Category: Religion

Photo

Photo

vampiregirl2345: theoutatheist: vampiregirl2…

vampiregirl2345:

theoutatheist:

vampiregirl2345:

just-aspie:

vampiregirl2345:

theoutatheist:

vampiregirl2345:

theoutatheist:

vampiregirl2345:

theoutatheist:

vampiregirl2345:

theoutatheist:

He’s not owning everyone, he used the same “artist argument” that has been tore down 100x ~ and the argument actually goes both ways.

Is it more ridiculous to think that the universe came to be on its own(via the big bang and expansion, both of which we have evidence backing) or that an all powerful, all knowing, omnipotent god (that we cant prove) came to be on its own and then created the universe?

The way i explain it is this: everything has an opposite. Ive encountered demons before. They suck, but luckily the ones i encountered got bored quickly when we proved difficult to spook. If demons exist, theres an opposite. Good and evil. Angels. Now, angels and demons both gotta come from somewhere. Most of them are true immortal spirits (meaning they were never “alive” in the human sense). So thus heaven and hell. Now, who rules them? Thus God and the Devil. Bam.

If that works for you than great, but thats not exactly proof or evidence. Its not enough to actually claim there is a god.

First and foremost you would have to define demon, what form it took, etc. Then you would have to provide evidence that there was no other possible explanation for besides “demonic activity”. Not to mention the terms angels and demons may be tied to theology, but calling something those terms does not make the “thing” theological.

So, even if demons existed that does not mean angels do, but lets go with this claim that everything NEEDS an opposite.

If angels and demons did exist they dont necessarily have to come from a god, just like humans dont. You would have the same difficulty proving a god created angels and demons as you would a god created humans. Proof of angels and demons would not prove a heaven and hell.

“Most of them are true immortal spirits”- how do you know this? Where does this statement come from? Whats the evidence of that?

Again- if this is just your personal thoughts that your sharing thats great(and im sorry for picking at it), but if youre trying to say that this is why a ‘god does exist’ then im here to tell you its extremely flawed.

*note I responded because it seemed like you were trying to make a point of it since OP was about “owning every atheist~ again Im sorry if that wasnt your intention*

Most of the time, people cant exactly “describe” the spirits that are bothering them. But i have seen pretty odd ones. My family has also, on the opposite end, experienced whats known as a guarian angel. So both exist, as an opposite to what the other represents. Demons are bringers of chaos, angels are bringers of peace. But unlike the omnipotent being that is God, they are supposedly not above making mistakes (the so-called fallen angels are a good example). Heaven and hell without a king, or at least someone to keep order, would be anarchy.

So what youre saying is that you dont have any evidence at all. That your way of explaining it to yourself is 100% based on unproven personal experience and further connections that you havent explained how you know and therefore does not apply to anyone but you?

Which is fine, you have the freedom of thought and belief. If that makes sense to you, thats wonderful… For you.

No one else. Your explaination applys to no one else.

Theres plenty of stories like mine on opposite ends of it. Ill post an example of a true miracle.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/miracle-baby-thrown-from-car-survives-horrific-crash-unscathed/

This baby should have DIED but didnt. Even a grown adult wouldnt normally survive being thrown 35 feet in a wreck like that, but an 8mo baby survived with only a few relatively minor injuries (cuts and bruises).

That is not proof or angels or a god.

All youve proven is that in EXTREMELY rare cases a baby can survive a horrific crash like that.

“Normally” being the key word. Its not the “norm” but that doesnt mean its supernatural.

I dont think you quite understand what evidence is.

As for other people having stories like yours; like yours, their stories are not backed by evidence. If you know of one that is, please share it.

Theres about a hundred stories of miracles available on the internet. But linking them all to prove a point is outright ridiculous. Goodbye.

@theoutatheist The ‘evidence’ you want cannot be provided yet, but that doesn’t mean that it doesn’t exist. It used to be believed that evil spirits caused sickness before we understood the science behind diseases, that doesn’t mean that it wasn’t the cause all along. Sometimes unexplainable things happen that are beyond science’s ability to explain.

We cannot prove to you the existence of a God, but you cannot disprove the existence of God either. Where is your proof that He doesn’t exist?

There isn’t anything that is currently at the disposal of modern day science that can prove or disprove the existence of God. Plus, it is outside the realm of science. Science is about understanding the workings of the natural world around us. That is the great misnomer, that if science doesn’t prove it, it doesn’t exist. There are plenty of things that science doesn’t cover and even more that it doesn’t try to. Your undying belief in science is more fallible than someone’s personal experience. Science is, as a matter of fact, a collection of personal experiences that can be repeated.

But there is always a margin of error. Sometimes science doesn’t explain what happened. People are in comas that shouldn’t be. People wake up from comas that shouldn’t. People live who should die and die that should live. When you can explain everything that is currently unexplainable in the universe (past and present), then you can prove that God does or doesn’t exist. Until then neither of us can say one way or another. Your disbelief in God is just as founded as my belief in God.

