Results 1 to 15 of 241

Thread: Atheism

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    In my knickers
    Posts
    31,029
    Thanks (Given)
    13927
    Thanks (Received)
    15358
    Likes (Given)
    4384
    Likes (Received)
    5487
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    181 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475358

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pete311 View Post
    If the beginning of someone's life is religious and the end. Then I would suspect it never really left him. However it's speculation and I'm not interested in debating the speculation. In the end I just detest abbey's baiting trying to connect the shooters atheism to his behavior. I am atheist and non violent, even after being shot at myself. So there.
    I wasn’t baiting. You felt trapped so you perceived it that way. This guy apparently immersed himself in Atheism in recent times. He shot innocent people, even children, worshipping God. I will grant you this- Atheistic “beliefs” alone would not necessarily cause such sick behavior. The influence of Satan is a very possible primary cause.
    One might also posit that his mental illness led him to Atheism. It is after all, an illogical set of beliefs.
    The good news is, God loves you, Pete.
    After the game, the king and the pawn go into the same box - Author unknown

    “Unfortunately, the truth is now whatever the media say it is”
    -Abbey

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    6,314
    Thanks (Given)
    5
    Thanks (Received)
    354
    Likes (Given)
    36
    Likes (Received)
    131
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    63
    Mentioned
    145 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Abbey View Post
    I wasn’t baiting. You felt trapped so you perceived it that way. This guy apparently immersed himself in Atheism in recent times. He shot innocent people, even children, worshipping God. I will grant you this- Atheistic “beliefs” alone would not necessarily cause such sick behavior. The influence of Satan is a very possible primary cause.
    One might also posit that his mental illness led him to Atheism. It is after all, an illogical set of beliefs.
    The good news is, God loves you, Pete.
    And trusting 2000 year old goat herders is logical? He was also a military man. Maybe the military experience had something to do with this. Sounds just as valid as his atheist views. btw, motive has already been declared domestic. So you can stop now.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Podunk, WI
    Posts
    9,836
    Thanks (Given)
    4248
    Thanks (Received)
    4521
    Likes (Given)
    4519
    Likes (Received)
    2812
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pete311 View Post
    And trusting 2000 year old goat herders is logical? He was also a military man. Maybe the military experience had something to do with this. Sounds just as valid as his atheist views. btw, motive has already been declared domestic. So you can stop now.
    Declared by WHO?

    Not so fast, kemosabe...

    EXCLUSIVE: 'Creepy, crazy and weird': Former classmates say Texas gunman was an 'outcast' who 'preached his atheism' online before killing 26 in the state’s worst ever mass shooting

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz4xg2LTqnb
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

    And as far as this POS being a "military man," obviously he wasn't very good at that because he was DISHONORABLY DISCHARGED and reduced in rank. He was a mentally ill outcast, and probably sounded a lot like YOU preaching his atheism and INSULTING Christianity.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    6,314
    Thanks (Given)
    5
    Thanks (Received)
    354
    Likes (Given)
    36
    Likes (Received)
    131
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    63
    Mentioned
    145 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by High_Plains_Drifter View Post
    Declared by WHO?

    Not so fast, kemosabe...

    EXCLUSIVE: 'Creepy, crazy and weird': Former classmates say Texas gunman was an 'outcast' who 'preached his atheism' online before killing 26 in the state’s worst ever mass shooting

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...#ixzz4xg2LTqnb
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

    And as far as this POS being a "military man," obviously he wasn't very good at that because he was DISHONORABLY DISCHARGED and reduced in rank. He was a mentally ill outcast, and probably sounded a lot like YOU preaching his atheism and INSULTING Christianity.
    Preaching atheism is not a motive. It's already been revealed he was targeting his mother in law.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Podunk, WI
    Posts
    9,836
    Thanks (Given)
    4248
    Thanks (Received)
    4521
    Likes (Given)
    4519
    Likes (Received)
    2812
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pete311 View Post
    Preaching atheism is not a motive. It's already been revealed he was targeting his mother in law.
    If you're a nut case atheist and have a hard on to kill yourself some Christians, that most certainly is a motive.

