Happy Atheist Forum

I found this... Thing, I hesitate to call it a test... But it's sure something allright.

http://www.proofthatgodexists.org/logic.php

I find it made far too many assumptions about me, and the way it's set up is to punish you for not following the EXACT same thought process as the person who made it.

What do you think of this "Proof that God exists?"

If I converted any of you to Christianity, I apologize... It was not my intention to do so.  

I think we've established that all these tests are horribly lopsided.
so...TL;DR

Well that's no fun, I always humour the prosetletizing (I mangled that word, I just know it...) types... Though I haven't found any that are as nice as the Jenova's witnesses.

I invite them in, give them tea and hear them out. They're always so nice... At least until they find out I'm a Pagan.  

Quote from: "Byronazriel"Well that's no fun, I always humour the prosetletizing (I mangled that word, I just know it...) types... Though I haven't found any that are as nice as the Jenova's witnesses.

I invite them in, give them tea and hear them out. They're always so nice... At least until they find out I'm a Pagan.  

Pagan's gain enlightenment through sex, do they not?  Where do I sign?

...Are you coming on to me?  

I'm an asexual Pagan. I believe that sex is a powerful thing, It's just not for me.

To me sex is like... Muay Thai, powerful and worthy of respect. Just not something I'd be interested in.

I saw that a couple of years ago and then some douche invited the guy who wrote it to come post at our forum.  Those were a couple of interesting days.

Quote from: "PoopShoot"I saw that a couple of years ago and then some douche invited the guy who wrote it to come post at our forum.  Those were a couple of interesting days.

Oh Jac didn't write it?

Quote from: "DropLogic"

Quote from: "PoopShoot"I saw that a couple of years ago and then some douche invited the guy who wrote it to come post at our forum.  Those were a couple of interesting days.

Oh Jac didn't write it?

Nope, but I wouldn't be surprised to find it was Boobquake.

The quiz doesn't even attempt to support step 8 with evidence.

One of the biggest problems I have with it is this:

"If you truly believed that there was no such thing as absolute morality then there would be no 'right' or 'wrong,' just things that you or your society happen not to like. Rape and child molestation would not be wrong, they would just become manmade objections. The question then becomes: 'If man is the measure of all things - which man? - which society? If someone with enough power happened to like rape and molestation, what right would we have to impose our morality on him? What would be wrong with the person, or society, with the power imposing their morality on you? Why do we condemn the Nazi society for following their self-imposed morals? Why did the Nazi society not have the right to break from the tradition of morality in western civilizations?

There is no question that societies have different interpretations of morality but if you examine the following sentence you will see the illogic of thinking that societies determine morality. "The majority of the people in our society participated in that evil deed." If morality was up to society, that sentence would never make sense, but we know that morality is beyond societies and such a proposition is possible.

You have denied that absolute moral laws exist but you appeal to them all the time. You say that rape IS wrong because you know that it IS wrong and not just against your personal preference. Unless you reconsider your stand on this matter, your road to this site's proof that God exists ends here. It is my prayer that you come to understand how inconsistent and irrational this line of thinking is and return to seek the truth."

I could sit here and point out every single thing that's wrong with this, or I could play tLoZ:tMC... I know what I'd rather do.

I also noticed that it tends to have EXTREME either or questions... It's very black and white. Also it tends to dismiss entire ideologies and notions purely because of one or two iffy points that THEY put in there in the first place!

I cannot truthfully go any further than step six because the answer lies somewhere between the two given, the "laws" of science, math, and morality are niether universal or individual they're closer to societal.

I like how when you answer that morality isn't absolute that it then says you think child rape might be fun sometimes.  Well duh, pedophiles don't rape children because it's boring.

Quote from: "PoopShoot"I like how when you answer that morality isn't absolute that it then says you think child rape might be fun sometimes.  Well duh, pedophiles don't rape children because it's boring.

Oh, I didn't know a Priest wrote this quiz.

