Topic: The problem with atheism. - page 21. (Read 38470 times)

Dammit, you had to go there. Therein lies the crux of the matter. Pun intended. God, who won't or can't show itself, creates an avatar and has it destroyed, briefly, so that "we" are all "saved" from "sin". Convenient, eh?

Try that in life. Kill somebody, then blame it all on them. You will hang. Further, all of the "justifications" in the world do not forgive the very IDEA that a being that is mortal deserves ETERNAL damnation, regardless of what they may have done to other mortals. Also, as an anarchist, I'm in favor of compensatory justice, not punitive. Punishment only works to CORRECT a behaviour. Punishment that never ends is evidence of sadism, and nothing else.

Not just mutations. Diseases, viruses, cancers, extreme inefficiencies in our biology, extreme fragility in our environment, tons of vestigial organs and completely useless body parts in many animals including us... If there was someone intelligent creating all life on earth, why was he so horribly bad at it?

Rassah, it is rare that I disagree with you, so don't take it personally. Science doesn't work by proving things true, it works by lack of disproof. The idea of the scientific method is to test a hypothesis to destruction. If it can't be destroyed, it becomes part of the theory. It is always open, no matter how well "established", to new data and further attempts at disproof.

However, absence of evidence does imply evidence of absence. It just doesn't prove it. Which is why the common Christian comeback has no good answer, as they are asking us to prove or disprove a negative. Which IS a logical fallacy

I have to take severe exception to this. I have been an atheist for some time now, and reading, then extrapolating, studying, searching and HOPING it was true (because I had wasted half my life believing). I actually encourage everyone who call themselves Christian to read the bible, straight through, and see if they still believe. I can't recall who said it, but a rather prominent atheist once said that the bible is the best argument for atheism that exists. I don't agree with that, as there are far more logical reasons to disbelieve in deities, but it's still been my experience that the VAST MAJORITY of atheists whom I have interacted with (and it's been rather a lot) are far better versed in the bible than the majority of Christians. The main exceptions I have seen to this are people from nations or places where Christianity holds little sway. Even there, they seem to be more knowledgeable than most Christians.

My take is simple, though not simply arrived at. If there is a god, and it wants to be worshiped, and it is omnipotent, (all Christian claims, here) Then it would have the power AND MOTIVATION to make this obvious. We would not need a collection of old books voted upon by political committees in order to validate the existence and will of such a being. Thus, if there is a god, based on the observations of the world and visible universe around us, I have to say that it doesn't want to be worshiped. The more likely solution is that it simply doesn't exist, but the jury is out on that.

I could go to great lengths in exposing the multiple mistakes and fallacies contained within the Christian bible and it's derivatives, but at this time I don't see the point. It's all well documented, and there is no swaying a "true believer" with facts. A thing I have come to realize after a great deal of personal pain. For psychological reasons, it is very difficult to relinquish belief, even when it has been proven to be false. It was for me. Losing my religion was personally devastating until I figured out who I really am, and managed to initiate a new paradigm. I'm a pretty tough person, so if it was that hard for me, I can understand why people cling to it. But that doesn't make it correct.

For God so loved the world that He gave His only Son, that whosoever believes in Him will not perish but have eternal life.

That gift is for everyone.  He wills that EVERYONE comes to repentance.  He is no respecter of persons.  He loves us so much He gave his Son for us.  What more could He have possibly done?

But we have a choice to accept His gift or not.  You can look at him as prideful and vain but I look at Him as a loving Father that is to be respected but still loves us and wants what is best for us.

Come on Rassah.  We have had this discussion before.  I know how frustrated you are with the concept of a God that would send anyone at all to Hell for any reason.  But is it fair that no one gets punished for the evil they commit on earth?  Should people be allowed to get away with anything and everything?  There is a price to be paid for sins.  We have all committed them.  The only ones that will be cleared of them are the ones that accept the blood of God's son as a ransom for those sins.

That's not a logical fallacy, and is in fact exactly scientific. The fallacy you are thinking of is "It's true, because it has not yet been proven false," which is the exact opposite of what you have said. In science everything is considered false until proven true. In religion, everything is true until proven false (an impossibility, and thus a fallacy).

There are mutations in the world for sure, but I wholeheartedly agree (as you probably know about me anyways that the world was perfectly created in the beginning.

From this article: http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cfl/mutations

Hmm. This just reaffirms my belief that the Christian god is a vain and prideful asshole. Who the hell tortures people for eternity just because they don't give them attention or worship him?

Why do you believe that everything is too perfectly created? Are you not aware of the massive flukes and flaws that exist in biology and nature?

You are using logic to try and prove the existence of God but I'm proving you don't know how logic works.  For two things to be equivalent they must have the same identical properties.  That's what you must prove.  If you are just putting the God label on truth then you can do that, but that is not the commonly understood definition of God.  Just look it up in a dictionary if you don't believe me.  And using your own labels is not how language works.  Because if we all used our own labels for everything communication would be almost impossible. 

Either you accept common definitions for God and truth or you are just trying to redefine terms to suit your indoctrinated belief.

Should have quoted just the part it was responding to, which is the part where he mentions Qualia.

The genetic make up, the taste, the smell, the look. All these are unique to apples.

"Omniscient powers" have nothing to do with the argument, and the argument doesn't require me proving that absolute truth "has omniscient powers."  You're overthinking this.  Why do you have such a problem with me calling something 'god' instead of 'absolute truth' when I set them to be equal?  Whatever label you want to tack onto it, there still remains the burden of defining the concept.

By the way, what do you think the "apple" quality is that gives an apple it's appleness?  What property is that?  I'm specifically referring to something unique to apples and not to, for example, all fruits in general.

Well, 13 billion years is not really suddenly.
If you multiply by the number of planets,
it's quite probable that the earth would exist.

Why pick one religious book?  Well that would take a while to write.  Here is a good link:  http://www.focusonthefamily.com/faith/the_study_of_god/how_do_we_know_the_bible_is_true.aspx

That said, have you read the Bible?  I would say at least read the gospel of John before you discredit it. Maybe you will then see why perhaps so many have found it to be true for themselves.

I do not think believers are crazy. But why do you pick one religious book? Why not the Egyptian book of the dead? People believed that book as fervently as you believe in the Bible.  Or why not worship Kim Young Un, leader of North Korea. Many people are prepared to die for him as their god. The number of people who believe and how much they believe is not a factor in truth. The world was never flat, even when it was widely believed.

Who witnessed this?  This is a parable that Jesus told.  If He is God in the flesh it would not be hard for Him to know the story.

But as for the Bible being proof, therein lies the dilemma.  If the Bible is not true then you are right.  There is no need to worry.  Eat drink and be merry should be the goal of life.  On the other hand, if the Bible is true then what?  It should be a bit disconcerting and cause someone to at least study the Bible carefully to make sure they are right. Most people who discredit the Bible have never even read it.  As for the Bible just being any other book, millions of people believe it to be true to the core of their being.  People die for their faith in Jesus that they have found by reading the Bible.  Are we all crazy or is there something more to this book that has been cherished for so many?  No one would die for Harry Potter so that book cannot compare.  You could debate that other religious books are as valid but the Bible stands apart.  It is the only book that says that there is no way we can earn salvation by our own merit.  It is a free gift from God.  Other "gods" or paths are all about working or earning our way to heaven somehow.