How much of whatsupyall/musclemans's posts do u comprehend?

[Frencheneesz]

Whatsupall:

"You have faith in science and your own judgment..."

I DO have faith in my own judgment and my senses. Through those I can get enough information to rationalize ANYTHING ELSE. The ONLY thing I must have faith in is my judgement. I reduce the amount of faith I have to only one subject. I can think of a REASON to have faith in my senses (because they are my only connection with the world). My senses connect me to the world, and my judgement lets me interpret my senses. These are the only two things I have and will ever have faith in.

Faith can prove to be plain wrong. My senses can fail me, my judgment can fail me. Yet I have no choice but to trust them, without them we are nothing. If you cannot trust your judgement than everything (pardon the cliche) goes to hell. But humans all have much the same judgment (on average) and so If my judgment is wrong than so is yours, which means that where I am wrong for endevouring in science, you would also be wrong for endevouring in

Since my senses and judgement are the only things I will have faith in, I must have reasons for EVERY OTHER THING, even if that reason is that it "makes sense" to me.

"If you do the virtues above, God will reveal Himself to you because you earned it "

This might hold good sence in godly reasoning, which I do not have, but in human reasoning, that idea is a bit retroactive. What I mean is that if god revealed himself to EVERYONE, then there would be much greater chance that everyone would "do" the virtues "above".

"God is the greatest treasure, you donot find him by being perverted, lazy, disrespectfull, you will not see God because your blinded by all these, and God will not force himself on you........"

I believe you have said that one day everyone will be athiest (because its in the prophesy or something). Won't god have to force himself on us then?

"Well yur right, I am an idiot..I am a sinner, I am jacked up in the head"

How can you believe that and still act that way? Do you really believe that?

"Only my family knew this experience I had, I never shared this to anyone because they might call me "delusional""

My problem is, unlike you who say we are all liers, I cannot just believe someone is lying. Maybe I should? So where I cannot say that you are NOT delusional, I can't say that you are either. The only thing I have to say is that YOU have to ACCEPT that there is the possibility that you ARE deslusional, the same possibility that I myself am delusional. In the same way, everyone has to accept the POSSIBILITY that god exists and that, a couple thousand years ago, he made the universe the way we know it was a couple thousand years ago.

"and what i said is truth"

You cannot say that. Give a reason for it to be truth and we might believe you. But even if we end up believing you, it still does not mean that it is truth, only that we believe that it is truth.

 

[whatsupyall]

((((((((Clapping hands))))))) Im impressed, what an intelligent thing to say, our body is its own temple, which itself is living and requires reasoning, your right....Astounding remark concerning "Faith" and "Belief".

I agree about everything you said...Except one below, just one.....

Originally posted by Frencheneesz
Whatsupall:
In the same way, everyone has to accept the POSSIBILITY that god exists and that, a couple thousand years ago, he made the universe the way we know it was a couple thousand years ago.

The bible never said earth was created a couple of thousands of years ago, never did it state that. Only some of the bible christian who take the symbolic parables literally, such as the southern batist and others who rejects the fossil records and scientific fact, their ignorance gives christianity in general a bad name...


However, Adam and Eve is dated by the theologians about 6,000 yrs ago, the time when the church was founded. They were the first children of God in a spiritual sense, not the first literall human species...

"He was in the beggining with the world and all things were made through Him, but the world knew him not. He came to his own but his own recieve him not. But to those who do, he gave authority to become a children of God BORN NOT BY POWER, NOR BY WILL, BUT BY SPIRIT"- John.

Adam and Eve, werfe born in spirit. The first human species to accept God and was born again...
"Amen I say to you, unless you are born again, you will never enter the kingdom of God"- Jesus...In other words unless you "CHANGE YOUR WAYS AND CONVERT" you will never see God, because you are blinded by your lifestyle.
Now dont take that literally and say "How can i come back to my mom's womb and b born again", LOL, thats what happens if u take Adam& Eve literally. It doesnt mean you will be sinless either, like Adam and Eve u will still sin, but you have to work hard and labor to do good...

