Topic: Why do Atheists Hate Religion? - page 220. (Read 901515 times)

Now, that's quite presumptuous of you, suggesting that I don't know what my underlying assumptions are. It seems that you can barely stay on point. Are you a mind reader that you know my underlying assumptions enough so that you can examine them? If you happen to know my underlying assumptions, are you so foolish that you think that you can judge their validity fairly?

Okay. I'll tell you what my underlying assumptions are in this case. I assume that Newton's 3rd Law is indeed a law as science has declared. I assume that there is great complexity in the universe, because any honest researcher will tell you about the complexity that is denying him his research answers easily. I assume that scientists and others who have examined many aspect of entropy, are correct when they say that entropy is universally all-pervading, and that there is nothing factually found or proven that opposes it.

Now, if you don't know these things, you can go out and research them yourself, so that you can assume that they are correct, as well. In fact, you might be able to do some experiments thereby proving them to yourself.


Hurt your itty bitty feelings, did I? You suggest that I do this to you, and the way you suggest it does it to me. Can't take it, huh? Perhaps forum life, and maybe relationships in general, are things that are not suited to you... at least until you become a bit more mature.



Actually, it is your challenge that changes the subject.

The on-topic part that I was doing was to show why atheists hate religion. You and your challenges without doing your research, shows how you would rather change the subject so that we move away from the proof that God exists, and away from showing atheists why they hate religion... which is... because religion is right, and not even atheists like being proven wrong.

You have free will in deciding to have faith in him or not.



Best regards.

Free will?  That is something I can prove false...

If you believe these 3 common Christian beliefs:
1) God created the universe exactly as it is
2) God could have created the universe differently if he wanted to (billions of possibilities)
3) God is Omniscient (knows the future)

Then free will cannot exist

God created this specific universe, knowing exactly what would happen, including your personal choices (free will)...  he could have created a universe where I was a Christian instead of an Atheist, but God created this universe, knowing that I would be an Atheist... It's God's fault I'm an Atheist, not mine!



A point about free will and prayer...

When you pray for God to change his divine plan to benefit yourself... You claim that you know better than God does?  You ask him to change his perfect/divine plan because your kid has cancer?  Who are you to question God's divine/perfect plan?!?  God gave your kid cancer because that is His plan, and you think you know better than God? The lolz

God tests us based on the Firewall we did set in place to protect our Faith in him from crackers.


Best regards.

Personally, I don't think you are using poor reasoning by asking questions.


God has left a tiny area of free will open in us. It has to do with aspects of faith that we have in Him. It doesn't have anything to so with any of our standard understanding of free will, like choosing which side of the bed to get out of in the morning.

Our free will has to do with limited aspects of our faith in God. That's it. God judges us according to our faith in Him.


God tests us based on the freewill portion of our faith in Him.



His actions are based on the same things.

For example. If He punishes someone for robbing banks, He will stop punishing when the robber stops robbing. But He will start punishing again when the guy starts robbing again.

Whatever His rules for handling the universe and people are, God never changes. Only people change. People change in the one small area that they can change... the area of free will to have weaker or stronger faith in God. God uses cause and effect on us based on our faith in Him. The workings of this are complex beyond understanding.

I'm taking about carrying over the sin of the atheist in our life.

It is not right not carry this sin with us.


Best regards.

If you are talking to me, what do you mean by "carry over?" And what is the thing being or to be carried over?

Seems like they have a tolerance level really close to 0, even for people sharing the same faith in the same God...

OK, OK, I had no idea you guys hated each other so much! Sheesh. I thought you two had bonded over your idea that murdering atheists is morally acceptable.

That's the point - you don't even know what your underlying assumptions are, and I'm trying to find out if they are valid or not. If not valid, your entire argument disappears in a puff of logic.



Absolutely not. I'm talking about how to argue your point logically and create a watertight argument.


When you're challenged you change the topic and make some sort of remark denigrating the intelligence of your opponent. You always do this. Maybe you should concentrate more on your own intellectual development and less time on writing uncreative and pointless insults.


My point is that neither of us knows if you are wrong because once challenged you just change the subject and insult whoever is the target du jour.

Poor reasoning here. If we had the proof of His existence then how us, mortals, could oppose His will? Then how could He test us?
He couldn't judge us because some would be frightened of Him, other would love Him, but actions would be the same.

"He's talking but his words have no meaning"

You really want to carry over this thing user BADecker?!?


Best regards.

+1

This is faulty thinking. For example. You know that I exist. The proof that I exist lies in the fact that you see my post in this forum.

If, on the other hand, I say that I have 20 children, you might have to take me on faith, if you do not know me personally.

In a similar way, we can know that God exists as a fact. If we know it as fact, there isn't any room for having faith in His existence.

But we need to have faith that He will save us for eternal life in Heaven when He tells us  this. Why? Because we haven't seen it happen yet. We don't know that it will happen, except that God has told us that it will happen. We either have faith in Him for this salvation, or we don't.

That God exists is fact. We might have to take something that He says, or some attribute about Him, on faith.

You can't give proof. That's stupid if you could prove God's existence, there would be no need of having faith in Him.

The important thing is to be honest with your own feelings. If you have the faith, then you should cherish it and live regarding it. If you don't, then it's not your fault and you shouldn't be judged for that.

Since I haven't seen you showing me anything via your posting, and since I haven't been posting any underlying assumptions that I have, your statements here are irrelevant for me, at least regarding the things I have posted.


Now you are talking about all of life, science, knowledge and everything else.

If you had never made any kind of mistake in life, if everything had always turned out exactly according to your vision about things, then you MIGHT be able to live truthfully with these three points you have made here.

However, even then you might not, except that you had all knowledge and understanding about everything.

