digg

Join DiggAbout
See the original image at arch.kimag.es

ATHEISTS

arch.kimag.es — Winning since 33 AD

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • RoryQ, on 04/18/2008, -18/+34Possibly my favourite quote, when arguing with religious people.
    • covertress, on 04/18/2008, -3/+25Mine too. Unfortunately, the person who created this poster spelled Atheists incorrectly. ('I' before 'E' except after 'C' or when sounded like 'A' in neighbour or weigh...)
      • Sucka27, on 04/18/2008, -2/+8What about in "weird" situations?
      • Fatcheeseguy, on 04/18/2008, -1/+6There is no "science" in that.
      • mjfitzge, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1my favorite band is "foreigner".
      • ElAssoWipo, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3Bleh, bury me, I'm at wit's end it seems.
      • fatTJ, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1And On Weekends and Holidays and Even in May
    • ani625, on 04/18/2008, -5/+12Except that Epicurus lived in 341 - 270 BC.
      • moletimer, on 04/18/2008, -4/+11That's not what the date is about. 33 AD is the year when Christianity was founded. Get it now?
        • TritonX, on 04/18/2008, -5/+3Even that I think is not historically true. Isn't it a Roman Emperor, that much latter established it as a religion?
          • Ndiggnation, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1If you go by what the Catholics say, it was Peter himself I believe, that established the official church of Christianity.
        • Rotzooi, on 04/18/2008, -11/+10No, it's when the fictional character of Jesus died.
          • fad3d, on 04/18/2008, -6/+1you're obviously an ignorant tool because almost every intellectual agrees that Jesus was a historical figure.
          • d03boy, on 04/18/2008, -4/+1Yes, Jesus died 33 years after..... his death... what?
      • jeremyduffy, on 04/18/2008, -12/+3Thank you Captain History!
        -From the who-the-hell-cares-if-the-picture-matches-the-timeframe committee
    • theberlindoctor, on 04/18/2008, -5/+12I always liked "2 hands working does more than a million hands praying"
    • 5urr3al5am, on 04/18/2008, -1/+6Why would an atheist even reference Christ death and resurrection? Good try though.. oh by the way .. you spelled Atheist wrong.. dumb ass
      • djholybolt, on 04/18/2008, -2/+2i would reference Christ's death and resurrection as a sham.. Athiest ftw!
    • ElAssoWipo, on 04/18/2008, -2/+4Here's mine:

      "Show me."
    • shinythingy, on 04/18/2008, -7/+3It is quite sad that you actually argue about religion. Both on your part and those argusing with you. How about just letting ***** believe in what they want without trying to sound so high and mighty?
      • ElAssoWipo, on 04/18/2008, -2/+5An argument involves two parties.

        An argument about religion involves a very dumb one.
        • 5urr3al5am, on 04/18/2008, -6/+1yes, in this case the Athiests /sp
        • ElAssoWipo, on 04/18/2008, -1/+6Atheists will be right until you can demonstrate the existence of God.
      • d03boy, on 04/18/2008, -5/+2The only true religion is agnosticism.
    • wafla, on 04/18/2008, -3/+7The problematic one is "able but not willing = malevolent."

      I am not a nutty religious person (as far as I know), but that part of the statement does not make sense to religious people. It's not God's design to run around forcing everybody to share their crayons -- being good is up to us.

      Christians, at least, see a lot of value in being able to choose for themselves. "Able to rise, free to fall," is the crux of the religion.
      • ElAssoWipo, on 04/18/2008, -2/+6Then what is the purpose of Hell?

        • djholybolt, on 04/18/2008, -3/+7to scare kids into being good. This only lasts until the point the kid's now older and realizes hell and religion are a sham.
          • ElAssoWipo, on 04/18/2008, -1/+6Can't believe you were dugg down.
      • blindmonkey, on 04/18/2008, -0/+4Actually, the malevolent argument is more geared towards the "why do bad things happen to good people" question. God is malevolent because he lets children in Africa starve. God is malevolent because he lets murderers escape. God is malevolent because the allows innocent people in jail or on death row.
        Also, what about insane people? People who kill people because they don't know any better?
        And as another point, do those people go to hell? Do the people that indirectly cause harm go to hell?
        There are too many gray areas for the black and white world of religion/God to exist as it (is believed) does.
        • wafla, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Then we're both quoting from the same book... because in "Why do bad things happen to good people", Kushner's whole point is that "God gives us room to be human." Based on Kushner there's no other credible way to explain the pain and suffering in the universe. We get the bad with the good, and the price of free will is the occasional tragedy. God doesn't let kids in Africa starve, Africans do (and so do folks like us, since it's in our power to ameliorate the suffering).

          As for hell -- there are too many sects and conflicting visions of hell, all of them conflict wildly. For the longest time hell was considered green, since the world is green and so hellishly unfair and uncomfortable. Going back to Milton, hell is the absence of God; going back to Heinlein, hell is fun. I have no clue what the right answer is... I'm not actually very religious.
          • Zipper114, on 04/18/2008, -0/+4"God doesn't let kids in Africa starve, Africans do"

            In other words you're saying God stands by and let's innocent children suffer, even though He could stop it? You're just proving Epicurus' point. The children aren't starving because of their own freewill - In this example, for all practical purposes, a newborn has no free will. If God is both omnipotent and good, then He must stop the suffering of the starving children. Don't you see the circular logic you've adopted?
      • Zipper114, on 04/18/2008, -0/+4If God is omnipotent and can do anything and if God is good, then why do babies sometimes starve to death? The only logical conclusions are that
        a) God is not omnipotent, and therefore isn't God.
        b) God is not good.
        c) Our understanding of what is good is radically different from God's, in which case it is impossible for us to know when our actions are just and good.
        d) There is no God.

        Wafla, you are arguing basically that God is not good because He chooses to allow babies to starve to death. A baby doesn't starve to death because of a choice it makes, nor does it do so as some form of just retribution. In this sense, babies don't have free will. A starving baby suffers for no just reason. Any human understanding of what is good would necessitate that any being that could stop needless suffering by the innocent (as an omnipotent being could do by definition) must stop the suffering. But still we have starving babies.