LOL, unfortunately, some people took this out of context then BUILD A CHURCH WITH THIS QUOTE, calling themselves "Born Again Christian"...Stupid, you have to be born again to be a christian to begin with...

 

[Frencheneesz]

Whatsupall:

"The bible never said earth was created a couple of thousands of years ago,"

Whether the bible said it or not, we both still must accept that it is a possibility.

 

[Xelios]

"Whether the bible said it or not, we both still must accept that it is a possibility."

Everything is possible, that doesn't mean it's probable or should be taken seriously. For example, a giant purple squid monkey could exist in galaxy x, but does that mean we should take this idea seriously? no.

 

[Frencheneesz]

Xelios:

Not everything is possible, by certain axioms certain things cannot exist or happen. For example, the premise that no humans exist is just wrong, the probability for it is 0%. You know what I mean.

But, in any case, yes that was my point. Many things are possible, but only a few can be taken seriously. We must accept the fact that god COULD have created the universe, but I'm nowhere nearer to believing in him.

 

[MarcAC]

Closer yet!

Originally posted by Frencheneesz
Xelios:

Not everything is possible, by certain axioms certain things cannot exist or happen. For example, the premise that no humans exist is just wrong, the probability for it is 0%. You know what I mean.

But, in any case, yes that was my point. Many things are possible, but only a few can be taken seriously. We must accept the fact that god COULD have created the universe, but I'm nowhere nearer to believing in him.

You are a lot closer than others bro or sis. You redefine atheism if you insist on maintaing that title.

 

[whatsupyall]

A claim of POSSIBILITY, needs evidence, otherwise such claim of POSSIBILITY IS DELUSIONAL, an example is atheism, toothfairy, giant purple squid monkeys, etc. no conviction, to testimonies, so reasons, NOTHING....

 

[Thor]

So you're denying the possiblilty that there is a god.

Well done, you've come far!!

 

[Frencheneesz]

Whatsupall:

Back to your old self I see...

"A claim of POSSIBILITY, needs evidence, otherwise such claim of POSSIBILITY IS DELUSIONAL"

Possibility does not need evidence. The only requirement for a possibilitiy is that it does not break rules that are already in place. To BELIEVE in a possibility DOES need proof. To prove that a possibility is more PROBABLE in the others needs proof.

"an example is atheism"

You seem to think atheism claims something.... When it is handed all the proof of god (ie. nothing) it says "well this doesn't prove anything" and so we go on with our lives. The burden of proof is on a Thiest to prove the existance of something. To NOT believe in something requires only the same thing as a possibility, only that to NOT believe doesn't break rules that are already set. And the non-belief in god does not break any rules I know of.....

 

[whatsupyall]

Originally posted by Frencheneesz
Whatsupall:


Possibility does not need evidence. The only requirement for a possibilitiy is that it does not break rules that are already in place.

IF A CLAIM OF POSSIBILITY NEEEDS NO PROOF, THEN IN THAT CASE I CAN CLAIM THAT A FUNCTIONING JUMBO JET AIRPLANE CAN BE FORMED BY 4 YRS OF EARTHQUAKE, WIND AND LIGHTNING BY "CHANCE". YOU THINK THATS STUPID? YUR RIGHT, THATS WHY A CLAIM OF "CHANCE" NEEDS PROOF OF POSSIBILITY, OTHERWISE YUR AN IDIOT..

Originally posted by Frencheneesz

To BELIEVE in a possibility DOES need proof. To prove that a possibility is more PROBABLE in the others needs proof.

TO BELIEVE IN A JUMBO AIRPLANE FORMED BY LIGHTNING AND EARTHQUAKE BY "CHANCE" NEEDS PROOF, U EVEN AGREED ABOVE. SO HOW CAN I PROVE THIS TO YOU? WELL, I CAN CLAIM THAT EARTHQUAKES SHOOK THE ROCKS, THEN LIGHTNING STRUCK IT AND WIND CARRIED IT AND PLACED IT IN LOCATION, THIS CYCLE REPEATEDLY DONE OVER AND OVER AGAIN, UNTIL A FUNCTIONING JUMBO JET AIRPLANE WAS ASSEMBLED!!!

