God's Gravediggers: Why No Deity Exists

by Guest Sun Apr 17, 2016 8:31 pm

Description

Raymond Bradley is probably the most important atheist you’ve never heard of. 16 years before the release of Richard Dawkin’s The Selfish Gene, Professor Bradley was completing his Ph.D. regarding the theological problem of free will, setting off a long, esteemed and distinguished career. As a veteran professor of philosophy back in 1994--long before Krauss, Harris or Hitchens--Bradley debated the renowned Christian academic William Lane Craig using a course of formal logic to demolish not just the idea of "Can a loving God send people to Hell?" but to doubt the existence of God altogether.

20 years after his retirement--which has been punctuated with regular debates and scholarly articles on atheism and philosophy--Bradley has produced his coup de grâce on religion, God’s Gravediggers. It begins as a narrative on his journey from winning souls for Christ in the 1940s to passionately arguing for atheism by the mid-1900s. It fast turns into the philosophical fruit of an entire career from one of the world’s most experienced, yet arguably lesser known, atheist thinkers.

Comment

“Bradley's forte is logic and he brings that to bear throughout the work. It is well-written and thoroughly absorbing. I have nothing but praise for his project.”
-- Theodore Drange, Professor Emeritus, West Virginia University

“From a young person's rejection of Christianity, to a mature philosopher's cogent critique of all religions. This compelling defense of atheism is a brilliant read.”
-- Professor Robert Nola, University of Auckland.

“Bradley does not gloss over difficult points of logic and reasoning. A pleasure to read.”
-- Professor Graham Oppy, Chair of Council of the Australasian Association of Philosophy

"With Ray Bradley's education and years of experience in secular activism, he destroys arguments for theism and outlines why gods likely don't exist (among other things). A former philosophy professor who debated William Lane Craig in the 1990s, Bradley has the knowledge to put forth arguments and the evidence to support them. Wherever you are on the belief spectrum, I highly recommend God's Gravediggers."
-- David G. McAfee

http://infidels.org/kiosk/book/god-s-gravediggers-why-no-deity-exists-1074.html

by veya_victaous Sun Apr 17, 2016 11:49 pm

I wish people like this would Shut the Fuck up

begins as a narrative on his journey from winning souls for Christ in the 1940s to passionately arguing for atheism by the mid-1900s

Why when they Finally grow some common sense, do they feel the need to become Fundmentalist Wack jobs for athiesm? If they literally spent years preaching Rubbish and then learnt that they are dumb asses and wrong, Why don't they learn from that experience and STOP FUCKING PREACHING !!!!!

in the 1950's my grandfathers were both Atheists already. these late commers are so 'base'. IF you Still want to fuck around in Abrahamist theology you are no true athiests, just an anti abrahamist Cause You still are not dealing in reality.

If they put as much effort into aquiring more information about the universe as they do trying to re-enforce their theological opinons the world would be much better.

by veya_victaous Mon Apr 18, 2016 1:45 am

by Guest Mon Apr 18, 2016 6:55 am

veya_victaous wrote:I wish people like this would Shut the Fuck up

begins as a narrative on his journey from winning souls for Christ in the 1940s to passionately arguing for atheism by the mid-1900s

Why when they Finally grow some common sense, do they feel the need to become Fundmentalist Wack jobs for athiesm? If they literally spent years preaching Rubbish and then learnt that they are dumb asses and wrong, Why don't they learn from that experience and STOP FUCKING PREACHING !!!!!

in the 1950's my grandfathers were both Atheists already. these late commers are so 'base'. IF you Still want to fuck around in Abrahamist theology you are no true athiests, just an anti abrahamist Cause You still are not dealing in reality.

If they put as much effort into aquiring more information about the universe as they do trying to re-enforce their theological opinons the world would be much better.

And this is the problem with believers, they get over emotional because others just like religious people do constantly, reason their views as to their beliefs or non-beliefs as the case may be. So according to the delusional world of Veya, to just express a belief that no God exists and reason this makes an atheist be something which is not only illogical, but impossible. A fundamentalist follows a strict literal religious interpretation of religious works. Atheists just simply do not believe in anything, there is no doctrine or anything to even need to follow.

I suggest you get over your hatred

by Ben Reilly Mon Apr 18, 2016 7:18 am

I don't think you'll find many atheists who say it's impossible for a deity or multiple deities to exist.

The standard argument is that while anything might exist -- an invisible, weightless dinosaur that lives on my head, for example -- we have no convincing evidence of the existence of anything supernatural, or that anything is impossible to explain without the supernatural.

I'd say the standard atheist position is more along the lines that since there's no evidence so far to suggest that deities are changing things about our universe, they at the very least can be safely ignored.

I think Veya's position is something along the lines that even a life-giving star could be considered a god -- I'd reply that this stretches the definition of what a deity is to the point that we might as well deem the earth, or the ocean, gods (which has been done as well).

As much as it is a lack of belief, atheism is also a social force in the sense that many atheists see people doing stupid or harmful things due to religious beliefs and we become advocates of letting go of nonsense and being more happy and/or free, or at least tolerant, as a result.

I'd therefore take issue with the idea that atheists "preach." Preaching in every other context includes a promise that the supernatural is real and has a massive influence on your life, and that there are hard-bound right and wrong ways and answers. Atheist "preaching" amounts to "there are no answers or habits besides those we create for ourselves, and there are rational and irrational ways of coming up with these answers and habits."

by Raggamuffin Mon Apr 18, 2016 9:51 am

Ben_Reilly wrote:I don't think you'll find many atheists who say it's impossible for a deity or multiple deities to exist.

The standard argument is that while anything might exist -- an invisible, weightless dinosaur that lives on my head, for example -- we have no convincing evidence of the existence of anything supernatural, or that anything is impossible to explain without the supernatural.