        What other conclusion is there?
    • toekneebullard, on 04/18/2008, -4/+2By admitting evil you're admitting good. By admitting a difference you're admitting a sense of morality. By admitting morality you're admitting an ultimate right and wrong.

      That quote just lays the groundwork of God.
      • Zipper114, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1Um, no. Morality can exist only within the realm of human judgment. Morality and ethics can exist on even the individual level. No higher or absolute authority is necessary to ascribe a moral code to an action.
        Go take freshman intro to philosophy.
  • rabidmonkey1, on 04/18/2008, -20/+29Great, I'm going to be seen as the religious nut of Digg =/ I'm not, it's just that I feel there is a fundamental mistrust and misunderstanding between Atheists and (for lack of a better term) Theists, and I think I'd like to help amend that. With that said, I'd like for you to watch this video which features my favorite apologist, Ravi Zacharias, dealing with the question of evil and God, and seems to be to be the perfect response to this vein of thought. Thanks for your time and mannered debate!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9b0PJDDof4
    • joshhero123, on 04/18/2008, -6/+17Good to see people sharing their point of view in a mature way.
      • derek20cali, on 04/18/2008, -2/+7Except the idiots that dugg him down. And the idiots taunting him below.
        • Ndiggnation, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2Mannered debate, this is Digg. One sure way to start a fire is start a religious debate on here. :)
      • Zlorp, on 04/18/2008, -3/+3theres nothing "mature" about treating fantasy as srs business. this is the message we try to spread. one day we hope that all of man kind can live their lives according to what they observe rather than what they wish was true
        • jjensenii, on 04/18/2008, -3/+0I hope one day all of humanity can live their lives honestly instead of having a religion or atheism shoved down their throats.
    • Rotzooi, on 04/18/2008, -21/+4Hahaha! Retarded! And so is god!!!11eleven
    • Zlorp, on 04/18/2008, -17/+12the area of mistrust stems from the fact that you want us to take your fantasy seriously yet we see no valid reason to do so.

      let me ask you something. Would you take me seriously if i told you that Peter Pan was the king of the universe and that it must be true because some book says so?

      yeah, thats what i thought.

      Understand?
      • pianomahnn, on 04/18/2008, -4/+8Doubtful that he will.
      • djholybolt, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3Peter Pan is my king, my savior. He died for my sins. And flew to neverland waiting for me there.
      • jjensenii, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2I really do wish more people thought of it like that. It really is quite reasonable. "I don't see any reason to believe it, so I won't," says the nonbeliever. "I do see reason to believe it, so I will," says the believer. And they agree to do their level best to leave each other alone, just in case they are wrong.
        • Zlorp, on 04/18/2008, -0/+6i promise you that if i didnt constantly have to hear about religion, or see people trying to slyly force it on the rest of us (ID? no gay marriage?) that i would have nothing to say about it.

          also theres a difference between reason and legit reason. there is no legit reason for religious belief, because if there were, someone might actually have one.

          anyone can believe whatever they want, thats fine. but if they arent going to keep it to themselves, you better believe they're going to hear about it.
          • jjensenii, on 04/18/2008, -2/+1I think the legitimate/illegitimate comes down to philosophy. In which case there is no simple answer. If you think skepticism should be the rule and belief the exception, what you consider to be a legit reason will be different than if you think that doubt and belief both require justification.
          • Zlorp, on 04/18/2008, -1/+4there is no simple answer only because someone asserts their belief. of course you cant say for certain once its brought into the picture, but thats my entire point! there is no legitimate reason to even bring it into the picture. Religion is simply tradition, thats all it is, people feel comfortable believing in it because everyone else does.

            i only have to "doubt" these beliefs because they are asserted to begin with, my only justification for "doubting" is that there is no legitimate logical justification for believing! of all the trillion reasons religious types give for why one should believe in God, NOT ONE is based in reality.

            you cant just assert something and then tell everyone who doesnt believe you that they too have to have faith to doubt, it doesnt work that way.

            your problem here is thinking religion and non-religion exist on equal ground, they do not.
      • toekneebullard, on 04/18/2008, -2/+3If Peter Pan being the king of the universe could be found through philosophically analyzing our world...then yeah, I just might.
        • Zlorp, on 04/19/2008, -0/+3philosophically analyzing our world doesn't exactly point to religion. religion points to philosophy however in order to trick people like you into thinking they are credible.

          its tradition is embedded in our society for sure, but that says nothing of its credibility, merely the gullibility of the human race. think of all the ***** humans have been fed and accepted throughout history. you really think religion couldnt be one of those?

          please.
      • rabidmonkey1, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1Thanks for the comment, Zlorp. I'd like to take some time to respond.

        Let me start off by saying that Religion in general is too broad a term for me. I don't believe in the pantheon of gods that are available to the world today, nor the majority of superstitions that are practiced. In this area, I believe Dawkins to be largely correct.

        It's funny that you mention Peter Pan in your statement. I think that Christians in general try to "prove" God to people by reciting talking points and scripture and the like; but what if you don't even believe the bible to be true? You could just as easily go into a bookstore and purchase Harry Potter and make him into a personal idol. So why the hangup on the Bible?

        I try not to prove God because I know I can't prove the existence of God to anyone. I can act in a way that may make someone curious about what I believe; indeed, I try to demonstrate God's love for people through my actions so that they'd be drawn to him, but ultimately I can never "prove" God to anyone. Luckily, I know I don't have to either. If I believe that God is really God, than God is perfectly capable of proving himself to people, without my involvement whatsoever. And I believe that He does do this. In the Bible and in theology, this is often called the Calling, sometimes the Irresistible Calling; once you hear it, it literally being the voice of God (which if not [usually] an audible voice), you cannot ignore it.

