🕯️ Traditions Why People Become Atheist?

[homer_simpson]

Assumptions of what? Why don't you just simply say you don't understand me?

Why don't you/we go back to my previous post and tell me what what triggers you.

You are full of BS to be honest.

 

[bandwagon]

So what exactly do you mean?

Why can't you be so direct? Can you further elaborate what do you mean by "Your complaints about this so called evil doesn't conflate to the non existence of God"? Did I explicitly state that "there is NO god!"?

You seem to be full of assumptions about my belief.

I didn't say either that you explicitly argue in this thread that there is no God.

Your message @207PM simply is a complaint on morality not the non existence of God. Even if this world " moral evil" preponderates "moral good", it doesn't follow God doesnt or can't exist.

 

[bandwagon]

Why don't you/we go back to my previous post and tell me what what triggers you.

You are full of BS to be honest.

Therefore I should avoid a mediocre arrogant intellect like you who can't offer good logical arguments on God's existence but full of desparate shits.

 

[homer_simpson]

I didn't say either that you explicitly argue in this thread that there is no God.

Your message @207PM simply is a complaint on morality not the non existence of God. Even if this world " moral evil" preponderates "moral good", it doesn't follow God doesnt or can't exist.

What does MORALITY has to do with (non)existence of god? Humans can be moral with or without god.

Where did you get that moral evil/good crap? And I was wondering how you come up with that correlation?

 

[homer_simpson]

Therefore I should avoid a mediocre arrogant intellect like you who can't offer good logical arguments on God's existence but full of desparate shits.

No, you are just full of rigmarole. Rather than discussing topics, you try to deluge other posters with your "ginormous vocabulary" and "English writing" skills. Remember when you told me last time that what I posted is gooblydook something?

C'mon, let's continue.

 

[bandwagon]

No, you are just full of rigmarole. Rather than discussing topics, you try to deluge other posters with your "ginormous vocabulary" and "English writing" skills. Remember when you told me last time that what I posted is gooblydook something?

C'mon, let's continue.

No, you are just full of rigmarole. Rather than discussing topics, you try to deluge other posters with your "ginormous vocabulary" and "English writing" skills. Remember when you told me last time that what I posted is gooblydook something?

C'mon, let's continue.

You are self confused. A person who lacks understanding pretends he understands anything. That is you. An honest inquiring mind is.better to interact with.

Also, you can not figure out why you are full of desperate shits.

 

[bandwagon]

No, you are just full of rigmarole. Rather than discussing topics, you try to deluge other posters with your "ginormous vocabulary" and "English writing" skills. Remember when you told me last time that what I posted is gooblydook something?

C'mon, let's continue.

The problem with intllectual pretenders is that when their shits are exposed, they do more shits.

 

[homer_simpson]

The problem with intllectual pretenders is that when their shits are exposed, they do more shits.

Let's say that I am indeed an "intellectual pretender" and you are a "true" scholar. Now go back to my previous post and give your rebuttal.

 

[homer_simpson]

The problem with intllectual pretenders is that when their shits are exposed, they do more shits.

What exactly did you expose?

The problem with you is you are full of word gymnastics, but zero substance.

 

[bandwagon]

Let's say that I am indeed an "intellectual pretender" and you are a "true" scholar. Now go back to my previous post and give your rebuttal.

I am not implying I am a scholar. I am PhCorner message contributor like you. Since, your message in this thread is public, I reacted.

Didn't you get me? I just exposed your superficial understanding and arrogance. Your arrogance, according to my personal disposition requires counter-attack.

If you were more honest, you did welcome understanding. Your message posted@207PM i just reacted that it doesnt mean that God cant or doesnt exists. Your question is about morality on a possible world where God exists. Now, take a second look on the title pf this thread if my reactiob has no interconnectedness with my reaction to your crucial message. You maybe nice personally, but we're both sorry.on this shits.

 

[homer_simpson]

I am not implying I am a scholar. I am PhCorner message contributor like you. Since, your message in this thread is public, I reacted.

Didn't you get me? I just exposed your superficial understanding and arrogance. Your arrogance, according to my personal disposition requires counter-attack.

If you were more honest, you did welcome understanding. Your message posted@207PM i just reacted that it doesnt mean that God cant or doesnt exists. Your question is about morality on a possible world where God exists. Now, take a second look on the title pf this thread if my reactiob has no interconnectedness with my reaction to your crucial message. You maybe nice personally, but we're both sorry.on this shits.

Let me quote myself:

Let's say meron nga god. Ano ba ang silbi nito sa mankind? Actually, isa pa itong pabigat - na ito pa nag naging dahilan ng countless wars and killings.

If he is indeed supreme and uber-intelligent, he won't asked nor need humans to worship him. Bakit? Kasi kung worshipping lang ang pag-uusapan, kaya ko ding gumawa ng program na will keep on greeting me and worshipping me till the computer runs out of juice. My program will tirelessly greets me like:

"Good morning, Master Homer"
"Have a nice day, Master Homer"
"You are glorious, merciful and loving, Master Homer"

Pero hindi ko gagawin yun kase alam kong pointless.

Now, let me ask you. Did you see any mention of morality there? And as per my post, how did you come up with the correlation between (non)existence of god and morality?

