[Credendovidis]

I received the following private question from sassyT, and I think it is useful to handle that one here in all openness.

Hi Credo,
I have been reading your posts and have responded to quite a few of them and i have found it quite ironic that you claim to only believe in things that have objective evidence however none of the claims you have made are backed by any such evidence. In fact most of your beliefs are based on Faith not facts. So please before you make condescending remarks about other people's beliefs, consider and examine your own beliefs and you will realise that it takes as much faith to believe what you believe as it does any other religious belief. You are only creating a double standard which makes you appear to be a hypocrite.

Ok. Let's do that one line by line...

"... i have found it quite ironic that you claim to only believe in things that have objective evidence"

Wrong, totally wrong! I do not believe in things that have objective supporting evidence. You do not need belief in such evidence. Belief you need as support for claims. I do not claim anything, I just question religious claims.

===

"however none of the claims you have made are backed by any such evidence. "

I have not made any claims. That is already done sufficiently here on this board by theists.

===

"In fact most of your beliefs are based on Faith not facts. "

A wild claim. What religious beliefs may that be? I have no religious beliefs.

===

"So please before you make condescending remarks about other people's beliefs, consider and examine your own beliefs and you will realise that it takes as much faith to believe what you believe as it does any other religious belief. "

How nice ... I do not make condescending remarks about other people's beliefs. Instead I respect other people's religious views. But that does not make their religious claims reality.

And note : I have no religious beliefs. It does not require any faith at all to accept what you claim I believe. I base as Secular Humanist my life's philosophy on reality and objective supporting evidence. Not on dogmatic religious claims.

===

"You are only creating a double standard which makes you appear to be a hypocrite."

There is no double standard. My views are based on objective supporting evidence. Your views are based on religious claims.
The ones who try to create double standards are people like you, who insist that because they believe something, that they may use that something and elevate it to the "one and only truth". You may do that at for instance the Christianity board, but not here, on the religious discussions board.

Thanks sassyT !

Now : has anyone anything to add to this ? Just feel free to react !

;)

[NeedKarma]

By her reasoning it takes much more faith to NOT believe in talking teapots that pour purple metal that it does to believe in talking teapots that pour purple metal.

Or in other words, anything that we don't see or have no evidence of, all things that we DON'T believe, requires a great deal of faith. Example: 80 foot tall amoebas, if you don't believe in them that takes a lot of faith.

:rolleyes:

[achampio21]

Okay I think I can make a comment on this since I have read a lot of the comments that sassy is probably commenting on.

I just went back over all of the comments on my question:where did Jesus' body go?" Which started a heated debate.

And I found that credendovidis never really said anyone was wrong. All credendovidis said is that certain comments that others made where based on their beliefs. And would point out that those comments were based only on their beliefs and that there is no proof of those claims.

I can see where just making that comment alone would set someone off, but everyone is allowed to believe how they want. If credendovidis feels that religious claims aren't real then that's okay. And when credendovidis makes a statement about their not being proof of those claims then I would give proof or just accept that credendovidis feels that way and deal with it. The only proof that was put up as argument to credendovidis' claim of "no proof" was scripture. I personally don't think scripture is proof. Because scripture is based on belief. The only other proof given was eyewitness testimony, which again only comes from scripture. And scripture is based on belief. It is totally up to the person asking the question whether they want to believe a certain way or not. Trying to force that belief on them isn't very fair. And pointing out the differences in each claim is fair. But you can't dig at someone just because they don't feel the same way you do.
I said it before and I will say it again, if I don't believe in gay rights that is my choice, if I don't believe in Santa Clause that is MY choice, if I want to believe that I can jump off my roof and fly to Cinderella's castle that is MY choice. Because when I fall on my face and have to be rushed to the ER, I will be the only dumbie that has to deal with the pain. So let me believe how I want and let me say what I want and let EVERYONE say what they want and who the heck cares if you don't agree. If everyone thought the same way, this world be so extremely boring it wouldn't be funny. And besides if you believe in Heaven don't you think it would be very crowded if the whole world's existence believed and was there at the end of time. The Devil would be very lonely I think. ;)

So, I do not sit on any one side of any argument, but I do feel like I owe credendovidis my opinion> :)

[Credendovidis]

Example: 80 foot tall amoebas, if you don't believe in them that takes a lot of faith.

And it takes even more faith to BELIEVE in them

:)

[Credendovidis]

So, I do not sit on any one side of any argument, but I do feel like I owe credendovidis my opinion> :)

Which is much appreciated ! Thanks Champ !

