The Forum > General Discussion > Merry Christmyth from the Atheist Foundation of Australia
Merry Christmyth from the Atheist Foundation of Australia
- Pages:
-
- 1
- 2
- 3
- ...
- 24
- 25
- 26
- Page 27
- 28
- 29
- 30
- ...
- 72
- 73
- 74
-
- All
Posted by AJ Philips, Saturday, 22 December 2012 11:08:00 PM
| |
I might add though, SoG, that I'm quite happy to include some theists into the Rationalist and Skeptic categories. In fact, I'll take what I said back there if it makes you happy. It would only strengthen the point I was making to Shockadelic at the time anyway.
More importantly, however, it has no bearing on the points I have been trying to make on this thread, and that you have been struggling with immensely for some mysterious reason. Although I suspect you simply found what you thought to be a glass jaw and went for it as some diversionary tactic to mask the fact that none of your points have withstood the scrutiny they have endured. Which really dosen't make you look like much of a fence-sitter. Posted by AJ Philips, Saturday, 22 December 2012 11:40:29 PM
| |
I agree onthebeach. I would never presume to tell someone what to believe or what not to believe.
However, I would reserve the right to point out why I don't believe in Gods. That's one of the reasons I enjoy living in a secular Australia. At least we have the right to disagree with religions or other ways of life. Many countries don't have that religious belief freedom, and it is the cause of much angst and fighting... Posted by Suseonline, Sunday, 23 December 2012 2:21:38 AM
| |
"Many countries don't have that religious belief freedom, and it is the cause of much angst and fighting..."
True enough :( Sometimes the young can light the way for us: http://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/1452086/Muslim-teen-defends-Christmas-tradition All of the religious and cultural special days are there for us all to respect and share our common humanity. Particular beliefs for instance Muslims might get special significance from theirs, but we can share at some level and so on. One of the events we went to for the first time (for us) was the Buddha Birthday festival in Brisbane. It was most enjoyable. Here is the 2013 program for information, http://bbdf2012.buddhabirthdayfestival.com.au/ Might as well enjoy our allotted three score and ten years above ground. We only ever regret the times we didn't share with family friends and other people :) Posted by onthebeach, Sunday, 23 December 2012 5:35:16 AM
| |
Atheist Foundation “There is life on earth so there is the possibility of life elsewhere in the universe.”
But to claim “no aliens exists” because you don't see any evidence would be preposterous! “What is your point if you have one?” What is YOUR point? That if you disregard people's reported experiences, therefore those people are liars? “There is no reason anyone else should accept the claim without evidence.” You don't have to. But you can't then claim it's all false/non-existent! “Actually, Hitler was written about as it was happening” Duh! But would you only consider *those* sources reliable? Time magazine made him Man Of The Year! “Pushing a one sided story without proper investigation is no way to draw conclusions.” I'm not pushing any story. “If you can’t follow the agnostic argument...” You are the confused one, saying the core atheist view is that God “probably” doesn't exist. Sorry, there's no “probably” in atheism. There can be in agnosticism. “This sentence doesn’t make sense.” Why *wouldn't* you listen to what Jesus said if you are ASSUMING HE'S GOD!? Of course, you could choose not to listen, but that wouldn't change a thing about him being God, would it? He would *still* be God, you just wouldn't care. That still wouldn't justify an “atheist” identity, would it? You can rebel against or reject God all right. In the Christian account, Adam and Eve did, and before them Satan. You could claim to be a “sinner” or “dissenter”, but not an “atheist”. Not if you are “assuming Jesus is God”. “If one follower accepted Jesus was God, that person would be locked up.” Why? Is he dangerous? Should deviant thought be automatically punished or “treated”? “Because lots of people believe it they are not. People believe many things. That does not make them true.” It also doesn't make them false. The only way you could *prove* one belief is false would be to prove a *contradictory* belief is true. Since none of these beliefs can be proved true, NONE can be definitely said to be false either. Posted by Shockadelic, Sunday, 23 December 2012 6:59:04 AM
| |
Dear onthebeach,
Your words of reason have touched my heart and I Thank You for them! Big hug! Posted by Lexi, Sunday, 23 December 2012 9:28:24 AM
|
If you really are a fence-sitter, then I don't understand why it's so hard for you to understand the burden of proof. I'll try explaining it to you.
There are two types of 'burden of proof': the legal burden of proof, and the philosophic burden of proof.
The legal burden of proof requires that the prosecution present a case beyond all reasonable doubt. Until they do, the default position of the jury is that the defence is 'not guilty'. Unlike in your world, the judge or jury do not expect both sides to present a convincing case right from the get go. The prosecution has to have produced something of substance first.
To give an example of the philosophic burden of proof, if we take all possible nouns and all possible adjectives, and apply them to the statement "A is B", most of the statements we could construct at random would be false (e.g. The sky is red). Only a very small minority of statements in that form are true, whereas most of the statements in the form of "A is not B" are true. Therefore the burden of proof lies with the positive assertion - "A is B".
Do you get it now?
<<Rationalism is the belief that thought and action be governed by reason.>>
Correct, and religious faith is the antithesis of reason. Faith is the excuse people give when they don't have a good reason to believe something... http://tinyurl.com/c4f8yz9
<<Further I know Christians who are absolutely committed to taking all things generated from humanity with a grain of salt…skeptical.>>
Um, I DID mentioned that I was referring to Scepticism in the philosophical sense... http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophical_skepticism
<<I have challenged their intellectual credibility on choosing the term atheist.>>
Then learn what it means first... http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism
<<How one can have 100% surety of no creator...>>
Here you go again with the absolutes. Nothing about atheism says or necessitates 100% certainty. This is something you have invented yourself.
<<...and we know the universe had a start point in time.>>
In its current form, yes. Ever heard of string theory?