A Long Long List of Ignorance (-2able) (695 hits)
Category: NoneRating: 1.3 on 28 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by goferforhire <goferforhire.at.yahoo.com> (View user info) at 2006-11-09 15:04:12 EST
Submitted by Foolproof (user info) at 2006-11-09 07:27:26 (#)
Ranking: 0
HAHAHAHA! You really think you are going to change my mind?
You sound like a devout person. My view doesn't match yours so I am uneducated.
I was raised Catholic. For 15 years I was forced to read the bible. Forced to see the shit inside it. I woke up and realized it for the lie it was.
HAHAHAHAHAHB! I disagree with you, so I'LL PAY!
======================================
Actually, Foolproof, I think *you* sound like a devout person. You have made post after post sounding like the atheist equivalent of the 700 club, but you continuously pump your arguments so full of the most classic and basic intellectual fallacies that the only reason I even make time to debate with you is because you won't shut the fuck up. If you're past the point of caring, everybody else, stop reading now. What follows is a list of ignorant comments made by Foolproof and my attempts to rebut them specifically and completely.
Let's start with this:
Submitted by Foolproof (user info) at 2006-11-09 14:00:00 (#)
Ranking: 0
The burden of proof falls to those that want to prove God's existence, not the other way around.
Selective skepticism at its finest. The burden of proof falls to those who attempt to prove something. When you attempt to prove that God does not exist the burden is on you, and when people fill your arguments with holes, you can't turn around and say "well the burden of proof's on you anyway." On the subject of religion it is impossible to get an indubitable yes or no answer. You can work with probabilities and matters of convenience all you like but no one's proven anything and no one ever will, likely as not.
Next:
"Atheism is not a philosophy; it is not even a view of the world; it is simply a refusal to deny the obvious. Unfortunately, we live in a world where the obvious is overlooked as a matter of tradition."
Oh well that's right convenient isn't it? Religion's making a broad sweeping statement but atheism isn't? To say that no God exists? It's a philosophy. If you don't see it that way you haven't spent any time thinking about it and you've got no call to argue about it. You really are no better than the Christians you hate, because you spout your little buzzwords and feel inferior and sad when people don't listen to you. In your own way, you think the Christians are going to hell for their belief. A hell of imagined ignorance.
Next:
Submitted by Foolproof (user info) at 2006-11-07 14:23:10 (#)
Ranking: 0
"Hello, my name is Jesus. I love you deeply. I have loved you since you were conceived in the womb and I will love you for all eternity. I died for you on the cross because I love you so much. I long to have a loving personal relationship with you. I will answer all of your prayers through my love. But if you do not get down on your knees and worship me, and if you do not EAT MY BODY and DRINK MY BLOOD, then I WILL INCINERATE YOU WITH UNIMAGINABLY TORTUOUS PAIN IN THE FIRES OF HELL FOR ALL ETERNITY BWAH HA HA HA HA HA!"
Do I really need to point out that this is immature drivel? I'll just say briefly that in only one Gospel does Jesus say anything even approaching that- the Gospel of John where he talks about how he is the one path to the father. You will note that the Gospel of John differs greatly from the rest of them. The majority of Christians and atheists who think about it at all realize that John, written some 100 years after the fact, is utter crock designed primarily to impress people and disagree with the non-canonical Gospel of Thomas, which is a very pleasant and eastern Gospel that got taken out on the cutting board because people in the first millenium were twats.
Next:
Submitted by Foolproof (user info) at 2006-11-07 15:02:15 (#)
Ranking: 0
Wait, so if it was written by man, it's meaningless, right? No more holy than The Babysitters Club or Highlights for Children.
Thanks for pointing out the bullshit of religion to yourself for me.
An almost valid point that really isn't. The Old Testament, particularly the Torah is supposed to be the word of God handed down to man, so it has elements of truth that have been corrupted in places by the narration. The New Testament is entirely man made (particularly the epistles) which is why people tend to focus mostly on the words spoken by Jesus in the Gospels on the hope that they are direct quotes. There are fanatics who take the word as law, certainly. The average Christian, Jew, and even the average Muslim, believe it or not, knows better. You clearly don't, which surprises me since you're an atheist.