I'd say the standard atheist position is more along the lines that since there's no evidence so far to suggest that deities are changing things about our universe, they at the very least can be safely ignored.

I think Veya's position is something along the lines that even a life-giving star could be considered a god -- I'd reply that this stretches the definition of what a deity is to the point that we might as well deem the earth, or the ocean, gods (which has been done as well).

As much as it is a lack of belief, atheism is also a social force in the sense that many atheists see people doing stupid or harmful things due to religious beliefs and we become advocates of letting go of nonsense and being more happy and/or free, or at least tolerant, as a result.

I'd therefore take issue with the idea that atheists "preach." Preaching in every other context includes a promise that the supernatural is real and has a massive influence on your life, and that there are hard-bound right and wrong ways and answers. Atheist "preaching" amounts to "there are no answers or habits besides those we create for ourselves, and there are rational and irrational ways of coming up with these answers and habits."

Why would it be up to atheists to decide that those with faith are not happy/and or free? In what way is it their business?

If people hurt others because of their faith, that's a different thing, but it's also not up to atheists in particular to become "advocates" of anything, particularly if they go around telling people that their faith is "nonsense".

by Guest Mon Apr 18, 2016 12:12 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:I don't think you'll find many atheists who say it's impossible for a deity or multiple deities to exist.

The standard argument is that while anything might exist -- an invisible, weightless dinosaur that lives on my head, for example -- we have no convincing evidence of the existence of anything supernatural, or that anything is impossible to explain without the supernatural.

I'd say the standard atheist position is more along the lines that since there's no evidence so far to suggest that deities are changing things about our universe, they at the very least can be safely ignored.

I think Veya's position is something along the lines that even a life-giving star could be considered a god -- I'd reply that this stretches the definition of what a deity is to the point that we might as well deem the earth, or the ocean, gods (which has been done as well).

As much as it is a lack of belief, atheism is also a social force in the sense that many atheists see people doing stupid or harmful things due to religious beliefs and we become advocates of letting go of nonsense and being more happy and/or free, or at least tolerant, as a result.

I'd therefore take issue with the idea that atheists "preach." Preaching in every other context includes a promise that the supernatural is real and has a massive influence on your life, and that there are hard-bound right and wrong ways and answers. Atheist "preaching" amounts to "there are no answers or habits besides those we create for ourselves, and there are rational and irrational ways of coming up with these answers and habits."

Subjective, appeasing and is the kind of view and stance taken by submissive people who nobly try to get everyone to become friends, but failed entirely. Where you are either unable or unwilling to speak openly speak out about wrongs within religion when they effect the well being and equality of others. As you place a higher value not on doing the right thing reasoning something is wrong, but on their feelings and sensitivity. You are then allowing emotions to overrule what is rationally best to do. Fearing that we may inadvertently upset a religious person, when is always going to occur with those who are deeply religious, again is allowing an emotion to control you. To me that is not being honest to someone, as your intent is not truly to hurt but for them to be free of this emotive controlling belief system. That requires preaching as you call it, to reason against such bad ideas. Its called teaching, to show religious moral absolutes that have plagued our societies for thousands of years. I take no issue with any religious person having their beliefs or even preaching them, as it is their right to do so, but its when they try to impose their beliefs, that has always been the problem. You see for literal religious believers, they are unable rationalize many social.

To then go off a stance, that it is only "so far" that no evidence exists for a deity, is reasoning that you believe at some point there will be evidence. That is not really being atheist is it Ben? There simply is no evidence and the onus is for those who do believe to prove what they believe in exists. What I can say with some confidence is that the deities betrayed within the Abrahamic religions, is not anything of intelligence or love. The very fact humans can and do have the ability to respect other beliefs and who people are, than the commands written claimed to have come from something so intelligent. It leans very much so towards something very bad, that requires slaves to its will. Only the slaves are saved in these stories but it is a life of servitude, whilst all others then suffer torture and pain eternally for just being themselves, free to believe what is best and right for them. At the end of the day people will philosophize around beliefs and whether a deity can or cannot exist, but atheists have help bring progression in societies because they openly spoke out against poor beliefs

by Ben Reilly Mon Apr 18, 2016 7:45 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:I don't think you'll find many atheists who say it's impossible for a deity or multiple deities to exist.

The standard argument is that while anything might exist -- an invisible, weightless dinosaur that lives on my head, for example -- we have no convincing evidence of the existence of anything supernatural, or that anything is impossible to explain without the supernatural.

I'd say the standard atheist position is more along the lines that since there's no evidence so far to suggest that deities are changing things about our universe, they at the very least can be safely ignored.

I think Veya's position is something along the lines that even a life-giving star could be considered a god -- I'd reply that this stretches the definition of what a deity is to the point that we might as well deem the earth, or the ocean, gods (which has been done as well).

As much as it is a lack of belief, atheism is also a social force in the sense that many atheists see people doing stupid or harmful things due to religious beliefs and we become advocates of letting go of nonsense and being more happy and/or free, or at least tolerant, as a result.

I'd therefore take issue with the idea that atheists "preach." Preaching in every other context includes a promise that the supernatural is real and has a massive influence on your life, and that there are hard-bound right and wrong ways and answers. Atheist "preaching" amounts to "there are no answers or habits besides those we create for ourselves, and there are rational and irrational ways of coming up with these answers and habits."

Why would it be up to atheists to decide that those with faith are not happy/and or free? In what way is it their business?

If people hurt others because of their faith, that's a different thing, but it's also not up to atheists in particular to become "advocates" of anything, particularly if they go around telling people that their faith is "nonsense".

As someone who appears to perceive zero friction between your own lifestyle and what God wants, I wouldn't expect religion to make you unhappy, personally. But I know a lot of people who are ridden with guilt because they think their version of happiness is lacking or faulty because it doesn't line up with God's version.