@theoutatheist

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/10/15/city-sodom-discovered-archeological-find-gives-insight-into-story-destruction.html

This is quite possibly one of the most concrete examples of bible stories come to life. Hows that? Scientists tried and failed repeatedly to explain why both cities were destroyed with no warning. Theyre too far apart for one city, should a building catch fire, to destroy the other. Theyre too far from the nearest volcano to catch fire from that. Etc. More to the point is the pattern and type of destruction. As if both cities just…combusted suddenly. Kaboom. Leveled. No physical evidence to explain why. Sodom and gamorrah are just one bit of proof that the bible is a history text, not myth. Chew on that.

The bible has multiple authors, multiple translations, and multiple edits. Even if one story was true in it that would not make it a historical text.

However, a lack of explaination does not mean the bible is correct.

You’d need evidence confirming that it was what the bible said happened. And even then, again, that proves one story in the bible.

Even if a god exists, I can say with certainty that the bible is not 100% accurate. Yes, certainty, why? Because it contradicts itself, its different translations contradict eachother, and the different edits ESPECIALLY contradict eachother. It proves that at the very least(though likely more) its inaccurate. The bible itself shows its inaccuracy.

You have not provided evidence that a god exists, just that there are things we havent explained yet.

Again, I support your right to believe, but dont tell other people to or talk about it like its fact. Its not fact. Its a belief based on your personal opinions and understandings.

Theres a reason no one listens to atheists and this is it. Throwing concrete evidence back in my face in the name of “science”. Science isnt absolute. Literally everything is a theory thats tested and tested again. Sometimes results contradict each other. And guess what? Science only exists for the concrete. But theres so much thats abstract. Just because you cant see something, doesnt mean it isnt real. Especially if theres evidence. You cant see air but no one is suffocating. We arent even close to exiting our little corner of the galaxy but that doesnt mean there isnt intelligent life on other planets. You cant claim something as not real just because we havent invented a way of “proving” it.

You have not provided any evidence and certainly not “concrete evidence”.

Gas is 100% observable (air). You can see it move leaves. You can see vapor. You can see it when its cold. You can feel it. And thats without even getting into a molecular level.

Unlike a god that you have NOT provided evidence for. Maybe you need a better understanding of what evidence is.

And for the record, I never once said a god doesnt exist. I never said it was an impossibility. If you go through every single response yoy will not see “god isnt real”, because it was never said. I said that its not a fact and that your “explaination” and “examples” did not make it fact. You are the one making a claim here, not me. The thing about making a claim, is you have to back it up with real evidence(yes, proof) before it can be a fact.

Unlike air, which we have real evidence for, your belief in a god is not a fact. Its a belief and nothing more.

Im sorry if that upsets you, but its the truth.

We get complaints. We also ignore them.

We get complaints. We also ignore them.

vampiregirl2345: theoutatheist: He’s not own…

vampiregirl2345:

theoutatheist:

He’s not owning everyone, he used the same “artist argument” that has been tore down 100x ~ and the argument actually goes both ways.

Is it more ridiculous to think that the universe came to be on its own(via the big bang and expansion, both of which we have evidence backing) or that an all powerful, all knowing, omnipotent god (that we cant prove) came to be on its own and then created the universe?

The way i explain it is this: everything has an opposite. Ive encountered demons before. They suck, but luckily the ones i encountered got bored quickly when we proved difficult to spook. If demons exist, theres an opposite. Good and evil. Angels. Now, angels and demons both gotta come from somewhere. Most of them are true immortal spirits (meaning they were never “alive” in the human sense). So thus heaven and hell. Now, who rules them? Thus God and the Devil. Bam.

If that works for you than great, but thats not exactly proof or evidence. Its not enough to actually claim there is a god.

First and foremost you would have to define demon, what form it took, etc. Then you would have to provide evidence that there was no other possible explanation for besides “demonic activity”. Not to mention the terms angels and demons may be tied to theology, but calling something those terms does not make the “thing” theological.

So, even if demons existed that does not mean angels do, but lets go with this claim that everything NEEDS an opposite.

If angels and demons did exist they dont necessarily have to come from a god, just like humans dont. You would have the same difficulty proving a god created angels and demons as you would a god created humans. Proof of angels and demons would not prove a heaven and hell.

“Most of them are true immortal spirits”- how do you know this? Where does this statement come from? Whats the evidence of that?

Again- if this is just your personal thoughts that your sharing thats great(and im sorry for picking at it), but if youre trying to say that this is why a ‘god does exist’ then im here to tell you its extremely flawed.

*note I responded because it seemed like you were trying to make a point of it since OP was about “owning every atheist~ again Im sorry if that wasnt your intention*

Reminder*****

slipperyslopesblog:

sophisticatesophia:

theoutatheist:

You don’t need religion to have morals.
You don’t need a deity to have strength.
You don’t need a church to be charitable.
You don’t need theistic faith to make it through the day.