        You have to ask yourself a few questions about life and those are what is your origin, meaning, morality, and destiny? Whatever world view you choose, it has to be able to consistently and holistically answer those questions. However, the most common reason for at least mentally dispelling God is because, if there is a God, than there is a creator and a ruler and a law giver, and instinctively we know that we are rule breakers and are therefore under the creators wrath and judgment. If I can ignore the creator, I am free to pursue my own carnal interests, at least temporarily avoiding the consequences.

        The anti-God movement is nothing new. It goes back a long time, and in more recent memory, Descartes said back in the 1600's that by the 1700's God would no longer be necessary; that man had transcended the need for God. Surprisingly, after he died, his house was turned into a Bible Printing house. I think God has a sense of humor, and I always try to remember that he is more powerful than we often give him credit for.

        If you can't answer your life's origin, meaning, morality, and destiny, then maybe you should ask yourself what exactly you are living for and why it even matters.
    • alanr19, on 04/18/2008, -11/+3Hey rabidmonkey1 why don't you go crying to your "god" godboy fag.
    • thallium205, on 04/18/2008, -8/+9Ravi Zacharias -> owning atheists and philosophers since 1946
      • itsthebrod, on 04/18/2008, -7/+4That must be why he's such a big name and so popular, right?

        Science -> Owning the Bible since its inception
    • NoCt1, on 04/18/2008, -7/+1Funny thing is people get so bent out of shape about this quote.. He said this in like 300bc.. Wasnt christianity founded in 200ad or something.. 300 or 400 ad.. Somewhere in that time period.. he wasnt referring to christianitys god but just in general to anyone you call a god.. whether it be at the time a man who claimed it because many did.. or say Zeus from the Mythology and beliefs of that time period..
      • Zlorp, on 04/19/2008, -0/+4people have been intelligent for centuries, it just never caught on sadly.
    • chadlewis76, on 04/19/2008, -0/+1How is that response perfect? He doesn't even finish his own thoughts. He starts like three different ideas, each time abruptly ending one and moving on to the next. That bit in the beginning for example - he started to talk about the *question* falling apart because it posits the existence of good. Nice idea, but completely inaccurate. Religion claims the existence of an absolute good and evil. The problem of evil simply illustrates how flawed this type of thought is.
    • kaplanfx, on 04/20/2008, -0/+2he said "you must assume" like 50 times. That instantly makes me skeptical of anyone. particularly the statement "If you assume there is moral law, you must assume there is a moral law giver", yet he provided no evidence. That's a whole lot of assumptions that would have to be right in order for anything he says to be correct.
      • macp, on 04/20/2008, -0/+1I think he's going along the lines that we have laws today written by people to direct social behaviour of what is acceptable and not acceptable based on our understanding of morality. I don't think you require evidence to make that statement. So he's just suggesting "IF" you believe there is a moral law, which must exist if you're going to label things as "good" and "evil", then there's must be someone that defines that law. Just like how we define our laws regarding murder, stealing, speeding, bribery, extortion etc.
        • kaplanfx, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1He makes the leap to the assumption that there must be a moral law giver, implying some deity. It's entirely possible that moral law develops in any number of ways, the fact that it exists doesn't imply any particular method for it to come about.
  • incendiarylvr, on 04/18/2008, -20/+13I would love a framed copy of this for my home. Put right in the entry way.
  • jeremyduffy, on 04/18/2008, -15/+5Oddly, I had nearly this same conversation earlier today. Contradictions are a bitch aren't they :)
  • smacksaw, on 04/18/2008, -19/+9If we could understand God's infinite wisdom, we'd be gods as well. Either that, or in on the joke.
    • e36wheelman, on 04/18/2008, -6/+3Worst argument ever...

      Please tell me that was sarcasm.
    • CarStan, on 04/18/2008, -2/+3Life's a laugh and death's the joke, it's true
      • LeggoMyEgo, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1Just remember that the last laugh is on you.
    • jeffinfremont, on 04/18/2008, -4/+2The problem is that, all this time, we've been pondering the wrong question. We should stop asking if we belive in god. We need to start asking if god believes in us.
    • weizbox, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3if you can't understand it, why would you think it's there?
  • NaziHatinChimp, on 04/18/2008, -35/+105Dude I am so sick and ***** tired or people stuffing their religion or lack of down everyone's throat. Atheists have become what a lot of them detested about religion in the first place; elitist, judgmental assholes. If you want to be against organized religion and cockamamie ideas like the world is 5,000 years old I am all for it. Just stop acting like your better than everyone else and like you know something that no one else does. You don't know everything mother *****, for all you know we are just a terd waiting to be flushed. Quit it with the elitism.
    • leodavinci, on 04/18/2008, -10/+16hah, I like you. Let's be friends :P
    • Scape89, on 04/18/2008, -6/+9Amen to that.
    • Chakat, on 04/18/2008, -10/+18I agree. I've honestly found that I can have more rational discussions with fairly fundamentalist christians, whose points I almost completely disagree with, than with atheists. Atheists have proven that you don't need to have religion to be a complete *****.
      • itsthebrod, on 04/18/2008, -7/+5Atheists have the right to be a tad bit assholish since they've had to put up with religious ***** interfering negatively with their own lives since, oh, the beginning of religion. Name any topic. I'm sure you can find a way religious nutjobs have ***** it up for the rest of us.
    • dafragsta, on 04/18/2008, -15/+8You are making all that ***** up just to satisfy the anxiety you have toward people who do not want to lord anything over you, but would rather the truth came out and that we get over it together. Then you can be truly free to live your life, without the false hope of a big reward. This IS the reward, if you chose to make it that way.

      There is no elitism. I'm agnostic, not atheist, but the reasoning is that there is no way of knowing for sure, a credit to people of faith, but there is lots of contradictory doctrine and beliefs that creates conflict among people all over the world, maybe not directly in the name of religion, but because theocracy is so firmly ingrained in our way of life, it does become very divisive.

