Jump to content
Banner by ~ Ice Princess Silky

Atheist bronies: Why not chat a bit?


Kharkov

Recommended Posts

using constructs like timelines, nature, elements of certain affinities and or organizations just as we would use the internet or artificial intelligences he creates these constructs to serve certain purposes from gathering information to influencing the experiments

Link to comment
Share on other sites

using constructs like timelines, nature, elements of certain affinities and or organizations just as we would use the internet or artificial intelligences he creates these constructs to serve certain purposes from gathering information to influencing the experiments

Is there infinite learning possible? How long would it take him to learn how everything is going to be? And why does he care?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What would you do if you had an infinite amount of time to spare and a whole universe to explore and shape? there is no real purpose in these experiments except to pass the time and they will never end as long as there is new material to gather

There is an infinite amount of learning possible as the thig that created both God and the universe itself continues to create even now every moment for eternity

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What would you do if you had an infinite amount of time to spare and a whole universe to explore and shape? there is no real purpose in these experiments except to pass the time and they will never end as long as there is new material to gather

If I could manipulate the universe, what about what if a jellyfish could manipulate the whole universe, or a turtle or a snail or a whale? We have our own biases from our experiences. And considering the universe currently is operating on stable laws of physics, I do not see where the god would be interacting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He wouldn't be directly he's far too busy elsewhere constantly shaping new things why would he bother with the stable dimension we currently inhabit? he also does not simply shape things but also watches the results, like I said it's all for entertainment

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been an Agnostic Atheist for 4 years. 

 

Funny enough, it was first revealed at the Thanksgiving table with my folks when I refused to bow my head. My mother noticed that I haven't been praying in quite a while and she called me out on it. One thing came to another and boom -- I finally admitted it to both her and dad. 

 

Fortunately, I had a high school agnostic sociology teacher to talk to about these things after class. That's when I found out about the likes of Hitchens, Carlin, and Harris.

  • Brohoof 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was a pure agnostic for about 3 years starting at 13.

Then at 16 I declared myself an agnostic atheist.

I went through sort of an antitheistic phase at 17 and a quarter of my 18th.

In a month I'll be 19, and I've somewhat changed in my attitude towards certain religious concepts.

One in particular being reincarnation.

I like the idea that you could one day be an underprivileged poverty stricken citizen, then die, and come back as someone who grows up to be an astronaut or someone who contributes to society in some other way.

I don't subscribe to any religion and do still call myself an atheist, but I just like little thought experiments like this.

I'm particularly turned off by any religion that has to threaten it's followers to ensure their faith.

Prime Example: You're going to receive eternal punishment if you don't do *blank*.

It's just as ridiculous as the "Heaven's Gate" crowd who poisoned themselves to board a fictional alien ship because they believed a comet was going to destroy earth.

Heaven's Gate had to threaten it's followers into committing an action to escape an invisible threat.

The same with "born-again" Christianity, where you have to ask God for forgiveness to escape Satan's eternal wrath (which can only conveniently be confirmed after you die; which is the same for Heaven's Gate).

Difference is that Heaven's Gate is a cult and Christianity is a religion.

They both use the same tactics of threatening people to gain followers, so they're really no different in that aspect.

The primary reason why I don't take too kindly to any religion that threatens eternal damnation is the improbability of it all.

If you're incorrect, who's hell are you going to?

Some ancient religion's hell that is no longer believed by anybody in the modern day?

I see the concept of eternal punishment as more of tool to spread any religion or cult.

In fact, it's the perfect tool to do so.

Think about it.

If I wanted to start a cult or religion (to make money of course), I would throw out the message that if you didn't subscribe to my specific set of beliefs, you'd be eternally damned and tortured without end in the afterlife.

Anybody who hasn't caught onto the pattern yet would have no choice, but to join my cult and encourage their loved ones and friends to do so as well, to save themselves and others from the invisible threat I've made up in my head.

This is why I see any religion like this as particularly unbelievable, and also why I reject allot the world's major religions.

 

Anyways that's my little slice of thought for why I'm an atheist.

Not trying to start an argument here, but if I'm going to introduce myself on a thread like this, I might as well give my full rational for being who I am.

Edited by Blue Snow
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think I ever believed in religion. Even when I took CCD classes back when I was 7, I saw problems with the class. The one time I remember was when the teacher told us to close our eyes and listen for God. I heard nothing but said so anyways. I guess that was the first nail in the coffin.