    If he wanted to kill his mother in law he could have done it without killing 24 other people, so that theory is a farce.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    6,314
    Thanks (Given)
    5
    Thanks (Received)
    354
    Likes (Given)
    36
    Likes (Received)
    131
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    63
    Mentioned
    145 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by High_Plains_Drifter View Post
    If you're a nut case atheist and have a hard on to kill yourself some Christians, that most certainly is a motive.

    If he wanted to kill his mother in law he could have done it without killing 24 other people, so that theory is a farce.
    You're just completely making things up

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Podunk, WI
    Posts
    9,836
    Thanks (Given)
    4248
    Thanks (Received)
    4521
    Likes (Given)
    4519
    Likes (Received)
    2812
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    38 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pete311 View Post
    You're just completely making things up
    Not surprising that's what you think of logic.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    23,251
    Thanks (Given)
    7207
    Thanks (Received)
    11746
    Likes (Given)
    1048
    Likes (Received)
    1381
    Piss Off (Given)
    4
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    39 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475215

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pete311 View Post
    Preaching atheism is not a motive. It's already been revealed he was targeting his mother in law.
    petey....do you know how funny you sound? Here you are, DEFENDING a mass murderer, and making excuses to distract attention from your devotion to Atheism???

    Wanna try another tactic?
    I love to make Liberals Cry, and Whine.
    So, this is for them.
    GOD BLESS AMERICA - IN GOD WE TRUST !

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    18,759
    Piss Off (Given)
    0
    Piss Off (Received)
    0
    Mentioned
    139 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475235

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aboutime View Post
    petey....do you know how funny you sound? Here you are, DEFENDING a mass murderer, and making excuses to distract attention from your devotion to Atheism???

    Wanna try another tactic?
    point of order - he's defending atheism and it's relation to these events. Pete never condoned or defended the asshole shooter.
    “… the greatest detractor from high performance is fear: fear that you are not prepared, fear that you are in over your head, fear that you are not worthy, and ultimately, fear of failure. If you can eliminate that fear—not through arrogance or just wishing difficulties away, but through hard work and preparation—you will put yourself in an incredibly powerful position to take on the challenges you face" - Pete Carroll.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    USA, Southern
    Posts
    27,683
    Thanks (Given)
    32441
    Thanks (Received)
    17532
    Likes (Given)
    3631
    Likes (Received)
    3156
    Piss Off (Given)
    21
    Piss Off (Received)
    2
    Mentioned
    58 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    21475259

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pete311 View Post
    And trusting 2000 year old goat herders is logical? He was also a military man. Maybe the military experience had something to do with this. Sounds just as valid as his atheist views. btw, motive has already been declared domestic. So you can stop now.
    Just for you Petey--to enlighten you a bit..And low and behold this is by highly qualified and well respected (scientific) authorities.
    Do try to absorb the numbers given and contemplate the odds..
    Very informative, interesting AND EDUCATIONAL READ.... SEE BELOW - TYR

    1966, Carl Sagan, and the Odds on God (and Aliens)
    Belief, Fascinating, Quotes

    Dec 282014


    Too often, one faulty thought enters the mainstream, is picked up as a soundbyte and disseminated by the media, and multitudes are affected by it. In this case, the thought was issued in 1966 by 32 year old Carl Sagan, when half the appliances in the USA were avocado and linoleum was in. The rest of the scientific community latched onto his quote and started doing math, coming to conclusions like the universe must be populated by thousands of planets that support intelligent life. Even today, “the math from the 60’s and 70’s” persists in many of our high school teachers.

    CarlSagan-1966

    As knowledge evolved, that math started to change. Here is an article that appeared in the Wall Street Journal this month. I don’t know if its 100% right (that’s hard to find) but it seems well worth considering.

    I.M. Optimism Man

    Preserved from the Wall Street Journal…
    Science Increasingly Makes the Case for God
    The odds of life existing on another planet grow ever longer. Intelligent design, anyone?
    By
    Eric Metaxas

    Dec. 25, 2014 4:56 p.m. ET

    In 1966 Time magazine ran a cover story asking: Is God Dead? Many have accepted the cultural narrative that he’s obsolete—that as science progresses, there is less need for a “God” to explain the universe. Yet it turns out that the rumors of God’s death were premature. More amazing is that the relatively recent case for his existence comes from a surprising place—science itself.