I was looking up why Christians believe in Christianity and not say Shinto, and I found this:

"Though there are other religions that have prophecies in them, none are 100% accurate as is the Bible and none of them point to someone like Jesus who made incredible claims and performed incredible deeds. The Old Testament was written hundreds of years before Jesus was born. Yet, the Old Testament prophesied many things about Jesus. This is undoubtedly evidence of divine influence upon the Bible."

At first I was like :raised:. This isn't just regular everyday stupid, this is some kind of... super stupid. Stupid with a capitol S. Well either that or a mild case of crazy, mixed with ingnorance or deceit.

Quote from: "Byronazriel""Though there are other religions that have prophecies in them, none are 100% accurate as is the Bible

Yet the bible predicts the destruction of Tyre, never for it to be rebuilt.

(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fsophismata.files.wordpress.com%2F2009%2F02%2Ftyre_today_satellite.jpg&hash=d47b9e524670a31c689b227c110e5b9fef488a5a)

That's why Christians want to convert or destory all non-believers... they don't play by their rules.

I didn't click, I had better things to do, like trim my toenails.

QuoteSince Marks believe there is no Commander God (i.e., a God who is perfectly good in essence and issues commands that are good), the ground for morality are gone. The issues then become twofold, for me:

1. The primary issue is the existence of God. There are two options: either God exists or God does not exist. (Marks, like myself, is interested in the existence of the theistic God and not, e.g., polytheism’s multiple gods and avatars.)
2. If God exists, then we have grounds for morality. If God does not exist, then morality does not exist.

Marks then writes in answer to the question: How then shall we live?

I can agree with Marks that the only atheism worth holding is hard atheism. In that we are both dissatisfied with the New Atheist softies.

http://www.johnpiippo.com/2010/08/soft- ... heism.html (http://www.johnpiippo.com/2010/08/soft-atheist-converts-to-hard-atheism.html)

Why live like there is morality if there is no god ?

http://www.philosophynow.org/issue80/80marks.htm (http://www.philosophynow.org/issue80/80marks.htm)

If one is living under a moral construct then the existence of God is established by implication.

Quote from: "freeservant"Why live like there is morality if there is no god ?

Because it maintains peace in the community and tends to provide for one's longer life.  After all, if you break into my house, you're leaving feet-first.

QuoteIf one is living under a moral construct then the existence of God is established by implication.

Is that the god who advocates for genocide and eternal torture?  Mmkay.

Most Christians I know operate under the ussumption that if God does it, that MAKES it moral.

Thus in a very real sense Christian morality couldn't exist without the Christian God.

Quotehttp://www.johnpiippo.com/2010/08/soft- ... heism.html

Why live like there is morality if there is no god ?

http://www.philosophynow.org/issue80/80marks.htm (http://www.philosophynow.org/issue80/80marks.htm)

If one is living under a moral construct then the existence of God is established by implication.

This amazingly flawed notion assumes that morality somehow comes from god...I'm a much more moral person than a lot of my religious friends, and I have never believed in god...ever.  Right and wrong is defined by your parents and peer influence, and the governing body at that point in time.  (Time is an important distinction because back in JC's day, it was cool to throw big rocks at people until they died.)

Quote from: "Byronazriel"Most Christians I know operate under the ussumption that if God does it, that MAKES it moral.

Thus in a very real sense Christian morality couldn't exist without the Christian God.

I am a moral absolutist who would say that morality is objectively true as they are part of God's character and thus the immanence of morality in our moral compass is a deductively valid reason we are not amoral creatures that have no compassion or transcendent altruistic nature.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_absolutism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_absolutism)

QuoteWhy do I now accept hard atheism? I was struck by salient parallels between religion and morality, especially that both avail themselves of imperatives or commands, which are intended to apply universally. In the case of religion, and most obviously theism, these commands emanate from a Commander; “and this all people call God,” as Aquinas might have put it. The problem with theism is of course the shaky grounds for believing in God. But the problem with morality, I now maintain, is that it is in even worse shape than religion in this regard; for if there were a God, His issuing commands would make some kind of sense. But if there is no God, as of course atheists assert, then what sense could be made of there being commands of this sort? In sum, while theists take the obvious existence of moral commands to be a kind of proof of the existence of a Commander, i.e., God, I now take the non-existence of a Commander as a kind of proof that there are no Commands, i.e., morality.

