: The King James Bible. It PROVES that God is the Way and the Truth.

The Bible is a book. Books cannot prove something alone. Even Holy Books cannot prove something alone.

Tell that to evilutionists. They read On the Origins of Species and have followed the false Darwinism religion ever since. The BIBLE is not a mere book, however. It is the Word of God.

We need to use documentaries (Books, but they tell about lives, but you need to provide something more than a book, so don't try to argue back about this.)

More atheists saying "trust me...don't argue with me..." LOL!

, archives, documents about how they behave, and more.

So you say we need documents, archives and documents. And an archives is what? A collection of documents. So, in the end, you say we need "documents, collections of documents, and documents." You do realize that the Bible is a collection of documents, right? Written by MULTIPLE witnesses, right? So doesn't the Bible give you the "documents, collections of documents, and documents" that you ask for?

You just make up things on the spot with little to no research.

EVERYTHING we say is backed up by scripture and thousands of years of theological thought and research into scripture. You don't seem to be able to read the Bible and admit that what we say comes straight form the Good Book.

I can see now that you are in fact, a cult. You preach falsehood and teach your followers on how to be butthurt, make falsehood, and stuff like that. You are almost like Scientology.

Go look up the definition of a cult. Then come back here and apologize.

[BakaisMe]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

Of course religion wasn't important in them, because they were atheists! And excuse me if I find it hard to keep track of what the point was, since you seem to change it every time you post, and sometimes more often than that.


Because you believe in karma.

Karma is a higher power.

Kill yourself.

But it's not an inevitable part of existence, because we have morals. It sounds like you're just trying to deny the existence of morals, and claim it's impossible to have them, to give yourself an excuse for being a selfish, uncaring, lying misanthropic scumbag.

By this point, I'm finding it difficult to keep track of what you're yammering lies about.

Prove it.

Yes it is. Think about it, how could God have created the universe if He didn't exist before it began? You're a bit dim.

If I tried to "look at it from the spiritual and intellectual perspectives" of a bunch of demon-worshippers, God would probably send me to Hell for blasphemy, and rightly so. They were trying to be Christians and they got it wrong, end of story.

So you admit that the New Deal was an atheist plot against God? And please provide proof that Hitler's pagan Catholic beliefs influenced the essential atheist character of the Nazi project (which, by the way, you cannot condemn).

You're an idiot on several counts. Do you even know who Jeff Luers is?
1) According to your stupid, inconsistent beliefs, no-one is ever right or wrong about anything ever, so if I, as an individual, arbitrarily choose to decide that environmentalism is immoral, that is every bit as objectively valid as any other definition of morality. Do you agree with that, or are you even more of a hypocrite than I thought you were?
2) Environmentalism leads directly to terrorism. Do you agree with Utah Phillips' famous quote, "The Earth is not dying - it is being killed. And the people who are killing it have names and addresses"? Do you see how this quote leads directly to terrorism - not just in theory, but in the practice of the ELF, Earth First!, Sea Shepherd, the Coalition to Save the Preserves, the Unabomber, Jeff Luers, Eric McDavid, Daniel McGowan, and many more? Do some reading.
3) Global warming is a lie.

These theories, unlike Christianity, were internally inconsistent, and so did not provide usable objective standards of good and evil.

Alright then, what does the Freedom of Information Act have to do with survival?

Prove these false gods existed. You're just proving Bobby-Joe's point about how they're all imitations of the real God.

Islam and Judaism are both splinter factions from Christianity. They are every bit as Christian as, say, Catholicism. Zoroastarianism is just a sinful, devil-inspired mockery of Christianity, and so can be safely discarded.

So it's just an accident that Stalin, Mao and FDR were all atheists, right?

You have shown once again that, as Bobby-Joe claimed, atheists are blind to the willful tough love of God manifested in these events. Therefore, you are wrong.

That's the lamest excuse for an argument I've ever seen. Put up or shut up.

Why do they live in warmer or colder environments, though? Random chance, according to you. So BJ's still right.

You're an idiot. Apart from the fact that your fellow hateful atheist scumbag, Stella, has just copied and pasted numerous essays proving that atheists have no morals, to say that "people have different standards of morality" proves nothing. You can have as many subjective moral codes as you like, but objective morality can only come from God.

Not an argument, so point 6 clearly still stands.

Not an argument, so point 7 clearly still stands.