Oh, and telling people something is nonsense is my right just as it is yours. You are free to tell me atheism is nonsense, just as I'm free to tell you faith is nonsense.

by Ben Reilly Mon Apr 18, 2016 7:49 pm

didge wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:I don't think you'll find many atheists who say it's impossible for a deity or multiple deities to exist.

The standard argument is that while anything might exist -- an invisible, weightless dinosaur that lives on my head, for example -- we have no convincing evidence of the existence of anything supernatural, or that anything is impossible to explain without the supernatural.

I'd say the standard atheist position is more along the lines that since there's no evidence so far to suggest that deities are changing things about our universe, they at the very least can be safely ignored.

I think Veya's position is something along the lines that even a life-giving star could be considered a god -- I'd reply that this stretches the definition of what a deity is to the point that we might as well deem the earth, or the ocean, gods (which has been done as well).

As much as it is a lack of belief, atheism is also a social force in the sense that many atheists see people doing stupid or harmful things due to religious beliefs and we become advocates of letting go of nonsense and being more happy and/or free, or at least tolerant, as a result.

I'd therefore take issue with the idea that atheists "preach." Preaching in every other context includes a promise that the supernatural is real and has a massive influence on your life, and that there are hard-bound right and wrong ways and answers. Atheist "preaching" amounts to "there are no answers or habits besides those we create for ourselves, and there are rational and irrational ways of coming up with these answers and habits."

Subjective, appeasing and is the kind of view and stance taken by submissive people who nobly try to get everyone to become friends, but failed entirely. Where you are either unable or unwilling to speak openly speak out about wrongs within religion when they effect the well being and equality of others. As you place a higher value not on doing the right thing reasoning something is wrong, but on their feelings and sensitivity. You are then allowing emotions to overrule what is rationally best to do. Fearing that we may inadvertently upset a religious person, when is always going to occur with those who are deeply religious, again is allowing an emotion to control you. To me that is not being honest to someone, as your intent is not truly to hurt but for them to be free of this emotive controlling belief system. That requires preaching as you call it, to reason against such bad ideas. Its called teaching, to show religious moral absolutes that have plagued our societies for thousands of years. I take no issue with any religious person having their beliefs or even preaching them, as it is their right to do so, but its when they try to impose their beliefs, that has always been the problem. You see for literal religious believers, they are unable rationalize many social.

To then go off a stance, that it is only "so far" that no evidence exists for a deity, is reasoning that you believe at some point there will be evidence. That is not really being atheist is it Ben? There simply is no evidence and the onus is for those who do believe to prove what they believe in exists. What I can say with some confidence is that the deities betrayed within the Abrahamic religions, is not anything of intelligence or love. The very fact humans can and do have the ability to respect other beliefs and who people are, than the commands written claimed to have come from something so intelligent. It leans very much so towards something very bad, that requires slaves to its will. Only the slaves are saved in these stories but it is a life of servitude, whilst all others then suffer torture and pain eternally for just being themselves, free to believe what is best and right for them. At the end of the day people will philosophize around beliefs and whether a deity can or cannot exist, but atheists have help bring progression in societies because they openly spoke out against poor beliefs

You completely misinterpreted me and appear to have ignored a lot of what I said. Just for one example, as a rationalist I can't logically say there will never be evidence found for the existence of anything, so I point out that evidence of deities has not been found yet. It doesn't mean that I think evidence will be found -- I think that every day that goes by when we don't find evidence, and all the increasing evidence we find that the universe runs without supernatural intervention, makes it less and less likely that we'll ever find evidence of a deity.

As far as speaking out against "poor beliefs" (which is a poor way to phrase it -- why not "destructive beliefs"?), it's not necessary to come after someone who believes God wants us to kill gay people with "God doesn't even exist, you superstitious fool!" You may want to say that, but a full-frontal assault on an essential part of someone's identity rarely gets results or changes minds.

by Raggamuffin Mon Apr 18, 2016 8:03 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Why would it be up to atheists to decide that those with faith are not happy/and or free? In what way is it their business?

If people hurt others because of their faith, that's a different thing, but it's also not up to atheists in particular to become "advocates" of anything, particularly if they go around telling people that their faith is "nonsense".

As someone who appears to perceive zero friction between your own lifestyle and what God wants, I wouldn't expect religion to make you unhappy, personally. But I know a lot of people who are ridden with guilt because they think their version of happiness is lacking or faulty because it doesn't line up with God's version.

Oh, and telling people something is nonsense is my right just as it is yours. You are free to tell me atheism is nonsense, just as I'm free to tell you faith is nonsense.

So why is it up to atheists to "advocate" anything to those people who are ridden with guilt? Aren't other religious people who are not ridden with guilt just as capable of talking to them? Furthermore, perhaps some people want to be ridden with guilt, or don't mind, or perhaps they're not asking for opinions or advice. As for atheists telling someone who is ridden with guilt that their beliefs are nonsense, well I wouldn't advise them to counsel anyone if they have that attitude. The guilt-ridden person would be better off talking to another religious person who understands better.

by Raggamuffin Mon Apr 18, 2016 8:06 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:
didge wrote:

Subjective, appeasing and is the kind of view and stance taken by submissive people who nobly try to get everyone to become friends, but failed entirely. Where you are either unable or unwilling to speak openly speak out about wrongs within religion when they effect the well being and equality of others. As you place a higher value not on doing the right thing reasoning something is wrong, but on their feelings and sensitivity. You are then allowing emotions to overrule what is rationally best to do. Fearing that we may inadvertently upset a religious person, when is always going to occur with those who are deeply religious, again is allowing an emotion to control you. To me that is not being honest to someone, as your intent is not truly to hurt but for them to be free of this emotive controlling belief system. That requires preaching as you call it, to reason against such bad ideas. Its called teaching, to show religious moral absolutes that have plagued our societies for thousands of years. I take no issue with any religious person having their beliefs or even preaching them, as it is their right to do so, but its when they try to impose their beliefs, that has always been the problem. You see for literal religious believers, they are unable rationalize many social.

