RELIGION FACTS

[Viktor TandofskyParticipant]

https://groups.google.com/g/reply-to-the-atheist-experience

[PopeBeanieModerator]

That just looks to me like really long, lame list of rebuttals (and so-called “facts”) that are hardly even worth mentioning.

If I had to pick the lamest one, it might be the last one on that list called BIBLE LITERALISM. So the Discovery Institute’s motive for any work they do is to make Creationism look like science, and they do a really good job of pandering to creationists who just want to keep believing what they’re already believing. I just guesstimated, it looks like that list of scientists they present (from among a lot of random disciplines that have little expertise in evolution) is about 1200 scientists long.

Okay, if the number of scientists you can get onto a list really means a lot to you, take a look at Project Steve. Here’s a paragraph:

However, at the same time the project is a genuine collection of scientists. Despite the list’s restriction to only scientists with names like “Steve”, which it turns out is roughly 1 percent of scientists,[1] Project Steve is longer and contains many more eminent scientists than any creationist list. In particular, Project Steve contains many more biologists than the creationist lists, with about 54% of the listed Steves being biologists.[3] The “List of Steves” webpage provides an updated total of scientist “Steves” who have signed the list.[4] As of January 28, 2021, Project Steve has 1,465 signatories.[4]

• This reply was modified 2 years, 1 month ago by  PopeBeanie. Reason: fixed a redundant phrase

[jakelafortParticipant]

No, no Pope. Those are FACTS-unassailable, inerrant, august and didactic. Imbibe the received wisdom. Heresy isn’t next to hearsay. Heresy will get you relaxed to the secular arm for punishment. If not in the here and now in the eternity of hell where unending torture will inspire you to be more circumspect in the next universe.

[Simon PayntonParticipant]

I think that the pattern, “God does not exist”, fits those data points as well as the pattern “God exists”.  In other words, no matter how hard someone tries, they can’t prove it either way.

[DavisModerator]

Although there is overwhelming evidence that the New Testament is an accurate and trustworthy historical document

Oh my God I totally busted a gut laughing at this claim in one of the articles. LAUGH MY ASS OFF! There is evidence that a small (and VERY small) number of the historical claims are accurate. The rest is only as likely to be true as you want it to. I would love anyone do demonstrate through reason how Jesus walking on Water or the Judas kiss is historical fact. Convince me of this and I will convert to Christianity.

This article then goes on to explain how other sources PROVE attributes about Jesus, but in fact only prove that historical figures commented on Jesus well after Christian claims were made, and only one directly refers to Jesus at the time of Jesus and even then it is extremely vague and could refer to a multitude of people. I would read the other links but I imagine they are all as ridiculous as this link!

[DavisModerator]

Simon, the fact that you cannot prove that the Easter bunny exists nor prove that it doesn’t exist does not make both statements worth taking equally or less seriously. The 99.999999999999999999999% likelihood that the Easter Bunny (as with God) does not exist is the only important argument. That we cannot 100% prove anything does not exist is a trivial matter.

• This reply was modified 2 years, 1 month ago by  Davis.

[_Robert_Participant]

Yes Davis, It is the way of all conspiracy theories….have a little bit of truth mixed in with your otherwise complete bullshit claims of what they want to hear. You are special, you are loved by a supreme creator and you will get to live forever. It is hard to top that.

[jakelafortParticipant]

Davis that is an excellent point that seems lost on a great many atheists. The no evidence take kind of misses the point. Obviously there is no evidence and a great deal of wish thinking and a fairly universal human tendency to try to make sense of the universe from a selfish perspective. The god hypothesis as a yes or no equal proposition is asinine. If a delusional psych patient posits the snot monster as the culprit in missing his snots or a 4 year old in the unicorns who make nightly visits we don’t think to ourselves oh well there is an equal possibility of existence and nonexistence. We dispatch that possibility summarily. We don’t get into but there is no evidence to support your monster/unicorn.

[DavisModerator]

Pretty much Jake. I do not see the 99.999999999999999% probability that something doesn’t exist as some impure insufficient disappointing conclusion. It is not only the best we can expect, but it is far also more than sufficient and yet allows the tiny microscopic potential for a surprise. This is the stance any rational person should have with anything and you should actually “AIM” for the 99.999999999999% when negating something.