Next:
Submitted by Foolproof (user info) at 2006-11-07 15:52:06 (#)
Ranking: 0
Ah, yes "faith".
Faith is kinda like wishing, only not called it.
Like I said, if God is real - PROVE IT!
That's all I want. Proof. That's how it works on both sides.
If I say my shoes make me invisible, the devout person will want proof. If I say I am Jesus reincarnated, they want proof. If I say God personally talks to me they say I'm crazy and they want proof.
Proof. Undeniable, absolute proof.
I can prove fire, earth, water, the sun, cars, space, etc., etc., etc. Therefore they EXIST.
Stop dancing around the word "faith" and "God works in mysterious ways" and give me something tangible.
But you can't.
So there is no God.
*Sigh* You really are a sad man, you know that? Now I'm an atheist, but I'm not an atheist because there's no proof God exists. You know why? Because there's also no proof he doesn't. I believe in something that I feel I have concrete proof for. If you feel like calling me out on that go ahead and I'll show you. But you're no better than a devout person. You're just devout in the opposite direction. The fact that no one can prove God exists doesn't mean he doesn't, it just means no one can prove it. It's not certain he exists. Some, myself included, might even go so far as to say that it's highly unlikely that he doesn't exist. However, a lack of proof in one direction doesn't stand as proof in the other. Lack of proof that the world was round didn't make the world flat. It made a lack of proof that the world was round, an issue which was eventually settled in the affirmative. Keep your eyes peeled and your brain running, anything can happen.
Finally:
Consider this; somewhere right now a man will kidnap, rape, and murder a child. Well, maybe not right now, but in the next few minutes or at least days. This child's parents may pray to God to return their child safely, but it won't happen. The child's body will be found and people will mourn.
Now, since the parents prayed to God and he failed, should they believe in God?
Now this is a potent case, and if you'd focused on this in a different manner I wouldn't have brought it up because it has philosophical merit. The problem of evil is one that has plagued Abrahamic scholars for quite a while, but the problem of unanswered prayer is one that is touted only by the ignorant. Prayer is not and has never been about asking God for something. The "ask and it shall be given you quote" that you cited separately simply doesn't mean that. It's talking about forgiveness. Ask for forgiveness and it shall be given you. That's something you can live with, right? It's certainly not something you can disprove.
Prayer is exactly like meditation. It's a focusing exercise. It's a discipline. It's getting yourself in touch with your faith, communicating with yourself, employing your intellect. Obviously, just like yourself with atheism, there are apeshit Christians who misuse it, but I'll tell you something Foolproof. Crazy people don't disprove the belief system they stand for any more than intelligent and moral people support theirs. At least not by their sheer existence. What supports a belief system is your own personal calculation of probability.
Here's a refined and simplified proof for the existence of God. I will follow it with a refined and simplified proof of his nonexistence and then shut the fuck up.
All beings must have a justification for their existence. An explanation for why they are here. For the most part we can use the "begat" rule and say I am here because of my parents. However, then you have to explain the parents. Evolution is all well and good but it doesn't work ad finitum. Here's a little diagram for you. P is person and R is reason.
... R19 - R18 - R17 - R16 - R15 - R14 - R13 - R12 - R11 - R10 - R9 - R8 - R7 - R6 - R5 - R4 - R3 - R2 - R1 - P
This chain cannot continue infinitely. This seems to imply the existence of a self-existent being, an impetus for existence. The Christians would call this being God. There's a shitload more to this argument than that but for the purpose of time...
Problem: There is evil in the world. God is omniscient so he knows of its existence. God is omnipotent so he can stop it. God is omnibenevolent so he should want to. Therefore God does not exist.
There are countless points and counterpoints surrounding both of these, but I feel I made a pretty good point here- neither of them is definitive, or rather they are pretty much equally definitive or non-definitive. God can no more be proven not to exist than he can to exist. So shut the fuck up.