To then go off a stance, that it is only "so far" that no evidence exists for a deity, is reasoning that you believe at some point there will be evidence. That is not really being atheist is it Ben? There simply is no evidence and the onus is for those who do believe to prove what they believe in exists. What I can say with some confidence is that the deities betrayed within the Abrahamic religions, is not anything of intelligence or love. The very fact humans can and do have the ability to respect other beliefs and who people are, than the commands written claimed to have come from something so intelligent. It leans very much so towards something very bad, that requires slaves to its will. Only the slaves are saved in these stories but it is a life of servitude, whilst all others then suffer torture and pain eternally for just being themselves, free to believe what is best and right for them. At the end of the day people will philosophize around beliefs and whether a deity can or cannot exist, but atheists have help bring progression in societies because they openly spoke out against poor beliefs

You completely misinterpreted me and appear to have ignored a lot of what I said. Just for one example, as a rationalist I can't logically say there will never be evidence found for the existence of anything, so I point out that evidence of deities has not been found yet. It doesn't mean that I think evidence will be found -- I think that every day that goes by when we don't find evidence, and all the increasing evidence we find that the universe runs without supernatural intervention, makes it less and less likely that we'll ever find evidence of a deity.

As far as speaking out against "poor beliefs" (which is a poor way to phrase it -- why not "destructive beliefs"?), it's not necessary to come after someone who believes God wants us to kill gay people with "God doesn't even exist, you superstitious fool!" You may want to say that, but a full-frontal assault on an essential part of someone's identity rarely gets results or changes minds.

How interesting that you used that terminology.

by Ben Reilly Mon Apr 18, 2016 8:06 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Why would it be up to atheists to decide that those with faith are not happy/and or free? In what way is it their business?

If people hurt others because of their faith, that's a different thing, but it's also not up to atheists in particular to become "advocates" of anything, particularly if they go around telling people that their faith is "nonsense".

As someone who appears to perceive zero friction between your own lifestyle and what God wants, I wouldn't expect religion to make you unhappy, personally. But I know a lot of people who are ridden with guilt because they think their version of happiness is lacking or faulty because it doesn't line up with God's version.

Oh, and telling people something is nonsense is my right just as it is yours. You are free to tell me atheism is nonsense, just as I'm free to tell you faith is nonsense.

So why is it up to atheists to "advocate" anything to those people who are ridden with guilt? Aren't other religious people who are not ridden with guilt just as capable of talking to them? Furthermore, perhaps some people want to be ridden with guilt, or don't mind, or perhaps they're not asking for opinions or advice. As for atheists telling someone who is ridden with guilt that their beliefs are nonsense, well I wouldn't advise them to counsel anyone if they have that attitude. The guilt-ridden person would be better off talking to another religious person who understands better.

Maybe so, but I don't think that's going to help a gay Christian who's been convinced everything they feel about love and attraction is evil.

by Ben Reilly Mon Apr 18, 2016 8:07 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:
didge wrote:

Subjective, appeasing and is the kind of view and stance taken by submissive people who nobly try to get everyone to become friends, but failed entirely. Where you are either unable or unwilling to speak openly speak out about wrongs within religion when they effect the well being and equality of others. As you place a higher value not on doing the right thing reasoning something is wrong, but on their feelings and sensitivity. You are then allowing emotions to overrule what is rationally best to do. Fearing that we may inadvertently upset a religious person, when is always going to occur with those who are deeply religious, again is allowing an emotion to control you. To me that is not being honest to someone, as your intent is not truly to hurt but for them to be free of this emotive controlling belief system. That requires preaching as you call it, to reason against such bad ideas. Its called teaching, to show religious moral absolutes that have plagued our societies for thousands of years. I take no issue with any religious person having their beliefs or even preaching them, as it is their right to do so, but its when they try to impose their beliefs, that has always been the problem. You see for literal religious believers, they are unable rationalize many social.

To then go off a stance, that it is only "so far" that no evidence exists for a deity, is reasoning that you believe at some point there will be evidence. That is not really being atheist is it Ben? There simply is no evidence and the onus is for those who do believe to prove what they believe in exists. What I can say with some confidence is that the deities betrayed within the Abrahamic religions, is not anything of intelligence or love. The very fact humans can and do have the ability to respect other beliefs and who people are, than the commands written claimed to have come from something so intelligent. It leans very much so towards something very bad, that requires slaves to its will. Only the slaves are saved in these stories but it is a life of servitude, whilst all others then suffer torture and pain eternally for just being themselves, free to believe what is best and right for them. At the end of the day people will philosophize around beliefs and whether a deity can or cannot exist, but atheists have help bring progression in societies because they openly spoke out against poor beliefs

You completely misinterpreted me and appear to have ignored a lot of what I said. Just for one example, as a rationalist I can't logically say there will never be evidence found for the existence of anything, so I point out that evidence of deities has not been found yet. It doesn't mean that I think evidence will be found -- I think that every day that goes by when we don't find evidence, and all the increasing evidence we find that the universe runs without supernatural intervention, makes it less and less likely that we'll ever find evidence of a deity.

As far as speaking out against "poor beliefs" (which is a poor way to phrase it -- why not "destructive beliefs"?), it's not necessary to come after someone who believes God wants us to kill gay people with "God doesn't even exist, you superstitious fool!" You may want to say that, but a full-frontal assault on an essential part of someone's identity rarely gets results or changes minds.

How interesting that you used that terminology.