;)

[achampio21]

Just one more thing I wanted to add because I thought it was a little odd.

I had the administrator close my thread on where did his body go. I noticed that sassyt made an appearance on that board just to debate with you on your comments and made no attempt to give the OP (me) any kind of insight to his/her thoughts on the question at hand. So I figured if it was goint to turn into a thread of attacking then I should have it closed.

[Credendovidis]

Just one more thing I wanted to add because I thought it was a little odd.

I too was a little upset when the debate was MOVED to religious discussions without any warning or notice. I also thought it had been closed. But the "powers that be" insist that that is the normal way here on AMHD !
Every day you learn something new. ;)

Ciao!

[Fr_Chuck]

Not this power, I did not move it either, where was it originally posted?

But of course talking tea pots, whooo, sort of like things from the 60's that I would like to forget.

But I from my point in some things, such as the "big bang" esp without a higher power guiding it, is much harder to "believe" I mean to me, life starting from no life, then being able to split, and become fish, birds, reptiles, and treees and grass. And then dividing into male and female, and not die off before there was both. Ok, not to me that take a lot more faith.

I can certainly accept God having a hand in it, and then it makes sense. Without it, now that takes a lot more faith.

[Credendovidis]

I can certainly accept God having a hand in it, and then it makes sense. without it, now that takes alot more faith.

Than it makes sense ? May be to you, but not to me !
Where ever a deity is required to explain something, all logical thinking is thrown out of the window.
Why do you need an unproven to exist deity with unproven to exist powers and capabilities to explain something that has today already a proper scientific explanation ?

;)

[achampio21]

But if you don't believe in ANY higher power, how do you explain where it all started? Even the big bang theory only goes back to a huge rock that exploded, where did the huge rock come from? It didn't just "appear".

So what are your ideas credendovidis? I am curious?

I'm sure there is more science proven theories that I don't know about!! My life revolves around sleep, work, eat, change diapers, feed kids, work more, Blues Clues and Spongebob!! :)

OH! And of course cookie monster and the spaghetti monster!! ;)

[Credendovidis]

So what are your ideas credendovidis? I am curious!

Ok. Here they are, champ ! :)
.

But if you don't believe in ANY higher power, how do you explain where it all started?

The existence of ANY "higher power" is nothing but a wild unsupported religious claim. Fine for whomever wants to believe it, but never-the-less a claim.
Never ever was any objective supporting evidence provided to back up that claim. Many thousands of years, many religions, many gods, but no objective supported evidence for any of these gods.
So unless one believes in any of these gods, the claim that gods exist and played a role in anything has no validity at all. Until the claim will be supported by objective evidence , gods were NOT involved in the origin of life, the origin of the universe, or whatever else is claimed god/gods do.

As to the origin of life on earth : At first there could not have been any life on earth, as earth in it's earliest existence was nothing more than a collection of gas and minerals , part of all the matter from which the solar system was born.
About 3.5 Billion years ago the first forms of life appeared. Much simpler than whatever lives today. But evolution took over and these first life forms were at the origin of all that lives today. All present lifeforms came from only two different early lifeforms. One common lifeform for all cells, and another common lifeform with other DNA that was at some time absorbed into the first common cell, to function as part of the power house of each cell, in the Mitochondria.
Why life started ? How life started ? We simply do not know. But as we are here, it surely did. ;)

Even the big bang theory only goes back to a huge rock that exploded, where did the huge rock come from? It didn't just "appear".

You better read up a little about the Big Bang. Let me say first of all : the following is based on various theories that explain what we can see that happened a long time ago in the far far past (about 14 Billion years ago). It is no objective proof, but it provides an explanation that fits and explains our observations, and are not opposed to logic, natural laws, and/or scientific, astronomical, and cosmological observations (unlike the thesis of gods, which is a wild claim).

The Big Bang theory is one of the most misunderstood thesis of our time. No there was no rock that exploded. Actually there was no explosion at all. There was a very short time during which tremendous amounts of energy were converted into a lot of mass, while the space in which that mass existed was "expanding" at a very high speed (multiples of the speed of light). The conversion of energy into mass generated a tremendous amount of heat, trillions of degrees Kelvin. During the cooling down the mass more and more became into what we know today : first there were only quarks, later protons, neutrons, and electrons, and much later atoms (mainly hydrogen and helium).

Note : the above is no wild claim. There is very good support for that. Many excellent books exist that explain the process in detail. But this lead is not the place to go deeper into that.

I'm sure there is more science proven theories that I don't know about!!!

Science and technology go so fast that it is almost impossible to keep track with all the latest findings . So no problem !