The universe exists. How could it exist if God hadn't created it? By the way, prove logic works without using logic.

Not an argument, so point 9 clearly still stands.

You don't believe in an infinite creator God, we do, so we win. Simple as that.

And chinks are wrong about most things, so if they think we're idiots then that's no skin off my beautiful Christian nose.

We don't run screaming away, we are entirely calm and complacent about them. That's the opposite of running screaming away. And it's still the case that we are much more loving and caring than atheists. We sent over 5000 Bibles to the victims of the floods in Pakistan, how many Bibles did you send?

This is Bakaisyou. Why do you keep on stereotyping people by their beliefs? People are not like that. Also, when criticizing another religion, look up their rituals, facts about that religion, etc etc etc. Use actual, reliable evidence. I see some butthurt coming out of your anus. The Bible is a book. Books cannot prove something alone. Even Holy Books cannot prove something alone. We need to use documentaries (Books, but they tell about lives, but you need to provide something more than a book, so don't try to argue back about this.), archives, documents about how they behave, and more. You just make up things on the spot with little to no research. I can see now that you are in fact, a cult. You preach falsehood and teach your followers on how to be butthurt, make falsehood, and stuff like that. You are almost like Scientology. Now go eat some driftwood and keep on sucking Jesus' {sodomy reference removed}.

[Brother Temperance]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

You're missing the point - for the third time, now, it is not the religion that is important in these. The fact that Naziism was Christian and that Communism was atheist is completely irrelevant.

Of course religion wasn't important in them, because they were atheists! And excuse me if I find it hard to keep track of what the point was, since you seem to change it every time you post, and sometimes more often than that.

How am I a "false atheist"?

Because you believe in karma.

And I was stating my views, not necessarily the ones advocated by everyone of atheistic affiliation. Bear in mind that atheism is simply an adjective describing any philosophy that rejects the existence of a higher power, and not necessarily a title or label!

Karma is a higher power.

Myself, I'm not the biggest advocate for humanity.

Kill yourself.

The points he made about morality, I agree with him - that there is no such thing. However, he made it out to be a bad thing, rather than an inevitable part of existence.

But it's not an inevitable part of existence, because we have morals. It sounds like you're just trying to deny the existence of morals, and claim it's impossible to have them, to give yourself an excuse for being a selfish, uncaring, lying misanthropic scumbag.

I answered it in my second response.

By this point, I'm finding it difficult to keep track of what you're yammering lies about.

No; Brahma resides in Brahmlakoka, the highest celestial abode which possess twenty heavens. It is not contained within this universe.

Prove it.

Is that proven? No.

Yes it is. Think about it, how could God have created the universe if He didn't exist before it began? You're a bit dim.

Besides, you have to look at it from the spiritual and intellectual perspectives of the cultures that possessed these gods to gain understanding. If the country was in a time of peace, the culture had benevolent gods. If the country was counstantly besieged by floods, they had vengeful gods.

If I tried to "look at it from the spiritual and intellectual perspectives" of a bunch of demon-worshippers, God would probably send me to Hell for blasphemy, and rightly so. They were trying to be Christians and they got it wrong, end of story.

I was speaking of two discrete instances, although I could have better differenciated between ideas:
In dictatorships where one person is behind a government, the religion of the leader is taken into consideration. Hitler was Christian, and he was the sole person in charge of the government.
In democracies where multiple groups of people head the goverment, the religion of these people does not have a reflection on the policies of the land.

So you admit that the New Deal was an atheist plot against God? And please provide proof that Hitler's pagan Catholic beliefs influenced the essential atheist character of the Nazi project (which, by the way, you cannot condemn).

WHAT. I'm simply dying to know how protecting the environment can be considered immoral, by any meaning of the word.

You're an idiot on several counts. Do you even know who Jeff Luers is?
1) According to your stupid, inconsistent beliefs, no-one is ever right or wrong about anything ever, so if I, as an individual, arbitrarily choose to decide that environmentalism is immoral, that is every bit as objectively valid as any other definition of morality. Do you agree with that, or are you even more of a hypocrite than I thought you were?
2) Environmentalism leads directly to terrorism. Do you agree with Utah Phillips' famous quote, "The Earth is not dying - it is being killed. And the people who are killing it have names and addresses"? Do you see how this quote leads directly to terrorism - not just in theory, but in the practice of the ELF, Earth First!, Sea Shepherd, the Coalition to Save the Preserves, the Unabomber, Jeff Luers, Eric McDavid, Daniel McGowan, and many more? Do some reading.
3) Global warming is a lie.