User Reviews
Submitted by wookie (user info) at 2006-11-13 16:59:51 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by goferforhire (user info) at 2006-11-13 16:50:30 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by Foolproof (user info) at 2006-11-13 07:02:58 (#)
Ranking: 0
Looks as if you said EXACTLY what I said, but on the religious side. People that beleive in "God", in my opinion, are sub-intelligent beings as they let a fairy tale run their lives out of fear of death. That's it. No "bad" religious experience, no nothing. JUst opened my eyes and read the shit the way it is.
--------
That's not what I did at all, actually. I said what you said, then said something else entirely my own pointing out not necessarily how you were wrong, but how you were ignorant. Do you know what the difference is? Wrong is saying that The Scarlet Letter is Modern Prose. Ignorant is saying The Scarlet Letter isn't modern prose (or that it is) and that anyone who believes otherwise is a fuck. Do you know what I mean? I wouldn't give a shit if you believed what you believed about God. I don't like what you believe about people. People who believe in God, misguided as they may be, are not sub-intelligent beings. They just think differently than you or I. P.S- nice try on the "you" with the devout people bit. I've expressed myself as an atheist countless times, I'm just a more open-minded atheist than you.
-----
Stop that "it's the way you interperet it" shit. That's a weak fucking argument. That's just saying "The sky is red. You see blue because you don't really understand it."
-----
Those two things are not alike at all. "The Sky is Red" is a measurable fact, or at the least a perception of a physical reality. What I'm saying, I think (I can't really tell because you didn't quote anything I said, just made general comments about me, so I'm not even sure what "it's the way you interpret it" refers to here) is that the Bible is a book, and various people interpret it various ways. Just like the Great Gatsby, just like The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, there's no right or wrong way to read it.
-----
Tell me what parts are literal and what aren't.
-----
It's a book. Personally I don't believe any of it's literal. But literal doesn't mean true. The Catcher in the Rye is not a 'literally true' book, but it contains a great deal of truth.
-----
All "religious" people are hypocrits anyway. The bible is "God's infallible word"? Fine, follow it to a tee and stone disobedient children to death. What's that you say? We don't believe that anymore? We don't follow alot a lot of stuff in the bible? Then you are saying YUOU know better than GOD!! See what I'm saying?!?
-----
Christians (not me, mind, Christians) believe that the New Testament is an alteration of the Abrahamic Covenant. An ammendment to the religious constitution, if you will. They believe that "the greatest commandment is love the lord your God, and the second is like unto it, to love your neighbor as yourself," or at least most of them do. Also, the Bible is believed by most religious people, the obvious exception being fundamentalists, to be divinely inspired rather than the "word of God." That means it is true in a metaphorical sense rather than a literal. Just like Catcher in the Rye, only with less profanity.
----
YOU SAY THAT WHAT GOD INSPIRED TO BE WRITTEN WAS WRONG!
What? It was written by man? Then it isn't holy.
----
I disagree on both these counts. They say that it is divinely inspired, but man made. Just like all other works of art. I don't see a problem with that at all, even as an atheist. I think that T.S Eliot's The Wasteland is holy, but I don't think it's something to follow. I think that War and Peace is holy, but that doesn't mean I give my life to it. Christians have a collection of nice stories, similar in a sense to Aesop's Fables only with better credentials, by which they may create guidelines to live their lives. Some assholes like Fred Phelps do more than that, but they have always been and will always be the exception to the rule.
----
You fucking bible nuts run in circles with your excuses. And that's all they are. Not one ever told me that what is written in the bible is God's law and should be followed properly. Not one will say that when I point out the bullshit. Then I get the runaround.
Get the story straight will all devout people and agree on ONE definition of what is in the bible. Until then, you will always be less intelligent than those that see the shit.
----
You've said nothing to counter anything I've said, just accused me of "making excuses." Prove me wrong! Make a counter argument that isn't calling me a bible nut. See, that's quite ironic since I've got in my post catalogue here several posts about my atheistic tendencies. This one included. Maybe you didn't read it. But here's the thing about this parting shot that really bothers me. Why do "devout people" need to have a united opinion of what's in the Bible? Should atheists have a united opinion about why God doesn't exist? Should artists have a united style?