And of course cookie monster and the spaghetti monster!

Do you realize that with the same "logic" and faith theists use to defend their favourite god/gods, one could easily set up a real religion based on either one of these characters?
A rather simpleton called L. Ron Hubbard in the US did 50 years ago something similar and started a religion that was called scientology, with which he exchanged many millions of dollars for useless training courses to his followers.
To think of that... actually almost all religions do that ;)

Hope that this reply assists you in becoming an enlightend person !

:D

[achampio21]

You better read up a little about the Big Bang.

I told you I didn't know that much!! LOL

Do you realize that with the same "logic" and faith theists use to defend their favourite god/gods, one could easily set up a real religion based on either one of these characters?
A rather simpleton called L. Ron Hubbard in the US did 50 years ago something similar and started a religion that was called scientology, with which he exchanged many millions of dollars for useless training courses to his followers.
To think of that... actually almost all religions do that

Hope that this reply assists you in becoming an enlightend person !

You know what's funny about that statement... Tom Cruise is into scientology and he makes millions to make fiction based movies!! I totally agree with this statement though, just lookat Santa Clause and the Easter bunny.. who makes money from those fiction based characters!! Businesses and ideally the government.

I have just recently discovered that the government is not my friend. That in all truth the government is like that one friend that always shows up on payday or when you just got your new apartment or when it's your birthday, but never seems to want to help you out when you need them.

Which is why I have begun questioning just about everything that my life once was revolved around. I was raised by a military daddy and a high-class con artist mommy. But of course didn't know that until I was out on my own and found out what life is all about. Then I began to wonder how two of the most manipulative horrible people in the world could go to church every Sunday and pray before dinner to God and bad mouth all the "sinners" and tell me that I am going to go to hell because I wouldn't come over and cut their grass for free at age 24 with two kids and a husband. What the hell was I thinking?! :)

So in a large nutshell... that is why I turned to this board. And my questions began.

And I have one more for you dear credendovidis...
What do you think happens when we die? We just go into the ground and get eaten by bugs and that's it, no streets of gold, no coming back as a big black bear or chipmunk?

[sassyT]

Than it makes sense ? May be to you, but not to me !
Where ever a deity is required to explain something, all logical thinking is thrown out of the window.
Why do you need an unproven to exist deity with unproven to exist powers and capabilities to explain something that has today already a proper scientific explanation ?

;)

So have your BELIEFS on Origins been proven?. lol Please provide proof your beliefs on the origin of life are factual.

[sassyT]

[QUOTE=Credendovidis]

As to the origin of life on earth : At first there could not have been any life on earth, as earth in it's earliest existence was nothing more than a collection of gas and minerals , part of all the matter from which the solar system was born.
About 3.5 Billion years ago the first forms of life appeared. Much simpler than whatever lives today. But evolution took over and these first life forms were at the origin of all that lives today. All present lifeforms came for only two different early lifeforms. One common lifeform for all cells, and another common lifeform with other DNA that was at some time absorbed into the first common cell, to function as part of the power house of each cell, in the Mitochondria.
Why life started ? How life started ? We simply do not know. But as we are here, it surely did. ;)

These are your BELIEFS.. these are not FACTS. There is no conclusive evidence to qualify the above beliefs as facts. Evolution is a theory but if you believe in it as fact, it is by FAITH.

You better read up a little about the Big Bang. Let me say first of all : the following is based on various theories that explain what we can see that happened a long time ago in the far far past (about 14 Billion years ago). It is no objective proof, but it provides an explanation that fits and explains our observations, and are not opposed to logic, natural laws, and/or scientific, astronomical, and cosmological observations (unlike the thesis of gods, which is a wild claim).

There is no objective proof, But you believe it anyway.. :rolleyes:
That my point right there. You just contradict yourself. Lol

The Big Bang theory is one of the most misunderstood thesis of our time. No there was no rock that exploded. Actually there was no explosion at all. There was a very short time during which tremendous amounts of energy were converted into a lot of mass, while the space in which that mass existed was "expanding" at a very high speed (multiples of the speed of light). The conversion of energy into mass generated a tremendous amount of heat, trillions of degrees Kelvin. During the cooling down the mass more and more became into what we know today : first there were only quarks, later protons, neutrons, and electrons, and much later atoms (mainly hydrogen and helium).

Note : the above is no wild claim. There is very good support for that. Many excellent books exist that explain the process in detail. But this lead is not the place to go deeper into that.

