Topic: Health and Religion - page 124. (Read 210868 times)

Agnostic just means the person is honest, and is not the same thing as Atheism...

You can be an Agnostic (honest) Christian...

Or, you can lie... claiming to know for certain that God exists (lie or delusion, your choice)

You can also be an Agnostic Atheist... meaning you don't know for certain that no gods exist, but you don't believe the myths about any diety


You see, Agnostic is about knowledge (certainty), and Atheism is about belief (based on available evidence)... the terms are not mutually exclusive

How does atheism make sense for high IQ?

I thought that was the agnostic thing, you know like high IQ people without knowledge would assume agnostic until measurement with instrumentation occurs.

Or maybe it's about the laws of physics. Are you all atheist because of the laws of physics? How life of maximum nature isn't as "heavenly" as you want it thus everything goes to "not everything is possible" burn in hell instead?

I like how semi-smart people parade themselves around as smart while being effectively complete retards.

That's cool though that you think that around me. I didn't think my life was that godly either despite it being the thing.

You know what's poison? Me.

It makes sense though to put a bunch of NPCs around to keep the religion at bay, you know, so the religion has an offset for the life.

Whether or not that life is God is kind of... depends on how good of a life it needs to be to qualify as God. This life is probably more torture bear than God. Since it's max nature life of max nature shape it's kind of lacking in the other "perfect orientations".

This coming from you, an atheist, should make me feel delighted with the things that I have said.

So first you deny that you used that term, then you try to justify your use of it. Most of what you post is a justification for your behaviour.

Your posts are bad and you should feel bad.

As I have said elsewhere, I can't help it if they have proven what they are, simply by being what they are. They should like it when I join in and help them insult themselves, since that is all they are doing by professing what they are. I know. They are jealous that I can do a better job of it than they can.

No, I'm not saying anything about my theistic beliefs. I am clearly saying that you have called Moslems "religitards". Here is the quote:

You deceptive excuse for an atheist. Now you are directly saying that you, yourself, are a Muslim.

OK, I'll say it in simple words: You have called moslems "religitards". You are a mean person. And rude to other religions.

You just said nothing other than a babbling of words.

However, Gobekli Tepe, in the Muslim land of Turkey, is translated, "Potbelly Hill."

Moloch has a point.  Why don't religious people just kill themselves IF they truly believe they will go to heaven and live in paradise, instead of struggling here on Earth?

At least Muslims got this part right, they are willing to die for their beliefs, and are happy about it.
Muslims suicide bombers are the true believers, IMHO.  Christians are fakes.  They think they believe in afterlife but ask God to keep them alive as long as possible here on Earth

A word which you have used to describe Moslems.

Pots and kettles, buddy.

Christians are by definition hypocrites

Some religions do not focus on the afterlife.

http://www.jewfaq.org/m/olamhaba.htm

No, no! Don't let the religious people kill themselves. We wouldn't have any atheists to play with in the forum!

God keeps us Christians alive so that we can do 2 major things:
1. Convert some atheists to believe in God so that they can be saved;
2. Gain more glory in Heaven by doing it.

God keeps atheists alive for 2 major things:
1. So that maybe they will convert and be saved;
2. To give Christians mental and spiritual exercise so that the Christians can do their 2 major things better.

 

Moloch you are obviously very angry but just to clarify I have never said athiest are horrible people in fact I have said quite the opposite on numerous occasions.


The purpose of this post is only to inform and share knowledge. It is a presentation of some data that highlights a possible health effect associated with atheism. If that has caused you distress I am genuinely sorry for that is not my intent.

Are atheists horrible people? They were created by God. God doesn't make anything horrible. Atheists make themselves horrible, simply by not accepting God Who is evident all around us through the universe He created.

Notice how upset Moloch is. He uses the word "asshats" to talk about wonderful, God-believing, creations of God, while he, himself, would rather set himself up as a god by saying that God doesn't exist, in the face of the proof that God does indeed exist. How self-contradictory can Moloch get? (Please, don't show us.)

Then he even describes himself with his made-up word "religitard."  Wow!

Atheism maybe bad but its not poison and its not even bad. in fact It's just a person who accept the reality that Gods are just creation of human beings instead of the otherwise.

I find it incredibly sad that CoinCube and BADecker spend 24/7 crying about how Atheists are horrible people...

Get a fucking clue asshats

Get out of your mother's basement... Look up the words bigot, hypocrite and delusion... Then get back to me

Fucking stupid ass religitards are always hypocritical hatemongers... Every fucking one of them

Nihilnegativum we agree that this is a question of apriori knowledge the base fundamental assumptions about that nature of reality. Arguments on eventual convergence aside nihilism and theism represent competing and mutually exclusive views on reality. How should a rational individual choose between competing apriori assumptions?

One approach is to adopt the position that most appeals to the self as true and accept it as true regardless of the secondary cascade of consequences that result. This approach might lead one to choose either theism or nihilism.

A more practical approach is to examine the results of the choice and use that additional information to help guide the choice. Your concerns regarding the suppression of knowledge by spiritualism are valid based on historical president. However, my concerns regarding the undermining of health, well-being, and social stability by nihilism are also valid based on current data. By your own admission and logic you expect spiritualism to fade away with time leaving a theism of transcendent perfection that is entirely compatible with knowledge. I have no similar expectations regarding the detrimental effects of nihilism.  

One can argue that biological, moral, and anthropological arguments are entirely irrelevant in a discussion of metaphysics but this conclusion too stems from apriori assumptions. It is hard, usually impossible, to induce a re-examination of fundamental assumptions. However, what you currently regard as 'truth' is essentially choice and dictated by assumptions, which are not compelled. Looked at this way, to choose modern nihilism rather than the natural, spontaneous, 'biological' tendency to religious explanations is not just foolish, but incoherent - since the choice of nihilistic assumptions makes that choice itself meaningless.

Well, that's what you seem to think.:


Which means that you think that all other religious people *won't* be offended by your term "religitard". How do you know this? I bet you don't.