First up: I think the iPhone 4 looks great, I do, it's a really nice looking piece of kit.

But again with Apple trying to pretend they invented something. Video calling now? Really? Really... the feature that has been on pretty much EVERY 3G phone out there? And it's not even doing it over 3G?

Come on guys, don't insult people. Even your average Joe knows that phones have had video calling for years now.

I hadn't watched this presentation, only the video 'ads' they have for it, and I seriously didn't think they'd be so bold as to try to suggest that NOW it's a reality, when it's been so for ages. I thought they might say that the iPhone gives a BETTER experience, but not try to suggest it's created it. Man.

Example Debate 3:

Unicornist: "What is your evidence for there being no unicorns"?

Theist: "Because unicorns only exist in fairytale books created by man."

Unicornist: "Good point."

Bible not been refuted, eh?

The Bible actually refutes itself in the very first section of the very first book by giving two separate and contradictory accounts of the creation story.

Here is a summary for those too lazy to look it up for themselves.

Genesis 1:1 - 2:4 summary:
God creates the heavens and the earth. He separates the light from the darkness (whatever that means). He creates a dome to separate Earth water from space water. He creates land, fruit and vegetation. God makes 2 lights; the sun for a day light and the moon for night light. He creates water life, bird life, sea monsters and animals (all at once without any type of evolution), and then tells them all to fuck the shit out of each other. God creates humans in their (why is this plural?) image and gives them dominion over the other beasties, and then tells them to bone up a storm too. God tells the humans and animals to help themselves to all the plants, fruits and vegies they like (but makes no mention of eating meat). On the seventh day, God orders a pizza, smokes some weed and plays Xbox all day. These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created.

Done deal, right!? But wait, there's more...

Genesis 2:4-2:22 summery
On the day that God created the heavens and the earth, back before there were plants, rain and people to work the land, God forms a man from dust on the ground and breathes life into his nostrils. After that, he creates plantlife, the garden of Eden and a tree of knowledge of good and evil. God puts the man in the garden of Eden and tells him not to eat from the tree of knowledge. Then God creates all of the animals and tells the man to name them all. Finally, he creates a woman out of the man's rib.

Can you spot the differences in these two contradictory creation myths?
-The first myth spans 7 days, the second spans one day.
-The plants and animals are created before man in the first myth, and after in the second.
-In the first myth humans are created all at once, in the second the man is made first - the woman second.

Did God forget to proofread?

It is theorized that these two competing creation stories - which were passed from generation to generation through oral tradition before being written down - were both so popular, that the creators of the version of Genesis that ended up in the book that we now call 'the Bible' decided to include both.

Another interesting discussion is how the Bible was assembled from many stories written by many different people over hundreds of years, and even after it was codified, was (and still is) edited and translated and manipulated, which explains its many shifts in mood, tone, and content. If you read the Bible as literature, it is full of some great stories. The stories of David and Lot are juicy. Ecclesiastes was written by a total nihalist and is pretty bad ass. Revelation is fun too, in its own sociopathic way.

I appreciate your comment, and I understand what you're saying. I once wrote a 16-page paper on the "Problem of Evil," so I understand it a little bit. It took me at least 16 pages to write a sufficient solution to the Problem of Evil, but I feel that I did it. To me the solution is extremely simple, but I can never seem to convince anyone of this. Frankly, I don't have the time or the energy to try and convince you, but I'll give some highlights.

God is a perfect being, yet he is eternally progressing. He progresses through his creations. His creations increase, his children grow, etc. We, as his creations, are extensions of the progression of God. I think that you understand that in order for us to grow or be anything more than biological robots, we must have choice. God allows us to make evil choices and hurt ourselves and each other. He has provided the means for us to learn "the rules," but because of agency, people are free to choose what they will believe. This always worries people when I talk about it. We are all born with the ability to tell good from evil, but many people are never given a fighting chance to be "good" because of the evil of others or for whatever reason. The simple truth is that God is perfectly just. Because he has given us agency and because he will not intervene in our agency, some people do not have the same choices to be good as you or I, but it would be crazy to believe that God condemns people for things that they do not have a choice in. Whatever the inequites of this world that are created by man, God will make sure that all is fair, all is resolved, all is right. People worry about death and despair in this life, saying that a just God would not allow people to suffer so much. But to God, death is not a punishment. This life is so incredibly short in the grand scheme of eternity that it is not hard for me to believe that God will take care of it. If we suffer because of floods and famine, it will be for our good. You might say that people who live their entire lives in poverty are not benefitting from hardship, but God will reward us and make up a million times for our sufferings. You'd better believe that impoverished people are humble, and God has promised to reward the humble and meek. In the scope of eternity, suffering is a blessing. He has promised rewards in heaven for enduring our trials well that are beyond our comprehension. I think that's benevolent.

