132 replies to this topic

[william7]

Unfortunately Elijah, the bible (every word inspired by "god") also commands men to do violence against other men.

Exodus 35:1,2

QUOTE 
These are the words which the lord hath commanded, that YE should do them. Six days shall work be done, but on the seventh day there shall be to you a holy day, a sabbath of rest to the lord: whosoever doeth work therein shall be PUT TO DEATH

This only applied to Sabbath violations during Old Testament times. With the coming of Jesus Christ mentioned in the New Testament, there's been an evolution in the law in regards to the death penalty for sin. See, for example, John 8:1-11; Matthew 12:1-8; 23:23. Eventually, when God's law and Christ's teachings are taught so well in a communal setting without private property or a monetary system, the people will be so careful to keep the law that punishment will rarely if ever be needed. This next evolutionary stage in God's law was prophesied to come about in Ezekiel 11:19-20; Jeremiah 31:33.

[Richard Leis]

It's going to take a stronger than usual set of moral standards backed by a consistent religious practice to overcome man's tendency to aggressive and destructive impulses.

Only the atheist can be truly moral. Only she has embraced the material and reason and education and the scientific method to negotiate existence. Only she has rejected the supernatural and faith. Having done these things, now she has the appropriate foundation upon which to build a real moral system.

Only the atheist can be truly moral.

[Aegist]

After seeing this lineup, I thought: One well prepared terrorist could score a lot of atheists at this event. I hope they've arranged for some good security.

God knows (pun intended) that there are quite a few fundies out there that wouldn't mind taking the lot of them out.

It is far more likely that a christian would take them out than a "Terrorist" from the middle east because no one in the typical terrorist organisation in the Middle East would even know who Richard Dawkins is, or care about him. If anything, they would appreciate the fact that the Christians hate him...

[Karomesis]

[spectate]

[Karomesis]

Ok, is it just me or is anybody else getting tired of all this Bible prophecy business?

AMEN to that.

unfortunately, elijah doesn't know how to take a clue. [mellow]

[william7]

Ok, is it just me or is anybody else getting tired of all this Bible prophecy business?

Bible prophecy is what's happening if you want to know what's in store for the future. Checkout this chapter entitled "The Bible and Prophecy" in the booklet Is the Bible True?, at http://www.gnmagazin...bleprophecy.htm, and see if you can pick up on it.

[william7]

It's going to take a stronger than usual set of moral standards backed by a consistent religious practice to overcome man's tendency to aggressive and destructive impulses.

Only the atheist can be truly moral. Only she has embraced the material and reason and education and the scientific method to negotiate existence. Only she has rejected the supernatural and faith. Having done these things, now she has the appropriate foundation upon which to build a real moral system.

Only the atheist can be truly moral.

I haven't seen that personally or historically yet Richard. Show me the truly moral atheist if you can.
Or, show me one that has a better moral plan than God.

[william7]

It is far more likely that a christian would take them out than a "Terrorist" from the middle east because no one in the typical terrorist organisation in the Middle East would even know who Richard Dawkins is, or care about him. If anything, they would appreciate the fact that the Christians hate him...

Not a real practicing Christian would do it. May be one of those wannabees acting without authority from God and suffering bona fide religious delusions according to the established criteria of the American Psychiatric Association. Not that I believe the APA has the authority or the necessary wisdom to accurately determine what is normal and abnormal or what is right and wrong. But, they do see human behavior accurately sometimes.

[JonesGuy]

To Sanjay: keep in mind that very many people feel a spiritual connection when they pray. Or at least, they remember feeling a connection. Biologically, there might be many reasons for such an event, but it's still important to them and empirically significant.

[Live Forever]

Now, I may not agree completely with everything that Christopher Hitchens says but I agree with every single word he says in the following video:

The full video of that speech:
http://www.imminst.o...T&f=179&t=15900
(one of my favorites, obviously ))

[Richard Leis]

I haven't seen that personally or historically yet Richard. Show me the truly moral atheist if you can.
Or, show me one that has a better moral plan than God.

I can show you. Several of the founders and members of ImmInst are truly, or well on their way to being, moral atheists. Look no further than their efforts and you will see the best that humankind can offer.

These atheists believe it is right to reduce human suffering and act to make it so. They are not racist, homophobic, ageist, or sexist. They value happiness, enjoy life, and deplore hatred and faith. They focus on the positive while combating the negative through their physical activity, working their bodies and brains to extremes, such as late night laboratory research and juggling different aspects of their lives, while still finding time to participate in outreach and advocacy.