People who believe in ridiculous nonsense bullshit exploit that sliver of possibility that nonsense-proposition is possible into a meaningful possibility, but even into a kind of 50/50 possibility (as though probabilities of the absurd are balanced) and then into some bizarre “you might as well believe in it” absurdity. Of course that just applies to their God, not to competing ridiculous world views.

None the less…blowing away all the bullshit-dust, you are left with an extremely high level of certainty that there is no God or modern poppycock or historical gobbledegook. 99.999999999% certainly is not the same as 50/50 on any level in any discussion in any way.

[DavisModerator]

Indeed Robert. Theologians seem to aim for an extremely low threshold of “demonstrable proof” for their historical claims, both in the quality and sophistication of evidence for particular claims AND in the quantity of claims in the overall package which can be proven. It seems with many religions that if 5% of the narrative is true…then that is good enough and the rest will go on > simply the word of God fuck you for doubting it > faith > the general gist > a likely narrative > “just stories” > it goes with the package I guess  (all of this depending on your attachment to it’s verisimilitude and how committed you are to your religion and reason).

Someone who accepts a larger story where evidence demonstrates only 5% of an outlandish narrative that makes up a world view would under this scenario:

is charged with a serious crime and the prosecutor spins an outlandish tale as to how you committed it giving evidence for only 5% of the general story

is very likely to object in court. But they have no problem accepting a nutty under-proven narrative if it is a tale their parents and teachers told them since they were young “simply is”.

• This reply was modified 2 years, 1 month ago by  Davis.

[Viktor TandofskyParticipant]

It is not only atheists who are misinformed and confused about religion. Some believers are, too. Unfortunately, unscrupulous people like Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris and Matt Dillahunty take advantage of people’s ignorance and confusion to push their antireligion propaganda on the unsuspecting.

[TheEncogitationerParticipant]

Viktor,

I don’t think any Atheist can do a worse job on religion than religion does on itself.  Observant and intelligent Atheists just bring it to the surface for all to see.

[_Robert_Participant]

TheEncogitationer wrote:

Viktor, I don’t think any Atheist can do a worse job on religion than religion does on itself. Observant and intelligent Atheists just bring it to the surface for all to see.

I have noticed how the religious of completely opposing faiths will typically unite against the atheist. Like how some drunks prefer to suck down vodka and some only hit the whisky and then a sober one shows up a ruins the whole party.

[jakelafortParticipant]

Viktor is representative of the acumen of a great many humans. It is just discouraging.

Viktor writes: It is not only atheists who are misinformed and confused about religion. Some believers are, too. Unfortunately, unscrupulous people like Richard Dawkins and Sam Harris and Matt Dillahunty take advantage of people’s ignorance and confusion to push their antireligion propaganda on the unsuspecting.

Would you refer disparagingly or with approval to antirapist, antigay, antiintellectual, antiscience, anticuriosity, antirational, antiindividuality, antiwomen, as propaganda? Religion is all of the aforementioned and more. If you embrace those values you can step back in time and find camaraderie. Or you can be in the present and align yourself with the most pious and fundamental theists. Secular decent humans reject not only the superstition, mythology and authoritarianism of religion but the degenerate values that religion engenders.

It is not a coincidence that religion takes children whose brains are unfinished and easily imprinted and bombards them with propaganda. Examining what it is and what it does by atheists and antitheists is exposing propaganda not furthering it.

[Reg the Fronkey FarmerModerator]

@Vicktor –  “It is not only atheists who are misinformed and confused about religion. Some believers are, too…”

Do you mean believers in other gods? I mean Hindus are atheists when it comes to Jesus and Yahweh. Do you ever address them on Hindu fora or are you only concentrating on those of us who are atheists regarding the gods of all religions?

I have often heard Christians say about people of other religions that “at least they believe in something”. But they are still atheists when it comes to the God you profess to believe in. Of course, you are also an atheist when it comes to all of the gods Hindus believe in. I bet you don’t have faith that any of their gods actually exist, do you? Could you help us to understand why you don’t please?

 

 

[Author]

Posts