    Here’s the story: The same year Time featured the now-famous headline, the astronomer Carl Sagan announced that there were two important criteria for a planet to support life: The right kind of star, and a planet the right distance from that star. Given the roughly octillion—1 followed by 27 zeros—planets in the universe, there should have been about septillion—1 followed by 24 zeros—planets capable of supporting life.

    With such spectacular odds, the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence, a large, expensive collection of private and publicly funded projects launched in the 1960s, was sure to turn up something soon. Scientists listened with a vast radio telescopic network for signals that resembled coded intelligence and were not merely random. But as years passed, the silence from the rest of the universe was deafening. Congress defunded SETI in 1993, but the search continues with private funds. As of 2014, researches have discovered precisely bubkis—0 followed by nothing.

    What happened? As our knowledge of the universe increased, it became clear that there were far more factors necessary for life than Sagan supposed. His two parameters grew to 10 and then 20 and then 50, and so the number of potentially life-supporting planets decreased accordingly. The number dropped to a few thousand planets and kept on plummeting.

    Even SETI proponents acknowledged the problem. Peter Schenkel wrote in a 2006 piece for Skeptical Inquirer magazine: “In light of new findings and insights, it seems appropriate to put excessive euphoria to rest . . . . We should quietly admit that the early estimates . . . may no longer be tenable.”

    As factors continued to be discovered, the number of possible planets hit zero, and kept going. In other words, the odds turned against any planet in the universe supporting life, including this one. Probability said that even we shouldn’t be here.

    Today there are more than 200 known parameters necessary for a planet to support life—every single one of which must be perfectly met, or the whole thing falls apart. Without a massive planet like Jupiter nearby, whose gravity will draw away asteroids, a thousand times as many would hit Earth’s surface. The odds against life in the universe are simply astonishing.

    Yet here we are, not only existing, but talking about existing. What can account for it? Can every one of those many parameters have been perfect by accident? At what point is it fair to admit that science suggests that we cannot be the result of random forces? Doesn’t assuming that an intelligence created these perfect conditions require far less faith than believing that a life-sustaining Earth just happened to beat the inconceivable odds to come into being?

    There’s more. The fine-tuning necessary for life to exist on a planet is nothing compared with the fine-tuning required for the universe to exist at all. For example, astrophysicists now know that the values of the four fundamental forces—gravity, the electromagnetic force, and the “strong” and “weak” nuclear forces—were determined less than one millionth of a second after the big bang. Alter any one value and the universe could not exist. For instance, if the ratio between the nuclear strong force and the electromagnetic force had been off by the tiniest fraction of the tiniest fraction—by even one part in 100,000,000,000,000,000—then no stars could have ever formed at all. Feel free to gulp.

    Multiply that single parameter by all the other necessary conditions, and the odds against the universe existing are so heart-stoppingly astronomical that the notion that it all “just happened” defies common sense. It would be like tossing a coin and having it come up heads 10 quintillion times in a row. Really?

    Fred Hoyle, the astronomer who coined the term “big bang,” said that his atheism was “greatly shaken” at these developments. He later wrote that “a common-sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a super-intellect has monkeyed with the physics, as well as with chemistry and biology . . . . The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question.”

    Theoretical physicist Paul Davies has said that “the appearance of design is overwhelming” and Oxford professor Dr. John Lennox has said “the more we get to know about our universe, the more the hypothesis that there is a Creator . . . gains in credibility as the best explanation of why we are here.”

    The greatest miracle of all time, without any close seconds, is the universe. It is the miracle of all miracles, one that ineluctably points with the combined brightness of every star to something—or Someone—beyond itself.

    Mr. Metaxas is the author, most recently, of “Miracles: What They Are, Why They Happen, and How They Can Change Your Life” ( Dutton Adult, 2014).
    18 U.S. Code § 2381-Treason Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Debate Policy - Political Forums