210 replies to this topic

[Slahzer]

^
Disregard the spelling mistake.

Edited by Slahzer, 25 April 2012 - 09:47 AM.

[mikeinnaples]

I think the old testament god that wasn't afraid to hurl fire and brimstone wouldn't have much problem laying down the smack on me for some of the crap I have said about his non existence. Surely I have offended one of the many gods of our various religions enough that ONE of them would at least have the balls to put me in my place with some holy vengeance. Surely enough people are questioning existence of a god that one of them will stop playing hide and seek with us and let us know he/she/it is really there in order to reinforce our belief. How about just popping in for a visit? Giant eye ball in the sky? Undeniably supernatural event witnessed by everyone on the planet? Come over for dinner and turn some water into wine for me?

[steampoweredgod]

I think the old testament god that wasn't afraid to hurl fire and brimstone wouldn't have much problem laying down the smack on me for some of the crap I have said about his non existence. Surely I have offended one of the many gods of our various religions enough that ONE of them would at least have the balls to put me in my place with some holy vengeance. Surely enough people are questioning existence of a god that one of them will stop playing hide and seek with us and let us know he/she/it is really there in order to reinforce our belief. How about just popping in for a visit? Giant eye ball in the sky? Undeniably supernatural event witnessed by everyone on the planet? Come over for dinner and turn some water into wine for me?

One of the interesting things is that whatever god there is if there is one, cares deeply about the laws of physics, enough to ignore the suffering of billions of humans. No dictatorship such as north korea where pregnant women are kicked in their belly, prisoners fed poisoned grain, nor even the german concentration camps demanded divine intervention. It is said there are 12 Million child sex slaves, they'll live and die serially raped and god will not intervene.

Yet we're supposed to believe he deemed it worthy to impress a few old males in a desert with parlour tricks so they'd follow and spread an incoherent belief system? I'm sorry but inhuman monstrocity, if there is such a god, it is an eldritch abomination from the twilight zone,and as far as we're concerned it is an amoral monstrocity.

[Slahzer]

I actually hoped a theist would give answer to the question.

The expected response would be something like "When I die and nothing happens, then I would know there is no god".
Though I hope a theist will actually give an honest answer to this question.

[gamesguru]

Most theists are confident in the afterlife, and shame Atheists for their lost opportunities.

[mikeinnaples]

Most theists are confident in the afterlife, and shame Atheists for their lost opportunities.

In contrast, I feel sorry for Theists because they are never actually able to grasp the true value of life and what it means to live. If more people believed that death meant they ceased to exist forever, the life extension movement would be vastly more advanced. We would have the funding, research, and drive as a species to make it happen.

[DAMABO]

Most theists are confident in the afterlife, and shame Atheists for their lost opportunities.

so, even if there is an afterlife, what you say implies only those who believe can enter this afterlife. yet another assumption unneeded, besides the afterlife.

[DAMABO]

Most theists are confident in the afterlife, and shame Atheists for their lost opportunities.

In contrast, I feel sorry for Theists because they are never actually able to grasp the true value of life and what it means to live. If more people believed that death meant they ceased to exist forever, the life extension movement would be vastly more advanced. We would have the funding, research, and drive as a species to make it happen.

right on. theists are likely to be 'deathists', believing 1. that afterlife exists 2. that dying early is somehow a necessary condition for access to the afterlife.

[Elus]

"This topic has been visited by 16 user(s) [ Collapse ]

PWAIN, Link, steampoweredgod, shadowhawk, johnross47, eternaltraveler, Connor MacLeod, Slahzer, mikeinnaples, dasheenster, platypus, Lufega, burungnasar, DAMABO, The Immortalist, Elus"

Lol, SH didn't even bother posting a reply. This is no surprise, though. Nothing can change poor hawky's mind, can it?

On topic: Your question does not have one answer. It depends on the theist and whether or not they capacity to reason has not been neutralized, as is the case with many religious individuals.

Edited by Elus, 28 April 2012 - 04:45 AM.

[Slahzer]

The lack of replies from theists only reinforce the idea that no amount of evidence can change the opinion of an irational mind.

[N.T.M.]

thought

[shadowhawk]

The lack of replies from theists only reinforce the idea that no amount of evidence can change the opinion of an irational mind.

Evidence there is no God, evidence for Atheism.

[gamesguru]

Maybe there is no evidence refuting the possibility of God, or maybe we just haven't stumbled upon it yet. I think if we could show there are no exceptions to physical law, that at best, God is non-interventionist--the deist's God. If that's the case, it's reduced from theism to a deterministic sort of panentheism. That would make predictions into truth/falsehood (as opposed to simply predictions), and it wouldn't even matter what we do since we'd be bound by fate.

It is my belief that all sensible people will be soft agnostics for the time being. I cannot prove this to be true, nor can I prove my beliefs to be superior to yours...I only express my convictions with all my confidence, which might not be worth much!