http://www.philosophynow.org/issue80/80marks.htm (http://www.philosophynow.org/issue80/80marks.htm)

As distasteful as this may be for the soft-atheist I see it as the only logical consequence of a godless pitiless universe where death an privation are the only entailment's the right thinking atheist should have in order to be a proper soulless meatpuppet product of naturalism.  Everything is already determined from T=0.

Quote from: "freeservant"I am a moral absolutist who would say that morality is objectively true as they are part of God's character and thus the immanence of morality in our moral compass is a deductively valid reason we are not amoral creatures that have no compassion or transcendent altruistic nature.

Christian morality is neither objective nor absolute.  Morality in a Christian worldview is subjective to God's whims, and has changed.  Moreover, ALL forms of morality include mitigating and extenuating circumstances, meaning NO system of morality is absolute.  It's wrong to kill people, unless...  It's wrong to steal, unless...  It's wrong to rape people, unless...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_absolutism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_absolutism)

QuoteAs distasteful as this may be for the soft-atheist I see it as the only logical consequence of a godless pitiless universe where death an privation are the only entailment's the right thinking atheist should have in order to be a proper soulless meatpuppet product of naturalism.  Everything is already determined from T=0.

Oh my, It's like a No True Scotsman on an outgroup.  No True Irishman, perhaps?

Quote from: "freeservant"I am a moral absolutist

So you believe that Robin Hood is a bad guy?

Quote from: "Byronazriel"

Quote from: "freeservant"I am a moral absolutist

So you believe that Robin Hood is a bad guy?

A fictional bad guy, but a bad guy still.

A thief is a thief.  

He stole from thieves, and assholes. Still a thief, yes, but better than someone who steals candy from babies and purses from old ladies.

I guage morality on a basic rpg style graph: Good to Evil, and Lawful to Chaotic.

I'd put Robin Hood as varying between Chaotic Good, and Chaotic Neutral. Depending on the tale.

Not Evil = Not a bad guy. Though you can be an asshole without being evil, and you can be evil without being an asshole.

QuoteI am a moral absolutist who would say that morality is objectively true as they are part of God's character and thus the immanence of morality in our moral compass is a deductively valid reason we are not amoral creatures that have no compassion or transcendent altruistic nature.

Would you like some dressing on that word salad?
Morality evolved just like we did.  You hurt someone...there are consequences from the people who care about that person.  Morality came from people pushing limits, and majorities decided what was acceptable or not.  If god was responsible for morality in humans...it would not have changed over the last 2000 years.

Quote from: "Byronazriel"I guage morality on a basic rpg style graph: Good to Evil, and Lawful to Chaotic.

I use the common social scale. Law breaker = bad. Law-abiding citizen = good.

It has little to do with evil, which I view as more of a psychological thing than social. Goes to motives, not effects.

For instance, Robin Hood may well not be evil while still being a bad guy.

Quote from: "Asmodean"

Quote from: "Byronazriel"I guage morality on a basic rpg style graph: Good to Evil, and Lawful to Chaotic.

I use the common social scale. Law breaker = bad. Law-abiding citizen = good.

It has little to do with evil, which I view as more of a psychological thing than social. Goes to motives, not effects.

For instance, Robin Hood may well not be evil while still being a bad guy.

The scales are the same essential things with different labels.  Law/chaos gauges whether a character can follow rules/laws, whereas good/evil addresses motives, such as whether killing made the character feel happy.

Quote from: "PoopShoot"The scales are the same essential things with different labels.  Law/chaos gauges whether a character can follow rules/laws, whereas good/evil addresses motives, such as whether killing made the character feel happy.