IS THIS CLAIM OOF POSSIBILITY TRUE? NO..WHY NOT? BECAUSE NOT ONLY ITS ILLOGIC AND UNPROBABLE, BUT THIS CLAIM HAS NOT BEEN DEMONSTRATED, ARE YOU PROPOSING THIS IS POSSIBLE? THEN YOUR AN IDIOT FRENCHENEEZ, IF YU CLAIM THAT IS POSSIBLE, THEN PROVE IT..

WHICH ONE IS MORE PROBABLE? JUMBO JET AIRPLANE FORMED BY EARTHQUAKE. LIGHTNING, AND WIND BY "CHANCE" WHICH THE CLAIM OF POSSIBILITY IS NEVER PROVEN...THEREFORE ITS IMPOSSIBLE...OR FUNCTIONING JUMBO JET AIRPLANE BEING FORMED BY "INTELLIGENT DESIGNER"...
THE INTELLIGENT DESIGN IS PROVEN, HAS BEEN DEMONSTTRATED TO BE A FACT..

SO WHICH CLAIM WOULD U BELIEVE? THE POSSIBLE AND PROVEN CLAIM? OR THE IMPOSSIBLE AND PROOFLESS CLAIM?

AS FOR ME I BELIEVE THE CLAIM THAT HAVE PROOF, BECAUSE I AM NOT DELUSIONAL, THATS WHY IM A CHRISTIAN AND NOT A ATHEIST...

YUR CLAIM OF CHANCE HAVENT BEEN PROVEN...

TO SAY A FUNCTIONING JUMBO JET AIRPLANES IS FORMED BY LIGHTNING AND EARTHQUAKE IN 4 YRS BY "CHANCE", THOUGH IMPOSSIBLE, THAT HAVE MORE CHANCE OF HAPPENING THAN LIFE FORMS FORMED BY EARTHQUAKE AND NATURAL PHYSICS BY "CHANCE", THERE IS FAR MORE COMPLEXITY IN A BIOLOGICAL LIFE FORM THAN IN JUMBO JET AIRPLANES..



IT IS MORE BELIEVEABLE TO SAY THAT A FUNCTIONING JUMBO JET AIRPLANES IS FORMED BY LIGHTNING AND EARTHQUAKE IN 4 YRS BY "CHANCE", THAN A LIFE FORM EXISTING THROUGH NATURAL MEANS BECAUSE JET PLANES ISNT SENSITIVE, LIFE FORMS ARE DELICATE, IT EXPIRES, ITTS VERY SENSITIVE...

IN OTHER WORDS, IT IS MUCH MORE POSSIBLE FOR THE IMPOSSIBLE TO HAPPEN, THAN FOR A LIFE FORM TO EXIST BY "CHANCE"...

ATHEISTS, ARE BELOW DELUSIONAL, WORST THAN DELUSIONAL...YOU THINK THAT BELIEVING THE CLAIM OF JUMBO JET AIRPLANE EXISTING BY "CHANCE" IS DELUSIONAL?

ATHEISTS TOP THAT, THEY THINK THE WHOLE COMPLEXITY, FUNCTIONING, ORDER OF NATURE AND EARTH IS "CHANCE"...LOL....CRAZY....

 

[Nebula]

WHATSUPYALL MAYBE YOU WILL UNDERSTAND THIS YUR A SMART GUY ARENT YOU WELL MAYBE YOU WILL UNDERSTAND THIS THEN

QUIT POSTING IN CAPS, YOU LOOK LIKE AN IDIOT BY DOING IT

QUIT POSTING IN CAPS, YOU LOOK LIKE AN IDIOT BY DOING IT

QUIT POSTING IN CAPS, YOU LOOK LIKE AN IDIOT BY DOING IT

QUIT POSTING IN CAPS, YOU LOOK LIKE AN IDIOT BY DOING IT

**takes out hammer, starts beating it into your head***

Everyone else: is it possible to get someone banned by circulating a petition!?!?