[nowayout]

It is a waste of time. Since theism has no rational basis, theists can by definition not be convinced by rational argument.

[gamesguru]

Well a lot of schools of thought don't even promise to look out for contradictions. Look Rousseau, a believer in natural religion.

Are you suggesting that we shouldn't argue with these people? In my opinion, you can sometimes break them lose, if they have genes that might let thev break free. To land a harsh blow, I am building a strong inkling that shadowhawk is not one who is so lucky as to have such brilliant genes. I think you might be right, we might not be able to sway him into valuing logic/rationality.

Edited by dasheenster, 23 May 2012 - 03:46 AM.

[shadowhawk]

Well a lot of schools of thought don't even promise to look out for contradictions. Look Rousseau, a believer in natural religion.

Are you suggesting that we shouldn't argue with these people? In my opinion, you can sometimes break them lose, if they have genes that might let thev break free. To land a harsh blow, I am building a strong inkling that shadowhawk is not one who is so lucky as to have such brilliant genes. I think you might be right, we might not be able to sway him into valuing logic/rationality.

You guys are so logical. With arguments such as these I should convert to atheism right now!

[Slahzer]

Evidence there is no God, evidence for Atheism.

Evidence that god is not probable. Our world does not need a god to exist, but a god needs humanity to exist.

[shadowhawk]

Slahzer: Evidence that god is not probable. Our world does not need a god to exist, but a god needs humanity to exist.

So this is your reason not to believe in God and to believe in atheism? God is a human invention? This supposedly renders God as unreasonable? Is It reasonable that so many people believe in God, is best explained by the fact that he actually does exists?

If it can be argued that humans created God out of a need for security or a father figure, then it can just as easily be argued that atheism is a response to the human desire for the freedom to do whatever one wants without moral constraints or obligations.

If belief in God is indeed an issue of hardwiring, then two possible explanations exist for the design we observe. Either a blind process of natural selection produces religious belief over time as a by-product with some selective advantage, or an Intelligent Mind designed humanity to naturally believe God exists.

The projection theory you expressed begs the question against God. It cuts both ways.
What are the implications of humans being "hardwired" to believe?

I believe God is not just a projection of the human mind and in-probable.

Why is there something rather than nothing? If God made the world, do you need God for the world to exist?

[Slahzer]

My non-believe does not really stem from the view that I believe god is a human creation.
Rather I do not believe in a god because it contradicts scientific fact and theories. The idea of a god does not fit in with the current accepted view of the universe.
It could perhaps be argued that god could fit in with evolution but would raise a lot of issues about a personal god and the bible itself.

I don't think that any of the modern religions today have a concept of a god that fits in well with the Big Bang Theory. Not even a deistic god fits in there.

then it can just as easily be argued that atheism is a response to the human desire for the freedom to do whatever one wants without moral constraints or obligations.

I don't know why many people view atheists as immoral. Just because our morality does not originate from some holy book does not mean we are less moral than religious folk.
Many evil deads and good deads have been done by both religious and irreligious alike. Clearly morality is not a unique attribute to believers.
It can certainly be said that atheists are free from moral contraints because we do not fear divine punishment but it does not explain why the vast majority of atheists are just as moral as religious folk. Clearly this is an indication that atheists are not just atheists for the sake of being free from moral obligation.

Either a blind process of natural selection produces religious belief over time as a by-product with some selective advantage, or an Intelligent Mind designed humanity to naturally believe God exists.

Natural Selection is not a blind process. Natural Selection is the inevitable outcome of a evolutionary system. It is not a theory that is based on randomness or chaos.

Natural selection is the gradual, non-random, process by which biological traits become either more or less common in a population as a function of differential reproduction of their bearers. It is a key mechanism of evolution.

~ Wikipedia

I'd like to ask you two questions
First, do you believe that the scientific theories that are largely accepted by the scientific community (those that contradict ID) are dead wrong ?
Secondly, I would like your personal answer to what would it take for you to reverse your position on the existence of God?

Edited by Slahzer, 26 May 2012 - 11:49 AM.

[shadowhawk]

Slahzer: 'd like to ask you two questions
First, do you believe that the scientific theories that are largely accepted by the scientific community (those that contradict ID) are dead wrong ?
Secondly, I would like your personal answer to what would it take for you to reverse your position on the existence of God?

Most of your last post is in response to straw men you constructed, not something I argued. So I won’t waste time.

Now to your questions, there are tens of thousands of scientific theories, some being disproved while others gain in evidence. What is the scientific method to you to cause such a question?

I already answered this second question,
“Evidence there is no God, evidence for Atheism. “

[aleelc]

Religion is something that we believe in and though people could go about and continue a movement to show what facts are available to prove the very existence of a god, it would not really matter unless the individual opts to believe in it. And until that happens, there is really nothing we can do to sway them over the other side.

We could try in order to talk them down to it but by the end of the day, that is still a call they are to make.