Obviously, they are not the same since you've managed to equate a bad guy to evil.

Quote from: "Asmodean"

Quote from: "PoopShoot"The scales are the same essential things with different labels.  Law/chaos gauges whether a character can follow rules/laws, whereas good/evil addresses motives, such as whether killing made the character feel happy.

Obviously, they are not the same since you've managed to equate a bad guy to evil.

How?

Biased test is biased.

Joker = Chaotic Evil

Penguin = Neutral Evil

Doctor Doom = Lawful Evil

Deadpool = Chaotic Neutral

Galactus = True Neutral

Punisher = Lawful Neutral

Wolverine = Chaotic Good

Spider-man = Neutral Good

Superman = Lawful Good.

It's a lot more useful way of gauging character than just arbitrarily and ambiguously labelling someone as "good" or "bad."

It's not perfect, but it's the best way I've found for defferentiating "kind of evil" with "good with a darkside."

Where does Batman land in that rating scale?

I'd put him as Neutral Good overall, but you'd have to name a specific Batman becuase he's been portrayed differently during different times and by different people.

Quote from: "Byronazriel"I'd put him as Neutral Good overall, but you'd have to name a specific Batman becuase he's been portrayed differently during different times and by different people.

Heh, so is god.

I'd put God as True Neutral.

Quote from: "Byronazriel"I'd put God as True Neutral.

I prefer True Irrelevance.

For the hell of it I used the link and took the "test." When it came to a question about absolute morality I answered no, there is no such thing as absolute morality. Then it asked if it was absolutely immoral to rape a child. Keeping the concept of "absolute" in mind I answered no.

Here's what came up on the monitor:

"Unless you reconsider your stand on this matter, your road to this site's proof that God exists ends here. It is my prayer that you come to understand how inconsistent and irrational this line of thinking is and return to seek the truth."

So I never got to see the proof that God exists. I only hope it doesn't haunt me for the rest of my life.

It doesn't get better.

Quote from: "PoopShoot"

Quote from: "Asmodean"

Quote from: "PoopShoot"The scales are the same essential things with different labels.  Law/chaos gauges whether a character can follow rules/laws, whereas good/evil addresses motives, such as whether killing made the character feel happy.

Obviously, they are not the same since you've managed to equate a bad guy to evil.

How?

Sorry. Wasn't you - was Byron.  

Quote from: "Byronazriel"Joker = Chaotic Evil

Penguin = Neutral Evil

Doctor Doom = Lawful Evil

Deadpool = Chaotic Neutral

Galactus = True Neutral

Punisher = Lawful Neutral

Wolverine = Chaotic Good

Spider-man = Neutral Good

Superman = Lawful Good.

It's a lot more useful way of gauging character than just arbitrarily and ambiguously labelling someone as "good" or "bad."

It's not perfect, but it's the best way I've found for defferentiating "kind of evil" with "good with a darkside."

It's flawed on SO many levels... You see, that system lumps two different scales together and gives a few names to a few intersection. And thus, people with fundamentally different ideologies, mindsets and personalities can be easily lumped into the same cathegory.

...And that would be a problem if it was measuring ideologies, mindsets or personalities!

It's not supposed to be a unifying psychological theory, or a litmus test of character. It is what it is: A way to gauge a person's moral and ethical alignment.

It's no different than society's Masculine/Feminine system, and/or the sexuality spectrum: A useful too for gauging someone's relative attributes, but ultimately neither will tell you much about who they are.

You can say that someone is a heterosexual masculine male, but that wont tell you about their kinks or much of anything about their personality. It is what it is, and they are who they are.

There is no perfect systems, everything has flaws. You just need to learn to work around them, or replace it with something better... Which will ultimately just be as flawed only in a different way, because there are NO PERFECT SYSTEMS!

I found it amusing that in navigating away from the site (after "failing" the "test") using the "Exit" button provided, one is sent to a Disney page.  It seems that Sinner Ministries is bound and determined to get you into a fantasy world, one way or another.

