Atheists are hypocrites

Author: Ehyeh

Posts

Total: 465
#31
Elliott
Elliott's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 407
2
2
6
Elliott's avatar
Elliott
2
2
6
-->
@3RU7AL
there is a significant amount of quantifiable empirical evidence for "the sun"

there is significantly less quantifiable empirical evidence for "the god" (or "the bigfoot" or "the space aliens" or "the lochness monster")
I agree, but if you take the solipsistic view the only thing you can prove is your own existence.
#32
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Elliott
I agree, but if you take the solipsistic view the only thing you can prove is your own existence.
#33
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@3RU7AL

--> @Ehyeh

That's not really true at all. Christian religions say God is completely unconceptualizable, he cant be put into boxes not does he have characteristic or sin like humans. Just because God is "person" doesn't mean he's one like a man or human.
--> @3RU7AL


why do the christians insist on calling their god a "him" or a "he" ?

why do the christians refer to "god's will" as if their version of god doesn't already know exactly how every event will play out ?
Luke 1 identifies God and the Holy Spirit as a He. The two went on to gang rape the Virgin Mary. Giving us the threesome or a trinity that produced Jesus.

Luke 1:34 “How will this be,” Mary asked the angel, “since I am a virgin?”
35 The angel answered, “The Holy Spirit will come on you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. So the holy one to be born will be called[b] the Son of God.
#34
Elliott
Elliott's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 407
2
2
6
Elliott's avatar
Elliott
2
2
6
-->
@3RU7AL
I don’t necessarily agree with the solipsism hypothesis but as far as I know there isn’t an argument to refute it.
Topic's author
#35
Ehyeh
Ehyeh's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 318
3
4
9
Ehyeh's avatar
Ehyeh
3
4
9
-->
@3RU7AL
I'm not too sure, im not a Christian. There could be many reasons why, it could simply be relateability to common people, etc. 
Topic's author
#36
Ehyeh
Ehyeh's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 318
3
4
9
Ehyeh's avatar
Ehyeh
3
4
9
-->
@Elliott
"I would would agree that faith based on empirical evidence is necessary for us to function within our perception of reality. Religious belief requires no such evidence."

I get the sense this is an appeal to vagueness. Which empirical beliefs are necessary for day to day functioning? I feel like it exists in a manner of degrees. Some people are fine not believing in free will, some people even seem fine being unsure of what will happen tomorrow.  In this same sense some are fine not being religious or fine with god not existing, others not so much!
#37
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Elliott
I don’t necessarily agree with the solipsism hypothesis but as far as I know there isn’t an argument to refute it.
right,

i'm simply pointing out that EITHER WAY

the solipsism hypothesis does NOT dismantle the concept of science
#38
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Ehyeh
I'm not too sure, im not a Christian. There could be many reasons why, it could simply be relateability to common people, etc. 
don't you have to have a "Y" chromosome in order to be considered "male" ?
#39
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Ehyeh
Which empirical beliefs are necessary for day to day functioning?
those related to food, clothing, and shelter
Topic's author
#40
Ehyeh
Ehyeh's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 318
3
4
9
Ehyeh's avatar
Ehyeh
3
4
9
-->
@3RU7AL
It seems apparent to me that the usage of metaphors was extremely common in the bible. Again, it could simply be a metaphor, i would ask gotquestions.org

Its also true they did say god is not a man, so i would assume its not a contradiction but simply a metaphor for relateability.
Topic's author
#41
Ehyeh
Ehyeh's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 318
3
4
9
Ehyeh's avatar
Ehyeh
3
4
9
-->
@3RU7AL
What happens when we fulfill those needs? it turns out humans now have more needs which need to be fulfilled and if they're not you wont be happy (such as the need for entertainment and social interaction). God can easily fall under this category and in a sense falls under the category for survival itself (if this god implies an afterlife).
#42
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Ehyeh
Its also true they did say god is not a man, so i would assume its not a contradiction but simply a metaphor for relateability.
they do tend to get rather agitated when you refer to god as an "it"
#43
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Ehyeh
What happens when we fulfill those needs? it turns out humans now have more needs which need to be fulfilled and if they're not you wont be happy (such as the need for entertainment and social interaction). God can easily fall under this category and in a sense falls under the category for survival itself (if this god implies an afterlife).
our best data indicates that pre-agrarian humans believed in animism

a "commander" "king" "lord" only emerged after agrarian societies became established

this would indicate that the currently dominant "lawmaker" style god is not "required for human survival"
#44
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,293
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
Is 'survival enough though?
Survival of the species, societies, individuals?
Which or all?