 

[Cris]

Everyone else: is it possible to get someone banned by circulating a petition!?!?

You could post a POLL thread and see what happens.

But this might be the price we pay for having the standard of free speech. There is nothing to say that irrational people like whatsup can't say what they like.

 

[whatsupyall]

I confess, Forgive mee guys if I failed to recognize yur intelligence

Cris, I confess, I am so dumb, compared to atheists, I donot have anything intelligent to say...Read your top 10 arguments below, they are almost flawless...

THE TOP 10 OF THE ATHEISM'S ARGUMENT AGAINST GOD, ALL QUOTED FROM THE WRITINGS OF ATHEISTS HERE....This are the "intelligent" arguments to prove that God dont exist...

1. Atheist says "To have faith means to believe in myths", so faith is illogic...(LOL, got brain?)

2. Atheist says "Nature is super duper LUCK! In other words "Chance"!", (no evidence supports this claim of "possibility")..

3. Atheists says "All christians are killers and perverts! Therefore there is no God!", (Are u ok?)...

4. Atheists says "The word "Knowing" means establishing, controlling, and Doing! Therefore if humans have freewill, then God cant be all knowing!! Because knowing something means contolling something!!", (just plain stupid).....

5. Atheists says "You have no proof of God!", (although tons of evidence are given)...

6. Atheists says "Theory means FACT! And needs no faith! Because theory is another word for PURE EVIDENCE!!", (just plain delusional)...

7. Atheists says "I am very smart!! And I know what Im talking about!!", (another false remark)....

8. Atheists says "I dont make a claim, you do, so prove your claim, otherwise God is a myth"...(Wait a minute, u said u dont make claim, but then said "God is a myth", isnt that a claim? Now do u have a proof of yur claim?).

9. Atheists says "Evolution contradicts God"...(When it doesnt, only 2 those who take the bible literally)...


And let the drums roll, for the best and the last comment atheists will say concerning God.........((((((((((drums rolling)))))))))))..

Well here it is...

10. Atheist says "Prove to me Giant purple squid monkeys, fuzzy pink elephant dont exist", (TENG DENG! This is the best of the best of atheism's argument against God, a IGNORANT and illogic pointless comment, is their best argument)...


HAVE YOU SEEN ANYTHING LOGIC ABOVE? HAVE YOU SEEN ANYTHING THAT IS "TRUTHFULL"? HAVE YOU SEEN ANYTHING "SCIENTIFIC" ABOVE? LOL, ASK ATHEIST AND THEY WILL SAY "YES, ALL THOSE MAKE SENSE"....LOL...

 

[spuriousmonkey]

let's go over a few points then:

++++1. Atheist says "To have faith means to believe in myths", so faith is illogic...(LOL, got brain?) +++

faith is not illogically in the sense that it is unnatural. The human brain is susceptible to the religous experience. An artificial stimulation of certain brain areas can induce a relgious experience. This doesn't mean that faith is logical, because it isn't. Many things in religion don't make any sense, except if you blindly accept them as the truth.

++++2. Atheist says "Nature is super duper LUCK! In other words "Chance"!", (no evidence supports this claim of "possibility").++++

haven't got the faintest clue what you are talking about here, since only a creationist would use a chance argument against evolution.

++++5. Atheists says "You have no proof of God!", (although tons of evidence are given)... ++++

i guess they meant to say that there is no scientific evidence for the existence of God.