And by the way what is morality?

 

[bandwagon]

Let me quote myself:


Now, let me ask you. Did you see any mention of morality there? And as per my post, how did you come up with the correlation between (non)existence of god and morality?

And by the way what is morality?

Let me quote myself:


Now, let me ask you. Did you see any mention of morality there? And as per my post, how did you come up with the correlation between (non)existence of god and morality

And by the way what is morality?

I ask you if you're ready for a civil discussion/dialogue.

 

[AimHigh_21]

Popcorn

 

[bandwagon]

I ask you if you're ready for a civil discussion/dialogue.

...before we proceed straight to the question of morality, God and atheism with no s-h-i-t-t-y rhetorics.

 

[homer_simpson]

ho hum...

 

[bandwagon]

ho hum...

Ok. To my opinion, the definition of morality isn't so critical here. But, for the sake of argument, it is necessary to laid a consensual definition otherwise, we would end up in endless semantic shenanigans over the meaning of morality than to prove our point why morality can't even disprove God's existence.

Take note that my logical position in this PhCorner is an agnostic/skeptic.

I am an atheist in some sense. Yes, a provisional atheist, depending.on the existence of arguments laid here from all camps(atheists, theists, agnostics, pagan, what else).

You may react to this initial message..will continue tomorrow.

 

[Jerome16360]

atheist its applicable to all of us. Isa sa dahilan siguro is people had a hard time to obey. Since bible and GOD is all about obedience we tend to eliminate things that makes us obey. Yun lang po. And also "money is not the root of all evil" it's "the love of money is the root of all evil"

 

[fabbriche]

Science at education ang dahilan kung bakit nagiging atheist ang isang tao at kung bakit marami nang atheists ngaun. Dinisprove o pinasinungalingan na ng science ang maraming myths ng religion. Negatibo ang epekto ng education sa religion.

Sa scientific at philosophical circles may pinakamalaking percentage ng atheists (68% at 73% respectively).

Sa mga bansa naman, mga post-Enlightenment, modern, technologically-advanced societies ng Western Europe, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Japan, China, South Korea may pinakamalaking percentages ng mga atheist.

 

[homer_simpson]

Ok. To my opinion, the definition of morality isn't so critical here. But, for the sake of argument, it is necessary to laid a consensual definition otherwise, we would end up in endless semantic shenanigans over the meaning of morality than to prove our point why morality can't even disprove God's existence.

Take note that my logical position in this PhCorner is an agnostic/skeptic.

I am an atheist in some sense. Yes, a provisional atheist, depending.on the existence of arguments laid here from all camps(atheists, theists, agnostics, pagan, what else).

You may react to this initial message..will continue tomorrow.

Morality has ZERO relevance to what I'm talking about.

If morality isn't so critical, why correlate it in the first place to (non)existence of god? It is akin to saying that "you can't be humane/moral if you have no faith in god". Or "you can't be humane/moral if you don't believe in god".

And to discuss morality itself is another huge topic and open to a lot of interpretations similar to the concept of what is good/bad?

To put it succinctly, my point is: what is the utility/purpose of god in human lives - which can be infer from my post quoted below:

Let's say meron nga god. Ano ba ang silbi nito sa mankind? Actually, isa pa itong pabigat - na ito pa nag naging dahilan ng countless wars and killings.

I am NOT in any way associating/correlating the concept of (a/im/)morality in any way.

 

[bandwagon]

Morality has ZERO relevance to what I'm talking about.

If morality isn't so critical, why correlate it in the first place to (non)existence of god? It is akin to saying that "you can't be humane/moral if you have no faith in god". Or "you can't be humane/moral if you don't believe in god".

And to discuss morality itself is another huge topic and open to a lot of interpretations similar to the concept of what is good/bad?

To put it succinctly, my point is: what is the utility/purpose of god in human lives - which can be infer from my post quoted below:



I am NOT in any way associating/correlating the concept of (a/im/)morality in any way.

I think we are just rewinding here.

Your first paragraph from your message yesterday posted@207PM(i can't edit due to I'm using cellular phone) contains elements of morality. Not that you argue how people should behave. Since you point out of " war and killings", this is a subject that concerns morality. Now, if we have to argue the definition of morality or at least these wars and killings have no "correlation" or relevance to morality, we having nothing to talk about.

I didn't even say you pushed something here.in this particular thread that God doesn't or can't exist. See, that as in relation to the title of this thread ("Why people become Atheist" ts question) you made a point where morality is touch(see your first paragraph) and since this is public forum, I read it and I reacted saying that, it doesnt mean God doesnt or cant exist. What then is the law or logic that I cant comment to your post?

This is not even a debate/argumentation whether morality is relevant or that some need or need not to recognize morality. I reiterate, morality (that which concerns "good", " bad", right, wrong and "evil") cant even disprove the existence of God. Again and I'll tell you again and again, I did not refute anything in your yesterday's posted@207PM. Even there are wars.and killings, some people believe in God. The irony is even that they kill/murder in the name of their God. Belief in their God isn't even tiring to them. Even a dehumanizing act becomes a jubilee to them. In the end, everything is a matter of choicr. You or I chose to be an atheist pr agnostic or believer which once we.made that act, we tend to reinforce it with logic or arguments.