A person wants for meaning, for 'living, more than survival at times,
Then again, different people have different ideas of meaning, living.

Not @ting 3RU7AL,
As these are more my thoughts to myself, than directed,
Though I still feel like posting my thoughts.

. . .

I'd suppose even hunter gather's would have hierarchy, laws in a group,
Though I'm not sure I see a need for the supernatural, excepting for what one does not understand,
Then again, people might make or live by fiction, even when they know a truth.

. . .

Hm, when I say 'enough,
I'm not sure I had any fixed idea in mind, though I suppose vaguely I had the thought that many things can survive without various items, though in a worse state than if they had various items.
Eh is all subjective anyhow.
And I find meaning and life enough without God, myself.
Topic's author
#45
Ehyeh
Ehyeh's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 318
3
4
9
Ehyeh's avatar
Ehyeh
3
4
9
-->
@3RU7AL
Is social interaction required for human survival? in certain scenarios it is, others i don't think so. Some people are skilled survivors and could survive on their own. Would you say community and having a social life is therefore unnecessary, or a lack of requirement for some peoples? Even if God doesn't impart on the material or make crops grow (at least in a way we can test and verify) The idea of God still appeals to our survival instincts in the same sense a piece of bread does, as it offers us a chance or belief of a continued existence in some manner. Most animist religions believed in a spirit world, demons, ghosts etc.
#46
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Ehyeh
"I would would agree that faith based on empirical evidence is necessary for us to function within our perception of reality. Religious belief requires no such evidence."

I get the sense this is an appeal to vagueness. Which empirical beliefs are necessary for day to day functioning? I feel like it exists in a manner of degrees. Some people are fine not believing in free will, some people even seem fine being unsure of what will happen tomorrow.  In this same sense some are fine not being religious or fine with god not existing, others not so much!
The world survived without any of your prerequisites.
It was science that has led us to our current situation. Pollution, global warming, population explosion etc.etc.
Topic's author
#47
Ehyeh
Ehyeh's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 318
3
4
9
Ehyeh's avatar
Ehyeh
3
4
9
-->
@Shila
IPhone's aren't necessary for the continued existence of humanity.
#48
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Ehyeh
Is social interaction required for human survival? in certain scenarios it is, others i don't think so.
food, clothing, and shelter are easier to obtain in social groups

also, reproduction is required for the survival of the human species

and social groups certainly make this requirement easier to obtain
Topic's author
#49
Ehyeh
Ehyeh's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 318
3
4
9
Ehyeh's avatar
Ehyeh
3
4
9
-->
@3RU7AL
Something being easier is distinct from necessary. Many animals (at least the males) evolved to be raised by their mother and then sent off to find their own pack (0f women) when they're an adult. I see little reason why humans couldn't of evolved this way. Obviously we evolved the way we did as it was more pragmatic and better, yet there's no reason as to why this way of evolution of needing a big social group was necessary. It still seems like these things exist in degrees, and it still seems like god infiltrates into these degrees of necessity.
#50
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Ehyeh
The idea of God still appeals to our survival instincts in the same sense a piece of bread does,
the idea of a god appeals to us in the same way the idea of a parent appeals to a child

notice that the statues of gods, like the greek and roman gods, were often portrayed so that an adult human would look like a child standing next to them
#51
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,293
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@Shila
I read an atheistic book once, that was of the opinion/theory that fiction, imagination, the communication of ideas,
Led to the evolution of humans, our societies and writings, far flung, high built civilizations.

I suppose other species are also wide flung,
But there's a lacking of tool use in them, ignoring the primitive tools of use,
Instinct perhaps guiding ants to vast empires,
But still, existence of other methods, doesn't discount our own.

. . .