[Slahzer]

Now to your questions, there are tens of thousands of scientific theories, some being disproved while others gain in evidence.

These are more minor theories you are referring to. Major theories such as the big bang and natural selection are quite well established. Minor theories within evolution might change, but that would not affect the fact that evolution occurs.

Also why do you believe that Christianity is the right choice ?

Though people could go about and continue a movement to show what facts are available to prove the very existence of a god,

I am unaware of any fact that might prove the existence of god. Indeed I know many theists that say there is no evidence and that one needs faith.

[gamesguru]

If there isn't evidence either way, why bother siding with either side? From a purely theoretical perspective, you should remain undecided if you can't be totally confident in your new opinion.

And if we really were created in the image of almighty Gods, I doubt they would have such uneasy vanities as to be offended by those who doubt their existences or question their plans.

[shadowhawk]

These are more minor theories you are referring to. Major theories such as the big bang and natural selection are quite well established. Minor theories within evolution might change, but that would not affect the fact that evolution occurs.

Also why do you believe that Christianity is the right choice ?


I am unaware of any fact that might prove the existence of god. Indeed I know many theists that say there is no evidence and that one needs faith.

Science is a process, not a position and I agree it is a profitable process when it comes to learning things about the universe. As such, everything is open to scrutiny. That is what I agree with.

As a Christian,, I believe in Christ.

Did you bother to listen to any of the debates I posted? http://www.longecity...tes-in-england/

What do you accept as evidence? What proves something to you? I know of no theist that says faith is without evidence. Who are you talking about?

[mikeinnaples]

In order for shadowhawk to reverse his position, it would most likely take a lobotomy. It is the only way to overcome the sheer amount of self delusion and brain washing he exhibits.

[shadowhawk]

In order for shadowhawk to reverse his position, it would most likely take a lobotomy. It is the only way to overcome the sheer amount of self delusion and brain washing he exhibits.

What profound thinking! Heavy. What else would one expect from you.

[Slahzer]

Did you bother to listen to any of the debates I posted? http://www.longecity...tes-in-england/

What do you accept as evidence?

I am not going to go through the entire thread, but if you point out a few good debates (particularly debates containing good religious arguments and concerning evidence for Christianity) then I will find the time to watch them.

For evidence I would like to know what evidence indicates that Christianity is the right religion (and not some egyptian knockoff).
Proof of miracles. Indication that the Bible is true.

In general modern evolutionary and cosmological theories make an omnipotent deity improbable and an extraordinary amount of evidence for such a deity would be needed to prove it's existence.

What do you view as good evidence (not arguments) for Christianity in particular?

Personally I view religions nothing more than detailed children stories.

[mikeinnaples]

What profound thinking! Heavy. What else would one expect from you.

Wow, I am shocked. You responded without quoting someone else or posting an inane link to some random nut job pontificating about his belief in stone age mysticism and fairy tales. Maybe you are a real person after all and not a spam bot?

[shadowhawk]

I am not going to go through the entire thread, but if you point out a few good debates (particularly debates containing good religious arguments and concerning evidence for Christianity) then I will find the time to watch them.

For evidence I would like to know what evidence indicates that Christianity is the right religion (and not some egyptian knockoff).
Proof of miracles. Indication that the Bible is true.

In general modern evolutionary and cosmological theories make an omnipotent deity improbable and an extraordinary amount of evidence for such a deity would be needed to prove it's existence.

What do you view as good evidence (not arguments) for Christianity in particular?

Personally I view religions nothing more than detailed children stories.

All the debates are good ones with some of the top Atheists in the world today. There were many arguments presented, why don’t you take one that you find particularly powerful enough that it would disprove theism and we can discuss its merits.

Theism is much broader than Christianity and the topic is about theism.
If there was a miracle what evidence would you accept that it took place? I find lots of things about Christianity compelling. Perhaps the resurrection of Christ is one of the most.

Tell me how evolutionary and cosmological theories make an omnipotent deity improbable..I have dealt with this elsewhere when discussing intelligent design (ID). Perhaps you want to comment. Here are the key points.

Definition of ID
http://www.longecity...post__p__498808

Peer Review
http://www.discovery.org/a/2640

Atheist Theist debates.
http://www.longecity...post__p__480983

Arguments for Intellignt Design - Evolution
1. http://www.longecity...post__p__491476

2. http://www.longecity...post__p__491932

3. http://www.longecity...post__p__492066

4. http://www.longecity...post__p__492250

5, http://www.longecity...post__p__492433

6. http://www.longecity...post__p__496211

All arguments.. http://www.longecity...post__p__498997


Challenge to Atheists to prove random mutations drive evolution. http://www.longecity...post__p__499021

Summary. http://www.longecity...post__p__507405

Edited by shadowhawk, 05 June 2012 - 02:20 AM.

[shadowhawk]

SLAHZER
Perhaps we could take this as a starting point for our discussion.