T
tonyrey
Guest
Misrepresent?
- Status
T
tonyrey
Guest
Non sequitur.
A
antunesaa
Guest
As someone said:
“A magician pulls rabbits out of hats. An experimental psychologist pulls habits out of rats.”
A
antunesaa
Guest
That reminds me of an episode I had with an atheist friend at a restaurant. He was describing how we should taste a particular dish, as the parts of the tongue that were stimulated depended on the particular ingredients of the dish. At some point, I told him to shut up and actually enjoy the dish. We all laughed and ate cheerfully, the whole accompanied by a wonderful red.
T
tonyrey
Guest
T
tonyrey
Guest
Both logical positivism and behavourism have died a **natural **death. Natural selection will be the next on the list when it is realised that it is self-refuting:
Natural selection has produced intelligence which has determined that natural selection has produced intelligence.
A
antunesaa
Guest
For me the most compelling evidence of design is the intelligibility of the laws of nature (1) and the existence of the mind and the associated rational and moral attributes (7).
Isn’t it intriguing that there are immutable (or so we think) laws behind the way an apple falls from a tree or the way light propagates in a room? Why aren’t things just chaotic, with no order or balance, completely impervious to any attempt of understanding them? I see this rationality as the mark of a rational creator.
Why is there an instrument like the mind, capable of penetrating the strangest of riddles?
If evolution explains the mind, it seems absurdly improbable that what was enough for the first individuals of our species to barely survive as hunter gatherers among different beasts (some quite similar to themselves, like the Neanderthals and possibly other superior primates), was also enough to allow that same species to formulate the relativity theory and paint the Mona Lisa, thousands of years later and without additional and significant anatomical changes. Why didn’t they become just another type of hairy monkey? This is a mystery to me and I never found a decent account of this without invoking a tremendous amount of luck. And if the “explanation” is that evolution is such that this outcome is inevitable, then I’ll say that the laws of evolution are suspiciously designed to lead to rationality. In fact, if it was discovered that the laws of evolution led inevitably to reason, I would conclude that they weren’t just there; instead, they were created in that specific way in order to bring about the mind.
C
Charlemagne_II
Guest
Sally did not ask to be created. Sally had no say in her creation. Sally chose not to accept something that was nothing more than an invitation. Sally is now damned.
I agree with tonyrey.
Sally got what she wanted. What’s your beef?
If she had asked for heaven and got it, neither she nor you would have any beef.
I agree with tonyrey.
Sally got what she wanted. What’s your beef?
If she had asked for heaven and got it, neither she nor you would have any beef.
T
tonyrey
Guest
Precisely. An atheist contributor recently conceded on the thread “What is the relationship between the abstract world of mathematics and the material universe?”:“The intelligibility of the world and the connection of mathematics (the product of logic) to reality, those things I discuss in this and other posts in this thread, are by far the biggest challenges to me in my atheistic worldview.”
B
buffalo
Guest
Caution - we all need to be aware that the biggest reason these threads get shutdown is the conversation gets too personal and out of hand.
A
atheistgirl
Guest
Sally is not existing for herself. She is existing for her children, family, friends, etc.Sally chose to exist for herself and she is getting what she wanted. What is unjust about that?
What is unjust is that Sally, refusing the invite from a God she does not believe in, should be punished eternally for not loving a being she can not believe in. When death comes, as it surely will, Sally wishes for that to be the end, and to live on in the hearts and memories of her loved ones. But apparently, that won’t be happening. She will be condemned to a life of eternal torture for doing absolutely nothing wrong to anyone or anything. That is where the injustice is, in my opinion.
Sarah x
A
atheistgirl
Guest
If Sally knew God existed, and chose to reject Him, then hmmmmm - maybe. But Sally is rejecting the idea this God exists because try as she might, she can not find any evidence for Him and has a very good understanding in terms of human fears and that other thing that may not be mentioned, as to why man has developed such ideas and beliefs. Should Sally be be subjected to eternal misery?
If God exits, wouldn’t the loving thing be to either let her into heaven, so simply destroy her existence entirely, so she is not subjected to eternal misery or torture?
If a parent has a rebellious child, and try as they might this child rejects the parents love completely, would anyone think it was either fair, just or right that this parent would then go on to inflict eternal misery or torment on this child?
Sarah x
A
atheistgirl
Guest
Sally thinks heaven is a place on earthIf she had asked for heaven and got it, neither she nor you would have any beef.
Sarah x
B
buffalo
Guest
Where does this sense of morality come from?Sally is not existing for herself. She is existing for her children, family, friends, etc.
What is unjust is that Sally, refusing the invite from a God she does not believe in, should be punished eternally for not loving a being she can not believe in. When death comes, as it surely will, Sally wishes for that to be the end, and to live on in the hearts and memories of her loved ones. But apparently, that won’t be happening. She will be condemned to a life of eternal torture for doing absolutely nothing wrong to anyone or anything. That is where the injustice is, in my opinion.
