This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Classic Theme
Thottbot Theme
What do people think of atheists?
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
blademeld
So you admit that they were concepts fabricated by the human mind? A dragon never truly breath fire, it was just their tongue. God never existed, he was just a man fabricated concept?
I never denied that the dragons weren't fictional. I just had to reply that the anatomy could be fitted.
On the other hand, I do believe that God exists. Dragons weren't gods, if they did exist they were killed and presumably left bones.
Then they never came back from the dead, did they?
All you're doing is rambling by now...
Watch my wording.
"should" "accounting for human error"
Stop rambling and go to sleep Ivokk.
Post by
ShadowSerpent
O, so they are reptiles... I always thought they were classified as dinosaurs. In any case, they're still not lizards.
/agree, but you're just nitpicking now and you know it =p
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
301440
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
161088
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
blademeld
Why is that human error? It went perfectly along the lines of what was defined as death. Was it an error of our definition of death? A siezing of circulatory and respiratory systems. The truth of the matter is organs don't just die when a body is considered dead. Take the chicken that lived without a head for a month (or more), I even remember stories of how heads would still see (moving eyes to focus on objects) and blink after being decapitated back during the French revolution, which supposedly happened very often.
It's human error because there are only 2 possibilities otherwise:
Miracle, or the person doesn't wake up.
Irreversible damage means the person couldn't wake up afterwards, so you're either admitting supernatural influence or that the doctors diagnosed wrongly.
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
blademeld
There are only two possibilities due to the fact that one word "irreversible"
If an electric shock can revive the person, than the damage is no longer considered "irrversible"
Post by
327953
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Random0098
there is supernatural influence everywhere...
when u read the story of a child of 8, having cancer all over his body... the night he found "christ," all cancer was removed from him the following morning when he woke up.....
-______-
just some things science can't explain...
Screenshots?
Post by
Random0214
Atheist is pretty cool guy. eh godless and doesn't afraid of anything.
Post by
TheMediator
Saying someone is "dead" when they suffer irreversible damage is stupid, because there is really no such thing as irreversible damage. Eventually when we get past this stem cell bull&*!@ controversy, and become able to develop the ability to replace lost brain cells, there will be no irreversible damage. Then the soul will never leave the body, because it has to linger there forever just in case its revived then, right? What if we go dig up old bodies and revive them? Do the souls come back down from heaven to fit into the body again? And all other souls are magically trapped within their body because we invent a new technique?
At the end of the day, trying to say that there is some soul that is magically tied to your body, and then carries all your personality, with resulted from the experiences you faced in your environment written into your brain by your DNA, into heaven, and then your soul floats around with a bunch of dead guys, forever, is just stupid.
Post by
184848
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
241606
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
301440
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
90985
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
382830
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
TheMediator
Evolution and religion are both based on faith. There is no point in even attempting to argue which one is true and which one isn't, neither are truly provable. Until then, I still remain agnostic, which I see as the best way to live my life.
have you ever heard the epigram "it is better to break than to bend"? saying this is just a way to sit on the fence, so in the event that there is a god, you can argue that you should be saved. i would understand this if you truly were conflicted but sometimes it just takes a little faith.
the way i see it is a man with no faith is worse than a man with blind faith. a christian that argues "the bible says it" in this case is better than " both sides confuse me, so i guess ill just believe in both."
not meaning to insult your beliefs or anything, i just dont like when people sit idle with an issue as big as this. i think some "soul searching" is in order here so you can find what you really trust in
Its not a big issue, aside from people like you pushing your beliefs on your children, which honestly disgusts me. If you want to be Christian after examining all the facts (and ignoring them), that's fine, but don't push that %^&* on the kids. You can tell them Santa exists etc. etc., but when they're old enough, they should be told "Hey, I was lying, I have no idea if my god actually exists, its up to you to decide whether or not you believe they exist".
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.