Its funny that you claim to not believe in anything that has no objective proof and yet you believe in theories as truth. A theory, need I remind you, is nothing but a hypothesis that has not been proven to be true. It is also an assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture/guess.
A big bang that created everything? Lol it takes more faith to believe that than it does to believe someone intelligent created everything. There is ZERO conclusive/objective evidence that the unverse originated from a "big bang" this just part of your religious doctrine and Faith. Not fact.
But I admire your zeal though, you are truly a great woman or man of faith. :)

[Choux]

John,

Quite an excellent introductory summary for champ. I enjoyed reading it. :)

[Choux]

Sassy,

University libraries are filled with books, treatises, essays, test projects written over the centuries that show proof, and now common knowledge, about how our physical universe works.

You have a collection of ancient stories in ONE BOOK stories that were handed down orally for generations by illiterate people trying to make sense of a world without having knowledge or facts about much of anything! When finally written down, so many contradictions, errors and just plain confusion.

An all powerful, perfect God would hardly tell his story in such an imperfect confusing book!

[sassyT]

[

QUOTE=Choux]Sassy,

University libraries are filled with books, treatises, essays, test projects written over the centuries that show proof, and now common knowledge, about how our physical universe works.

I know that because I am a biology masters student and have studdied science for many years. There is imperical proof of how the physical universe works and there is no disputing that, but there is no conclusive evidence to prove such theories as the big bang. Science does not KNOW anything of origins.

You have a collection of ancient stories in ONE BOOK stories that were handed down orally for generations by illiterate people trying to make sense of a world without having knowledge or facts about much of anything! When finally written down, so many contradictions, errors and just plain confusion.

This is your opinion of the Book base on your baised beliefs and lack of knowledge and understanding of the text. Not a fact.

An all powerful, perfect God would hardly tell his story in such an imperfect confusing book!

This is not a factual statement, highly speculative. Just because it is confusing to you does not mean it is to everyone else.

[Credendovidis]

And I have one more for you dear credendovidis....
What do you think happens when we die? We just go into the ground and get eaten by bugs and that's it, no streets of gold, no coming back as a big black bear or chipmunk?

There is nothing that is based on objective supported evidence that proves the following to be incorrect :
Thinking in essence is nothing else than electrons jumping gaps and move from synapse to synapse in the brain.
When we die, our heart stops beating, and oxygen supply to the brain stops. Within minutes the brain dies.
Once a brain is starved from oxygen the (brain) dying process starts, and electrons stop jumping. One of the last things a human being recognize is that process of the brain that dies.
It produces the tunnel effect with the light at the end of that tunnel.

Without a working brain no thinking is possible. So there is no place any longer for any selfconciousness. The actual "you" does no longer exist. Only your body remains.
It is one of the reasons an "hereafter" makes no sense. Even if it would exist, no human being would ever be able to link up to that "hereafter".

That leaves the human "soul". Again : for the existence of a soul there is no objective supported evidence. It may be sad for many to understand that they will never see their lost ones back any more. Neither bodies nor "souls". And that is a pity, because who would not like to see his/her parents and other loved ones back? Nor will anyone see one or more deities. Their existence has also never been supported by objective evidence.

So what will happen when you die?
You will "see" the tunnel (effect), "move" towards the light at the end, and once you reach it your brain has died, and you are declared to be dead.
Follows the burial or cremation a couple of days later. Nothing else remain of you other than (hopefully) a lot of memories in others, which slowly over time will fade away.

And one more item : So why do we live ? What meaning is there for our lives ?
For me that is very simple : we live to produce offspring that enables evolution to continue and allows the species to adapt to changing environmental conditions.
And for ourselves : we pass on our genes through our children and grandchildren.
That is the "eternal life" so many theists are hoping to obtain in that mythical "hereafter".
While they have that "eternal life" already in front of them in their children for many years.

;)

[Credendovidis]

Than it makes sense ? May be to you, but not to me !
Where ever a deity is required to explain something, all logical thinking is thrown out of the window. Why do you need an unproven to exist deity with unproven to exist powers and capabilities to explain something that has today already a proper scientific explanation ?

So have your BELIEFS on Origins been proven?..lol Plse provide proof your beliefs on the origin of life are factual.

Once again you show a lack of reading comprehension. I clearly stated that science provided a proper explanation. I did not state that what I posted was factual.
But is makes a lot more sense than believing in supra-natural entities, specially one who can not even produce a faultless instruction manual for humanity (also called the Bible).

;)

[Credendovidis]

John, Quite an excellent introductory summary for champ. I enjoyed reading it. :)

Done with pleasure, MS !

Thanks for that reaction !

;)