 

Family wasn't too heavy on church going, so I never got heavily into religious belief. Church has always been boring and a waste of time. So I can say I guess I was never an actual Christian, but I have admitted years ago that I was atheist to myself. Never turned back since.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I consider the concept of a god like entity creating the universe extremely unlikely, but aliens coming down from the heavens could be represented as gods with their advanced technology and stuff. Think of a primitive civilization or a tribe, and aliens come in their ships and stuff and show themselves to this tribe, what is the tribe likely to think of them? In my view they would see them as gods with their knowledge and technology. 

Edited by NightMare Star.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I consider the concept of a god like entity creating the universe extremely unlikely, but aliens coming down from the heavens could be represented as gods with their advanced technology and stuff. Think of a primitive civilization or a tribe, and aliens come in their ships and stuff and show themselves to this tribe, what is the tribe likely to think of them? In my view they would see them as gods with their knowledge and technology. 

 

Okay, but where is this reason to believe in aliens coming from? You basically took away one absurd concept, only to introduce another one in its place. There's no need. It would make neat fiction. However, I don't see any reason to believe that's where the concept of deities came from. I believe it came from pre-scientific cultures not understanding anything about the forces of nature around them, and feeling the need to personify them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is no absolute evidence to brother prove or disprove the existence of God, so it is foolish to absolutely believe/disbelieve in a God.

My thoughts exactly. Let others believe what they wish to believe, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, but where is this reason to believe in aliens coming from? You basically took away one absurd concept, only to introduce another one in its place. There's no need. It would make neat fiction. However, I don't see any reason to believe that's where the concept of deities came from. I believe it came from pre-scientific cultures not understanding anything about the forces of nature around them, and feeling the need to personify them.

Considering how some kings were called gods and such in ancient history, it could be their different attire alone that they could not fathom, being a farmer their whole life, could be convinced of when explained to them. So its likely not aliens, yeah. Just wanted to give more info.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Considering how some kings were called gods and such in ancient history, it could be their different attire alone that they could not fathom, being a farmer their whole life, could be convinced of when explained to them. So its likely not aliens, yeah. Just wanted to give more info.

Also true. If you've ever taken a World History class, you most likely remember people such as Suleiman the Magnificent of the Ottoman Empire, or the more famous Alexander the Great of Greece, or really any Egyptian Pharaoh. These people were practically gods on Earth, who often (unsurprisingly) used tactics of religious belief to convince their followers that they were gods/of the gods. One good example is the Chinese Mandate of Heaven. (Just a little knowledge for you all). Aliens with advanced technology could have the same effect on us that these ancient rulers had on primitive tribes.

Edited by Rulerofblocks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My thoughts exactly. Let others believe what they wish to believe, as long as it doesn't hurt anyone else.

How much indirect hurt would count as negligence, an actual hurt? The only way to find out is to scrutinize its results empirically through behavioral studies and the like. Can't just assume its good, which would be as bad as assuming its bad. Or neutral. Also, I wish to believe in Equestria for an after-life, but I can't. Rather, I wish there was equestria for an after-life. Believing it doesn't matter, it only benefits individuals to believe, it doesn't change reality. If I believe anything thats not true, it has the chance to cause neglect. if I can live a long enough life, it is a certainty that it'd cause neglect. Most people might not be neglected, but some naive people here and there may, or those with other vulnerabilities. Also saying life is life, does contradict giving the disabled more support. If we give them more support, it implies we need to objectively and ethically bolster people's weak points. Which means eventually it'll have to be legislated one way or the other. Just like arguing with a child who is 4 over god would be fruitless, or with various moderate to severe mentally handicapped individuals, what if we are flawed, or those who believe. They are producing our laws, and cannot see negligence when it happens sometimes. Everything is case by case, and debatable, just wanted to let you know, because everyone would argue their beliefs aren't hurting others, or would argue theirs were hurt first, or would argue to dismiss the hurt. It doesn't matter what people think so much as what they do, and what they do is based on what they think. Almost paradoxical. But its like this, if a mentally handicapped president gets elected and uses the nuclear launch codes on washington, shouldn't there be reasonable laws in place to prevent such an event, from co-conspirators? Or not even mentally handicapped, just ill-intentioned. Either way, behavior not being regulated causes neglect, and that example is almost extreme, so lets talk about a more down to earth example.

 

Like, mothers telling their kids if they don't do as they say they will go to hell or god doesn't love them. God doesn't care. Or they might say if you have premarital sex, you will burn in hell, its better to not have sex at all. They think they are saving their kid from eternal torture. They don't see the harm they do. That is neglect. And it happens, part of it happened to me. And my mom isn't super religious, imagine what other parents are like, especially in the bible belt. And thats when studies show communities that preach abstinence, have the most sexual abuse.