That wasn't the point I made - I never directly answered that statement, but rather said how there was no such thing as objective morality to begin with, in reality. I'll prove that one wrong if you like, though.
Pre-Socratic philosophy is the first example I can recall, the instance of Democritus - he believed in objective good and evil. Plato solidified this theory. This was hundreds of years before the Bible, I must add.

These theories, unlike Christianity, were internally inconsistent, and so did not provide usable objective standards of good and evil.

The rules of chess are not governed by authourity, and I was specifically referring to moral and legal laws in place.

Alright then, what does the Freedom of Information Act have to do with survival?

Look it up. Other beliefs have also had faith in eternal creation gods that exist outside the universe.

Prove these false gods existed. You're just proving Bobby-Joe's point about how they're all imitations of the real God.

Yes, I'm aware - but still, Judaism is a seperate religion asides from Christianity, so the idea of the infinite eternal creation god is expressed in both faiths. Also, Zoraastrianism and Islam also believe in such things.

Islam and Judaism are both splinter factions from Christianity. They are every bit as Christian as, say, Catholicism. Zoroastarianism is just a sinful, devil-inspired mockery of Christianity, and so can be safely discarded.

1: Atheists do have pity for others. This is just a false stereotype. Like everybody else, the attitude of the Atheist depends on the person, not their beliefs, skin color, accents, or anything like that.

So it's just an accident that Stalin, Mao and FDR were all atheists, right?

2: A natural disaster is neither a random event OR something from God. There are precursors to these events. For example, floods are preceded or accompanied by unnatural amounts of rain, Hurricanes, and things like that. The empathy thing also applies to #1. It depends on the person, not the differences between them. A person has their own opinions. Again, this is just a stereotype.

You have shown once again that, as Bobby-Joe claimed, atheists are blind to the willful tough love of God manifested in these events. Therefore, you are wrong.

By the way, you forgot #3.

That's the lamest excuse for an argument I've ever seen. Put up or shut up.

4: It's not random chance. It's Natural Selection. They adapted to different environments like hot and cold. For example, animals that live in colder environments have more fur or blubber than those who live in hot terrains. Again, see #1. This is just yet another piece of bias, flawed logic, misinformation, and stereotypes.

Why do they live in warmer or colder environments, though? Random chance, according to you. So BJ's still right.

5: No, morality does not come from a god and a 3,000 year book. Even Atheists know they have morality and standards. Again, a bunch of stereotypes appear. People have different standards of morality. Study more. Even a 5 year old with Down Syndrome can outsmart you buffoons.

You're an idiot. Apart from the fact that your fellow hateful atheist scumbag, Stella, has just copied and pasted numerous essays proving that atheists have no morals, to say that "people have different standards of morality" proves nothing. You can have as many subjective moral codes as you like, but objective morality can only come from God.

6: Again, stereotyping at its finest. By finest I mean dirtiest and most wrong.

Not an argument, so point 6 clearly still stands.

7: Stop trying to distort reality to your favor. Again, stereotypes are present here.

Not an argument, so point 7 clearly still stands.

8: Well, prove your god exists without your Bible or Wikipedia. A book proving itself with itself is a logical fallacy.

The universe exists. How could it exist if God hadn't created it? By the way, prove logic works without using logic.

9: No, it is not. Again, distortion of reality and stereotyping.

Not an argument, so point 9 clearly still stands.

10: Look at #8.

You don't believe in an infinite creator God, we do, so we win. Simple as that.

Also, Baka means idiot in Japanese, so my name says you are all idiots.

And chinks are wrong about most things, so if they think we're idiots then that's no skin off my beautiful Christian nose.

Maybe happy isn't all we want to be. As Hobbes said, "If you are squeamish, then do not prod the beach rubble."
You run screaming away when confronted with the problems of the world, saying that god did it and you shouldn't help because nowhere in the bible are the words "Thou shalt send thy funds to thy victims of earthquakes, for the LORD said that this was good."

We don't run screaming away, we are entirely calm and complacent about them. That's the opposite of running screaming away. And it's still the case that we are much more loving and caring than atheists. We sent over 5000 Bibles to the victims of the floods in Pakistan, how many Bibles did you send?