What you are, Foolproof, is an atheistic fundamentalist. That's why I disagree with you- not the atheist piece, but the fundamentalism.
Submitted by goferforhire (user info) at 2006-11-13 16:31:11 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Kid with his ass kicked below
Submitted by Foolproof (user info) at 2006-11-13 07:02:58 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Looks as if you said EXACTLY what I said, but on the religious side. People that beleive in "God", in my opinion, are sub-intelligent beings as they let a fairy tale run their lives out of fear of death. That's it. No "bad" religious experience, no nothing. JUst opened my eyes and read the shit the way it is.
Stop that "it's the way you interperet it" shit. That's a weak fucking argument. That's just saying "The sky is red. You see blue because you don't really understand it."
Tell me what parts are literal and what aren't.
All "religious" people are hypocrits anyway. The bible is "God's infallible word"? Fine, follow it to a tee and stone disobedient children to death. What's that you say? We don't believe that anymore? We don't follow alot a lot of stuff in the bible? Then you are saying YUOU know better than GOD!! See what I'm saying?!?
YOU SAY THAT WHAT GOD INSPIRED TO BE WRITTEN WAS WRONG!
What? It was written by man? Then it isn't holy.
You fucking bible nuts run in circles with your excuses. And that's all they are. Not one ever told me that what is written in the bible is God's law and should be followed properly. Not one will say that when I point out the bullshit. Then I get the runaround.
Get the story straight will all devout people and agree on ONE definition of what is in the bible. Until then, you will always be less intelligent than those that see the shit.
Submitted by goferforhire (user info) at 2006-11-10 16:52:29 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
I agree with the below
Submitted by gank (user info) at 2006-11-10 16:46:29 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
By the way, Gofer.
I think that some of us on here could have a truly enlightening conversation about all of this, over a beer or two of course. I know I disagree with you on some of the major conclusions, but I know at least that we have similar thoughts.
Though, I fear that Foolproof is not in our camp.
1. He has yet to respond to this post, and even if/when he does you'll be disappointed.
2. He has never responded to my rebuttals on some of his previous posts.
3. Actually, he might be just doing this to get hits and stir shit.
"They cannot get out of the penumbra of Christian controversy. They cannot be Christians and they can not leave off being Anti-Christians. Their whole atmosphere is the atmosphere of a reaction: sulks, perversity, petty criticism. They still live in the shadow of the faith and have lost the light of the faith." - GK Chesterton, "The Everlasting Man"
Submitted by Hypatia86 (user info) at 2006-11-10 15:58:22 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I like you
Submitted by gank (user info) at 2006-11-10 15:10:46 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2006-11-09 19:15:03 (#)
Ranking: 2
This is why I get all my ideologies from Jack Chick comics.
__________________________
AHHAHAHAHAHAHA!
I used to trip out to those all the time.
Submitted by indoninja (user info) at 2006-11-10 09:16:27 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by phauna (user info) at 2006-11-09 23:30:57 (#)
Ranking: -2
So the burden of proof is always on the people who make the claim.
------------------
phauna what you are missing here is that Foolproof made the claim, hence in whatever argument he makes the burden of proof is on him.
I don't know of any (I am sure they are out there) religious people who say they can prove God exists.
I any intellegen discussion of religion proof doesn't come up because that would negate faith.
Submitted by ShakeyBear (user info) at 2006-11-10 06:37:51 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
so FoolFace, how does it feel to be thoroughly shot down?
It's surprising more people aren't agnostic. It's like atheism is the only popular form of rebellion against religion. An inability to clearly state what you mean is often a hallmark of ignorance.
Submitted by phauna (user info) at 2006-11-09 23:30:57 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
---"When you attempt to prove that God does not exist the burden is on you."
You cannot prove a negative. You cannot prove something doesn't exist because you would have to examine the whole of space and time to make sure that the thing (ie god) is not hiding in a distant galaxy, behind a tree.
---"...but I'm not an atheist because there's no proof God exists. You know why? Because there's also no proof he doesn't."