A couple more things concerning the Atonement. I do not believe that we will be punished or condemned for our sins unless we make them with full knowledge and consent. Even then, we have the chance to repent.

Here's a really corny video that is a brief explanation of why the Atonement is necessary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gdc8rKcc4t4

How does sending his son to be brutally executed better equip God to forgive us? Even if it does, how is that a moral thing to do? Did everyone that died before 1AD go to hell? If not, then what made Jesus necessary later?

Like the video explains, in order for justice to be satisfied, Christ had to "pay for" our sins. In the garden of Gethsemane, not on the cross, Christ suffered for our sins. This is a matter of faith that I cannot explain. He was a mortal god, and because of this he was the only one who could suffer all of that exquisite pain. It had to happen the way that it did because Christ had to suffer as we will suffer. He had to

1. Have a body, because we have bodies
2. Be separated from God, because we are separated from God
3. Die, because we will die

It was moral because Jesus volunteered and knew what he was doing. And of course everyone before 1AD isn't going to hell. Time is a mental construct. The Atonement pays both past and future debts. Another thing is that we are not punished in eternity for mistakes that we make in a limited amount of time. If we do not repent, we have to pay the debt for our own sins instead of Jesus doing so, and then all but the vilest of sinners will be rewarded. I believe that only those that have a perfect understanding and knowledge of God and then deny him will be cast off forever. And maybe a few other really, really bad people. And that's almost no one.

I'm not done and there are lots of holes, but I want to go to bed. As a general rule, if something about Christian doctrine seems unjust or unmerciful or illogical to you, it is probably because it is wrong.

In reply to this comment by xxovercastxx:

Kara (after she died), Head Baltar, and Head Six were all angels, doing the will of the superior being (not necessarily god).

Head six at some stages in the series actually caused physical harm to real baltar, not limited to lifting him off the ground in some cases. Her ability to manipulate him, even physically like that, is just the same as Angel-Starbuck, only kara was visible to everyone, and was oblivious to her nature until the very end.

Daniel was just a story plot used to fill in the missing cylon model number, and plays no role in the entire series other than that.

Hera is the mitochondrial eve. Her mixed blood gives the best of the cylons and the humans of the colonies, to man kind on new-earth.

The cylons of Earth 1.0 were the cylons that the original humans before them created. There has been a cycle of man evolving, man creating technology, man mastering technology, technology rebelling against man, and both of them wiping each other out. These cylons were no different.

I too was disappointed with the ending, but theres no real mystery after its all over, just....really lazy writing.

Atheists can't actually be wrong because all religions were created by man, atheism is against religions created by mortal men.

If God exists, he is unknowable and impossible to understand. Human vanity is responsible for the idiotic belief that the entire known universe was created for them.

I say we are simply an anomaly in a chaotic system governed by solid rules we are still trying to understand fully.

This hasn't stumped philosophers. I solved The Problem of Evil in an 8-page double-spaced paper. No problem.

>> ^videosiftbannedme:
Freewill was a loophole created by the Church, after philosophers stumped Christians with the existence of evil. I believe the argument is summed up as:
The traditional conception of the Christian god is that he/she/it/whatever is:
1. All knowing.
2. All powerful.
3. Good.
So why does evil exist? If "god" was good, he wouldn't let something as bad as evil continue to exist, surely if he was all powerful...so, "god" either:
1. Doesn't know about it, therefore not all-knowing
2. Can't do anything about it, therefore not all-powerful, or
3. Won't do anything about it, therefore not good.

So the Church created the idea of "god" giving you a freewill, where you can choose. If you don't choose, or choose to go against what God wants, then you go to "hell", which isn't a choice at all. This is elementary logic, based on the rules that govern our reality (which "god" supposedly created).God didn't create man; Man created god.

