Shakeelz, for as long as this world goes on, there will always be Aethists. I have noticed though that sometimes it takes something extraordinary to happen in their life and then they believe there is a God.
WORD HISTORY: An agnostic does not deny the existence of God and heaven but holds that one cannot know for certain whether or not they exist. The term agnostic was fittingly coined by the 19th-century British scientist Thomas H. Huxley, who believed that only material phenomena were objects of exact knowledge. He made up the word from the prefix a-, meaning "without, not," as in amoral, and the noun Gnostic. Gnostic is related to the Greek word gnosis, "knowledge," which was used by early Christian writers to mean "higher, esoteric knowledge of spiritual things"; hence, Gnostic referred to those with such knowledge. In coining the term agnostic, Huxley was considering as "Gnostics" a group of his fellow intellectuals"ists," as he called themwho had eagerly embraced various doctrines or theories that explained the world to their satisfaction. Because he was a "man without a rag of a label to cover himself with," Huxley coined the term agnostic for himself, its first published use being in 1870.
In your face loser!! I am the smartest.........
Just kiddin'. My understanding is that atheists believe that there definitely is no god, whereas agnostics believe that its existence cannot be proven.
An atheist is a self-worshipping person. His idols are himself, his wisdom, his science, his dialectics. These are the things he believes in. He is a man of the physical, who believes there is nothing else beyond other than this miserable existence, and when he dies, he goes to dust to nourish the soil, and rot away in his pretty coffin.
Since an atheist does not believe in God, you would think that if he wanted sex, he would do it in public when he felt like it, since he believes there is no soul, no God to account to, no hell to face, and so on.
But if you want to rile an atheist, ask him about his morality and you will get an earful. Questions like "since you do not believe in God and accountability, would you screw your own mother, or sister, or aunt, or maybe an attractive three year old boy or girl ?", or, "would you without hesitation kill another human being for any reason at all, even for him just staring at you ?".
well since this thread has been taken over by cats, nows a good time to ask, what is the allure of the pictures. i'm not trying to pick a fight I am genuinely curious. I admit, some of them are cute (I did like the Earthquake one) but the ones lacking in wit, sarcasm or humor, far outnumber the ones that have it. is it just looking at cats in different positions? or the cats themselves. I admit I'm a dog person, but I don't find the humor in the dog versions either. maybe i just don't have a similar sense of humor, which is fine, I'm just curious.
That was over and done with, at the cross, more than two thousand years ago. God won, andSatan knows he's really running out of time, literally, and will soon step out into an eternity of fire,just that he's kinda like trying to show he can still dance around the ring.
No Scientific evidence that God created the Universe. But for sure, the Humans Created the God. 3000 years back, we didn't know/have this many God..not sure how many more Gods will come up in 3000 years into the future.
so...all of you hypocritical backwashes think that just because people like me believe differently than self-centered ones as yourselves...means people that believe the bible is a load of crap, go to some place Christians call Hell? well, im Agnostic, and Thelema Athiest. I believe that what you "Christians" seem to not understand. Following your own rules. Dont force things on other people. Do not judge, for you will be judged in the end. No fictional Character named Jesus is coming back. dead means dead. Thats it.
Seems to be the solution to everything. No chances, no repentance, no forgiveness just kill them all and then focus on killing each other because they are all sinners and deserve to die....blah, blah, blah.
The spiritual man in me would say: God said, "vengeance is mine, saith the Lord, I will repay".
But the old man, the flesh ?
I ain' gon' kill him. I'll douse him with gas, light him up, then extinghuish the flame and take him to hospital as quick as I can AFTER I cut off his tongue, gouge out his eyes and pierce his eardrum, AFTER I cap him in both knees and shoot off his arms from the elbow.
That is the point of punishment. Killing a proven rapist/murderer is much more merciful than inflicting pain and punishment. Tell the truth, the penal system in "civilized" countries is no longer "penal". Criminals get to finish college, or get a GED, they get 3 square meals a day, fresh clothes, good medical attention, somethings they don't get outside prison. Not to mention sex anytime they want it. The question is : is this type of approach working ? I don't know the statistics, but given the number of repeat offenders getting in the news I don't think it's working all that well. Prison ought to be what the name denotes, not just loss of freedom, but pain, pain, pain. I don't mean torture, but pain can be inflicted many ways. Loss of dignity, for one. Hell, these criminals are treated with more dignity than they accorded their victims. Sheriff Arpaio over in Arizona is getting it, but just a little.