Quote from: "Byronazriel"...And that would be a problem if it was measuring ideologies, mindsets or personalities!

Yes, it would.

QuoteIt's not supposed to be a unifying psychological theory, or a litmus test of character. It is what it is: A way to gauge a person's moral and ethical alignment.

No, it's a way to gauge an RPG character's moral and ethical alignment. RPG worlds are, in most ways, far less complex than our own and thus, a more complex model would be required for real life (Or real life fiction, for that matter) in order to approach accuracy.

QuoteIt's no different than society's Masculine/Feminine system, and/or the sexuality spectrum: A useful too for gauging someone's relative attributes, but ultimately neither will tell you much about who they are.

It is different.

QuoteYou can say that someone is a heterosexual masculine male, but that wont tell you about their kinks or much of anything about their personality. It is what it is, and they are who they are.

That tells you nothing at all about the degree of that person's masculinity or heterosexuality either. As such, that expression is useless unless applied to an (example numbers) 80% straight and 90% masculine guy. If that person is nearly bisexual and nearly feminine though, it fails miserably alhough the profile does technically fit.

QuoteThere is no perfect systems, everything has flaws. You just need to learn to work around them, or replace it with something better... Which will ultimately just be as flawed only in a different way, because there are NO PERFECT SYSTEMS!

So why do you feel the need to use a thoroughly flawed system to cathegorise people with not a hint of working around the flaws?

Quote from: "Recusant"I found it amusing that in navigating away from the site (after "failing" the "test") using the "Exit" button provided, one is sent to a Disney page.  It seems that Sinner Ministries is bound and determined to get you into a fantasy world, one way or another.

It's the guy who runs the site implying you're a child.  He's a condescending dick.

Frankly, I regard the Christian conception of god as Chaotic Stupid.

Quote from: "Thumpalumpacus"Frankly, I regard the Christian conception of god as Chaotic Stupid.

Eh... We do have a word for that today... Two actually. Sex and lies.

Sheâ,,¢ screws some goat herder up and down and then Sheâ,,¢ lies to her daddy so as to avoid stoning. A few months later, the joy is bundled...  

Ok. I got to the end. I even agreed that there are absolute moral standards (although grouping them with natural laws is strange because they are still created by humans), but I couldn't figure out what happened next. Somehow we had agreed that there are certain laws governing human existence, and then there was some giant, invisible, bearded old Jewish guy calling the shots. Non futuens sequitur.

QuotePlease examine the real reason why you are running from God. It is my prayer that God will open your eyes and change your heart so that you may be saved from your sin, embraced by His forgiving love, and come to know the peace which passes all understanding.

^^  lol if you can follow me  :D

I had to laugh at it - any arguement that comes down to 'if you don't agree with me you must be a peado' is a loser in my book.

Reminded me of this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dC6iQwoXc-w&feature=fvst (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dC6iQwoXc-w&feature=fvst)

Will clicking that send me on a killing spree with the Mother of all Meat Cleaversâ,,¢..?  

Maybe.....

Quote from: "MrsV"Maybe.....

MUST... RESIST... THE URGE MUST... RESIST THE...

*nervous ticks*

Quote from: "MrsV"I had to laugh at it - any arguement that comes down to 'if you don't agree with me you must be a peado' is a loser in my book.

Reminded me of this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dC6iQwoXc-w&feature=fvst (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dC6iQwoXc-w&feature=fvst)

lol  lol  :yay:  :yay:  :yay:

What the fuck, it literally forces you to accept the minor premises that laws of logic and morality are universal, immaterial, and unchanging. Then it tells you god exists because denying that is like air.

I fucking love logic...

christian logic isn't that synonymous?  google chrome tells me to capitalize christian thats how awesome christians are.

Quote from: "OdisBDilligaf"christian logic isn't that synonymous?  

Nope, it's actually an oxymoron, heavy on the moron.

Quotegoogle chrome tells me to capitalize christian thats how awesome christians are.