Why would it be different for anyone else? Good points and thoughts. But irrelevant regarding reality.



You are welcome to this opinion of yours, of course. Since you are not following your own advice/directive not to post, welcome to the team of ignorance. It certainly doesn't seem to hurt me when you let people know that you really don't understand a topic. Perhaps it hurts someone else? Maybe even yourself. If it does, I am not aware of it.

If your point is that I am wrong, perhaps I am. However, based on the evidence that can be found by anyone who wants to search for it, I am right. For example, perhaps sometime someone will post conclusive facts that show that Newton's 3rd Law is wrong. So far we haven't seen it. All we might have seen are some theories that suggest opposition to his 3rd Law.

I haven't seen you posting anything to refute the things that I have said in the same way that you want me to post things that uphold what I have said. You haven't even been telling me that such things exist so that I have opportunity to go look for them.

Your whole talk is irrelevant. Albeit, it is an exercise in wasting time responding.

The problem is not that I"don't believe" you. It's true that I don't accept statements that I can show to be either invalid or unproveable.

The problem is that while you think that what you're posting is a simple explanation, I have been showing you that your underlying assumptions appear invalid and warrant further discussion.

It's not unusual for people to not realise how many assumptions are required to support a point of view, and it's one of the reasons that "common sense" regularly leads people astray. For example, if you use "common sense" when you mine bitcoin, you'll fall for the gambler's fallacy every time.

If I question something you hold as self evident, take a moment to really think about your point. Think about the assumptions you've had to make in order to believe your statement, and decide for yourself whether or not they are true, and then how to prove that truth.

If any statement you make as a self evident fact is based on concepts that are:
* Not not completely understood by you
* Not able to be proven by you
* In principle not falsifiable

then you shouldn't post the ideas as self evident fact. It doesn't hurt to let people know that you don't really understand a topic (for example the genetics probability quote) but that you think it's interesting anyway. However if you post it as fact, then of course you will be questioned about it, and you shouldn't take offense.

God is perfect. Not only was He right in the things that He did, the things that Satan may have accused Him of making a mistake in, but He was right in casting Satan and his hordes out.

However, God is so immensely powerful that, regarding Himself, All the angels of all the Heavens could have done nothing to come close to harming Him in the least.

The thing that God has always been trying to do is save some of the AI machines He has made, both angels and mankind.

Do you know why God made the good angels to be virtual servants and protectors of mankind? I mean, angels are far greater than people. Why not let angels rule? But God has made them to be servants of people. Why has He done this?


It is because ALL the angels questioned God's judgment... not only the ones who are being destroyed. The good angels should have been destroyed just for questioning. God in mercy gave them a second chance by helping to save mankind.

That's why your powerful guardian angel who is invisible to you is protecting you. By attempting to get you to believe in the salvation of Jesus and so be saved, he (your angel) himself is partaking in that same salvation, which he couldn't have otherwise, because Jesus came for mankind, not for the angels.

Look. I am not posting with the idea that I am out to defame you in any way. And I suspect that you are not out to do such to me.

The things that I explain in my posts, mostly are the simple explanations. You don't have to believe me, obviously. But if you are interested in some of it, there are libraries full of books and an Internet that has almost as much. In addition, there are my previous posts, many of which have links in them, or instructions about what to search on to see why I say what I do.

This posting is fun. And it is instructional for all who want to take part. But I am not doing it with the idea of writing a book to explain answers to your questions.

First, God does miracles at times. But it is difficult to say when, because we do not know for sure when the thing that appears to be a miracle, is simply some avenue of nature that we don't understand yet, or when it is God doing a miracle.

More complex things do not develop from less complex things. For example. Simple water converts into a snowflake that is far more complex than the water was. But the forces that act on the water to form it into the snowflake are are far more complex than the water and the snowflake.

Cause and effect proves God because, whatever could "pitch out" all those electrons and energies and whatever else, and form the complexity of today's universe, especially with regard to the complexity of the mind, soul, spirit and reasoning ability of man, must be way more complex than all of it. We see nothing else in nature other than complexity being made by greater complexity. Rather, we see a gradual decay of greater complexity into lesser complexity (entropy).

Whatever it was that could form the complexity that exists, must have been more complex. Something that is more complex than mankind fits the description of what God must be. The further back we can push the beginning - say that we have some new theory that says that the universe is 20 billion-y-o rather than just 13 billion - the greater God must be to have been able to toss out the things that He did to make the complexity that exists now, all made by cause and effect, over great periods of time, especially in the face of all-pervading entropy.


This is because Big Bang Theory doesn't take into account the complexity that we see in the light that there is only cause and effect. Since nothing more complex comes from something less complex, if it was Big Bang that made the complexity that we have now after many years of cause and effect, Big Bang must have been more complex. More complex than the brain and mind and intelligence of man (since man is part of the universe) shouts "God" in the Big Bang.


There is no evidence of anything happening randomly. There is only evidence of complexity so great that we can't follow it without using the random idea. Everything operates by cause and effect... no random whatsoever.

Consider the flip of a coin. Will it come up heads? Or will it come up tails. It seems random. But it is only random to us because we can't measure all the forces on the coin that caused it to come up one way or the other. There is no random.



This is exactly my point. Natural selection happened back at the beginning when everything was set into its "orbit." Natural selection is the selecting done by Whoever programmed the cause and effect to act as it has down through all ages.

The basic trouble with people who understand that God exists - the ones in the churches and religions, I mean - even though they call Him the almighty, they usually don't have the slightest clue as to how immensely powerful He is. You are now smarter than most of the theists in the churches. You have now seen how God cast everything into its cause and effect path, and ages after He did it, the cause and effect is still producing complexity as great as the brain and mind and intelligence of mankind.

I kinda wish I could play pool that well.