Do you disagree? I think religion is a big part of someone's identity -- it was for me.

by Raggamuffin Mon Apr 18, 2016 8:22 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

So why is it up to atheists to "advocate" anything to those people who are ridden with guilt? Aren't other religious people who are not ridden with guilt just as capable of talking to them? Furthermore, perhaps some people want to be ridden with guilt, or don't mind, or perhaps they're not asking for opinions or advice. As for atheists telling someone who is ridden with guilt that their beliefs are nonsense, well I wouldn't advise them to counsel anyone if they have that attitude. The guilt-ridden person would be better off talking to another religious person who understands better.

Maybe so, but I don't think that's going to help a gay Christian who's been convinced everything they feel about love and attraction is evil.

I don't think you telling them that their faith is nonsense is going to help them much either really.

by Raggamuffin Mon Apr 18, 2016 8:23 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

How interesting that you used that terminology.

Do you disagree? I think religion is a big part of someone's identity -- it was for me.

No, I do not disagree. It's just a pity that you don't say it when someone keeps on insisting that faith is a choice which they can choose to drop at any time.

by Ben Reilly Mon Apr 18, 2016 8:24 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

How interesting that you used that terminology.

Do you disagree? I think religion is a big part of someone's identity -- it was for me.

No, I do not disagree. It's just a pity that you don't say it when someone keeps on insisting that faith is a choice which they can choose to drop at any time.

So you're saying your identity is immutable? I dropped my faith -- it wasn't an easy thing to go through, but I do feel a lot happier about it now than I did when I thought God was judging my every thought.

by Raggamuffin Mon Apr 18, 2016 8:28 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

No, I do not disagree. It's just a pity that you don't say it when someone keeps on insisting that faith is a choice which they can choose to drop at any time.

So you're saying your identity is immutable? I dropped my faith -- it wasn't an easy thing to go through, but I do feel a lot happier about it now than I did when I thought God was judging my every thought.

That was up to you, but it's not something I'm about to do - I don't think I could really because it's just there. The point is that so many times on here we're told that people can't choose this or that, but they can choose to have faith or not. Well I don't think they can, and I don't see why they should be berated for their faith.

by Raggamuffin Mon Apr 18, 2016 8:29 pm

Oh, and you used the word "essential" rather than "big" before.

by Guest Mon Apr 18, 2016 10:31 pm

Ben_Reilly wrote:
didge wrote:

Subjective, appeasing and is the kind of view and stance taken by submissive people who nobly try to get everyone to become friends, but failed entirely. Where you are either unable or unwilling to speak openly speak out about wrongs within religion when they effect the well being and equality of others. As you place a higher value not on doing the right thing reasoning something is wrong, but on their feelings and sensitivity. You are then allowing emotions to overrule what is rationally best to do. Fearing that we may inadvertently upset a religious person, when is always going to occur with those who are deeply religious, again is allowing an emotion to control you. To me that is not being honest to someone, as your intent is not truly to hurt but for them to be free of this emotive controlling belief system. That requires preaching as you call it, to reason against such bad ideas. Its called teaching, to show religious moral absolutes that have plagued our societies for thousands of years. I take no issue with any religious person having their beliefs or even preaching them, as it is their right to do so, but its when they try to impose their beliefs, that has always been the problem. You see for literal religious believers, they are unable rationalize many social.

To then go off a stance, that it is only "so far" that no evidence exists for a deity, is reasoning that you believe at some point there will be evidence. That is not really being atheist is it Ben? There simply is no evidence and the onus is for those who do believe to prove what they believe in exists. What I can say with some confidence is that the deities betrayed within the Abrahamic religions, is not anything of intelligence or love. The very fact humans can and do have the ability to respect other beliefs and who people are, than the commands written claimed to have come from something so intelligent. It leans very much so towards something very bad, that requires slaves to its will. Only the slaves are saved in these stories but it is a life of servitude, whilst all others then suffer torture and pain eternally for just being themselves, free to believe what is best and right for them. At the end of the day people will philosophize around beliefs and whether a deity can or cannot exist, but atheists have help bring progression in societies because they openly spoke out against poor beliefs

You completely misinterpreted me and appear to have ignored a lot of what I said. Just for one example, as a rationalist I can't logically say there will never be evidence found for the existence of anything, so I point out that evidence of deities has not been found yet. It doesn't mean that I think evidence will be found -- I think that every day that goes by when we don't find evidence, and all the increasing evidence we find that the universe runs without supernatural intervention, makes it less and less likely that we'll ever find evidence of a deity.

As far as speaking out against "poor beliefs" (which is a poor way to phrase it -- why not "destructive beliefs"?), it's not necessary to come after someone who believes God wants us to kill gay people with "God doesn't even exist, you superstitious fool!" You may want to say that, but a full-frontal assault on an essential part of someone's identity rarely gets results or changes minds.

So where we have seen progression after progression throughout the ages through people speaking out and standing up for change, it has rarely gotten results? I think you again are ignoring huge swathes of history.
What else did you miss also about in regards to rationalizing and reasoning for you to then claim I would instead do the opposite?
Everyday in schools beliefs are challenged by what is being taught and hence why each new generation becomes more progressive
So i completely disagree on that part.

by veya_victaous Mon Apr 18, 2016 11:49 pm

didge wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:I wish people like this would Shut the Fuck up

begins as a narrative on his journey from winning souls for Christ in the 1940s to passionately arguing for atheism by the mid-1900s

Why when they Finally grow some common sense, do they feel the need to become Fundmentalist Wack jobs for athiesm? If they literally spent years preaching Rubbish and then learnt that they are dumb asses and wrong, Why don't they learn from that experience and STOP FUCKING PREACHING !!!!!

in the 1950's my grandfathers were both Atheists already. these late commers are so 'base'. IF you Still want to fuck around in Abrahamist theology you are no true athiests, just an anti abrahamist Cause You still are not dealing in reality.

If they put as much effort into aquiring more information about the universe as they do trying to re-enforce their theological opinons the world would be much better.