Many of them do not get in debates like this with you, which make them far more moral than I can currently hope to be. They choose the right - action - and not the wrong - useless debate. They choose not think of you or people like you at all, except, importantly, as part of a human race that deserves to suffer less. Instead, these moral atheists act, while I waste everyone's time by continuing this useless conversation.

I am not yet brave enough to ignore you, which is the right thing to do, because there are actions of higher priority that need to be done right now. Obviously I am still trying to justify myself, to who knows who. When I can stop doing that, when I can become an active participant in the noble atheist and transhumanist effort to end human suffering, then maybe I will become another example of a truly moral atheist. Until then, I point you to the truly moral atheists that run this forum, work in the laboratory, and seek longevity for all humans, including the silly religious ones.

ImmInst has a better moral plan than God because only real people can make better moral plans; imaginary entities do not make moral plans. Imaginary entities do not do anything at all.

[DJS]

This atheism 'movement' is probably a receptive audience for immortalist and singularitarian ideology.

The "atheism movement" is probably a receptive audience? ppffftt. Hank, I don't think you realize just how rare of a breed you (we) are, although I can understand why you'd have this impression of comradery with other secularists. After all, it's tempting to think that individuals who embrace rationality and a naturalistic world view would quickly recognize the [airquote] brilliance [/airquote] of transhumanism. However in my experience the exact opposite is usually the case. Perhaps there aren't many atheists down there in the deep south for you to personally interact with and get a sense of what I'm saying?

[william7]

I'd like to ask you a few questions and please don't reply to any of them by posting links to sciptures. I've read the "holy" books and I know what's in them. I don't have anything to "pick-up" on. I certainly don't need to read some booklet to decide if the Bible is true or not. You seem to be totally unwilling to acknowledge the possibility that maybe.....just maybe, the "holy" books are NOT the word of God and they might actually be just a bunch of guidelines some people came up with thousands of years ago so that they can control and manipulate people.

If you truly knew what was in the Bible and understood it, you would be a believer like me. You may have quickly read the Bible through on one occasion, but it's obvious that you did not understand what you read.

I'm going to repeat a question I had posted earlier. If I put a newborn infant into your hands, can you tell me the religion of the child?

I vaguely recall you mentioning this in your previous post, so, without looking back to discover the point you're trying to make here, I'll say no I can't determine the religion of a newborn infant unless I know the parents and what their religion is.

It's never too late to change your mind. Are you afraid to admit that you MIGHT have been wrong about this your entire life?

I haven't been religious my entire life. I became a serious believer in 1989 when I was 33 years old.
Since I was a baby up until I was 14 or 15, I was forced to attend the Methodist church. I did not like attending church and tried to get away from it whenever I could. Instead, I liked to hunt, fish, and trap and spent many hours at my grandfather's hunting camp studying books and magazines on the subject and putting what I learned into practice.

I want you tell me what exactly do you get from religion. What do you get by talking about all these prophesies and rituals? I would also like to know a bit about your backgroud. How did you spend your days when you were younger? How do you spend your days now? Also, what places have you visited?

I believe the prophecies of the Bible are true and keep the seventh day Sabbath and the other Holy Days to the best of my ability. I don't make any money off my Bible knowledge and it's against my beliefs to sell biblical knowledge or make a profit off it in anyway. I believe when God's law and Christ's teachings are practiced correctly under the right conditions it leads to a substantially longer, healthier, and happier life.

A psychiatrist might say I was moderately hyperactive with attention deficit during my youth. I disliked school and got poor grades and was a constant behavioral problem. When I was 12 and 13, I was heavily into the Beatles, Paul Revere and the Raiders, the Doors, etc., and by age 14 and 15 I graduated to Led Zeppelin, Woodstock (the 3 record set), Ten Years After, the Who, the Grateful Dead, Black Sabbath, Pink Floyd, Deep Purple, etc., and began using marijuana, LSD, PCP, and amphetamines regularly. I drank alcoholic beverages too. By age 16, 17, and 18, I was using drugs more heavily and graduated to barbiturates, various narcotics, and pharmaceutical cocaine. At age 20, I robbed the local pharmacy for all their schedule 2 and shocked the small town I'm from.