Again, you cannot have proof that something doesn't exist. Some clues may lead you to mainly rule something out, however. Most people use Occam's razor (entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity), meaning that if their is no evidence that something exists then you are pretty safe in assuming that it doesn't. Of course, you can't prove this.
So the burden of proof is always on the people who make the claim.
Submitted by JonnyX (user info) at 2006-11-09 19:15:03 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
This is why I get all my ideologies from Jack Chick comics.
Submitted by Stagger_Lee (user info) at 2006-11-09 18:50:44 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by MeeatG (user info) at 2006-11-09 18:35:26 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
This was an oustanding argument of how an atheist is just as obstinate as a christian or any other religious type for that matter.
If you deny something totally you close your mind, just like the close-minded people you hate. I mean seriously, you are making stubborn assumptions based on no proof... what more else need be said?
Don't get me wrong though, I was down that rode myself. While I prefer atheism due to its clarity (when compared to blindly obeying SOME religious arachic rules), it's still not provable itself.
Submitted by ScarfaceMN (user info) at 2006-11-09 17:38:54 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
I didn't read this, but I'm all for Uber bitch fights.
Submitted by Axolotl (user info) at 2006-11-09 17:30:20 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
I've noticed it before in Foolproof, I wonder if he's had a bad experience in religion.
I'm a bit of a deist/theist myself but I keep my philosophical beliefs generally private.
Submitted by Newty (user info) at 2006-11-09 16:24:55 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
No Comment
Submitted by Wrightcopy (user info) at 2006-11-09 16:21:22 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
<applauds>
Submitted by beauxjizzle (user info) at 2006-11-09 15:48:18 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by kwame_johnson (user info) at 2006-11-09 15:27:03 (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by professorfuckface (user info) at 2006-11-09 15:18:57 (#)
Ranking: 0
I look down on religious people, they are not smart enough to distinguish reality from mythology and when I see them talking about god like it is something that exists outside of the movies it makes me feel more intelligent
------------------------
you both should be wearing helmets
Submitted by homer42 (user info) at 2006-11-09 15:35:44 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
No Comment
Submitted by inion_de_trua (user info) at 2006-11-09 15:31:13 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
ah pff, yes just because something is unrealistic makes it not real.
this was well done.
Submitted by kwame_johnson (user info) at 2006-11-09 15:27:03 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
Submitted by professorfuckface (user info) at 2006-11-09 15:18:57 (#)
Ranking: 0
I look down on religious people, they are not smart enough to distinguish reality from mythology and when I see them talking about god like it is something that exists outside of the movies it makes me feel more intelligent
Submitted by Orgasmatron (user info) at 2006-11-09 15:21:29 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by professorfuckface (user info) at 2006-11-09 15:18:57 (#)
Ranking: 0
I look down on religious people, they are not smart enough to distinguish reality from mythology and when I see them talking about god like it is something that exists outside of the movies it makes me feel more intelligent
---
I bet you love debating special needs kids too, don't you.
Submitted by professorfuckface (user info) at 2006-11-09 15:18:57 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
I look down on religious people, they are not smart enough to distinguish reality from mythology and when I see them talking about god like it is something that exists outside of the movies it makes me feel more intelligent
Submitted by Orgasmatron (user info) at 2006-11-09 15:17:33 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Submitted by Sacrilicious (user info) at 2006-11-09 15:07:24 (#)
Ranking: 2
Someone who is unfamiliar with the definitions of "faith" and "opinion" and "proof" has no business trying to make a case for or against the existence of god.
---
Anyone who leaves my cheese out in the wind, as well.
Submitted by Sacrilicious (user info) at 2006-11-09 15:07:24 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
Someone who is unfamiliar with the definitions of "faith" and "opinion" and "proof" has no business trying to make a case for or against the existence of god.
Submitted by beauxjizzle (user info) at 2006-11-09 15:06:00 EST (#)
Ranking: 2
i didnt even read this but i admire your diligence
Submitted by goferforhire (user info) at 2006-11-09 15:05:24 EST (#)
Ranking: -2
Oh that's not so bad after all.
I could have gone on