People that rape and murder should be put to death by the government. They should not be perpetually tortured in prisons by prison guards or whomever. Unbelievers often chastise God because of hell, but they, in turn, want to torture prisoners for the rest of their life (in essence, creating a hell for those they disapprove of). Prisons should not be perpetual hell-houses. A man that exercises life-threatening force against others should be killed for it. If he steals, he should pay back what he steals. Our prison population would diminish rapidly if those were enacted.
I'm not saying that because of pragmatism (if we kill them, it would reduce our prison population). Rather, it is just for a man to die who takes another man's life (and I think that extends to rape and kidnapping). Furthermore, it is just for a thief to pay back more than what he stole.
Oh, I hear what you're saying. Unfortunately, things don't work that way in the real world nowadays. Like I said, the freakin' criminal gets more rights and compassion than their victims, and given the luxury of most prisons that prisoners enjoy, hey, nobody minds going back there anymore, even if they get sodomized. Hell of a lot better than living conditions outside, you know what I'm saying ?
While it is true that some death penalty convicts who were executed and/or about to be executed may have been or may be innocent, doing away with the punishment of death is still not the answer. The answer should be sought in the way investigation, evidence, and trials were conducted and gathered. That being the case, though, if I were to take the law into my hands, what I described would exactly be what I will do. Cut off his dick and immobilize him in such a way that he has to suffer the indignation of having somebody wipe his butt for him and hold his twang while he leaks. Plus the pain of daily therapy for his burns. I mean, what I described was not fictional. Actually happened in my country. This guy murdered this kid's father, went to prison, came out ten years later, the boy was grown, in his twenties, kidnapped him, burned him, put out the fire, then took the guy to hospital. The perpetrator did not go to prison more than two years, because they couldn't charge him with even attempted homicide. As a matter of fact, the act of bringing his father's murderer to the hospital was so well exploited by his defense lawyer it was considered a mitigating circumstance by the judge. For the rest of his life, he was an invalid in a hospital who had to be fed by his wife, his grandchildren, and his nurses. The psychological pain hurts more than the physical.
Oh, I'm not going to argue that, sir, not one bit. On the other hand, I've known a lot of "religious" and "free thinking" people who are so indecent I've got a good mind to beat up on them if I find them within a mile of people I cherish, so to speak.
As I understand it, Billy Joel, my all time favorite, is an atheist, and I find him to be a pretty decent fellow.
"According to aethism is only a wrrong and illogical concept. We can not say that there is no God. How could this be possible? Does this whole great universe made at its own? Did a human make itself? "
The thesis isn't well-stated. However, rejection of God is 1) wrong and 2) illogical. I think that is the point the author is making. Our best observations point us to an initial Creator of the universe.
As for looking at cats, knock yourself out. Why don't you do that on another site devoted to cats (I'll answer it for you)? It's because you desire to stop any rational discussion about the illogic of atheism. Since you have no argument, you fill this thread with kitty litter to pretend there is no issue. People that tire of the discussion have run out of things to say and those people ought to go do something else. It's the response of the solipsist. It all has to center around him and what he wants. The topic is not going his way, so he has to ruin it for everyone else.
It's actually a perfect illustration to see the atheist's approach. Now that he has no argument, he throws garbage in the way of rational discourse (like "If you say that God created the universe, then who created God"?). There is no positive argument from atheism, just heaps of doubt and scorn on the believer's position.
I'm not the moderator; I have no power, only moral authority to say that if you're not on topic, get out.
100% lack of evidence for a god. Logically, there is no god. Allow me to introduce you to evolution. If you genuinely understand evolution, you must understand that there is no room for a guiding hand - none. Therefore evolution proves there is no god. Thank you and good night.
Who are "we" Indianapolis? Is this atheist censorship? Look, MK gets his kicks from posters like that. I mean, I think that someone that would even post something like that should be locked up. But, you are not really going to censor him, are you?
MK, don't let them get away with it! Stand up for your rights! They're taking away your free speech! Atheists, you're not going to let them get away with is, are you?
Actually, the baby poster has a lot more truth to it than the one that has Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson in it (where do you guys get this soft-core propaganda anyway?). Most atheists go to bat for doctors that will stick a stiletto in the back of a baby's neck, suck his brains out, and crush his skull. I'll admit, it's not exactly the same thing, but it's only a few steps away. I mean, I just don't trust people would would stab an infant in the back of the neck or burn him to death with salt, would you?