Today, I'm drug free and live on a Sabbatarian Bible campus that's affiliated somewhat with the Church of God (Seventh Day). The pastor considers himself to be independent and nondenominational within the Sabbatarian tradition. I spend my days studying the Bible, working in the kitchen, and tending the large vegetable garden we have. I also handle all prisoner correspondence that comes our way from Sabbatarian prisoners.

Michigan, Wisconsin, Illinois, Minnesota (when I was a baby), Indiana are the only states in the United States that I've been to. I went on a camping trip to Canada when I was 12 or 13 with the Methodist Youth Fellowship (MYF) that I enjoyed immensely (I smuggled back about 25 packs of firecrackers and pissed off the minister and his wife when they found out about it [lol]).

You've been constantly insulting Atheists on a board predominantly comprised of Atheists. When you see the comments we make and dismiss them as nonsense, why don't you employ this skeptical attitude towards religion?

Show an example of me insulting an atheist and if it's true I'll apologize. True, I disagree with atheists when it comes to the Bible, but pay close attention to them in other areas of knowledge. I've learned a lot in Imminst forums over the short period I've been hanging around here. My hopes are to win over atheists to see the wisdom and beauty in the Word of God and to see the harmlessness of the small Sabbatarian churches that have existed thousands of years and were persecuted by the large organized religions - particularly the Roman Catholic church. I'm very skeptical of the Catholic and protestant churches. I see them as a serious evil in the world the same as atheists.

Then you believe it's right to insult and ridicule all religious people including the small unorganized and totally harmless churches? You need to distinguish between those religious people who are engaged in harmful and oppressive behaviour and those who are not. There are people unaffiliated with any particular church who study the Bible regularly and try to practice Jesus Christ's teachings to the best of their ability. I was this way until October of last year when I came to this Bible campus.

I even disagree with insulting and ridiculing those from the large organized religions that are actively engaged in harmful conduct. The small Sabbatarian church I'm currently a part of doesn't bare arms or engage in aggressive protests that can turn violent. I believe we can be politely critical of harmful religions and try to change their behaviour through peaceful and educational means. You're only a small step away from becoming a persecutor when you engage in insulting and ridiculing others for the way they think and act. Do you think you or other atheists have the authority to police and condemn the unharmful thoughts of others?

Edited by elijah3, 24 June 2007 - 04:21 PM.

[Live Forever]

This atheism 'movement' is probably a receptive audience for immortalist and singularitarian ideology.

The "atheism movement" is probably a receptive audience? ppffftt. Hank, I don't think you realize just how rare of a breed you (we) are, although I can understand why you'd have this impression of comradery with other secularists. After all, it's tempting to think that individuals who embrace rationality and a naturalistic world view would quickly recognize the [airquote] brilliance [/airquote] of transhumanism. However in my experience the exact opposite is usually the case. Perhaps there aren't many atheists down there in the deep south for you to personally interact with and get a sense of what I'm saying?

I do think that atheists, humanists, free thinkers, whatever classification you want to use, will be among the first to adopt extreme life extension technologies and transhumanist related enhancements when they become widely available.

Not saying that there won't be a lot of religious types that accept it to, but most of them think there is a big reward after death, and so I have a feeling prolonging it by a few thousand (or more) years might not be as appealing to them as to those who don't think that. Just a hypothesis though.

[DJS]

I think many atheists continue to believe that death is a natural part of the cycle of life, leading to oblivion, and they find the idea of physical immortality as fantastic as the idea of an afterlife.

As usual Richard, you're money.

Every cultural movement is a product of the environment it evolved in, and mainstream atheism is no exception. Fundamentally I view it as the antithesis of the dominant Christian culture, with a value set that exactly mirrors (inverts) the Christian value set.

Christianity idealizes the concept of *self* as *soul*. Mainstream atheism devalues the concept of self as *illusion* (with interesting parallels to buddhistic philosophy). The vast majority of atheists can't relate to Immortalism because they don't possess the desire for immortality - which has nothing to do with logical analysis.

Also, *Faith* is rejected by atheists in favor of *rationality*, but the extreme standard for rationality maintained by your typical atheist sacrifices *imagination* in favor of *certainty*. Again, this has nothing to do with logical analysis. It involves deeply entrenched psychological preferences...which is why it's silly to think that after being exposed to futurism someone like a Dawkins would suddenly "get it".

[DJS]

I do think that atheists, humanists, free thinkers, whatever classification you want to use, will be among the first to adopt extreme life extension technologies and transhumanist related enhancements when they become widely available.