 

The definition of harm is too loose and debatable, and most people who are negligent could find ways to convince themselves their belief isn't harming anyone, and some might even believe it from their initial perspective instead of using affirmations to convince themselves they did the right thing. 

 

So I just want to say your statement was premature, and we need more conclusive evidence in behavioral/environmental psychology and socioeconomics etc etc.

 

Granted we have the freedom of speech, and I am aware of the cons of that getting restricted or removed. But this would fall under, avoiding the rights of others being taken away, and avoiding and preventing neglect.

Edited by Lil Pip
Link to comment
Share on other sites

However "premature" my statement is, I stand firmly by the belief that I, nor anyone else, has any business butting into other people's personal lives and their choices regarding religious viewpoint.

 

I live in the Bible Belt.

I am well aware of what goes on here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also true. If you've ever taken a World History class, you most likely remember people such as Suleiman the Magnificent of the Ottoman Empire, or the more famous Alexander the Great of Greece, or really any Egyptian Pharaoh. These people were practically gods on Earth, who often (unsurprisingly) used tactics of religious belief to convince their followers that they were gods/of the gods. One good example is the Chinese Mandate of Heaven. (Just a little knowledge for you all). Aliens with advanced technology could have the same effect on us that these ancient rulers had on primitive tribes.

The problem with claiming to be a god is that some would rebel eventually. Perhaps thats why other gods had to be invented and seem more powerful, to prevent this dictatorship from going on too long. But the problem is, you don't look humble, and you can be challenged. If god is no where to be seen, you can't challenge it, they are unassailable. This probably would save some priests lives, as opposed to a religion claiming pantheism where each priest claims to be a god. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with claiming to be a god is that some would rebel eventually. Perhaps thats why other gods had to be invented and seem more powerful, to prevent this dictatorship from going on too long. But the problem is, you don't look humble, and you can be challenged. If god is no where to be seen, you can't challenge it, they are unassailable. This probably would save some priests lives, as opposed to a religion claiming pantheism where each priest claims to be a god. 

It has worked quite well for past empires. Mandate of Heaven was a pretty successful system, if you don't count the eventual overthrow of a dynasty because of natural disasters indicating that the Mandate was over and a new dynasty needed to start. Egypt had little issue with rebellion against the all-powerful Pharaoh. No one under Alexander the Great's rule rebelled against him; he just simply died of an illness that is unknown. One exception off the top of my head would have to be Julius Caesar of the Roman Empire, ONLY because Rome had been a Republic for so long, and he tried to become an all-powerful dictator/god/king.

Edited by Rulerofblocks
  • Brohoof 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Atheist and Skeptic.... I've always believed that it's just unreasonable, and crazy to believe anything on pure faith, with a lack of physical evidence. I believe that for a society to be healthy, it's people needs to question assertions, and use critical thinking to form educated opinions about topics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It has worked quite well for past empires. Mandate of Heaven was a pretty successful system, if you don't count the eventual overthrow of a dynasty because of natural disasters indicating that the Mandate was over and a new dynasty needed to start. Egypt had little issue with rebellion against the all-powerful Pharaoh. No one under Alexander the Great's rule rebelled against him; he just simply died of an illness that is unknown. One exception off the top of my head would have to be Julius Caesar of the Roman Empire, ONLY because Rome had been a Republic for so long, and he tried to become an all-powerful dictator/god/king.

Maybe a different reason it evolved, is to prevent unknowns suddenly coming to light as a new god from dressing and behaving charismatically, because then conversions would be more common with political figures and such, rather than adhering to one your whole life.

 

and i'm agnostic, can i join?

Of course.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

okay my views are: i'm not a atheist but also i'm not a religious person, i simply think that there's tons of things that we can't explain, i believe in posibilities and mysteries, i can't accept or deny the existance of afterlife or such, but one thing i'm fully sure... there's no God as religion think

  • Brohoof 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've been brought up catholic (90% of my country is catholic so yeah) but I stared doubting this bs around the age of 13 and after that I was rather indifferent about religion. I knew I was an atheist but thought that's just how it works for me and generally saw no harm in religion as a whole. Nowadays I'm strongly against any kind of religion and I can't believe that in the XXI century people actually believe all of this. Any religious texts in my opinion are no more than folk tales and should be viewed as such. All the ignorance, stupidity and lack of reason in religious people makes me upset.

  • Brohoof 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Join the herd!

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...