Also, MK, while you're fighting off the censors I'd pull out the science books too. I'm not sure why you brought up evolution based on the post I gave. The only thing you proved is that you need to get someone to proof your posts before you press "submit."
Mark guess why Usmanali doesn't put his picture on his profile. He is a crusader against the Freemasons who are after him as he is a very important man, all the money of the Freemasons is going to be used to hunt him down.
Moral authority? I don't recall FSM granting you such authority. "rejection of God is wrong" Brilliant. I think the cartoon cats could have written a more meaningful statement.
For the record, I am not an atheist, but I am tempted to become one whenever I read posts such as yours and those of the death penalty cult. I've always had difficulty reconciling the notion of a perfect god that could create such evil minds.
There are just some religious people who judge others and have no right to do so. What some religions deem as "decent" is such a strict narrow vision. "Billy Joel has been married and divorced three times, has abused illegal substances, and attempted suicide."- is all that some people will see without seeing that as a person he could be so much more. Someone can't say "If you have done this you are a bad person." I don't feel it is right to be judged by others, especially when all they see is your faults.
Your accusation that religious people are judgmental (your original point) is judgmental. You presume to characterize "some" religious people as being judgmental. But, who do you think you are to make such an indictment? Second, it's disingenuous: we (yes, that includes you) make judgments all the time. We judge that the Nazis were wrong to kill the Jews, for example. Furthermore, we berate men like Adolph Eichmann that did not judge what the Nazis were doing. At his trial, Eichmann said "I was just following orders." He did not judge the Nazi behavior; he went along with it like a good little boy. Maybe he didn't want to appear judgmental either. But he was put to death: he participated in the Holocaust because at some point earlier, he refused to morally judge the Nazis. People who do not judge evil behavior usually become moral coconspirators in those wrong actions.
There are plenty of people on this post that judge Christians regularly all the while scorning them for being judgmental!
If you think that religious people are judgmental, then set the example--stop judging others. But a better choice is to stop the hypocrisy that you're not judgmental and exercise good judgment.
Maybe I wasn't clear in my original post. Of course we all judge. We have to. We have to make judgement calls in decisions in life. I didn't say that I wasn't judgmental. I didn't generalize all religious people either. There are a select few that feel it is there duty to impose their religion on others. We judge others to determine if we want to be friends with them, hire them, etc. I suppose what I meant to say is that it is frustrating to me to be judged by a person based on their religion when that is not my religion. I know that that is what they believe, and it is appropriate to keep it to themselves. But I just don't like being told that I'm going to hell for being me.
OK, good. But on what basis do you dismiss religiously-based judgments but accept other other kinds of judgments? What's your criteria? We receive offensive comments regularly, but those comments can't be dismissed merely because they're offensive. Furthermore, the most important thing about religiously-offensive comments like "you're going to hell" is whether or not they're true. I could understand a response that says "I don't believe in hell for the following reasons..."; it least it's rational, even if I don't agree with it. But the fact that you don't like the comment is trivial.
I'm done. You can have the last word on this if you wish.
Yer way too good to take part in that shit Cole, I wouldnt even lower myself to reply to that. Have fun on the forums and dont let a loser wind you up, jeeez I wish I was going to the west coast but I may hit Amsterdam for 3 days in August, just some windowshopping, ya know
I can get that a lot of people would not appreciate that, but the guy eating the baby? I get a different warm feeling off that! A bit like dressing a baby up in something funny, and how often do people say "my baby so cute I could eat him/her" Take it light folks.
Just havin some fun ,but maybe ,just maybe insects really are part of your diet.Ive eaten worms ,roasted insects that my dad said was popcorn , it really was nutty n crunchy ewwwww, but its true.So what did you eat when you were a kid that would be considered unhealthy or bizare...Grilled snake?...
The common thread that weaves through Atheism,Objectivism and Reductionism is the belief that reality can and must only be rationalized purely on the basis of its material or physical form.Atheism posits that anything that is not sensed in any physical way (seen, smelled, tasted, heard and touched)...
Is Atheism really just another religion or faith based concept?It seems like the notions that there is a God or there is not a God, are both founded in belief because there is not proof either way. Well there is proof, but not conclusive in either direction. So aren't organizations with set forth...
Google AdSense Host API
We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.
Conversion Tracking Pixels
We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.
Author Google Analytics
Amazon Tracking Pixel