++++6. Atheists says "Theory means FACT! And needs no faith! Because theory is another word for PURE EVIDENCE!!", (just plain delusional)...++++

i don't know about your atheist friends, but a scientist deals with both facts and theories. None of these concepts can be related to any concept in religion, since religion is not about facts or theories. I do know that most people have the wrong view of what a theory or fact is because they take it out of a textbook. The difficulty is that a fact is not always a 'fact' but scientists are trained to recognize this phenomena. Someone does an experiment today. It has a certain outcome and the result might be considered a fact. However, this fact might change later with new experiments, despite for instance that the theory didn't change. Sometimes experiments are interpreted wrongly and the facts turn out to be wrong. There is nothing strange in this since a scientist would know that nothing in science is written in gold. UNLIKE in religion were 'facts' never change. It is just clearly evident from every conversation with a religious person without proper scientific education that they do not understand the scientific language at all.


+++8. Atheists says "I dont make a claim, you do, so prove your claim, otherwise God is a myth"...(Wait a minute, u said u dont make claim, but then said "God is a myth", isnt that a claim? Now do u have a proof of yur claim?). ++++

if you think that God is a real natural phenomena and want scientists to take the existence of god seriously then it is up to you to prove the existence of god. And with proof we mean scientific proof again. Remember that science abides certain rules. If you want to play in the scientific courtyard then you have to play by these rules. Otherwise the scientific community will not take you seriously. You might think..i don't care about their opinion, but apparently you do since you want to be taken seriously.

++++9. Atheists says "Evolution contradicts God"...(When it doesnt, only 2 those who take the bible literally)... +++++

They might have said that evolution eliminates the necessity of a God. If you subsequently go for the simplest explanation then we don't need God to explain the world. Hence there probably is no god.


In Conclusion: want to debate with scientists try to understand the scientific language and I don't mean to know the terminology. I don't care if you know what RNA is or not. But science is a theoretical framework, and if you don't understand how it works, you can't enter a debate. And yes, I know how religion works, but i am not interested in debating with the religious framework, because it is too boring. Nothing but truths there. yuck

 

[Thor]

I love the way he's chosen to ignore my sentence that crushes his whole arguement, lol!!

 

[MarcAC]

Is Atheism a Religion?

Originally posted by spuriousmonkey
let's go over a few points then:
faith is not illogically in the sense that it is unnatural. The human brain is susceptible to the religous experience. An artificial stimulation of certain brain areas can induce a relgious experience. This doesn't mean that faith is logical, because it isn't. Many things in religion don't make any sense, except if you blindly accept them as the truth.

Faith is a religious experience in other words; thus we are all religious. Does it mean faith is illogical? And if so how? I am Christian and I blindly accept nothing [don't tell me anything about contradictory statements please - if you do, also submit proof of it] - man I just hate to be branded as religious - but it is a fact of life.

i guess they meant to say that there is no scientific evidence for the existence of God.

i don't know about your atheist friends, but a scientist deals with both facts and theories. None of these concepts can be related to any concept in religion, since religion is not about facts or theories. I do know that most people have the wrong view of what a theory or fact is because they take it out of a textbook. The difficulty is that a fact is not always a 'fact' but scientists are trained to recognize this phenomena. Someone does an experiment today. It has a certain outcome and the result might be considered a fact. However, this fact might change later with new experiments, despite for instance that the theory didn't change. Sometimes experiments are interpreted wrongly and the facts turn out to be wrong. There is nothing strange in this since a scientist would know that nothing in science is written in gold. UNLIKE in religion were 'facts' never change. It is just clearly evident from every conversation with a religious person without proper scientific education that they do not understand the scientific language at all.

Here we see an admission to the unreliability of science as opposed to religion [this is specially for the 'evidence-seekers' who so blindly and faithfully state that God does not exist]. I can see why many people will put their faith in something unchanging as opposed to the "sound wave of science" - keeps going back and forth while it is going forth and back.

if you think that God is a real natural phenomena and want scientists to take the existence of god seriously then it is up to you to prove the existence of god. And with proof we mean scientific proof again. Remember that science abides certain rules. If you want to play in the scientific courtyard then you have to play by these rules. Otherwise the scientific community will not take you seriously. You might think..i don't care about their opinion, but apparently you do since you want to be taken seriously.