[barton]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

No; Brahma resides in Brahmlakoka, the highest celestial abode which possess twenty heavens. It is not contained within this universe.

What utter nonsense is this? Twenty heavens? Brahmla-cuckoo seems more like it. I suppose this is just the kind of religion that you get from horrible nutrition, powerful hallucinogens and backwards savagery.

Hitler was Christian

Hitler was not Christian. He was a devout atheist who merely used the tools of religion to advance his cause. In Hitler's Table Talk, he explicitly revealed his hatred of Christianity, calling it all a lie and a disease. If anything, I think Nazism is far more closely linked to Paganism. Hitler's full support of Himmler's decidedly-fierce pursuit of such things is proof enough.

[jennabenna]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

@ Stella why do you feel the deep need to make Jesus cry? Life goes oh so much better if you just look to Him for all the answers. Thats what we have done and look how happy we are.

Maybe happy isn't all we want to be. As Hobbes said, "If you are squeamish, then do not prod the beach rubble."
You run screaming away when confronted with the problems of the world, saying that god did it and you shouldn't help because nowhere in the bible are the words "Thou shalt send thy funds to thy victims of earthquakes, for the LORD said that this was good."

[jonahmichael is Baka]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

The following ten points absolutely destroy Atheism.

#1 Atheists have no mercy or pity for others.
Time and time again history as shown with the Nazis, the Communists, the New Deal, the Spanish Inquisition that atheists will behave in a cruel and callous manner towards thier fellow man.

#2 To an Atheist a natural disaster is just a random event
Only a Christian can understand that when a building collapses in an earthquake that is the hand of God slaying sinners. Atheists are willfully blind to the unconditional tough love of God for His creation. In short Atheists lack pity for those who are killed in these disasters.

#4To an atheists there is no difference between an animal and a human
To an Atheist A pig or a human, an ape or a human, what is the difference? For Atheists they are all products of random chance. If Atheists were true to their beliefs they would be running around naked and tossing feces at each other and eating other people. They lack the compassion for their fellow man to realize animals are just tools placed here for us to use as we see fit.

#5 Only biblical faith offers objective standards of good and evil.
One just has to look at atheists societies like ancient Rome to see they had completely different morality than the Christian society of the West now. Rome lived by a philosophy of might makes right that gave Rome the moral superiority to invade their neighbors. Contrast that with America's war of liberation in Iraq and Mexico in 1848. Christians have the morality to know when their neighbors are evil and need to be destroyed.

#6 Atheists have no reason to feel pity for anyone or anything.
Sure Atheists may feel pity in their hearts of hearts but philosophically they have no reason to. Carving another human being up to them is just like carving a pig.

#7 Threw out human history there have never been any other gods but God.
God is the only God humanity ever had. Sure various confused pagans called God by different names like Thor, Zeus, Angra Mainyu and Kali but that has always been God. The past was not atheists, it Was Christian.

#8 There were false gods, but they were false because they exist within the Universe, not outside it.
No atheist can show us a false god who existed outside the universe so case closed.

#9 Any religion younger than Christianity is just a copy of Christianity.
Since Christianity is the Gold standard of morality all other religions just copy Christian doctrine like Islam. Atheism is younger than Christianity therefor Atheism is a mockery of Christianity.

#10 Only Christianity has ever had the idea of an eternal, infinite creator God.
No one, not the Egyptians, the Meso-Americans or even the Sumerians has a infinite God. Even Atheism doesn't have an infinite creator God.

I await your rebuttals to my points Atheists.

1: Atheists do have pity for others. This is just a false stereotype. Like everybody else, the attitude of the Atheist depends on the person, not their beliefs, skin color, accents, or anything like that.
2: A natural disaster is neither a random event OR something from God. There are precursors to these events. For example, floods are preceded or accompanied by unnatural amounts of rain, Hurricanes, and things like that. The empathy thing also applies to #1. It depends on the person, not the differences between them. A person has their own opinions. Again, this is just a stereotype.
By the way, you forgot #3.
4: It's not random chance. It's Natural Selection. They adapted to different environments like hot and cold. For example, animals that live in colder environments have more fur or blubber than those who live in hot terrains. Again, see #1. This is just yet another piece of bias, flawed logic, misinformation, and stereotypes.
5: No, morality does not come from a god and a 3,000 year book. Even Atheists know they have morality and standards. Again, a bunch of stereotypes appear. People have different standards of morality. Study more. Even a 5 year old with Down Syndrome can outsmart you buffoons.
6: Again, stereotyping at its finest. By finest I mean dirtiest and most wrong.
7: Stop trying to distort reality to your favor. Again, stereotypes are present here.
8: Well, prove your god exists without your Bible or Wikipedia. A book proving itself with itself is a logical fallacy.
9: No, it is not. Again, distortion of reality and stereotyping.
10: Look at #8.
In conclusion, you are a bunch of morons. Also, Baka means idiot in Japanese, so my name says you are all idiots. Try to get some legit, real logic in here and I may come back to this thread. For now, I bid you trolls adieu until I come into the next thread and point out its flaws.