And this is the problem with believers, they get over emotional because others just like religious people do constantly, reason their views as to their beliefs or non-beliefs as the case may be. So according to the delusional world of Veya, to just express a belief that no God exists and reason this makes an atheist be something which is not only illogical, but impossible. A fundamentalist follows a strict literal religious interpretation of religious works. Atheists just simply do not believe in anything, there is no doctrine or anything to even need to follow.
I suggest you get over your hatred

If they don't believe in anything specifically, why print a book?

It is not to express Disbelief, it to the Express that You are 100% sure there is nothing, that is NOT disbelief get it through your think skull you are stating SOMETHING IS FACT for which you have ZERO evidence. AND if you are not 100% sure there is nothing than WHY PREACH IT?

So why does literature like this exist? because fundamentalist Whackjobs like your self want to have a circle jerk with other deluded individuals to tell yourself "you know for sure you are right they are all wrong" JUST LIKE every dumb fuck religion SO You are No better than the fundamentalist Christian you are Zero improvement on their mental state.

It doesn't matter where you think there is a magic sky giant, a space turtle or anything. Because what matter is the way a primitive monkey brain like your constantly seeks to find likeminded wankers to start a conflict. Literally No better than the ISIS founders.

Religion is not the problem, People like you that PREACH are the problem. Particularly dumb ass copy and pasters like yourself that do not even comprehend the basics of what they are now "So sure is true"
Evil or Very Mad

by veya_victaous Mon Apr 18, 2016 11:55 pm

the OP and didge show how very very few Christians are ever cured of it. they remain illogical and incapable of understanding possibilities beyond those they are taught from the bible.
the fact they feel the need to use the very same tools that made Christianity so inherently evil in the first place show they never understood the reason why wise men question the universe

by veya_victaous Tue Apr 19, 2016 12:02 am

Ben_Reilly wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:
Ben_Reilly wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Why would it be up to atheists to decide that those with faith are not happy/and or free? In what way is it their business?

If people hurt others because of their faith, that's a different thing, but it's also not up to atheists in particular to become "advocates" of anything, particularly if they go around telling people that their faith is "nonsense".

As someone who appears to perceive zero friction between your own lifestyle and what God wants, I wouldn't expect religion to make you unhappy, personally. But I know a lot of people who are ridden with guilt because they think their version of happiness is lacking or faulty because it doesn't line up with God's version.

Oh, and telling people something is nonsense is my right just as it is yours. You are free to tell me atheism is nonsense, just as I'm free to tell you faith is nonsense.

So why is it up to atheists to "advocate" anything to those people who are ridden with guilt? Aren't other religious people who are not ridden with guilt just as capable of talking to them? Furthermore, perhaps some people want to be ridden with guilt, or don't mind, or perhaps they're not asking for opinions or advice. As for atheists telling someone who is ridden with guilt that their beliefs are nonsense, well I wouldn't advise them to counsel anyone if they have that attitude. The guilt-ridden person would be better off talking to another religious person who understands better.

Maybe so, but I don't think that's going to help a gay Christian who's been convinced everything they feel about love and attraction is evil.

they should convert to Eros Smile

God's Gravediggers: Why No Deity Exists E192f011a3eee539751c96477026c653

by veya_victaous Tue Apr 19, 2016 2:31 am

God's Gravediggers: Why No Deity Exists FZkkYre

Cause not every spiritual belief is a dumb anti education and knowledge as Abrahamism or New Atheism Suspect

by Guest Tue Apr 19, 2016 6:33 am

And after the mad ramblings of Veya, he seems to forget I am not going to engage him in debates anymore, mainly because anything he posts is from the mindset of a brainless idiot who cannot counter my points but makes further unfounded accusations.

Like I told you Veya and I made the mistake to reply the first time, mainly to correct your incoorrect insane views. Unless you have anything related to moderation, then I am not going to engage you again in any single debate, especially when you just post up continued nonsense and bollocks

All the best

by Raggamuffin Tue Apr 19, 2016 8:12 am

veya_victaous wrote:the OP and didge show how very very few Christians are ever cured of it. they remain illogical and incapable of understanding possibilities beyond those they are taught from the bible.
the fact they feel the need to use the very same tools that made Christianity so inherently evil in the first place show they never understood the reason why wise men question the universe

The question is - will you ever be cured of your bigotry and tendency to judge those who believe different things to you? You and Didge are actually very alike in that respect. Cool

by Guest Tue Apr 19, 2016 8:59 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:the OP and didge show how very very few Christians are ever cured of it. they remain illogical and incapable of understanding possibilities beyond those they are taught from the bible.
the fact they feel the need to use the very same tools that made Christianity so inherently evil in the first place show they never understood the reason why wise men question the universe

The question is - will you ever be cured of your bigotry and tendency to judge those who believe different things to you? You and Didge are actually very alike in that respect.

Yet you constantly judge others all the time, like any mother who speaks out and you wrongly cast them as attention seekers

Hypocrite much?

by Raggamuffin Tue Apr 19, 2016 9:10 am

didge wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

The question is - will you ever be cured of your bigotry and tendency to judge those who believe different things to you? You and Didge are actually very alike in that respect.

Yet you constantly judge others all the time, like any mother who speaks out and you wrongly cast them as attention seekers

Hypocrite much?

Who cares what you think? You're just a moron.

by Guest Tue Apr 19, 2016 9:13 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
didge wrote:

Yet you constantly judge others all the time, like any mother who speaks out and you wrongly cast them as attention seekers

Hypocrite much?

Who cares what you think? You're just a moron.

You seem to care by continually replying.

Like I said, you happened top be one of the worst on here who judge

Hypocrisy much?

by Raggamuffin Tue Apr 19, 2016 9:15 am

didge wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

Who cares what you think? You're just a moron.

You seem to care by continually replying.

Like I said, you happened top be one of the worst on here who judge

Hypocrisy much?

