What's new

Closed Why People Become Atheist?

Status
Not open for further replies.
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.
You seemed to get too engrossed on your interpretation that the essence of my post is about morality. It is not. Again and again, I will repeat it to you: it is about utility/purpose of a deity. Simple.as.that.
 
Last edited:
You seemed to get too engrossed on your interpretation that the essence of my post is about morality. It is not. Again and again, I will repeat it to you: it is about utility/purpose of a deity. Simple.as.that.

I never asserted that it's all about morality. Admit it or not, your post touched the ontology of morality. I explained it clearly. When we comment here, some of our messages contain thoughts that we even ourselves have no control over its deconstruction. Deconstruction doesnt mean destroy but within a thought pr statement, it contains meaning more than what we intend and that it is not only of us who wrote it thay have the right to interpret. Such is the logical web. Our thoughts are interlinked like a web.

I think we.have nothing to proceed here. You go your way and I go my way.
 
I never asserted that it's all about morality. Admit it or not, your post touched the ontology of morality. I explained it clearly. When we comment here, some of our messages contain thoughts that we even ourselves have no control over its deconstruction. Deconstruction doesnt mean destroy but within a thought pr statement, it contains meaning more than what we intend and that it is not only of us who wrote it thay have the right to interpret. Such is the logical web. Our thoughts are interlinked like a web.

I think we.have nothing to proceed here. You go your way and I go my way.
Ok, pagbigyan kita. Let's say my post touches on the subject of morality as a side-effect. So what do you want to talk about now: the main essence which is utility/purpose; or its side-effect morality, which you keep on insisting? Your choice.
 
Last edited:
Alam mo naman siguro kung nasan utak mo diba?
I've been seeing this nonsense for quite a while now. Napaka-babaw na explanation nito. Since the beginning of time, we humans learned how to use tools. It can be stick, rope, stones, fire whatever. Neanderthals might not able to prove that they had a brain because they were unable to peek under their skulls. Modern humans however, using different kinds of tools/technology can peek more than your skull. They can peek even at the most fundamental level: atoms, subatomic particles, quarks, higgs-boson etc.

Ikaw, nakita mo naba god mo using tools (aided by LSD, 'shroom perhaps) or not? So what's your nonsense point?
 
Last edited:
may kaibigan ako na naging atheist, sabi nya dahil daw sa mga naging experience nya sa buhay kaya sya naging ganun. ang sa akin namn ang alam ko sa sarili ko is may mas makapangyarihang nilalang na nagpasimula ng lahat
 
in general people change faith/religion/belief based on experience
i was die hard theist in the past, experience changed my belief

is there something up there a eternal, timeless being which they call it doG/God???
philosophically i cant deny the existence of such doG


is this being (doG) a merciful, oft forgiving n tulad ng nakasulat sa bibliya, quran, tanakh and other religious scriptures??

my rational mind telling me that is not true, that is a pure lie

base on my experience the being we called doG ay may ganto kalagayan/katangian
im still agnostic on this two

1 he is a pure evil/malevolent being - he created evil anyway

2. and the most rational in my opinion he is on eternal sleep
he doesnt care on every human being - your prayer is useless, he is deaf, he is sleeping

maari may magsabi na dahil lang sa mga na experience ko d maganda pagsubok kaya nag bago ang paniniwala ko kay doG.
but that is not the case -- sometimes it takes a lot of terrible experience para magising ang isang tao sa realidad sa katotohanan which will push him and force him to follow the method of
socrates: follow the evidence wherever it leads
 

Attachments

Ok, pagbigyan kita. Let's say my post touches on the subject of morality as a side-effect. So what do you want to talk about now: the main essence which is utility/purpose; or its side-effect morality, which you keep on insisting? Your choice.

That's that.

If according to you, God is just a burden that caused war and killings, that is you chose that argument. Some people say otherwise.
 
I've been seeing this nonsense for quite a while now. Napaka-babaw na explanation nito. Since the beginning of time, we humans learned how to use tools. It can be stick, rope, stones, fire whatever. Neanderthals might not be able to proved that they have a brain because they are unable to peek under their skulls. Modern humans however, using different kinds of tools/technology can peek more than your skull. It can even peek at the most fundamental level: atoms, subatomic particles, quarks, higgs-boson etc.

Ikaw, nakita mo naba god mo using tools (aided by LSD, 'shroom perhaps) or not? So what's your nonsense point?
Ako ba talaga sinasabihan mo o parang mali yata nareplyan mo boss. connected tayo ng thoughts na gusto ko sabihin dun sa nireplyan ko sinimplified ko lang para maintindihan nya agad
 
I encourage you to direct your posts(all that are addressed to me) to the.thread I created and we can start a.conversation/dialogue.
Why create a separate thread? What's the motivation? We posters have been doing this for ages. A poster posts something that another poster disagrees (which might prompt him to counter post).

If all (most) posters will follow your precedence, then we are going to end up with a gazillion duel threads.

Again, what's the motivation?
 
Last edited:
Becomes atheist because they had realized things which are not inline to reality, so many evidences showing up saying what is true or not.

It is a belief needs to be respect as how other also respects one another.
 
Becomes atheist because they had realized things which are not inline to reality, so many evidences showing up saying what is true or not.

It is a belief needs to be respect as how other also respects one another.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

About this Thread

  • 138
    Replies
  • 4K
    Views
  • 46
    Participants
Last reply from:
newflames03

Online statistics

Members online
977
Guests online
5,920
Total visitors
6,897
Back
Top