[Rev. Edward Clement]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

Hogwash! The guidelines for morality did not come through so-called, satan worshippin' philosophers.The guidelines came from Jesus!



Stella, you are attempting to currupt us with your satan worshipping philosophies of humanism, you foul heathen scum!

Colasians
2:8 Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.

We are not to be partakeers with you for the Lord's Wrath is kindled against you!

Ephesians
5:6 Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.

Beware! This one may have a case of hemorrhoids-a sure sign of God's Wrath.

1 Samuel
5:6 But the hand of the LORD was heavy upon them of Ashdod, and he destroyed them, and smote them with emerods, even Ashdod and the coasts thereof.

[Stella LaForte]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

That's not how words work. You can't just deny that someone's an atheist just because you're ashamed of them. The Communists clearly did not see the Party as an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent being ruling over the universe. They were atheists who did terrible things. Deal with it.

So everything in American history is now Christian, is it? I wish that was true, but it isn't, so you're still an idiot.

So if FDR invented the New Deal, and FDR was an atheist, does that make the New Deal atheist or Christian? Think carefully here.

You're missing the point - for the third time, now, it is not the religion that is important in these. The fact that Naziism was Christian and that Communism was atheist is completely irrelevant.

That's what you're saying. You think that carving up a human is the same as eating some ham, because (your words) "We mean no more than any other animal. We are all simply life forms."
Thanks for proving BJ right, you sociopathic false atheist scumbag.

How am I a "false atheist"?
And I was stating my views, not necessarily the ones advocated by everyone of atheistic affiliation. Bear in mind that atheism is simply an adjective describing any philosophy that rejects the existence of a higher power, and not necessarily a title or label!

Again, you've proved his point about how atheists have no morals. Point 5: proved!

Perhaps my perspective simply differs from that of others in this instance - again, 'tis in no way representative of everyone sharing similar views.

You hate-filled atheist misanthropes really don't like people very much, do you?

Myself, I'm not the biggest advocate for humanity.

Let's look at what's been said here again, shall we?
"Carving another human being up to them is just like carving a pig."
[COLOR=black]"We mean no more than any other animal. We are all simply life forms."
"We object to murdering those of our race as a society."
"The answer is that killing is neither wrong nor right. It just is."
You're confirming BJ's points more and more.

The points he made about morality, I agree with him - that there is no such thing. However, he made it out to be a bad thing, rather than an inevitable part of existence.

That's not an argument. Or, to put it another way: no u

I answered it in my second response.

He was born in a lotus flower. That's hardly outside the universe, now is it?

No; Brahma resides in Brahmlakoka, the highest celestial abode which possess twenty heavens. It is not contained within this universe.

God before the beginning of the universe. They weren't influenced by Christianity, but by God.

Is that proven? No. Besides, you have to look at it from the spiritual and intellectual perspectives of the cultures that possessed these gods to gain understanding. If the country was in a time of peace, the culture had benevolent gods. If the country was counstantly besieged by floods, they had vengeful gods.

That's not an argument. Or, to put it another way: no u

Again, answered it in my second response.

Let's look at that one again:

Pick one or the other and stick with it. At the moment, you're just making yourself sound ridiculous.

I was speaking of two discrete instances, although I could have better differenciated between ideas:
In dictatorships where one person is behind a government, the religion of the leader is taken into consideration. Hitler was Christian, and he was the sole person in charge of the government.
In democracies where multiple groups of people head the goverment, the religion of these people does not have a reflection on the policies of the land.

Because they go against the objective standards of morality. And why not ask Jeff Luers?

WHAT. I'm simply dying to know how protecting the environment can be considered immoral, by any meaning of the word.