That's one of the many reasons chrome is dildos.

Quote from: "PoopShoot"That's one of the many reasons chrome is dildos.

Me, I don't see why people with Windows are not satisfied enough with IE and people with Mac with whatever it is Mac supplies...

Being halfway in this Internet business, I have never noticed my browser to have any shortages I would sacrifice it to be rid of.

Quote from: "Asmodean"

Quote from: "PoopShoot"That's one of the many reasons chrome is dildos.

Me, I don't see why people with Windows are not satisfied enough with IE and people with Mac with whatever it is Mac supplies...

Being halfway in this Internet business, I have never noticed my browser to have any shortages I would sacrifice it to be rid of.

Hmm, you don't usually troll.
If it wasn't for Firefox IE users would still be waiting for tabs.
IE is a target for all the black hats.
IE has improved since 8 arrived.
Firefox has lots of add-ons, I find a few of them very useful.
Chrome is a bit minimalist for me, but I use it sometimes.

All this talk about technical stuff is boring, so here's a picture to offened the Christians for great justice:

(https://www.happyatheistforum.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fk2.cdn.okcimg.com%2Fphp%2Fload_okc_image.php%2Fimages%2F16%2F150x150%2F558x800%2F226x38%2F612x424%2F0%2F10525734842921869993.jpeg&hash=c1355b93d2669097267a47466e38c666df5ec17c)

Quote from: "PoopShoot"That's one of the many reasons chrome is dildos.

Heresy!/Noob!

Quote from: "The Magic Pudding"Hmm, you don't usually troll.

No, usually, I don't.

QuoteIf it wasn't for Firefox IE users would still be waiting for tabs.

IE DOES have tabs though. So in that aspect, it is not inferior to FF

QuoteIE is a target for all the black hats.

Yup. Never had a problem though.

QuoteIE has improved since 8 arrived.

It has..? What did they do..?  Google product, it's banned from my computers (There are exceptions to that rule, like their search engine and Android mobile OS)

EDIT: before this grows into a technical debate on reasonably high level, my point is, and always was, this: If I, with my needs and uses for the Internet, can manage very well with OS default browser, why wouldn't regular Joe be able to do just the same..?

Quote from: "Asmodean"EDIT: before this grows into a technical debate on reasonably high level, my point is, and always was, this: If I, with my needs and uses for the Internet, can manage very well with OS default browser, why wouldn't regular Joe be able to do just the same..?

With no effort Joe can have a 7/10 browser.
With very little effort Joe can have a 9/10 browser.
Why wouldn't Joe go for the 9/10?
Supporting worthy competition drives improvement and innovation.
Some people like to give MS a kick now and then.

Quotegoogle chrome tells me to capitalize christian thats how awesome christians are.

Ummm... Isn't "Christian" a propper noun?  You'd capitalize it for the same reason you'd capitalize the name of any other specific thing not worthy of respect.

EX. "I saw a Christian downloading Internet Explorer onto her Netbook, while sitting in a Starbucks in Detroit."

Quote from: "The Magic Pudding"With no effort Joe can have a 7/10 browser.
With very little effort Joe can have a 9/10 browser.

Yup. That does tend to lead to mountains of garbageware on the hard disks, in registry and... Everywhere. In addition, that is, to all the garbageware that the OS provides as pre-installed.

That said, for ye old regualr joe, I believe the difference lies between the 5/10 and 6/10 browsers. A 7/10 browser would be expected to be advanced somewhat beyond the hypothetical Joe's needs and capabilities.

THAT said, there is nothing wrong in chosing software developed by other providers than Microsoft, but running a Microsoft OS with pre-installed web browsers that do their job just fine, I don't see the point.

Wanna stick it to the man? Build your own computer and get Linux.

christian logic is no different then the logic of the rest of humanity.

Yes, just as a gun in the hand of a gangster is no different than a gun in the hand of a police officer.

Hehe. Logically you can't prove that God exists in 8 easy steps.