Why do Atheists Hate Religion?

[the joint]

I'm an Atheist. I don't hate religions. I just believe in science that's all. But what I realized is that many wars, conflicts happened and still happen because of different religions. This is silly!!
I have friends who are jews, christians (catholic, evangelic orthodox), moslems. None of them asked me why I'm not religious. But from time to time they're arguing with each other and I'm just sitting there and shaking my head.

Science works, but 'how' and 'why' does it work?  Unfortunately, science will forever lack the means to answer these questions as the scientific method lacks the ability to explore and comment about real-but-abstract phenomena, e.g. mathematical principles governing physics in general, or the act of perception from which scientific knowledge can be inferred.  Because science cannot explore anything universal enough whose properties distribute to everything, it will never be a source of complete understanding, let alone a complete theory of knowledge in general.

[1714047603]

1714047603

[1714047603]

1714047603

[1714047603]

1714047603

[1714047603]

1714047603

[popcorn1]

I'm an Atheist. I don't hate religions. I just believe in science that's all. But what I realized is that many wars, conflicts happened and still happen because of different religions. This is silly!!
I have friends who are jews, christians (catholic, evangelic orthodox), moslems. None of them asked me why I'm not religious. But from time to time they're arguing with each other and I'm just sitting there and shaking my head.

Science works, but 'how' and 'why' does it work?  Unfortunately, science will forever lack the means to answer these questions as the scientific method lacks the ability to explore and comment about real-but-abstract phenomena, e.g. mathematical principles governing physics in general, or the act of perception from which scientific knowledge can be inferred.  Because science cannot explore anything universal enough whose properties distribute to everything, it will never be a source of complete understanding, let alone a complete theory of knowledge in general.

WHAT    
most of your life revolves around science..you would not be typing on this thread if not for science..
tell me 1 invention that has come out of the bible or any religious books..
the good thing about science is we always learn more and more useful information that can make our lives better..
So how will it make our lives better by reading the bible ..what will we discover that will benefit mankind..
i mean you get religious freaks saying science is the devil
and that same person uses all the implements made by science this is how dumb you religious freaks are
OK lets say we had no science would your life be better or worse.. I will tell you no running hot baths
no phone no telly no cars i could go on for ages what science as invented..

OK lets say we never had religion would your life be better or worse.. my life would be better or no worse because the bible serves no purpose but tells you how to be a better person ..which you should already know because you have feelings and emotions  

So before you call out SCIENCE..think of all the everyday stuff you use that was invented because of science..DUMBASS RELIGIOUS FREAKS..

SCIENCE IS THE DEVIL THEN YOU DUMB ASSES GO MAKE A CALL ON YOUR PHONE OR USE THE INTERNET AND SWITCH THE TELLY ON

THICK STUPID DUMB ASSES

[Cash BTC]

@CashBTC you asked Denker: "What's your definition of atheism?"

Can he have his own definition?
I would hope that his definition is the definition since there is only one.

In my experience, religious people are the ones who often have multiple definitions or interpretations.
I do love chatting with religious people tho....hours of entertainment for sure.

My definition is the Oxford dictionary definition.

===================================================================================================================

...omissis...
most of your life revolves around science..you would not be typing on this thread if not for science..

Your Life should revolve around people not science: this is called a cool Life.

tell me 1 invention that has come out of the bible or any religious books..
...omissis...

Life.

...omissis...
SCIENCE IS THE DEVIL THEN YOU DUMB ASSES GO MAKE A CALL ON YOUR PHONE OR USE THE INTERNET AND SWITCH THE TELLY ON

THICK STUPID DUMB ASSES

Once you cool down tell me how you are going to create Life with your cellphone.

[Vod]

I would hope that his definition is the definition since there is only one.

There are probably multiple ways you can describe anything.  I doubt you could come up with a single, all encompassing definition.

[popcorn1]

@CashBTC you asked Denker: "What's your definition of atheism?"

Can he have his own definition?
I would hope that his definition is the definition since there is only one.

In my experience, religious people are the ones who often have multiple definitions or interpretations.
I do love chatting with religious people tho....hours of entertainment for sure.

My definition is the Oxford dictionary definition.

===================================================================================================================

...omissis...
most of your life revolves around science..you would not be typing on this thread if not for science..

Your Life should revolve around people not science: this is called a cool Life.

tell me 1 invention that has come out of the bible or any religious books..
...omissis...

Life.