Here we see the inherrent declaration that all religious scientists are flukes and outcasts: or have they found evidence?!?

They might have said that evolution eliminates the necessity of a God. If you subsequently go for the simplest explanation then we don't need God to explain the world. Hence there probably is no god.

When man can consistently explain every 'quantum to macro' aspect of his environment and his being then the 'necessity' of God will be elliminated. When he can create a universe. When he can create a man from quarks and neutrinos. We're not there yet. My opinion is that we never will be.

In Conclusion: want to debate with scientists try to understand the scientific language and I don't mean to know the terminology. I don't care if you know what RNA is or not. But science is a theoretical framework, and if you don't understand how it works, you can't enter a debate. And yes, I know how religion works, but i am not interested in debating with the religious framework, because it is too boring. Nothing but truths there. yuck

Ah. Again the inherrent statement of the solidity of religion in reference to science. This guy states that there are nothing but truths. Thus, all the contradictions that the atheists have posted are ridiculous? No?!? Or is he ridiculous? I say he sounds intelligent {bear in mind Collosians 2: 8 Christians} What do you say atheists? In fact these atheists here trust science... and logic.. so much he'd probably think they were a religious sect within themselves. What do you say theists?

 

[MarcAC]

Faith!

Originally posted by whatsupyall
A claim of POSSIBILITY, needs evidence, otherwise such claim of POSSIBILITY IS DELUSIONAL, an example is atheism, toothfairy, giant purple squid monkeys, etc. no conviction, to testimonies, so reasons, NOTHING....

To add. I would say you also need faith to accept that evidence. In fact I don't see how atheism can exist without some form of faith [or maybe antifaith?].

 

[spuriousmonkey]

+++Here we see an admission to the unreliability of science as opposed to religion [this is specially for the 'evidence-seekers' who so blindly and faithfully state that God does not exist]. I can see why many people will put their faith in something unchanging as opposed to the "sound wave of science" - keeps going back and forth while it is going forth and back.+++


science is unreliable in the sense that it can never claim to have the ultimate truth. But this also makes science more reliable than religion because a scientist can admit to have been wrong.

Religion claims to have the ultimate truth, a never changing truth. The claim to have the ultimate truth, however, this doesn't mean that this truth is actually THE ultimate truth. It is quite obvious that most religions are wrong since there are so many of them. Although they have some things in common they differ in many crucial ways. If one claims that religion has the ultimate truth then you basically say that only one particular religion has the ultimate truth. All other ones are wrong. Now you have a problem. How do you know your religion is the right one and all the other people in the world are wrong?

You may use my statements in any way you like, but they are no proof for the superiority of religion in any way. If just pointing out the differences.

++++When man can consistently explain every 'quantum to macro' aspect of his environment and his being then the 'necessity' of God will be elliminated. When he can create a universe. When he can create a man from quarks and neutrinos. We're not there yet. My opinion is that we never will be.++++

The fact that we can understand a natural phenomena doesn't mean that we are able to recreate it. We can understand the universe without being able to create one. We can explain man without creating one.

 

[Frencheneesz]

Whatsupall:

"THE TOP 10 OF THE ATHEISM'S ARGUMENT AGAINST GOD, ALL QUOTED FROM THE WRITINGS OF ATHEISTS HERE"

I only noticed 3 that were legitimate atheist responses. I also noticed that most of those were NOT actually quoted from any of us, unlike what you write here.

"1. Atheist says "To have faith means to believe in myths", so faith is illogic...(LOL, got brain?)"

---exactly

"2. Atheist says "Nature is super duper LUCK! In other words "Chance"!", (no evidence supports this claim of "possibility").. "

---I believe those were your words... You obviously do not understand probability, which is a happening that was not predicted because we either didn't try to, didn't have sufficient laws, or had a lack of information.