Sarah x
A
atheistgirl
Guest
Quite a few scientists have a very good understanding of it’s #### and development. Not all are as easily bowled over by incredulity as Behe and AiG are. Lots of good papers on Pubmed
Sarah x
G
grannymh
Guest
That is what I started to write in response to your post 614. . I was about to add that the personal joy in hiking in the Alaskan mountains is a reason to continue to exist – when the gremlins in my computer shut it down.
My Dad continues to live (exist) in my heart and memories which helps me to get over some bumps in my existence. After years of taking care of family, I now have a chance to return to writing which made my long-ago professional existence enjoyable.
I am glad to be still in existence to have that same enjoyment. Existence is a many splendid thing.
The path of existence has many steps before we face death. These need to be explored and discussed. However, those gremlins used up my time and I have to leave. The “unjust situation” is still a long way off for Sally.
A
atheistgirl
Guest
From ourselves.
And it says it is wrong to inflict harm on another or violate their person. And inflicting eternal torture or misery on someone does just that. And for what reason? For refusing to love and worship a being she can’t believe in.
Our sense of morality tells us it is against human rights, compassion or any sense of justice to inflict pain and misery on someone, even for a short time, never mind for an eternity.
People get goal time for emotional and physical abuse and neglect.
Our morality tells us it is wrong to inflict such harm on another person.
But not for a Diety apparently?
Sarah x
A
atheistgirl
Guest
I like your postsThat is what I started to write in response to your post 614. . I was about to add that the personal joy in hiking in the Alaskan mountains is a reason to continue to exist – when the gremlins in my computer shut it down.
My Dad continues to live (exist) in my heart and memories which helps me to get over some bumps in my existence. After years of taking care of family, I now have a chance to return to writing which made my long-ago professional existence enjoyable.
I am glad to be still in existence to have that same enjoyment. Existence is a many splendid thing.
The path of existence has many steps before we face death. These need to be explored and discussed. However, those gremlins used up my time and I have to leave. The “unjust situation” is still a long way off for Sally.
Sarah x
B
buffalo
Guest
Quite a few scientists have a very good understanding of it’s #### and development. Not all are as easily bowled over by incredulity as Behe and AiG are. Lots of good papers on Pubmed
Sarah x
All life has it, no motor, no life.
D
danserr
Guest
If Sally knew God existed, and chose to reject Him, then hmmmmm - maybe. But Sally is rejecting the idea this God exists because try as she might, she can not find any evidence for Him and has a very good understanding in terms of human fears and that other thing that may not be mentioned, as to why man has developed such ideas and beliefs. Should Sally be be subjected to eternal misery?
If God exits, wouldn’t the loving thing be to either let her into heaven, so simply destroy her existence entirely, so she is not subjected to eternal misery or torture?
If a parent has a rebellious child, and try as they might this child rejects the parents love completely, would anyone think it was either fair, just or right that this parent would then go on to inflict eternal misery or torment on this child?
Sarah x
Well, I would say that in this case, Sally is committing the genetic fallacy. That means she is trying to falsify a belief by explaining how it arose. This is a fallacy because a belief might be true regardless of how it arose. So I don’t think her reason for rejecting belief would be a very strong one.
I suppose to answer part of your question better, I would need to know more information. For example, you imagine that Sally is “trying as she might” to look for evidence of God. I suppose I would need to know where she was looking and what her reservations were. Has she tried looking in a Church? Is she looking for a proof that is 100% certain? That hardly seems reasonable, we accept less than 100% certainty all the time in daily life, and even in unusual situations. What evidence has she considered for God’s revelation? Can she really say she has no reasons for not wanting to find evidence for God that might bias her search? I’m sure she doesn’t think so, but that’s a far harder thing to be sure of than most people think.
Anyway, I think the question you ask is answerable, but more complicated than a short internet post. It’s easy to ask a question about quantum physics, but much harder to get a short easy to follow answer. It’s the same problem here. So please be patient. I do think a few things, though. I think that no one who seriously searches for God fails to find him in the end, the catch is that one seriously has to search for Him.
-Second, CS Lewis, suggested that no one could do good and not serve God, no one could do evil and serve Him. So perhaps people who through no fault of their own (though there will be less of these people than I think many people imagine) do not believe, may still find that they have served God through obedience to their consciences. The problem with this, though, is that such a person might say “well, why then should I believe in God? I’ll just do the best I can anyway and he won’t punish me for that.” This is the risk with this, because a person who says this situation is probably not doing their best (at least in part because they have given up searching).
As to your example about the parent and rebellious child, I think this is easily explainable. Remember, as I have described it, that hell is a matter of separation from God. So let us suppose that child continues to reject his parents and their love. By doing so he deprives himself of a very great good. And in doing so, he suffers for doing so. His parents don’t punish him at all. Rather the rebellious child punishes himself by willfully separating himself from his parents love. And his parents, not able to force him to love them, must allow this. Likewise, with God. He would do anything to save that rebellious child. He made that child for eternal happiness with him, and suffered and died to try to help that child get that. But in the end, if a person rejects Him, God has no choice. CS Lewis said, “In the end, there are two kinds of people, those who say to God, ‘thy will be done,’ and those to whom God says, 'thy will be done.”
- Status