...omissis...
SCIENCE IS THE DEVIL THEN YOU DUMB ASSES GO MAKE A CALL ON YOUR PHONE OR USE THE INTERNET AND SWITCH THE TELLY ON

THICK STUPID DUMB ASSES

Once you cool down tell me how you are going to create Life with your cellphone.

So what you trying to say GOD created life THICK CUNT
WHAT YOUR SAYING MAKES NO SENSE TO ME  
GO AND JUMP OF THE ROOF HEAD FIRST YOU STUPID TWAT
I SWEAR YOU REALLY ARE A DICK ..  

How about i have a wank and cum on me cell phone and ram it up your girlfriends cunt here is a way..
sounds stupid does it ..
WELL SO DO YOU TIT HEAD..
what a wanker...
you talk a load of shit..i know i sound harsh..but omg soft twat.

.how do you create life with a cell phone you thick cunt..what a waste of space you really are.
.if this is how you think go kill yourself dick head i wont loose any sleep
world be a better place without thinkers like you TOSSER

YOU OWN THE AWARD FOR THE BIGGEST PLONKER I HAVE EVER SEEN TYPE ON HERE
WOW WOW WOW

[BADecker]

A full member, now. Its name is popcorn1. Starting to sound more and more like Decksperiment with every post.

[Cash BTC]

The fact that the sentence:

GOD created life

makes:

MAKES NO SENSE TO ME

explains why we need a definition of atheism.


Now please, go get a Life, before I'll kill you: your Life should revolves around people not science. You don't have a Life, get over it.



Thank You and best regards.

[popcorn1]

The fact that the sentence:

GOD created life

makes:

MAKES NO SENSE TO ME

explains why

most of your life revolves around science..you would not be typing on this thread if not for science..

please, go get a Life.

Your Life should revolves around people not science.


You don't have a Life, get over it.



Thank You and best regards.

DERRRRRRRRRRRRRRR BRAIN
why are you trying to be a plant pot..
no point even trying to explain to you because your so stupid
you can be on your own and you still be using science arrr do you know what forget about it

you are to thick to understand how old are you 3
sorry for being so harsh BUT   :oTHIS IS MY FACE

make sense please

[popcorn1]

A full member, now. Its name is popcorn1. Starting to sound more and more like Decksperiment with every post.

WELL HE MUST BE CLEVER THEN LIKE ME
OR EF AND BLIND LIKE ME
SORRY BUT SOME COMMENTS ARE SO STUPID I CANNOT BELIEVE THEY WOULD POST SUCH SHIT
AND IT GETS MY BACK UP..

HOW DO YOU CREATE LIFE WITH A CELL PHONE WOW WOW WOW
 PLUS DON.T SAY GOD SAID BECAUSE HE NEVER ITS ALL IN YOUR MIND NUTTERS

[BADecker]

The fact that the sentence:

GOD created life

makes:

MAKES NO SENSE TO ME

explains why

most of your life revolves around science..you would not be typing on this thread if not for science..

please, go get a Life.

Your Life should revolves around people not science.


You don't have a Life, get over it.



Thank You and best regards.

DERRRRRRRRRRRRRRR BRAIN
why are you trying to be a plant pot..
no point even trying to explain to you because your so stupid
you can be on your own and you still be using science arrr do you know what forget about it

you are to thick to understand how old are you 3
sorry for being so harsh BUT   :oTHIS IS MY FACE

make sense please

I gave you the simple definition of atheism and atheist. All the rest of the definitions suggest the same meaning, although many of them do it with an abundance of words.

Since I also showed you that, even if there happened to be no God, the atheist himself is the supreme being he is trying to deny, all you jokers are doing is batting at the air... air that you happen to attach words to, because words are easy.

Since I also showed you that God exists through 3 common scientific laws, atheism is a complete nullity. All that atheists want to do is make noise to prove they are something. But you jokers don't have to do this. God knows you are there, and He accepts you. Now accept Him.

Too bad for you atheist jokers. There isn't anything there in you. And there won't be until you start to accept the fact that God exists.

[Cash BTC]

@popcorn1

Please keep all your replies in one post.

Multiple replies in multiple posts is considered SPAM.

===================================================================================================================

I gave you the simple definition of atheism and atheist. All the rest of the definitions suggest the same meaning, although many of them do it with an abundance of words.

Since I also showed you that, even if there happened to be no God, the atheist himself is the supreme being he is trying to deny, all you jokers are doing is batting at the air... air that you happen to attach words to, because words are easy.