You are NOT broken.

You are whole.

You are enough.
 

*note if one of the things above help you, that’s wonderful this is a reminder that it isn’t a necessity.*

Just a short response to your third point. You don’t need a church but you do need a faith. 

(According to Barna Research Group 2007 updated 2012) Both “No-Faith” and “Active Faith” groups were equally “likely to think of themselves as good citizens, as placing their family first, as being loyal and reliable individuals, as preferring to be in control, and as being leaders,” and they reported comparable personal difficulties including serious debt and addiction. However, additional results show that there are some significant differences:

  • “No-Faith” individuals are less likely than active-faith Americans to be registered to vote (78% versus 89%)
  • They are less likely than active-faith Americans to describe themselves as “active in the community” (41% versus 68%)
  • They are less likely than active-faith Americans to personally help or serve a homeless or poor person (41% versus 61%).
  • They are less likely than active-faith Americans to volunteer to help a non-church-related non-profit (20% versus 30%)
  • The typical no-faith American donated just $200 to charitable causes in 2006, more than seven times less than the amount contributed by the typical active-faith adult ($1500).
  • Even subtracting church-based giving, active-faith adults donated twice as many dollars to charitable causes last year than atheists and agnostics.
  • 22% of “no-faith” adults failed to contribute any personal funds to charitable causes in 2006, compared to only 7% of active-faith adults.
  • Atheists and agnostics were more likely to be focused on acquiring wealth than Christians (10% versus 2%)
  • No-Faith adults embrace the description or perception of being “at peace,” less than Christians (67% versus 90%)
  • Atheists and agnostics are more likely to feel stressed out (37% versus 26%).

Many of these statistics seem to indicate that, despite claims to the contrary, atheism on the whole does in fact tend to be less family oriented, less involved in the community and civics, and less compassionate and generous. As such, they lend some credibility to the notion that at least some kinds of morality or magnanimity require a foundation in Faith.

Also interesting is the fact that since only 1/5 of the “No-Faith” group are unequivocal in their rejection of the existence of God and adopting the label “Atheist,” the vast majority harbor doubts about their rejection of faith.

Also, Christian charity far surpasses giving of any other sector in the United States. Think about all of the Christian Hospitals, orphanages, adoption agencies, women’s centers, community centers, international relief, disaster relief, Christian Schools, after school programs, scholarships, colleges and Universities. Lets not forget advances in medicine, the arts, music, paintings, sculpture, architecture and the sciences,

I am sure there are some very good atheist hospitals and atheist adoption agencies, some great atheist founded colleges and tons of atheistic disaster relief organizations, but I have never heard of them.

Bottom line is that you can paint Christians in any color you want but if you scratch the surface, you will find caring, loving, generous people. These are not the monsters you wish they were. The truth is we love all of mankind and pray that all come to a fully knowledge of God. In love.    

Just a note. I am agnostic, but have a healthy respect for Christian people. Most athiests I know are just shits of another religion, who have as much of an agenda as the guys who knock on my door trying to convince me of their way. My note to atheists: I don’t care if you worship a “not-god”, keep your fucking bullshit, and often communistic ideology to yourself.

I dont know how I missed this one, but your “note to atheists” only shows that your understanding of atheism is limited to stereotypes.

(“I dont care if you worship a not-god” doesnt even make sense- I got from your previous statements that you’re trying to say they want to convert individuals to their ideals because their ideals are better, but that phrase alone didnt really do your post any justice.)

My question is how many atheists do you know?

Because I know hundreds and Ive met only a handful who have been truly arrogant and forceful about their atheism.

Not saying it doesnt happen, because it certainly does, but that doesnt make atheism itself a title of an arrogant and forceful atheist. The loudest and most offensive are often given the most attention. So the few gets mistaken for the whole. Thats one way stereotypes come about in the first place.

Most atheists I know arent even anti-theists. While many have no problem discussing issues brought up in religion, most still support freedom of belief and religion(despite not agreeing).

I personally have never met an atheist whose atheism was tied to communism. Again, Im not saying it cant happen, but its not a majority…

Along with that the op was not an attack on christians. In fact, christians were never mentioned. It was a positive post for individuals who are secular (like yourself), whether that be atheist, agnositc, irreligious, or any other stance. So, I dont really get where this whole “atheist vs. Christian” attitude came from(unless it was inspired by the reblog, whom Ive previously replied to).

Let us know if you’ve heard this before.

Let us know if you’ve heard this before.

Photo

Photo

Christian Wife Swappers Preach The Word Of God…

Christian Wife Swappers Preach The Word Of God Through Swinging:

We’ll leave the commenting up to our followers.

Don’t all laugh at once.

Don’t all laugh at once.

TV evangelist: Trump is a born again Christian…

TV evangelist: Trump is a born again Christian but was told to keep it secret:

The poor individuals who send money to these grifters, see their own stupidity reflected in Trump.