      I do not hate religious people. I hate religion. It's organized in such a way to create false self righteousness in many flavors that prevent mankind from moving forward in science, health, technology, and otherwise. That is my motive. It's not to be elite.
      • cwmather, on 04/18/2008, -6/+0To all agnostics I say if you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything.
        • dafragsta, on 04/18/2008, -1/+4I didn't fall for Christianity. I say you stand for ***** kicker lyrics that you didn't come up with.
        • xedd, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1cwmather,

          Dude. That's not very original.
        • exomni, on 04/19/2008, -0/+2Like falling for unwarranted belief one way or another on the topic of God's existence?
      • Spartycus, on 04/18/2008, -0/+4His point was that evangelism and elitism are disrespectful and rude, no matter if you are trying to convert someone to your religion or non-religion.
        Faith, by its very nature requires dramatic leap and suspension of reason as the sole way we perceive the world. It can never be proven or disproven to another who does not share the same assumptions. I have no problem with deeply religious ppl, or atheists who do not evangelize.
        • dafragsta, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2I think we should all be moving toward one unified answer to everything. Enough with the Gods. Our reason for being here is to have a good time and to find that answer.
    • RandomH3r0, on 04/18/2008, -15/+12It's hard not to come off as better or elitist when the people you are against believe in an invisible man in the sky.
      • youthinkicare, on 04/18/2008, -6/+1it's this ***** attitude that will keep people from gravitating towards atheism. keep is up ***** for brains.
        • djholybolt, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3but it's that ***** remark that makes you just as bad
      • Abaddon1125, on 04/18/2008, -1/+7Agreed, and the people digging you down are doing so simply because they don't want to hear the truth. It's like the Digg version of covering your ears and going "LALALALA, I can't hear you!"
    • bradlkm, on 04/18/2008, -4/+6Perfectly said. . .
    • LingNoi, on 04/18/2008, -3/+6I've noticed assholism on both sides of the "debate"...
    • averageidiot, on 04/18/2008, -5/+5summed up brilliantly. if you have nothing to talk about other than religion or non-religion all the time, stuffing your beliefs in other peoples faces to somehow show that your better. please realize that you are not, and shut the ***** up.
    • CompACE, on 04/18/2008, -5/+3Agreed Wholeheartedly.
    • jonmlm, on 04/18/2008, -10/+6please take your own advice
      • exomni, on 04/18/2008, -1/+5I can't believe this is being dugg down. Dugg for truth, that was the most hypocritical comment I've seen in a long time. Calling people "*****" and "elitists" and "judgemental assholes" just because they don't act exactly as he thinks they should.
    • robocop1, on 04/18/2008, -10/+5I agree, It's just as ***** annoying! Quit shoving this atheist ***** down everyone's throat.
    • longbow486, on 04/18/2008, -5/+4its turd
    • kofuni, on 04/18/2008, -4/+4It wasn't until religion became a major issue in politics that I and many other non-believers started speaking out. Do you consider a raving lunatic talking to himself to be one of your equals? Probably not, its kinda similar to why we consider those that believe in imaginary gods to be inferior. We can't help but hide this feeling even if it is counterproductive to express them..
      • cababika799, on 04/18/2008, -2/+2In spite of what you've been told, it's ony recently that the lack of god has become a major part of politics. Your problem is that you are programed to think that you must see something for it to be real.
        The whole theory of gravity on large scales didn't work out, so you made up dark matter. A substance that you can't directly see, you only see it's effect on the worl we live in. Yet you see, on a daily basis, the effects of our creator on the same world and say that he must be imaginary since he won't come down and shake hands with you.
        It's just my imaginary god or yours buddy.
    • vuzman, on 04/18/2008, -3/+3But, but, it's good to be part of the elite! Elite means good! Jon Stewart says so.
    • exomni, on 04/18/2008, -4/+4You do realize you just stuffed your own opinion down everyone else's throat far more than the silly little image that was submitted did, right? Not that there's anything wrong with that: speaking your opinion, even rudely, shouldn't offend anyone.
  • paintpro, on 04/18/2008, -5/+44Atheists
    Misspelling "ATHIESTS" since 33 A.D.
    (Kudos to the poster for not blindly repeating the mistake.)
    • thechr0nic, on 04/18/2008, -14/+6too bad you were just a bit over 17 hours too late, to be the 'first' digger to notice. better late then never I guess.
      I guess we can safely assume the spelling police have won a huge victory today.
      • PabloMac, on 04/18/2008, -1/+4Better late THAN never. The grammer pollice are hear, to.
        • thechr0nic, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1heh, another perfect example of missing the point.

          I am an atheist, and found the picture very funny and pretty on target.

          But it gets annoying when the grammar and spelling police show up and nitpick idiotic details and miss the point altogether. Because im pretty sure if I went through all of your posts, you will have used perfect grammar, spelled every word right and used proper punctuation. But, im not nearly that ***** lame.
          • PabloMac, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2Of course I got your point, and even gathered that you subscribe to the atheism faith. I was just wise-cracking on your minor error. Some people appreciate clear and concise communication, and some don't. And some resort to excuse-making and name-calling.
    • skyshock1, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2Nothing a little Photoshop can't fix - http://www.lykachamp.com/Atheists.jpg
  • Fatcheeseguy, on 04/18/2008, -12/+51"i got kicked out of barnes and noble once for moving all the bibles into the fiction section"
    Oh Bash..
  • BXRWXR, on 04/18/2008, -3/+12ILLITERTAES
  • kipmartin, on 04/18/2008, -12/+9stupid.
  • alanr19, on 04/18/2008, -9/+13Well if he's so smart then how come he's dead?

    .
  • yohnstoppable, on 04/18/2008, -7/+30"Agnostics are Atheists without balls" - Stephen Colbert
    • orxor, on 04/18/2008, -3/+4No they're not. You can be an agnostic theist.
      • fultron89, on 04/18/2008, -3/+5no, agnostics are basically people who have no spine and cant make their own decisions. being an agnostic theist says that "I'm not sure if I believe I believe in a God."
        • spudmonkey, on 04/18/2008, -2/+4Words have meanings, please look this one up, cuz you be wrong.
        • Nanobe, on 04/18/2008, -1/+5If you're an atheist, then you're either a gnostic atheist (you claim certainty that there is no god) or an agnostic atheist (you don't believe in a god, but don't claim certainty).