Let's look at this argument again, and see what we can take from it:
Bobby-Joe: Only biblical faith offers objective standards of good and evil.
Idiotic atheist wop sex criminal: No, that is not true, for I do not believe in the Bible and I don't have objective standards of good and evil.
Seriously, how can you not realise how stupid that is?

That wasn't the point I made - I never directly answered that statement, but rather said how there was no such thing as objective morality to begin with, in reality. I'll prove that one wrong if you like, though.
Pre-Socratic philosophy is the first example I can recall, the instance of Democritus - he believed in objective good and evil. Plato solidified this theory. This was hundreds of years before the Bible, I must add.

What about the rules of chess? How do those laws help keep anyone alive?

The rules of chess are not governed by authourity, and I was specifically referring to moral and legal laws in place.

No, you claimed. That's not the same thing as showing.

Look it up. Other beliefs have also had faith in eternal creation gods that exist outside the universe.

Brahma cannot be infinite, otherwise Hindus would be monotheistic, which they aren't. And the God of the Old Testament is the God of Christianity.

Yes, I'm aware - but still, Judaism is a seperate religion asides from Christianity, so the idea of the infinite eternal creation god is expressed in both faiths. Also, Zoraastrianism and Islam also believe in such things.

[James Dewitt]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

@ Stella why do you feel the deep need to make Jesus cry? Life goes oh so much better if you just look to Him for all the answers. Thats what we have done and look how happy we are.

[Stella LaForte]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

Is there no end to your lies? you did exactly the same thing a couple pages back!

From page 10


http://www.xkaw.com/Arts_Humanities/...asp?id=1498376

It must be really annoying to not know how to think for yourself!

(Revelation 21:8, Proverbs 19:9)

Thank you very much for pointing out that site to me.

I wrote that.

As clearly shown here, where I originally posted it: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/in...9000441AAJ3Mfx

Again, thank you. I'll ask that site to either take it down or credit me.

[WinnerNotSinner]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

It's the same argument any atheist would present to you, and for the sake of time, I copied and pasted it. I have not done any such thing in this discussion besides that instance, and that one instance in which an argument is consistant always from one clearly defined side.

Is there no end to your lies? you did exactly the same thing a couple pages back!

From page 10

There is no difference between right and wrong, because right and wrong do not exist. I could lend any desired import to these terms, and who could tell me I am wrong? Concepts are ideas, fantasies; products of the imagination. There is no absolute meaning in any of it, no truth, no purport; no actuality. And this is proven by how often society’s notion of morality changes, how often they amend what is considered acceptable and what is considered taboo. In the end, all morality is is a set of directives put in place to support self- preservation. And those shift and morph and alter as needed. If the law no longer serves to uphold people’s survival, then that law is either modified or eliminated. But people don’t actually care about these things, about their notions of virtue or honour or benevolence; of good or evil. They simply wish not to perish, or to suffer. [/FONT]

http://www.xkaw.com/Arts_Humanities/...asp?id=1498376

It must be really annoying to not know how to think for yourself!

(Revelation 21:8, Proverbs 19:9)

[Brother Temperance]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

The communists were not atheists either - the Communist party was their god.

That's not how words work. You can't just deny that someone's an atheist just because you're ashamed of them. The Communists clearly did not see the Party as an omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent being ruling over the universe. They were atheists who did terrible things. Deal with it.

As for the New Deal, that was American - remember, "One nation under god"?

So everything in American history is now Christian, is it? I wish that was true, but it isn't, so you're still an idiot.

On the contrary, Lincoln and FDR were atheists.

So if FDR invented the New Deal, and FDR was an atheist, does that make the New Deal atheist or Christian? Think carefully here.

Humans are bipedal primates in the Hominidae family. Pigs are even-toed ungulates in the Suidae family. And they are a product of natural selection and evolution, not, as you say, “random chance.” In fact, there is no chance involved. However, pigs and humans are both animals that are slaves to their brainstems, perpetually locked in conflict with their primordial urges. Therein lie the similarities and differences. And it’s quite an unnecessarily egotistical perspective to say that animals are simply tools for our use, and an incorrect one at that. We mean no more than any other animal. We are all simply life forms.

So basically you agree completely with

To an atheists there is no difference between an animal and a human
To an Atheist A pig or a human, an ape or a human, what is the difference?