Yeah Nate, I tend to agree with you. Most free thinkers aren't hostile to a tech progressive agenda, they're just skeptical and apathetic. I have no doubt that they'll take advantage of technological advances when they arrive. Hence my mantra, change the technological environment and the memetics will follow.

[DJS]

(maybe this post should be split as it is somewhat offtopic...then again, most of this thread is offtopic. [lol] )

Every cultural movement is a product of the environment it evolved in, and mainstream atheism is no exception.

And I should add, nor is Transhumanism an exception for that matter.

It could be argued, quite convincingly I might add, that the historical figure of H.G. Wells represents a convenient demarcation for the emergence of transhumanist thought. (Hence the HG Wells Award for Outstanding Contributions to Transhumanism). Prior to the turn of the 20th century, futuristic references were very sparse - and if we go back far enough in history they become nonexistent. The presence of someone with even the vaguest resemblance to our mindset would simply not have been possible two hundred years ago.

With the above I know I'm only stating the obvious, but for some reason it fills me with a sense of wonder nonetheless. All of us are a product of memetic evolution, with our transhumanist perspective causally related to technological progress. The prominence of technology in the group consciousness demanded that its significance be established. The very fact that our perspective exists should give us cause for great hope.

The more pronounced technology becomes - the more its presence is felt by society - the more favorable the memetic environment for producing the transhumanist disposition. But here an important point must be made, one which perhaps will clarify why I have the opinions I have about activism. Irrespective of an individual's status as a "free thinker" or a "rationalist", hir disposition, hir innate preferences, are NOT produced by logical argumentation. They are produced during a child's formative years by subconscious mental inferences derived from the surrounding environment. Much like the imprinting of a baby bird, once the disposition is established it is locked in. At this point it is nearly impossible for alterations to take place, and on those rare occasions when baseline psychology is altered it is the result of strong overriding inferences produced by prolonged exposure to the requisite environment. This is the reason why I believe that marketing efforts like renting billboard space or buying radio advertising are misguided and a waste of resources.

Yet despite being pessimistic about the chances of success with 'active' marketing I am actually quite optimistic about the growth of Transhumanism over the coming decade. The environment is ripening. I make a direct correlation between personal computing and the concept of technology. Growing up, I didn't have a home computer until I was in high school (which might explain my ineptitude with computers [lol] ), but kids nowadays are usually online by the time they hit preschool. So I expect a large influx of young fledgling transhumanists over the coming years. Increasing our ranks requires lighting the online beacon for them as much as possible. For those already set in their trajectory, only drastic technological change will have an effect. Thus our activist agenda should be clear cut IMO.

[william7]

You see, your very first line has a condescending tone to it. You're openly declaring that you think my capacity to understand things is not equal to your own. So you are in effect saying that I'm not mature enough to comprehend the bible.

This wasn't meant to be condescending as you say. I'm just saying that you do not know or understand the Bible. You're obviously mature and intelligent enough to do serious Bible study.

I've just mentioned Example 1. I can distinctly recall that you've been calling Atheists losers. I'm not going to go through your voluminous postings to find more instances of this.

You're right I shouldn't have called atheists losers. I should've said it in a tamer way. My apology goes out to you and anybody else who read it. But, I would like everybody to know that it was my intent to be helpful and to warn. I'm also sure that most of the highly educated atheists on this thread enjoyed reading what the biblical prophets say the future of atheism is - whether they agree with it or not. I have an old Newsweek article that says Isaac Newton studied Bible prophecy intensely during the latter days of his life.

QUOTE (elijah3)
I'm very skeptical of the Catholic and protestant churches. I see them as a serious evil in the world the same as atheists.
Once again you reveal what you truely think about Atheists. So, most of us on this board are a serious evil huh?

My error. I meant to say that I see the Catholic and protestant churches as a serious evils in the world the same as the atheists do.

By Unharmful thoughts, if you mean religion, then I'm sorry to say that the world is awash with evidence that suggests quite the contrary. I do not think I have the right to police other people. No one has the right to do so. But people do have right to question and ridicule irrational claims and beliefs, whether it is in Religion or even in Science. How else will Human beings ever find out what is true and what is not? You must be joking if you think that atheists have any authority at all in the world. In fact, the truth is just the opposite.

I believe we should always be as respectful as possible when we directly question and criticize others beliefs whether in religion, politics, or science so as not to cause unnecessary anger or hurt. I might not always practice what I preach here, but it's my goal and intent to do this.