          If you're a theist, then you're either a gnostic theist (you claim certainty that there is a god) or an agnostic theist (you believe in a god, but don't claim certainty).
          • fultron89, on 04/19/2008, -1/+1Riiight, so what you're saying is that there's more than one level of not knowing what you stand for. That's comforting.
    • yohnstoppable, on 04/18/2008, -5/+4Why are you idiots taking my quote seriously? It was a joke from Colbert's book. If I could bury you tards off the internet completely I would
      • d03boy, on 04/18/2008, -7/+2I don't think Colbert is necessarily correct... most atheists aren't willing to admit that there is chance of God existing whereas agnostics realize the atheists are idiots.
  • FecalHurler, on 04/18/2008, -11/+8Someone should forward this to Ben Stein.
    • cababika799, on 04/18/2008, -2/+2Have you read is academic credentials? The guy is smarter than anyone on this thread will ever be. I'm sure he's aware of it.
  • JimSwarthow, on 04/18/2008, -11/+11funny, they misspelled "whining"
  • jeffinfremont, on 04/18/2008, -5/+22 Now it is such a bizarrely improbable coincidence that anything so mind-bogglingly useful could have evolved purely by chance that some thinkers have chosen to see it as a final and clinching proof of the non-existence of God. The argument goes something like this:

    "I refuse to prove that I exist," says God, "for proof denies faith, and without faith I am nothing."

    "But," says Man, "the Babel fish is a dead giveaway isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves that you exist, and so therefore, by your own arguments, you don't. Q.E.D."

    "Oh dear," says God, "I hadn't thought of that," and promptly vanishes in a puff of logic.

    "Oh, that was easy," says Man, and for an encore goes on to prove that black is white and gets himself killed on the next zebra crossing.

    Most leading theologians claim that this argument isn't worth a pair of fetid dingo's kidneys, but that didn't stop Oolon Colluphid from making a fortune when he used it as the central argument in his book Well That About Wraps It Up For God.
  • Edwaldo, on 04/18/2008, -13/+7Hardcore logic, beats blind religion everytime.
    • ComradeGoby, on 04/18/2008, -6/+2Apparently it doesn't....
      Damn logic, making less sense than blind religion!
    • Asianwaste, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2What about Galileo Galilei?
  • mbeauchez, on 04/18/2008, -2/+4Gah.... At least spell it right if you're planning on coming off as clever.
  • Elliottx, on 04/18/2008, -10/+3I'm using this when I go knocking on doors telling people about our lord of darkness, Satan and trying to convert them to my religion with a satanic ritual in which we pour blood on your head.
    ...You get it?
  • KnightMareInc, on 04/18/2008, -7/+9digg: the new home of old ***** news
  • digitalarcanum, on 04/18/2008, -10/+5older than the internet itself, but dugg because it's true.
  • bobbybebob, on 04/18/2008, -5/+3Mirror http://uploadingit.com/view/541968_1qsff if needed
  • elmuerte17, on 04/18/2008, -9/+18seems like a lot of atheists are as fervent and evangelical about their beliefs as any organized religion.
    • Abaddon1125, on 04/18/2008, -3/+6Yes, we spend a great deal of time espousing our belief about using your brain and thinking rationally. We're such terrible people.
      I hope you didn't mean to suggest the we believe God does not exist, because we do not make such a claim, as they would imply positive knowledge, however I will make the claim that there is no reason to believe a god exists, and as such, I do not believe in one.
    • mbeauchez, on 04/18/2008, -2/+5The point with Atheism is that it's not belief. It is based on facts, logic and reason. It is the blind belief, that i (and presumably other atheists as well) are combating. And (OT) if you really feel the need to 'believe' in something, then please keep it out of the public debate, mmkay?
      • worldchanger, on 04/18/2008, -4/+2hahaha
        it's still a belief, genius.
    • dutchb0y, on 04/18/2008, -0/+6[insert point about lack of belief in God not equaling faith in any way whatsoever]
    • IphtashuFitz, on 04/18/2008, -1/+10I think you'll find most atheists are "fervent and evangelical" simply because they find themselves having to defend against the pressures of members of other organized religions. If born-again Christians, hardcore Catholics, devout Muslims, the occasional whackjob cult leader, etc. didn't continually thrust their religion on others in all manner of ways I doubt you'd find any atheists at all behaving in this manner. Don't force your god on them and they won't force their non-god on you. Simple as that.
  • BornWithRage, on 04/18/2008, -1/+14Epicurus' Wikipedia page:
    This doctrine, however, is not aimed at promoting atheism. Instead, it is part of an overarching philosophy meant to convince us that what gods there may be do not concern themselves with us, and thus would not seek to punish us either in this or any other life.
    • alanr19, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2Your facts have no place here on digg. It means what we want it to mean.

      Get it?
    • Neverclear, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Oddly enough that's actually quite a sensible policy. Go Epicurus in 2008.
    • Abaddon1125, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2Yes, it merely points out that the Judeo-Christian God does not exist, but leaves room foe deist-type deities.
    • dutchb0y, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2it may not have meant to promote atheism, but given the time at which it was written it was essentially tantamount to it.