Since I also showed you that God exists through 3 common scientific laws, atheism is a complete nullity. All that atheists want to do is make noise to prove they are something. But you jokers don't have to do this. God knows you are there, and He accepts you. Now accept Him.

Too bad for you atheist jokers. There isn't anything there in you. And there won't be until you start to accept the fact that God exists.

Yes and I did agree with you with the definition of atheism being the one in the Oxford dictionary:

Definition of atheism in English:
noun
[mass noun]
Disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

Ref: http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/atheism

What are you rattling about?


Thank You and best regards.

[the joint]

I'm an Atheist. I don't hate religions. I just believe in science that's all. But what I realized is that many wars, conflicts happened and still happen because of different religions. This is silly!!
I have friends who are jews, christians (catholic, evangelic orthodox), moslems. None of them asked me why I'm not religious. But from time to time they're arguing with each other and I'm just sitting there and shaking my head.

Science works, but 'how' and 'why' does it work?  Unfortunately, science will forever lack the means to answer these questions as the scientific method lacks the ability to explore and comment about real-but-abstract phenomena, e.g. mathematical principles governing physics in general, or the act of perception from which scientific knowledge can be inferred.  Because science cannot explore anything universal enough whose properties distribute to everything, it will never be a source of complete understanding, let alone a complete theory of knowledge in general.

WHAT    
most of your life revolves around science..you would not be typing on this thread if not for science..
tell me 1 invention that has come out of the bible or any religious books..
the good thing about science is we always learn more and more useful information that can make our lives better..
So how will it make our lives better by reading the bible ..what will we discover that will benefit mankind..
i mean you get religious freaks saying science is the devil
and that same person uses all the implements made by science this is how dumb you religious freaks are
OK lets say we had no science would your life be better or worse.. I will tell you no running hot baths
no phone no telly no cars i could go on for ages what science as invented..

OK lets say we never had religion would your life be better or worse.. my life would be better or no worse because the bible serves no purpose but tells you how to be a better person ..which you should already know because you have feelings and emotions  

So before you call out SCIENCE..think of all the everyday stuff you use that was invented because of science..DUMBASS RELIGIOUS FREAKS..

SCIENCE IS THE DEVIL THEN YOU DUMB ASSES GO MAKE A CALL ON YOUR PHONE OR USE THE INTERNET AND SWITCH THE TELLY ON

THICK STUPID DUMB ASSES

Empiricism, the epistemological foundation for science, is the theory that knowledge is only derived from empirical/physical phenomena.  However, empiricism carries non-empirical assumptions, e.g. observation has no causal effect on physical reality.

The problem with an empirical methodology wielding non-empirical assumptions is that this means the assumptions are derived elsewhere.  In this case, that "elsewhere" is philosophical.  But, if we assume this non-empirical assumption to be valid, then we concede that knowledge must also derive from outside empiricism, i.e. outside science.

Yes, science works, and yes it produces technology that improves convenience and quality of life.  That, however, does not mean it is the best source of knowledge in all cases, and we know this especially because science doesn't work without its philosophical and mathematical underpinnings.

[Cash BTC]

Empiricism, the epistemological foundation for science, is the theory that knowledge is only derived from empirical/physical phenomena.  However, empiricism carries non-empirical assumptions, e.g. observation has no causal effect on physical reality.

The problem with an empirical methodology wielding non-empirical assumptions is that this means the assumptions are derived elsewhere.  In this case, that "elsewhere" is philosophical.  But, if we assume this non-empirical assumption to be valid, then we concede that knowledge must also derive from outside empiricism, i.e. outside science.

Yes, science works, and yes it produces technology that improves convenience and quality of life.  That, however, does not mean it is the best source of knowledge in all cases, and we know this especially because science doesn't work without its philosophical and mathematical underpinnings.

I didn't replied to your post because your nick: "the joint"

I was told all my life that people do not believe me because I was high: now it's your turn.


Thank You and best regards.

[the joint]

Empiricism, the epistemological foundation for science, is the theory that knowledge is only derived from empirical/physical phenomena.  However, empiricism carries non-empirical assumptions, e.g. observation has no causal effect on physical reality.

The problem with an empirical methodology wielding non-empirical assumptions is that this means the assumptions are derived elsewhere.  In this case, that "elsewhere" is philosophical.  But, if we assume this non-empirical assumption to be valid, then we concede that knowledge must also derive from outside empiricism, i.e. outside science.

Yes, science works, and yes it produces technology that improves convenience and quality of life.  That, however, does not mean it is the best source of knowledge in all cases, and we know this especially because science doesn't work without its philosophical and mathematical underpinnings.