As I recall the book was of the opinion that imagination, thinking on what 'might be, was useful for problem solving.
#52
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Ehyeh
and it still seems like god infiltrates into these degrees of necessity.
please explain
#53
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Ehyeh
Most animist religions believed in a spirit world, demons, ghosts etc.
but these are generally associated with geographic boundaries that indicate clear jurisdictions

notably absent is the idea of a "military style commander of all things" as well as some sort of "universal personification of evil"
#54
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Ehyeh
IPhone's aren't necessary for the continued existence of humanity.
Timely warnings on weather, natural disasters, traffic congestion, missing persons, public shootings are making the iPhone absolutely necessary for survival in the modern world. It has replaced condoms as a must have accessory.

#55
Lemming
Lemming's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 3,293
4
4
10
Lemming's avatar
Lemming
4
4
10
-->
@Shila
Personally I only bought a phone at age 20, when the military said I 'had to.
Bought a flip phone.
After I left I got rid of the phone,
Then got one again for current job, last 8 months, most purpose it's served is as a watch.
It's a flip phone.

Home phone on a cord works well enough for calling family, and even that's more for 'them than me.
Topic's author
#56
Ehyeh
Ehyeh's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 318
3
4
9
Ehyeh's avatar
Ehyeh
3
4
9
-->
@3RU7AL
Yeah though that doesn't make god any less essential for many humans, just like a parent is essential for a child.
Topic's author
#57
Ehyeh
Ehyeh's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 318
3
4
9
Ehyeh's avatar
Ehyeh
3
4
9
-->
@3RU7AL
and it still seems like god infiltrates into these degrees of necessity.
please explain

I've already explained. Every group of people on the planet have believed in some form of higher power or supernaturalism life after death in some form. The concept of God appeals to us in the same way a piece of bread may, we through induction choose to have hope the next piece of bread will fill our stomachs without actual certainty. In this same sense many have faith in a god as a ways to continue their lives even after death. 


Topic's author
#58
Ehyeh
Ehyeh's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 318
3
4
9
Ehyeh's avatar
Ehyeh
3
4
9
-->
@Shila
Humans wont die out if we didnt have phones, which is the main point. They're not a necessity for the humans species to survive. They may be essential for modern society but that's different from what we were talking about. 
#59
K_Michael
K_Michael's avatar
Debates: 38
Posts: 749
4
5
10
K_Michael's avatar
K_Michael
4
5
10
-->
@Ehyeh
To address the original post, yes, technically every belief is taken on faith that the evidence of your own senses and the reported experiences of others are reflective of reality. For instance, when I look down and see my shoelaces, the signals interpreted from my optic nerve tell me that my shoelaces are untied. Technically, that is the only evidence I have. The difference is that such beliefs can be tested for self-consistency. If I trip more often after getting the brain signal of [untied-shoelaces] than not, then that is a good indication of that signal being accurate to some part of reality. Because the rules are self-consistent, you can use science to suss them out, like guessing the rules to a game by playing it. [1][2]
That being said, your senses can trick you. The map is not the territory. An optical illusion will give you an actively wrong perception of reality, but you can usually look at it from another angle or something in order to correct your mistaken beliefs.

The problem with the idea of God or a god is that there isn't any part of my map I can point to that would indicate such an entity in reality. There are blank spots (definitely way more blank than not, given the scale of the universe and of quantum scaling) that could theoretically have God in them, like the beginning of the universe, but there isn't even the shadow of something on my map that would bias me towards God (especially any specific religion's God) existing as an anthropomorphic, sentient entity.
Topic's author
#60
Ehyeh
Ehyeh's avatar
Debates: 31
Posts: 318
3
4
9
Ehyeh's avatar
Ehyeh
3
4
9
-->
@K_Michael
Self consistency is irrelevant if these laws can  (in theory) fall apart at any minute. That's the problem of induction. Imagine Descartes's evil demon tricking your eyes into seeing your shoelaces as tied through your perception of phenomena but in the noumenon you're actually untying them. I think viewing a belief in God like believing in the tooth fairy completely unsymmetrical. There's very strong scientific and philosophical arguments to the existence (or necessity) of god. The tooth fairy is much more disconnected from any necessity of reality. If you think god (at least an infinite concept of god) has "blank spots" you would be incorrect. Its simply by definition impossible to assert or deny any sort of "blank spot".