      Still, the argument, whatever it's intention initially, supports the atheist rationale incredibly well. And if god doesn't care about our poor, weak, puny mortal selves/souls and our individual trials and tribulations, it's not the God of the Abrahamic religions anyway. Again: tantamount to the promotion of Atheism.
      • Neverclear, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3*****. There are dozens upon dozens of religions still in practice today that preach the gods don't give a damn and you should focus on self improvement without being a huge dick to everybody else. It may support some rational of a few atheist people with their own opinions, but the original point was avoiding the growing movement of "Be nice or god will spank you!" and encouraging "Be nice because you can. The gods don't care either way and prove it everyday by doing nothing to benefit you, or this society, outside of your own hard work."
  • Neverclear, on 04/18/2008, -6/+15Oh what a marvelous troll. Atheism. Trolling the nets since 199... wait when was the first post on the Internet made?
    • chucali, on 04/18/2008, -0/+21982
      • lukeev, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Some dude, circa 1982: "You know this internet thing'll never take off..."
  • cababika799, on 04/18/2008, -6/+10And if by winning you mean remaining entirely unconvincing for 1975 years, in spite of your supposed infallible logic and keen sense of elitism...then yes, you win....congrats from the other 5.9 billion of us.
    • cwmather, on 04/18/2008, -2/+4nice :)
    • Abaddon1125, on 04/18/2008, -1/+6It's hard to convince people who are willing to basically lie to themselves in order to feel a little more comfortable about dieing. Religion is still around for several reasons. One, children are raised in their parents belief systems while they are at their most impressionable ages. Two, people are afraid of dieing, and the idea of a happy eternal afterlife is comforting, and three, saying "godditit" is less complicated than the real universe, and so it is easier for the layperson to understand.
      • cababika799, on 04/18/2008, -2/+1That would all make sense except that to believe in God is to also believe in Hell which makes dying a little scarier than just blinking into nothingness. And if ""goddidit" was good enough, I suppose you wouldn't see Christians who are sincerely fascinated by studying the world around them. Lest we forget that all science today has been built on the backs of previous generations. I would like to hear someone say that religious people were not among those who have always been and always will be scientists.
        Plus, I would really like a run-down of why an infinite creator is so much easier to understand than our expanding universe. What draws many people to God is that he is truly infinite. We all believe that we will spend the rest of eternity exploring the neverending-ness of our God.
        • lukeev, on 04/18/2008, -0/+3So why is god a he, and why use the word "God"? I mean if "god" is truly infinite... just think about that for a second, infinite. It hurts my head, I mean it's everything that is was and possibly can or ever will be times 10 (+1, injection, no returns). It's this right now, it's the internet, it's the world, the anti-world, thought, matter, time, etc. So what's with the bible and god and all that anyway?! Why not just er... praise existence itself or something? Just curious, don't shoot me.
  • AdamZC, on 04/18/2008, -2/+1Can God spell?
    • alanr19, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1I don't think god actually made that image, but thanks for asking.
  • bdc83, on 04/18/2008, -1/+4Buried for glaring inability to spell "ATHEISTS".
  • tocsy, on 04/18/2008, -7/+2I love this quote. I have yet to have someone give me a sound refutation of it, although I'll be fair and say that even if they did, it wouldn't matter much to me anyway. I'm an apatheist (no, I didn't misspell atheist) and unlikely to change how I feel about the existence of a god or gods.
  • fr0ng, on 04/18/2008, -6/+1Don't be fooled by the devil! This is just another one of God's tests of faith! If you fail the test, you will !!
  • Hetman, on 04/18/2008, -7/+8Here is the thing. God could still be all knowing, all loving, and all powerful. But since he gave us free will all our actions would be up to us and that is why their would be evil in the world. Then you might say what about natural disasters. Well it is called soul building. If their was no natural disasters then everyone would have all the food, shelter, and necessaties they need. Their would be no reason to be patient, noble, courages helpful etc. This is just a bad argument against God. I agree though that religions are fundamentally flawed and do more bad for society than good but this just does not prove anything.
    • mrsark, on 04/18/2008, -1/+4actually you are wrong the problem of evil is the best argument against an all knowing/loving/powerful god.
      and natural disasters as soul building is a big load of BS. If souls existed (which they don't) and required 'trials' to 'build them', they would have enough trials without natural disasters, wars, famines, murders, etc (i.e all the problems that people cause for themselves through their actions or inactions). You argument that without natural disasters everyone would have all the things they need in life has no basis in reality, and never has.
      The problem of evil has yet to actually be 'solved' despite many attempts like yours to make things up out of nothing to try and solve it. face it, if there is a god, he doesnt give a damn about us, and that is a huge if, since its far more likely there is no god.
      • Hetman, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2What do you think causes Famines? Natural Disasters. What do you think causes wars. People fighting over natural resources Food and Water and now oil. This has always been the case. Religion has just gave people a moral way of dealing with wars. It is a lot easier to tell someone they are fighting for Good, instead of we are fighting because we need these resources to survive.
    • RandomH3r0, on 04/18/2008, -0/+5So then why do people pray to god for stuff if he never acts? You should bring the light to them so they can save some time. Two hands working does more then a million hands praying.
    • Abaddon1125, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2You can't be all knowing and all powerful and bestow upon your creations free will. If god is creating people with foreknowledge of all the decisions they will make in the future, how is that NOT deterministic?
  • jjensenii, on 04/18/2008, -8/+1I tend toward the Joseph Campbell view of religion: both theists and atheists miss the point.
    • jjensenii, on 04/18/2008, -2/+0W00T! Buried! Another win for independent thought!
  • BryanG412, on 04/18/2008, -10/+8I didn't realize religion could be destroyed in 4 questions
  • espek, on 04/18/2008, -6/+10what is with atheists becoming Atheists lately?
    It's non-believers needing to believe something so they can go mocking people about what they believe.
    Just let people be regardless of what they believe or don't believe.
    • RandomH3r0, on 04/18/2008, -1/+6If religion was a solely postive thing in the world that would probably be the case, but it isn't. A lie is a lie and one that directly effects everyone in this country, and the world at large.

      "No, I don't know that Atheists should be considered as citizens, nor should they be considered patriots. This is one nation under God." George Bush Sr.

