Bingo! We have a winner!
If I said to you the rate of suicide among atheists is significantly higher than the rate of suicide among religious people, would you again be arguing that I am vilifying atheists, or as you so endearingly put it, “spewing garbage”?*
Even if I believed you and your likely biased site, what does that prove? Religious people tend to be happier? I know that. If I believed I was being watched over by an all-powerful being that loved me and would send me to his kingdom of infinite pleasure after I die I would be happy too. Heck, I wouldn’t cry at funerals of people who share my religious convictions, because I would believe that only happiness awaits them. A life of wishful thinking would be easy.
Sadly, in this country, it is Illegal for you to touch the head of a bald Eagle, they are protected.
Okay, so when I’m searching for the truth in any field, I should cling to the beliefs that make me feel best. Would you advise giving this advice to children, or to an academic?Case closed!
Sometimes, people become emmotionally attached to Lies as well as Truth.
Give an example of Contradictory actions.
Let us compare and Contrast the THiest, to the Athiest.
Where did I make that claim? Cite a quote of mine, please. I don’t claim not to have it, I simply don’t believe that I have one. There’s a difference. It’s the same with God: I don’t negate his existence, I just don’t believe.
Is it possible for them to believe in eternal happiness without threatening others with eternal damnation? I can respect the kind of Christian who admits their belief is based entirely on faith and who resents the idea of others burning in Hell. People like you claim there is proof of God and love the idea of those evil people getting what you think they deserve. If the concept of eternal damnation doesn’t strike a nerve, you’re hopelessly lost.
I see why you would say that. It’s very inconvenient for your dogmatic assertions against me.
It wasn’t an argument, merely an observation. I notice that you didn’t contest its truth.
You as well.Even so, have a good day!
Not one but two false analogies! God does not make any promise nor does He mutilate His nature. He chooses to share His power but He can withdraw His gift whenever He chooses. He chooses not to do so because it would defeat the purpose of sharing His power - which is to enable us to make our own decisions rather than be cogs in the universal machine.
That is an arbitrary definition which imposes arbitrary limits on God’s omnipotence. I have already pointed out that if God cannot choose to allow His will to be frustrated he is not omnipotent. There is no logical contradiction in the power of an omnipotent being to share His power. There would be if it is asserted that God can divest Himself of all His power or cannot recover His power even if He chooses to.
If it is His intention to allow himself to be frustrated He would fail if could not permit Himself to be frustrated.
To create the universe or to change water into wine are not logically contradictory actions. It would be logically to assert that God can make the universe exist and not exist at the same time - or to change water into wine which retains the properties of water.
Since believers tend to believe that they will go to hell for all eternity if they commit suicide, isn’t it pretty easy to understand why they would have a lower suicide rate than nonbelievers?If I said to you the rate of suicide among atheists is significantly higher than the rate of suicide among religious people, would you again be arguing that I am vilifying atheists, or as you so endearingly put it, “spewing garbage”?
adherents.com/misc/religion_suicide.html
There was really only one provided source from that page…
Which seems to agree with your explanation. The lower aggression level I find interesting though.
Since you gave me advice, I’ll be kind enough to give you advice: if you want to persuade others, you must learn to be patient, especially in topics such as this. You act as though I’m intentionally misunderstanding you. You come across as being either impatient or paranoid.
It’s called an analogy for a reason…
Alright, let’s say I’m selling you my company. I will give you ownership of the company with a few conditions: you must sell the product I want, produce it in the amounts I want, sell it for the price I want, pay your employees the wages I want, donate to the charities I want, and allow me to commandeer the company whenever I want. Even though you own this company, who has power over it? In fact, if I can commandeer the company whenever I like, you never really owned it in the first place. Similarly, if God can revoke my power nad make it his own as he pleases, the power or ‘gift’ was never mine to begin with. It’s like your relative giving you a present during Christmas and saying they can take it back whenever they want.
Agreed. This is his choice, however, and not a restriction of his power. Choosing to only eat vegetables does not mean that I am limited to eating vegetables.
If God removes his own omnipotence (making his infinite power finite) I don’t see how he would have the means to restore his infinite power. How does a finite quality become infinite? Unless, of course, he never lost control of the power, in which case he wouldn’t have divested it. You can’t disown something while still owning it.
Creating the universe out of nothing is a blatant violation of the identity property. According to the identity property, nothing equals nothing, a thing equals itself, A equals A, etc. There are an infinite number of ways to say it. But saying that nothing can spontaneously become something makes this axiom forfeit.
Lust is a very common sin that is excused and joked-about. But I also suspect that it is a significant motivation for atheist belief.Yep, I’m on the verge of shouting in agony when I stare at a girl’s chest. Oh, the pain of sinning!
This is an excellent and much more honest answer than we usually see – and that is appreciated (and admirable).
This is what Mother Teresa would call “Spiritually poor”