Comments on: Believing in one less God is actually a pretty big deal http://blog.bumblebeelabs.com/believing-in-one-less-god-is-actually-a-pretty-big-deal/ Official company blog for Bumblebee Labs Thu, 09 Feb 2012 13:50:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Analog Kid http://blog.bumblebeelabs.com/believing-in-one-less-god-is-actually-a-pretty-big-deal/comment-page-1/#comment-9784 Analog Kid Fri, 27 Jan 2012 01:53:00 +0000 http://blog.bumblebeelabs.com/?p=832#comment-9784 WTF? WTF?

]]> By: Alexhawkhead http://blog.bumblebeelabs.com/believing-in-one-less-god-is-actually-a-pretty-big-deal/comment-page-1/#comment-9541 Alexhawkhead Fri, 09 Sep 2011 06:24:00 +0000 http://blog.bumblebeelabs.com/?p=832#comment-9541 Oh man, people are fucking dumb. Oh man, people are fucking dumb.

]]> By: UrMum http://blog.bumblebeelabs.com/believing-in-one-less-god-is-actually-a-pretty-big-deal/comment-page-1/#comment-9446 UrMum Fri, 01 Jul 2011 00:49:00 +0000 http://blog.bumblebeelabs.com/?p=832#comment-9446 There was no need to substitute the statements. This is not mathematics where you can change the variables and the end result will be the same. If you weren't able to internalize what that quote meant, then you need some help with your comprehension. This is basically a criticism on the "One True Faith". All Christians believe that Muslims will burn in hell for worshipping a false god and vice versa. There was no need to substitute the statements. This is not mathematics where you can change the variables and the end result will be the same. If you weren’t able to internalize what that quote meant, then you need some help with your comprehension. This is basically a criticism on the “One True Faith”. All Christians believe that Muslims will burn in hell for worshipping a false god and vice versa.

]]> By: Jeremy Barger http://blog.bumblebeelabs.com/believing-in-one-less-god-is-actually-a-pretty-big-deal/comment-page-1/#comment-9434 Jeremy Barger Mon, 06 Jun 2011 04:48:00 +0000 http://blog.bumblebeelabs.com/?p=832#comment-9434 Those examples don't apply. I can illustrate to you how Shakespeare being William Shakespeare has many times more evidence than him being Francis Bacon. Can you illustrate to me how your particular god has many times more evidence than all other gods that have been believed in? Also, the quote you are inexplicably arguing with is in no way trying to prove the lack of existence of a god. It's simply trying to defend atheists from childish, stupid and unfair attacks. I don't believe in YOUR god. Boo fucking hoo. I also don't believe in all these other gods, as you don't. Should they be crying in their milk that we don't believe? You don't believe because you found a different one to believe in. I don't believe because I haven't found ANY to believe in. Are you suggesting to me that there is something wrong with looking at all of these thousands of gods, and not finding any of them convincing enough to believe in one? If so, then please show me the indisputable proof that your particular god exists while all these others don't. Thank you. Those examples don’t apply. I can illustrate to you how Shakespeare being William Shakespeare has many times more evidence than him being Francis Bacon. Can you illustrate to me how your particular god has many times more evidence than all other gods that have been believed in? Also, the quote you are inexplicably arguing with is in no way trying to prove the lack of existence of a god. It’s simply trying to defend atheists from childish, stupid and unfair attacks. I don’t believe in YOUR god. Boo fucking hoo. I also don’t believe in all these other gods, as you don’t. Should they be crying in their milk that we don’t believe? You don’t believe because you found a different one to believe in. I don’t believe because I haven’t found ANY to believe in. Are you suggesting to me that there is something wrong with looking at all of these thousands of gods, and not finding any of them convincing enough to believe in one? If so, then please show me the indisputable proof that your particular god exists while all these others don’t. Thank you.

]]> By: Buddy Lee http://blog.bumblebeelabs.com/believing-in-one-less-god-is-actually-a-pretty-big-deal/comment-page-1/#comment-9320 Buddy Lee Wed, 17 Nov 2010 03:14:00 +0000 http://blog.bumblebeelabs.com/?p=832#comment-9320 Born atheist: Here's an explanation: http://bornatheist.com/ Born atheist: Here’s an explanation: http://bornatheist.com/

]]> By: Shi http://blog.bumblebeelabs.com/believing-in-one-less-god-is-actually-a-pretty-big-deal/comment-page-1/#comment-9309 Shi Mon, 01 Nov 2010 12:36:00 +0000 http://blog.bumblebeelabs.com/?p=832#comment-9309 you dont know how to reason out logically ^^ evidence are the way u making arguments you dont know how to reason out logically ^^ evidence are the way u making arguments

