Topic: Why do Atheists Hate Religion? - page 226. (Read 901342 times)

Obviously you haven't done your homework. If you had, you would know that BitNow has faith in God in legalistic ways expressed in the Old Testament. He (she) even said on one occasion that he had not gotten into the New Testament, yet.

My faith is in God in the way expressed in the New Testament... salvation through faith in Jesus Christ.

Obviously, you haven't done your homework sufficiently enough to make a valid point about us.

Can you read?  I refuted that claim in the post you quoted, I even underlined it to make it easy for you...

"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!"

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.