You must not have paid any attention to my post above that pointed out the massive loss of life, persecution, and oppression caused by atheists when they do get in power. See http://www.imminst.o...20.

Anyway, before I conclude, I would like to sincerely apologize if i've come across as rude or arrogant. That is certainly not my intention. I know that Religion is deeply ingrained in your life and it's your Support system. I wouldn't want to disrupt this balance that you've established in your life in any way. So, I am going to stop arguing about this issue. My best Regards!

No need for apology. I liked arguing with you. Feel free to question and criticize anytime. And thanks for recognizing my need for a "Support system" as you say.

[DJS]

blah blah blah

[william7]

blah blah blah

rah rah rah?

[Zarrka]

lol elijah

I think the basic point is that if you really want somthing to change, then you cannot change others beliefs through anger and hatred. its fine for you to hate religion, or any other cultural sect be it a political structure or race. History tells us one thing on this, this if you go about hating another social structure as a means to disable it you do little but solidify the group you are trying to dissolve.

Its not going to help. Atheists best hope of getting rid of christianity will be through a soft education of thier beliefs. and the only way to stop strong militant religion is through much the same methods: disable their properganda, but there are other ways of doing this then just replacing it with a properganda of your own.

Im not saying that there will be an easy peacful way out of this, im jsut saying more hatred and more violence is never going to be the answer. so promoting hate speach is not really going to serve except to solidify the atheists into one big hate-of-religion centre, and im not sure thast the best method of them feeling good about the way their contrey is going. Its not going to change a thing either.

go athiest alliance at least thats a plae of talking and discussion about why they believe what they do. Mix in a bit of hate speech and suddenly a real information debate turns into an agressive fight. Its just not that helpful.

[william7]

I agree with you 100 percent catichka. Do you think I'm a bit too hard on Catholics, capitalists, and atheists? My religion teaches that the Catholic church has been the cause of too much evil in the world and must be destroyed by God as prophesied in the Bible before any real progress can be made. When dealing with Catholics and protestants in person, I'm polite and courteous with them and try not to antagonize them. A lot of my relatives and family are Catholics and protestants.
I'm for the people, but dislike the church and its doctrines which are in opposition to the Bible.

[JohnDoe1234]

CRITICAL ERROR: This thread is infected with Win32.Elijah

[Aegist]

When I was 12 and 13, I was heavily into the Beatles, Paul Revere and the Raiders, the Doors, etc., and by age 14 and 15 I graduated to Led Zeppelin, Woodstock (the 3 record set), Ten Years After, the Who, the Grateful Dead, Black Sabbath, Pink Floyd, Deep Purple, etc., and began using marijuana, LSD, PCP, and amphetamines regularly. I drank alcoholic beverages too. By age 16, 17, and 18, I was using drugs more heavily and graduated to barbiturates, various narcotics, and pharmaceutical cocaine. At age 20, I robbed the local pharmacy for all their schedule 2 and shocked the small town I'm from.

Today, I'm drug free and live on a Sabbatarian Bible campus that's affiliated somewhat with the Church of God (Seventh Day).

Great music all of it. I listened to all of it when I was younger too, and still appreciate it, but have since moved on to even better music: TOOL. Tool, a band who quotes dead heros like Bill Hicks talking about all the good Drugs have done for society, like The Beatles... (Also a band which sings "Come down, get off your f**king cross, we need the f**king space to nail the next fool martyr.")

And I managed to love all of this music without doing any of those drugs. No alcohol. No smoking. No drugs. No need to be saved....

So do you thank God that you could leave that life behind? Or do you curse God for putting you through it in the first place?

Or am I supposed to be upset that I couldn't go through that so that I could have the opportunity to be saved?

[Aegist]

I agree with you 100 percent catichka. Do you think I'm a bit too hard on Catholics, capitalists, and atheists? My religion teaches that the Catholic church has been the cause of too much evil in the world and must be destroyed by God as prophesied in the Bible before any real progress can be made. When dealing with Catholics and protestants in person, I'm polite and courteous with them and try not to antagonize them. A lot of my relatives and family are Catholics and protestants.
I'm for the people, but dislike the church and its doctrines which are in opposition to the Bible.

So you believe that God created the Earth, and it was Good. Then it was Evil so he had to wipe everyone out except the one Good person...making it good again. Now it's infected with evil again so god is going to wipe us all out to make it good again...

Damn your God isn't very bright is he?

When is he going to take responsibility for his own failures?