Freewill was a loophole created by the Church, after philosophers stumped Christians with the existence of evil. I believe the argument is summed up as:

The traditional conception of the Christian god is that he/she/it/whatever is:
1. All knowing.
2. All powerful.
3. Good.

So why does evil exist? If "god" was good, he wouldn't let something as bad as evil continue to exist, surely if he was all powerful...so, "god" either:
1. Doesn't know about it, therefore not all-knowing
2. Can't do anything about it, therefore not all-powerful, or
3. Won't do anything about it, therefore not good.

So the Church created the idea of "god" giving you a freewill, where you can choose. If you don't choose, or choose to go against what God wants, then you go to "hell", which isn't a choice at all.

This is elementary logic, based on the rules that govern our reality (which "god" supposedly created).

God didn't create man; Man created god.

>> ^Blocky:
The Bible was written by God
Because God wrote the Bible it is infallible.
If you question the infallibility of the Bible you are a heretic and not worth hearing


And "God" was created by Man. Your point?

I have problems with religion as created by man but with belief in God subjectively I have no problem with, it's really not my place to tell others what to believe.

I just don't like other religions telling me because I don't worship God or overtly praise him in some way am lesser of a being. I just think frankly God has better things on his mind then indulge himself in a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of an atom of an electron of a quark his creation.

Man's belief in relating to a higher God on their own plain is ridiculous I believe, mostly because that relationship has been used and abused to commit various acts of war.

But that is simply because the belief in God was the mechanism of power in the old days, I been told by God to kill all those who oppose him thus you should obey.

But I believe for most people Faith and belief in God is a way of forgiving yourself and your inability to control the situations in life, because it provides a very safe comforting answer to myriad complicated psychological questions. What is my purpose? What will happen in the future? Will everything be okay? Am I part of something more? Belief in God and possessing Faith that a greater being is watching over you is very comfortable in that sense.

That is not meant to say it's stupid or anything like that but simply to illustrate that belief and religion have a very important psychological soothing effect that explains it's hold over Humanity for so many years.

I don't believe religion will ever go away, it will only mutate into newer forms over time. Christianity, Islam, Judaism are just newer forms of older religions, of Pagan traditions that held sway before.

Come the 22nd Century I can fully see us worshiping Black Holes or something, because Faith and God are ultimately unknown figments of our imaginations, we create the image of what we think God will be or is or not. Simply because we are limited by how far we have evolved both physically, mentally, psychologically and the ideas we have so far about the framing of the world.

The Bible is fallible, not because it's made by God but because it's made by Man.

Chicar, to provide one set of answers to your questions:

1) How does one face death with the belief that there is an afterlife? Does it make it OK that you are leaving your mortal self? Your time on Earth is ending regardless of what comes after. How have you spent your time? Have you led a life that you feel proud of? Having the opportunity to reflect upon those questions after death does not make death any easier. Believing that I will spend eternity in God's presence does not offer any more solace than believing that after having spent my life fighting for what I believe is right, I will have the opportunity to rest. Nothingness need not be viewed as fearsome.

2) I don't think I have any question in my life weighing more heavily on my mind. Self-exploration and attempting to discover as much as I can about the natural world and universe around me consume a large portion of my day. Philosophy is a good outlet for secular pursuit of such grand questions.

3) I feel that this question presupposes the existence of God and is too vague to provide a good answer to. But perhaps it is just my interpretation of the question that is vague. I will do my best to answer as succinctly as I can. Having been raised Roman Catholic, I spent a lot of time examining the philosophy of the church, but not in relation to God's will(even when I believed in God). It must be recognized that the church is primarily a social institution, created by man, for man. As such, it cannot accurately reflect the will of God, again presupposing God's existence. It will always reflect the will of man. Holy men's interpretations of God's will is inherently tainted simply as a result of being human.

I could talk for hours on these questions. Discussing spirituality, even as an atheist, brings me great inner peace. The reason I feel frightened by many Christians, particularly in America, these days is that they have politicized their religion. They have removed its spirituality and have taken to using it as justification for their agendas, which are frequently filled with a shocking amount of hate.