You're a drug-addled fool, so your opinion is based on delusional thinking.

by Guest Tue Apr 19, 2016 9:16 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
didge wrote:

You seem to care by continually replying.

Like I said, you happened top be one of the worst on here who judge

Hypocrisy much?

You're a drug-addled fool, so your opinion is based on delusional thinking.

From someone who believes in a book that a deity exists, is about the most funniest irony to then claim delusions to another person lol

by Raggamuffin Tue Apr 19, 2016 9:19 am

didge wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

You're a drug-addled fool, so your opinion is based on delusional thinking.

From someone who believes in a book that a deity exists, is about the most funniest irony to then claim delusions to another person lol

Well you claim to save lives by beating people up, so clearly you're totally delusional.

Now shooooo! I don't have time to pander to your need for a fight at the moment - you'll have to wait for someone else to pick on.

by Guest Tue Apr 19, 2016 9:21 am

Raggamuffin wrote:
didge wrote:

From someone who believes in a book that a deity exists, is about the most funniest irony to then claim delusions to another person lol

Well you claim to save lives by beating people up, so clearly you're totally delusional.

Now shooooo! I don't have time to pander to your need for a fight at the moment - you'll have to wait for someone else to pick on.

That is not what I claim, I did state that you sometimes have to use violence to save lives, or have you never heard of the concept to fighting back against an aggressive nation in war for example?

Not going to do anything a mouthy little brat tells me to do lol

Like I say its more delusional to through fear have to believe in gobbledygook with religion

by veya_victaous Tue Apr 19, 2016 11:23 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:the OP and didge show how very very few Christians are ever cured of it. they remain illogical and incapable of understanding possibilities beyond those they are taught from the bible.
the fact they feel the need to use the very same tools that made Christianity so inherently evil in the first place show they never understood the reason why wise men question the universe

The question is - will you ever be cured of your bigotry and tendency to judge those who believe different things to you? You and Didge are actually very alike in that respect.

Well YES raggs i do Judge those that Believe they know the divine truth for Sure, 100% positive, and feel the need to tell others. I never suggest You or anyone else should convert to the great rainbow serpent because i am not 100% positive it is right I just like the idea and it offers support for my Indigenous countrymen's traditional culture.

My point is merely, I don't know, You don't know, Didge sure as hell doesn't know and the guy it in the OP is so mind raped from his previous interaction with the church that he just perpetuates the actions of the church (like didge does) thus even though they become atheist in name they are still Christian in action by the constant preaching and pestering to convert.

as if didge doesn't make it apparent that as an new atheist fundamentalist he feels the need to have some sort of inquisition against abrahamists. which is different than an 'agnostic atheist' like ben than just doesn't believe but doesn't feel the need to preach that he 'believes in nothing'.

by Raggamuffin Wed Apr 20, 2016 8:01 am

veya_victaous wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

The question is - will you ever be cured of your bigotry and tendency to judge those who believe different things to you? You and Didge are actually very alike in that respect.

Well YES raggs i do Judge those that Believe they know the divine truth for Sure, 100% positive, and feel the need to tell others. I never suggest You or anyone else should convert to the great rainbow serpent because i am not 100% positive it is right I just like the idea and it offers support for my Indigenous countrymen's traditional culture.

My point is merely, I don't know, You don't know, Didge sure as hell doesn't know and the guy it in the OP is so mind raped from his previous interaction with the church that he just perpetuates the actions of the church (like didge does) thus even though they become atheist in name they are still Christian in action by the constant preaching and pestering to convert.

as if didge doesn't make it apparent that as an new atheist fundamentalist he feels the need to have some sort of inquisition against abrahamists. which is different than an 'agnostic atheist' like ben than just doesn't believe but doesn't feel the need to preach that he 'believes in nothing'.

I suppose that if you think people with faith are so stupid and illogical that they're not worth bothering with, it might be best if you just avoid them altogether. That way everyone's happy aren't they? Birds of a feather flock together.

by eddie Wed Apr 20, 2016 10:19 pm

I don't understand why atheists have to spend so much of their apparent free time trying to tell people that they're delusional.
They're preachers themselves and have an ego bigger than most religious people.

by Ben Reilly Wed Apr 20, 2016 10:31 pm

veya_victaous wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:the OP and didge show how very very few Christians are ever cured of it. they remain illogical and incapable of understanding possibilities beyond those they are taught from the bible.
the fact they feel the need to use the very same tools that made Christianity so inherently evil in the first place show they never understood the reason why wise men question the universe

The question is - will you ever be cured of your bigotry and tendency to judge those who believe different things to you? You and Didge are actually very alike in that respect.

Well YES raggs i do Judge those that Believe they know the divine truth for Sure, 100% positive, and feel the need to tell others. I never suggest You or anyone else should convert to the great rainbow serpent because i am not 100% positive it is right I just like the idea and it offers support for my Indigenous countrymen's traditional culture.

My point is merely, I don't know, You don't know, Didge sure as hell doesn't know and the guy it in the OP is so mind raped from his previous interaction with the church that he just perpetuates the actions of the church (like didge does) thus even though they become atheist in name they are still Christian in action by the constant preaching and pestering to convert.

as if didge doesn't make it apparent that as an new atheist fundamentalist he feels the need to have some sort of inquisition against abrahamists. which is different than an 'agnostic atheist' like ben than just doesn't believe but doesn't feel the need to preach that he 'believes in nothing'.

I'm happy to tell anybody who's interested how a lack of belief makes me a happier person, but you have to respect the process Smile

Has anybody ever changed their beliefs because they were repeatedly beaten over the head with an idea?

by eddie Wed Apr 20, 2016 10:40 pm

Ben what was it that made you "happier"?
I'm not religious, but I'm unsure how religion can make anyone "unhappy".

by Ben Reilly Wed Apr 20, 2016 11:25 pm

Not worrying about sex out of wedlock was a big one Smile

Finally getting used to the idea that my every thought and action isn't being monitored by a judgemental spirit. No longer having the tension between the teaching that homosexuality is an abomination and my own belief that there's nothing wrong with it. Not feeling at the mercy of a super-entity that might very well be insane, what with the commandments about shellfish and the contradictory teachings ...