"3. Atheists says "All christians are killers and perverts! Therefore there is no God!", (Are u ok?)... "

---I don't think anyone has ever said that. Again this is you jumping to retarded conclusions.

"4. Atheists says "The word "Knowing" means establishing, controlling, and Doing! Therefore if humans have freewill, then God cant be all knowing!! Because knowing something means contolling something!!", (just plain stupid)..... "

---We have told you many many many times that we don't believe this. For you to keep ranting about this is completely idiotic.

"5. Atheists says "You have no proof of God!", (although tons of evidence are given)... "

---you have never given us any proof, only crap you consider proof like "eye witnesses" and number of believers (which you exagerate).

"6. Atheists says "Theory means FACT! And needs no faith! Because theory is another word for PURE EVIDENCE!!", (just plain delusional)... "

--- my ass, this is completely wrong. This is what we are trying to get you to NOT believe. Stop being so stupid.

"7. Atheists says "I am very smart!! And I know what Im talking about!!", (another false remark).... "

---Just because we tell you you are an idiot, it doesn't mean we are glorifying ourselves.

"8. Atheists says "I dont make a claim, you do, so prove your claim, otherwise God is a myth"...(Wait a minute, u said u dont make claim, but then said "God is a myth", isnt that a claim? Now do u have a proof of yur claim?). "

The burden of proof lies in the person who claims something exists. You cannot ask us to find proof that he DOESN'T exist, that is insane. You cannot find proof of non-existance.

"9. Atheists says "Evolution contradicts God"...(When it doesnt, only 2 those who take the bible literally)... "

You're right it doesn't, but the bible does. The bible is a book of stories and metephors. To take the bible litterally is analogous to taking greek mythology to heart.

"10. Atheist says "Prove to me Giant purple squid monkeys, fuzzy pink elephant dont exist", (TENG DENG! This is the best of the best of atheism's argument against God, a IGNORANT and illogic pointless comment, is their best argument)... "

Its called a fucking analogy. Get that into your small brain. Analogys require the same thinking as what you are trying to draw analogous relations to. We cannot prove that a "giant purple squid monkey" DOESN'T exist, and the same with god.

"THEY WILL SAY "YES, ALL THOSE MAKE SENSE""

Some of them do, but most of them are to try and make YOU specifically understand this. Most of these are your own creation from your mind. We are not saying most of the things you have up there. REALIZE THAT you are drawing stupid conclusions.

 

[Frencheneesz]

MarcAC:

"Faith is a religious experience in other words; thus we are all religious."

Religion is the belief in a god or other supernatural entities. It REQUIRES faith, but is not synonomous with it. Thus we are not all religious, but life itself requires some bit of faith in yourself.

"to the unreliability of science as opposed to religion [this is specially for the 'evidence-seekers' who so blindly and faithfully state that God does not exist]"

Science is quite reliable. Religion, on the other hand, has no proof and no way of confirming their beliefs. Religion is based on complete faith in either a religious story, or belief in god because they have faith that "it" cannot be any other way (thus they don't search for "another way")

"When man can consistently explain every 'quantum to macro' aspect of his environment and his being then the 'necessity' of God will be elliminated."

There is already no neccesity for god, but either way we DO need some sort of faith. Either we believe that we have discovered everything or close to everything that we can, and the rest of the phenomenons are caused by god, OR we can say that we have faith that science will discover everything there is to know. Science has the better argument since we have already discovered so much, there is no reason we won't discover more. With god, there is no such "on a roll" argument, because supernatural phenomenons have never been proven.

God will always be a possibility, but if we can prove him, why can't we take him as an alien being instead of a god that needs us to pray to him? Why can't we focus our energies on making human kind better, rather than focusing on the selfish desire to make a deity happy so they can go to heaven.

"In fact these atheists here trust science... and logic.. so much he'd probably think they were a religious sect within themselves."

Atheists have much LESS faith than a Theist. Atheists trust only in their own logic and senses, while a Theist must also trust his logic and senses, but then chooses to also trust in a god to explain things he doesn't want to deal with.