      If the an elected president can have this view, I think we might be in some trouble.
    • Abaddon1125, on 04/18/2008, -1/+4WRONG.
      It's non-believers being tired the the believers controlling their lives through willful ignorance and sheer lunacy. I'd have no problem letting people believe what they want, as long as they stay out of my government, my schools, and away from my door. I never say anything about religion to anyone unless they make a statement first. It's my duty as a critically thinking individual to refute any ridiculous claim made by anyone, religious or not.
  • bilupdoll, on 04/18/2008, -3/+7if there is a god, and he wanted to protect us all from evil, he wouldnt have bothered creating life. If, however, he went ahead and did create life, he would probably have to allow for evil, or a lack of good, to enter our world. This is because we are imperfect, and without free will, we would not have lives worth living or learning from. So, that is why I disagree with this quote, which is also another elitist statement by a group of people trying to sound better than another (sound familiar??)

    That said, I don't believe in God.

    Thanks and goodnight
    • Chakat, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1Okay, you've just shown why you don't believe in the Abrahamic god, where all-loving is a big trait. Please, continue, explain your disbelief of some of the eastern belief systems, like Buddhism, or the native american systems.You're pretty disingenuous if you state that because the Abrahamic god can't exist, no god can exist.
      • bilupdoll, on 04/28/2008, -0/+0I dont believe in God. I didnt say no god exists, although I would say that it is highly unlikely it would be in the form of any self-knowing being, which is the way most religions see their gods. Buddhism is dif'frent, obviously, as they dont have a god or gods. But, I was speaking in more general terms than only an Abrahamic God, that just seemed like your easiest angle- I understand.
    • fultron89, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2The thing people don't understand about the existence of humanity is that God didn't create us in order for us to live a perfect life. He didn't create us to be robots either, following his every command and blindly accepting our fate. He created us in order that, by our observing the world around us and recognizing his supremacy, he might be glorified.
      The very fact that we're debating this is the realizing of his original plan. He has given us free will, not "that we might be condemned" but that we would make the decision whether or not to follow him, which is the essence of humans. You believe what you want, I'll believe what i want. That's the beauty of it.
      I think informed logic trumps a statement from a Greek philosopher who died 300 years before Jesus...
    • Abaddon1125, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1This quote assumes God is all knowing, which denies free will.
  • mmmcookies, on 04/18/2008, -2/+14This is a crappy quote to use as an arguement. Suffering is worthwhile. Suffering is important. What would you ever learn if you never suffered? How would you ever know what good is if you never saw the consequences of evil?
    • Abaddon1125, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1Why would I have to? What's wrong with NOT knowing what evil is? With never encountering it?
      • alanr19, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Not encountering evil means being dead.
    • QuetzlcoatlBlue, on 04/20/2008, -0/+0Suffering happens. But is suffering in and of itself worthwhile, or important? Tell that to everyone who has ever been tortured to death, lost a loved one. I can agree good might come of going through suffering if there is a reason to go through it. But if you believe suffering in and of itself creates virtue, than you're using that same kind of cargo cult thinking that got Christianity started.
  • TymonBrown, on 04/18/2008, -2/+10It's all about free will, baby.
  • SenorCardgage74, on 04/18/2008, -7/+4Diggity dugg!

    Unleash the LOLXTIANZ *****!!
  • Halfling64, on 04/18/2008, -11/+15***** Atheists. We get it. You don't believe in anything. I'm sorry that some religious people are overzealous and shove their religion down your throats and that pisses you off to no end.
    But your becoming what you hate. You shove your views onto us in the exact same way. And I'm tired of taking ***** just cuz I'm a Christian. I chose to believe in something, you chose to believe in nothing. We get it. We'll never get along, so drop it.
    It's stupid, it's annoying, and it's just plain tiresome.
    • Hetman, on 04/18/2008, -6/+5Be realistic. Who besides someone on digg has actually gave you ***** about being Christian? Im sorry but just because a bunch of athiests fanboys make fun of Christians on DIGG doesnt mean that you are an oppresed christian. Get over yourself Christians control almost 100% of this country.
    • jeffinfremont, on 04/18/2008, -1/+5So much for turning the other cheek.
    • Hetman, on 04/18/2008, -0/+5I would like an answer though. Have you been walking down the street and some random atheists came up and made fun of you. Were you chilling on your couch and some random athiests knocked on your door handing out pamplets. Were is this oppresion you speak of?
    • IphtashuFitz, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1You're wrong. Atheists have very strong beliefs. They believe that there is no god. That's totally different from not believing in anything. Agnostics are the ones more closely tied to not believing in gods due to a lack of any solid proof of their existence.
    • Abaddon1125, on 04/18/2008, -0/+6"Don't believe in anything?" Are you serious? Atheists believe in a lot of things, we just don't believe in any gods. And it isn't the shoving down our throats that has us upset, it's the stuff they're trying to shove down our throats that we're not happy with. If they were talking about something that actually made sense and was rooted in, oh I don't know -- SANITY -- then I'd live with it, but we don't, now do we?
  • SemiSarcastic, on 04/18/2008, -3/+10You know, can't we just settle things the old fashion way by taking out guns and killing each other?
  • RandomH3r0, on 04/18/2008, -3/+12"I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours", Stephen Roberts
    • jjensenii, on 04/18/2008, -2/+0So pagans are the only real theists?
      • RandomH3r0, on 04/18/2008, -1/+3There are no theists, only atheists who haven't let go of their imaginary friend.
        • jjensenii, on 04/18/2008, -2/+0Congrats. I think that's the most patronizing statement an atheist has ever made.
      • mlvassallo, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1Atheists have a God. They worship themselves, they just don't realize it.
        • jjensenii, on 04/18/2008, -1/+0Look, can we cut the armchair psychoanalysis from both sides?
  • Harelin, on 04/18/2008, -4/+8I'm agnostic, not religious nor atheist. But this is flawed logic, in my opinion. Ask yourself the following questions: do people ever ask you for help? yes? - then do you do it for them, or do you help them learn how to do it themselves? I think you understand what I'm getting at.