]]> By: Shi http://blog.bumblebeelabs.com/believing-in-one-less-god-is-actually-a-pretty-big-deal/comment-page-1/#comment-9308 Shi Mon, 01 Nov 2010 12:36:00 +0000 http://blog.bumblebeelabs.com/?p=832#comment-9308 you dont know how to reason out logically ^^ evidence are the way u making arguments you dont know how to reason out logically ^^ evidence are the way u making arguments

]]> By: Tony http://blog.bumblebeelabs.com/believing-in-one-less-god-is-actually-a-pretty-big-deal/comment-page-1/#comment-9215 Tony Sat, 09 Oct 2010 18:41:00 +0000 http://blog.bumblebeelabs.com/?p=832#comment-9215 Absolutely not.....in fact, I don't even give you credit for an intelligent statement. These examples you give are completely different scenarios, and you cannot relate them. It is simply stating that anyone who is religious is very wrongly biased toward their beliefs. In fact all religions can be broken down to show primitive ideas. They can be traced back in history to their origins......do you not find it interesting that the smarter someone is, the less likely they are to believe in these ridiculous stories.....anyone who actually examines all of the evidence, and who does not erroneously project their beliefs in order to rationalize their beliefs, making a circular argument, cannot still be religious. Religion should redirect its energy toward philosophy. Any philosophy that does not have a direct connection to reality, is pointless, and separates one from the natural world. Absolutely not…..in fact, I don’t even give you credit for an intelligent statement. These examples you give are completely different scenarios, and you cannot relate them. It is simply stating that anyone who is religious is very wrongly biased toward their beliefs. In fact all religions can be broken down to show primitive ideas. They can be traced back in history to their origins……do you not find it interesting that the smarter someone is, the less likely they are to believe in these ridiculous stories…..anyone who actually examines all of the evidence, and who does not erroneously project their beliefs in order to rationalize their beliefs, making a circular argument, cannot still be religious. Religion should redirect its energy toward philosophy. Any philosophy that does not have a direct connection to reality, is pointless, and separates one from the natural world.

]]> By: Jim http://blog.bumblebeelabs.com/believing-in-one-less-god-is-actually-a-pretty-big-deal/comment-page-1/#comment-9207 Jim Wed, 06 Oct 2010 15:02:00 +0000 http://blog.bumblebeelabs.com/?p=832#comment-9207 Some 9/11 theories are more plausible than others. All gods are equally implausible. That is the whole *point*. If the Christian god was more plausible than other gods, you'd have a point. It's not. Some 9/11 theories are more plausible than others. All gods are equally implausible. That is the whole *point*. If the Christian god was more plausible than other gods, you’d have a point. It’s not.

]]> By: Advocatus Atheist http://blog.bumblebeelabs.com/believing-in-one-less-god-is-actually-a-pretty-big-deal/comment-page-1/#comment-8922 Advocatus Atheist Sun, 13 Jun 2010 19:38:03 +0000 http://blog.bumblebeelabs.com/?p=832#comment-8922 You're logic is predicated on several falacies. Atheists aren't claiming there's no gods. That's the default position. List 500 gods you believe in. Well, if you don't believing in 499 of those gods, then you're an atheist with regard to those gods.<br><br>You believe in the ONE that some other faith would not. Well, that's what atheists are saying... step back... look... and THINK!<br><br>The Shakespeare interpolation is faulty. Both Francis Bacon and Shakespeare were real historic figures. This is not a just analogy, since the difference between the theist and atheist argument is basically a debate over the believability of the theist claims, ones which defy historical account and most of which lie outside of the testable realm of science. Big difference. You need to be aware of the context of the information, not just manipulate the terminology via semantics for rhetorical reasons.<br><br>Arabs flying planes is not related to whether or not conspiracy theorists believe 9/11 happened or not. The analogy falls flat. I think you need to understand atheism before you can comment on it. Try a dictionary and go from there. You're logic is predicated on several falacies. Atheists aren't claiming there's no gods. That's the default position. List 500 gods you believe in. Well, if you don't believing in 499 of those gods, then you're an atheist with regard to those gods.

You believe in the ONE that some other faith would not. Well, that's what atheists are saying… step back… look… and THINK!

The Shakespeare interpolation is faulty. Both Francis Bacon and Shakespeare were real historic figures. This is not a just analogy, since the difference between the theist and atheist argument is basically a debate over the believability of the theist claims, ones which defy historical account and most of which lie outside of the testable realm of science. Big difference. You need to be aware of the context of the information, not just manipulate the terminology via semantics for rhetorical reasons.

Arabs flying planes is not related to whether or not conspiracy theorists believe 9/11 happened or not. The analogy falls flat. I think you need to understand atheism before you can comment on it. Try a dictionary and go from there.

]]>