Not worrying about having some "purpose" that I was put here for, and whether I was living up to it. Not worrying about having a destiny. Realizing that my thoughts and decisions are all mine and mine alone to make, that I'm in charge of my life. Realizing that right and wrong are things we get to decide with our own minds. Realizing that our so-called "gifts" weren't actually "given" to us, but that they're actually things that make us great.

Realizing that a lot of stuff I'd beaten myself up about -- why didn't God answer my prayers, etc. -- were not a big deal after all.

by Irn Bru Wed Apr 20, 2016 11:38 pm

If people have faith and it brings them comfort and they are not harming anyone just leave them alone

I'm not one to continually tell them it's a load of bollocks and rip away any comfort they get from faith.

It's their choice to do it if they want.

by veya_victaous Wed Apr 20, 2016 11:46 pm

Raggamuffin wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:
Raggamuffin wrote:

The question is - will you ever be cured of your bigotry and tendency to judge those who believe different things to you? You and Didge are actually very alike in that respect.

Well YES raggs i do Judge those that Believe they know the divine truth for Sure, 100% positive, and feel the need to tell others. I never suggest You or anyone else should convert to the great rainbow serpent because i am not 100% positive it is right I just like the idea and it offers support for my Indigenous countrymen's traditional culture.

My point is merely, I don't know, You don't know, Didge sure as hell doesn't know and the guy it in the OP is so mind raped from his previous interaction with the church that he just perpetuates the actions of the church (like didge does) thus even though they become atheist in name they are still Christian in action by the constant preaching and pestering to convert.

as if didge doesn't make it apparent that as an new atheist fundamentalist he feels the need to have some sort of inquisition against abrahamists. which is different than an 'agnostic atheist' like ben than just doesn't believe but doesn't feel the need to preach that he 'believes in nothing'.

I suppose that if you think people with faith are so stupid and illogical that they're not worth bothering with, it might be best if you just avoid them altogether. That way everyone's happy aren't they? Birds of a feather flock together.

I have greater faith than you... Cool

Faith is belief in something that you acknowledge you are not 100% sure of.
Believing in something You know is WRONG is not faith, it is stupid and illogical.
I know many preachers try and repurpose the word faith to mean delusion. To choose to beleive something you know is incorrect is delusional. I persoanlly don't care if they want to be delusional just acknowledge that they are and not partake in decision making that affects the real world.

example, people have faith in their partners because they cannot be 100% sure they will not cheat. There is nothing wrong with faith, on balance it is good. But to have faith in a partner to not cheat on you, when you know they have been cheating, 100% positive they have cheated on you, is just stupid too.

by Guest Thu Apr 21, 2016 12:19 am

eddie wrote:Ben what was it that made you "happier"?
I'm not religious, but I'm unsure how religion can make anyone "unhappy".

Not that I'm WORLDLY {all knowing about every religion} but my fascination with the Catholic faith and those 300+ Saints have opened my mind/eyes to some really bizarre practices that are still done in the present day lives:

Why do some Catholics self-flagellate?
The late Pope John Paul II would whip himself, according to a nun who helped to look after him. So how common is this practice in the Catholic faith?"We would hear the sound of the blows," says Sister Tobiana Sobodka, who was in the next room to Pope John Paul II at his summer residence in Castel Gandolfo, near Rome. Her evidence was given to the Vatican body which is considering whether to declare the Pope - who died five years ago - a saint.Flagellation is the beating or whipping of the skin, most often on the back, and often drawing blood, as a bodily penance to show remorse for sin.It was a widespread practice in some parts of the Catholic ministry up to the 1960s but is uncommon today, says Professor Michael Walsh, a Catholic historian.Flagellation is acted out for symbolic purposes during penitential processions during Lent's Holy Week in Mediterranean countries, he says, as a reminder that Jesus Christ was whipped before the Crucifixion.But in some countries like the Philippines, this re-enactment of the suffering of Jesus Christ - called the Passion play - can take a more extreme form and can draw blood. For others self-flagellation is a more private expression of faith.It is thought to have come to prominence in Western Europe in medieval times around 600 to 800 AD as an extreme version of bodily penance, says Professor Lewis Ayres, a Catholic theologian at Durham University.Early Christians believed that the notion of bodily penance allowed control of the body and emotions in order to focus more fully on worshipping God.http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/8375174.stm

And somewhere I read about a Catholic church in rural Mexico where the dutiful grovel on their hands/knees and belly to approach their church --- blooded knees and all, just to pay penance/proof for their GOD and church.

For me {you question about happy} reminds me of all those twice on Sunday - Wednesday night and youth groups on Saturday that I was forced to sit through where the Southern Baptist preacher screamed "hell fire & brimstone" at all of us and told us: radio's/card playing/dancing/music were all abominations of SATAN and buried us all in GUILT. Ya, that method of dictation is HUGE in some faiths and it's what keeps the flock in line - keeps the tithes flowing in weekly - keeps the members coming back for MORE!
People that have fled the cults of Mormon/Jehovah's Witnesses/Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (RLDS)/Mennonite/Quakers etc., etc., etc., find life a thrilling thing to experience and not the fearful - SATAN GONNA GET YA - or you're gonna be cursed by GOD --- once they've become 'un-brainwashed'...that this isn't such a horrible place to dwell.
Now my dear granny would argue that there has to be a PROPER BALANCE and keeping her daily prayer and JOY in her heart was what made her HAPPY and her place was always a safe place to fall. Grandpa --- not so much...LOL

by Sponsored content