    Try stretching your imagination a bit and replace 'God' with 'Mom' in this instance and you will see my point.
    • ElAssoWipo, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2Unfortunately, nobody ever claimed that mom created the Universe.
    • CabesMojo, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Holy crap mom doesn't exist anymore, thanks a lot.
    • Abaddon1125, on 04/18/2008, -0/+2"If he is neither willing nor able"... hey, that's us, dude! Seriously, the point is if you are willing to let someone suffer through something (especially torture or death) in order to learn a lesson, you're hardly "all good."
      • ElAssoWipo, on 04/18/2008, -0/+3How about killing every single living thing on earth with the exception of Noah's family and two of each of millions of species in a wooden boat?
  • manbear, on 04/18/2008, -7/+15Is the person who made this completely ignorant of Christian theology and how God deals with evil?
    Yes.
    Then should we listen to them?
    No.
    • fad3d, on 04/18/2008, -4/+2ahahaha atheism destroyed in two sentences. +1 for God.
    • ScoobySnack, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1Given that Epicurus died in 270 BC, I would guess that he was "completely ignorant of Christian theology".
      • manbear, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1well, it would appear that he was, and the person that made the poster also is, otherwise they wouldn't have used that quote. Which was my point...
  • Ryanr14, on 04/18/2008, -4/+3If you believe in atheism, that is you believe in nothing, aren't you believing in something by believing in nothing, no one? I am aslo confused that this poster uses A.D. wouldn't that acknowledge Jesus' life?
    • Abaddon1125, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Er... no. It acknowledges the system used for writing dates in the western world.
      • Ryanr14, on 04/19/2008, -0/+0What does AD stand for? After Death, or what else, just being curious
  • kipmartin, on 04/18/2008, -5/+13interesting that Stephen Hawking believes in God. as did Einstein, Planck, Newton, and most other cosmologists and physicists. im not saying there is or isnt a Higher Power here, but greater minds than us seem to feel atheism is short-sighted and just as difficult to substantiate.
    • jjensenii, on 04/18/2008, -1/+5Actually, Hawking and Einstein were both atheistic pantheists: they used the word "God" to refer to the Universe at large.
      • cwmather, on 04/18/2008, -5/+2ACTUALLY, Einstein did believe in God. At least enough to acknowledge that the universe was created by Him. He did not however believe that God wanted a personal relationship with us as Christians believe.
    • Abaddon1125, on 04/18/2008, -0/+5Seriously? Einstein? Hawking? They're PANTHEISTS! They believe the universe is "god" and that it is not intelligent and doesn't care about us. It's romantic atheism.
  • hydroplane, on 04/18/2008, -4/+6A better question asked would be If there is a god, could your ape like mind comprehend such a being?
    • jjensenii, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2Now that's a very fair question.
    • ElAssoWipo, on 04/18/2008, -2/+3What being?
    • Abaddon1125, on 04/18/2008, -1/+2If we can't then we really can't be expected to believe in him either, then. If we were, he would almost certainly have to be evil.
    • HiddenCanuck, on 04/18/2008, -1/+1I don't understand a lot the complexities of the world - but I do understand the simple face of them. To this degree, Abaddon, we can.
  • chesscat, on 04/18/2008, -9/+4Religion sucks.
    • youthinkicare, on 04/18/2008, -2/+0so do assholes, bu I think we already know that, don't we?
      • chesscat, on 04/18/2008, -0/+3You're the expert. The only thing sucks more than religion are the zealots that post about how great it is.
        • youthinkicare, on 04/19/2008, -1/+0where did i say that religion was great? just tell me, please, because I haven't. i said that assholes suck. But, like i said, we already knew that
  • magicaltrevor, on 04/18/2008, -8/+2By far the greatest quote in history.
  • bradrmattison, on 04/18/2008, -2/+4First of all, if you are using the terms B.C. and A.D., if we want to be literally, you are using the birth of Christ as a reference point. While Christ may have lived just as a human as opposed to a divinity, this still if an indication that there is some significance.
    As for all of the posts concerning the usefulness of logic of religion: Anyone who actually believes everything that the bible says clearly has no background in intelligent study. For many perfectly logical people, the bible serves (as it rightfully should) as a way to form morals and to teach people righteous beliefs. While I am an Atheist, I understand the power of religion and the purpose, and hope that one day everyone will see why for so many people believing is important.
    • Merendino, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Nicely played. Use the bible as a 'guide' or gtfo. If noahs ark really happened it would have had to rain a little over 600 ft. A DAY! EVERYWHERE around the planet... Mt. Everest is 27,000 feet above sea level. Do the math. It rained for 40 days.
      Its not elitism to say that people who believe that nonsense are nuts. Its a fable meant to teach a lesson, not be taken literally folks.
      • fultron89, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1"In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, on the seventeenth day of the second month—on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened. 12 And rain fell on the earth forty days and forty nights."
        People who have actually read the passage about Noah's ark know that "the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of heaven were opened."
        also, you're being a legalist when you mention Mt Everest. It's highly likely that the people who transcriibed the story initially assumed the world was covered, because the world was a bigger place 6000 years ago. no planes, cars, trains or satellies to tell us exactly how much water there was, but it was enough to destroy a major percentage of the world's population, and enough to set an unguided boat adrift for a month and a half, enough to create massive landslides that covered vast areas, trapping fish and animals instantly under hundreds of feet of silt (ever hear of fossils? the only way to create one is to instantaneously cut an animal off from any outside influence ((air, microbes, other nimal)) and seal it permanently.)
        The massive influx of fresh water was apparently enough to change what we call the North Atlantic Current, and create the first ice age.
    • alanr19, on 04/18/2008, -0/+1Well excuse me godboy we have better things to do with our time like keep the economy going than learn useless crap like that.
  • jeffinfremont, on 04/18/2008, -2/+2I just think we've got it all wrong in pondering the existence of a supreme creator.

    Wouldn't a better question be: "If there is a creator, does it believe in us?"
  • alanr19, on 04/18/2008, -2/+1Back then they didn't even believe it atoms, or nebulae or lazers etc.

    What the ***** did they know anyway?
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 78 of 78 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.