I didn't replied to your post because your nick: "the joint"

I was told all my life that people do not believe me because I was high: now it's your turn.


Thank You and best regards.

em·pir·i·cism
əmˈpirəˌsizəm/
nounPHILOSOPHY
the theory that all knowledge is derived from sense-experience. Stimulated by the rise of experimental science, it developed in the 17th and 18th centuries, expounded in particular by John Locke, George Berkeley, and David Hume.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_science#Observation_inseparable_from_theory

Although it is often taken for granted, it is not at all clear how one can infer the validity of a general statement from a number of specific instances or infer the truth of a theory from a series of successful tests.[12] For example, a chicken observes that each morning the farmer comes and gives it food, for hundreds of days in a row. The chicken may therefore use inductive reasoning to infer that the farmer will bring food every morning. However, one morning, the farmer comes and kills the chicken. How is scientific reasoning more trustworthy than the chicken's reasoning?

Any argument in favor of induction must avoid the problem of the criterion, in which any justification must in turn be justified, resulting in an infinite regress. The regress argument has been used to justify one way out of the infinite regress, foundationalism. Foundationalism claims that there are some basic statements that do not require justification. Both induction and falsification are forms of foundationalism in that they rely on basic statements that derive directly from immediate sensory experience.

Another approach is to acknowledge that induction cannot achieve certainty, but observing more instances of a general statement can at least make the general statement more probable.

All observation involves both perception and cognition. That is, one does not make an observation passively, but rather is actively engaged in distinguishing the phenomenon being observed from surrounding sensory data. Therefore, observations are affected by one's underlying understanding of the way in which the world functions, and that understanding may influence what is perceived, noticed, or deemed worthy of consideration. In this sense, it can be argued that all observation is theory-laden.

Moreover, most scientific observation must be done within a theoretical context in order to be useful. For example, when one observes a measured increase in temperature with a thermometer, that observation is based on assumptions about the nature of temperature and its measurement, as well as assumptions about how the thermometer functions. Such assumptions are necessary in order to obtain scientifically useful observations (such as, "the temperature increased by two degrees").

[BCEmporium]

Watching a documentary about yet another religion of crackpots;

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-32412212

Now tell me, do we have reasons to love religion?
But there's a catch, a good Atheist will unlike or hate religion(s), not people. They're separate things, the same people without religion can be good people, the issue is often the religion itself and its doctrines.

[kampretkabur]

unfortunately, i dont hate any of them they have what they believe is right. but of course atheists hate religion, coz they dont believe it

[BCEmporium]

unfortunately, i dont hate any of them they have what they believe is right. but of course atheists hate religion, coz they dont believe it

Sorry to disagree with that! That sort of sentence is what religious people use to play victim!
The problem relies on doctrines. You see, isn't the "I believe in this" the problem, it's the "because I believe in this then YOU must do that (or else)".
Nobody cares about belief itself.

[BADecker]

A full member, now. Its name is popcorn1. Starting to sound more and more like Decksperiment with every post.

WELL HE MUST BE CLEVER THEN LIKE ME
OR EF AND BLIND LIKE ME
SORRY BUT SOME COMMENTS ARE SO STUPID I CANNOT BELIEVE THEY WOULD POST SUCH SHIT
AND IT GETS MY BACK UP..

HOW DO YOU CREATE LIFE WITH A CELL PHONE WOW WOW WOW
 PLUS DON.T SAY GOD SAID BECAUSE HE NEVER ITS ALL IN YOUR MIND NUTTERS

Cleverly ridiculous.

Most atheists are so caught up in the thing that they believe, that they don't even realize that it is a religion. And if somebody tells the about it, they would rather ignore it than Google it. But if they Google it and find out it is true, they would rather lie about it, and try to hide the fact rather than embrace the truth.

[BADecker]

unfortunately, i dont hate any of them they have what they believe is right. but of course atheists hate religion, coz they dont believe it

Sorry to disagree with that! That sort of sentence is what religious people use to play victim!
The problem relies on doctrines. You see, isn't the "I believe in this" the problem, it's the "because I believe in this then YOU must do that (or else)".
Nobody cares about belief itself.

The important point that atheism revolves around, is the idea that God exists. Now that I have shown that God factually exists with the 3 scientific laws, cause and effect, universal entropy, universal complexity, all that is left for atheism is to argue about its own doctrine.

[BCEmporium]

You've "factual evidence" of nothing and atheism has no doctrines.