That's what you're saying. You think that carving up a human is the same as eating some ham, because (your words) "We mean no more than any other animal. We are all simply life forms."
Thanks for proving BJ right, you sociopathic false atheist scumbag.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS OBJECTIVE MORALITY. Morality is a myth. There is no difference between right and wrong, because right and wrong do not exist.

Again, you've proved his point about how atheists have no morals. Point 5: proved!

The things people would do if they didn’t think they’d get caught! But they know they will, they’re afraid of what may happen to them, and so they live out their pathetic and meaningless existence in misery, in the death grip of a system which cares only to bridle their lives and exercise determination over who they are, where they go and what they do. And the lemmings that they are, they actually believe all that hoopla they’re fed about how freedom isn’t free and about having certain, inalienable rights.

You hate-filled atheist misanthropes really don't like people very much, do you?

… Uh… no. Just no. We object to murdering those of our race as a society.

Let's look at what's been said here again, shall we?
"Carving another human being up to them is just like carving a pig."
"We mean no more than any other animal. We are all simply life forms."
"We object to murdering those of our race as a society."
"The answer is that killing is neither wrong nor right. It just is."
You're confirming BJ's points more and more.

You couldn’t be more wrong.

That's not an argument. Or, to put it another way: no u

... What? Throughout history, all gods exist outside the universe. Brahma, for instance, in the Hindu faith.

He was born in a lotus flower. That's hardly outside the universe, now is it?

Again, that makes no sense. So Christianity, which started in around 20 A.D., influenced paganism, which started in 1000 B.C.? What, through an interesting accident involving hyperdimensionality and time travel?

God before the beginning of the universe. They weren't influenced by Christianity, but by God.

Dead wrong.

That's not an argument. Or, to put it another way: no u

Very true. However, Hitler was responsible for the Nazi party and he was a Catholic, so the views of Naziism are essentially his own, seeing as he embodied the idealogy completely...
But my real point here was that the religious affiliation of the leader does not matter.

Let's look at that one again:

Very true. However, Hitler was responsible for the Nazi party and he was a Catholic, so the views of Naziism are essentially his own, seeing as he embodied the idealogy completely...
But my real point here was that the religious affiliation of the leader does not matter.

Pick one or the other and stick with it. At the moment, you're just making yourself sound ridiculous.

Homosexuality, pre-marital sex, environmentalism, secularism, etc. are all legal in both the United Kingdom and the United States, for an example. However, the predominately atheist United Kingdom has - by percent - a much lower crime rate than the predominately religious country of the United States. And how do you go about questioning these things as immoral? And how can environmentalism be considered criminal?

Because they go against the objective standards of morality. And why not ask Jeff Luers?

I'm not arguing that morality is subjective, I'm arguing that morality in the way we define it does not exist. Nothing can truly be considered "right" and "wrong." And no, I did not prove his point that Only biblical faith offers objective standards of good and evil.

Let's look at this argument again, and see what we can take from it:
Bobby-Joe: Only biblical faith offers objective standards of good and evil.
Idiotic atheist wop sex criminal: No, that is not true, for I do not believe in the Bible and I don't have objective standards of good and evil.
Seriously, how can you not realise how stupid that is?

The laws people have created, the way in which they qualify everything by assigning it a meaning, a definition, a reason; it all is for one purpose and one purpose alone. To keep them alive.

What about the rules of chess? How do those laws help keep anyone alive?

The original poster said "No atheist can show us a false god who existed outside the universe." He says false god. Now, we are assuming for this post that the true god, then, is the god of Christianity, and that all others are false. I showed that there are false gods such as Brahma that, in theory, existed outside the universe in the same way that the Christian God does.

No, you claimed. That's not the same thing as showing.

Okay, let's use Brahma again! Hinduism too had the idea of the infinite eternal creation god. So is the god of Judaism.

Brahma cannot be infinite, otherwise Hindus would be monotheistic, which they aren't. And the God of the Old Testament is the God of Christianity.

[Lisa H]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

My mistake; if I ever intend to make use of an alternate resource, I shall be sure to cite it in the future.

I am disappointed even more now. You have been stealing other peoples work. Is there no end to atheist lies.

[Stella LaForte]

Re: Ten points that CRUSH Atheism

The same definition of plagiarism as anywhere: misrepresenting another author's work as your own.

My mistake; if I ever intend to make use of an alternate resource, I shall be sure to cite it in the future.