I am an atheist thread 2

[_A]

~He provides for us in all our needs.

This is another thing that bothers me about this belief. People provide for themselves. Well, they do or they starve.
Why doesn’t your god ever provide new, real flesh and bone limbs for amputees? They certainly need those missing parts.

~Jesus suffered and died for our sins.

Another interesting point here. Leaving aside the question of whether an omnipotent being would be harmed by pain, also let’s forget that he is rumored to be alive more enthusiastically than Elvis, there is still an important question here.
If he did something to himself for our sins, was it wasted effort? Some christians claim to be loaded with sin.

~After Jesus left this earth, He sent His Holy Spirit (the
Comforter) to guide the Church into all Truth, and dwell within
each believer as well.
~He has prepared an eternal home for us with Him, free of every
sorrow and pain.

He has been living in that eternal home, free of every sorrow and pain for a couple of thousand years now. I think that’s a pretty good trade-off he made. Not much sacrifice at all looked at that way.
A week or two of torture and agony, then 20 centuries of bliss.

As for “How do I know it’s the right one?” - I have found that Christianity speaks directly and profoundly to my humanity and my experience of life. It ain’t all pretty, but it is LIFE. “Love, pain, the whole dang thing…”, if I may paraphrase a certain song.

I have found that my Christian Faith has a traceable, concrete history, and the Faith fulfills all crucial aspects of life for me. The more I learn, the more I’m convinced. I just have not had any desire to look into other religions, which is not to say that I am not open to learning about them. But I believe that the Church and all Her sacraments contain what is necessary for fullness of life.

I could liken it to being born in a certain country. You really had no control over which country you were born in. But if you enjoy life there and find it very fulfilling, would you go and try to live in every other country in the world, just to see if your birth country really was the best one to live in?
On the other hand, if you were born into a country where you were constantly dodging bombs and grenades, perhaps you might look elsewhere.

People of every faith feel the way that you do. You can’t be sure you are right.

 

[BlaineTog]

This is another thing that bothers me about this belief. People provide for themselves. Well, they do or they starve.

People co-operate with God, as far as providing goes. Certainly a farmer can’t be said to provide rain for his crops, to give a simple example.

Why doesn’t your god ever provide new, real flesh and bone limbs for amputees? They certainly need those missing parts.

If they really needed them, they wouldn’t have lost them in the first place.

Another interesting point here. Leaving aside the question of whether an omnipotent being would be harmed by pain, also let’s forget that he is rumored to be alive more enthusiastically than Elvis, there is still an important question here.
If he did something to himself for our sins, was it wasted effort? Some christians claim to be loaded with sin.

He died so that sins might be forgiven, not so that they couldn’t be made.

He has been living in that eternal home, free of every sorrow and pain for a couple of thousand years now. I think that’s a pretty good trade-off he made. Not much sacrifice at all looked at that way.
A week or two of torture and agony, then 20 centuries of bliss.

God is perfect, and utterly undeserving of any and all suffering. Spilling even a drop of his blood is infinitely wrong for that reason.

People of every faith feel the way that you do. You can’t be sure you are right.

Why not? Someone could tell me that they are absolutely sure that the sky is tie-dyed plaid, and it wouldn’t shake my belief that it’s blue.

You have to have faith, otherwise you can do nothing. You can’t even be sure you exist without faith in the law of noncontradiction.

 

[_A]

People co-operate with God, as far as providing goes. Certainly a farmer can’t be said to provide rain for his crops, to give a simple example.

Farmers manage irrigation. Provide ‘rain’ as it were.

If they really needed them, they wouldn’t have lost them in the first place.

I think you should look an amputee in the eye when you say that.

He died so that sins might be forgiven, not so that they couldn’t be made.

If he is the god of the bible, he could not be hurt, and had no chance of dying. He knew just what was going to happen - 20 centuries of bliss.

God is perfect, and utterly undeserving of any and all suffering. Spilling even a drop of his blood is infinitely wrong for that reason.

Again, if he was a god, no-one could have spilled his blood without him willing it.

Why not? Someone could tell me that they are absolutely sure that the sky is tie-dyed plaid, and it wouldn’t shake my belief that it’s blue.

What if everyone who looked at the sky agreed that it was tie-dyed plaid? Would you have another look?

You have to have faith, otherwise you can do nothing. You can’t even be sure you exist without faith in the law of noncontradiction.

Whatever ‘faith’ I have is based on evidence. Not on a book of fiction thousands of years old.

 

[TDiGaetano]

To even start to believe there is a God one has to look at what this “God” claims to have created…

There is the Theory of Evolution where we all came from goo to mamals to monkeys to humans.

We have found fossils of Dinosuars, fish, bugs which are to have come millions of years before man. Yet we can’t find a fossil to fill the link between mankind and monkeys.

We have found different skeletons of humans that are thought to be of different races. This is suppose to show that mankind evolved from earlier forms of humans.

Just as you look around the world in North america, to Europe, to Africa to Asia. You see a lot of different people. People with bigger heads people with larger hands and feet people wider shoulders people with tiny bones. It boils down to genetics. There is as strong of evidence of man coming from goo and monkeys as there is a God.

Sure Man might share simular genes as a Mouse or a pig so that could be argued that we are related through evolution or the argument that we have the same creator. So those points cancel out.

So it comes down to what history do we have of Mankind what do we understand from our ancestors and about the gods or God or no God they believed in.

So since most of the arguments of how Macro Evolution vs creator cancel them out leaves us with what we choose to believe. There is no God or there is a God. So we need to look at another point in the life time of Mankind that shows that God does not exist. Is there any research or worldly understanding on how different groups of people developed at different rates? If so which should we discuss to determine if there is a God or no God?

 

[BlaineTog]

Farmers manage irrigation. Provide ‘rain’ as it were.

And I’m sure they create the water ex nihilo too.

I think you should look an amputee in the eye when you say that.

I think that this is a nonlogical response to a logical argument.

If he is the god of the bible, he could not be hurt, and had no chance of dying.

And by becoming human, he gave himself just those abilities.

He knew just what was going to happen - 20 centuries of bliss.

Which he would have had whether he had come down here or not.

Again, if he was a god, no-one could have spilled his blood without him willing it.

Without him allowing it, yes, though not necessarily without him willing it. You can allow something that you don’t want.

What if everyone who looked at the sky agreed that it was tie-dyed plaid? Would you have another look?

Oh I’d have another look anyway, but it would be incidental as part of rolling my eyes.

Whatever ‘faith’ I have is based on evidence. Not on a book of fiction thousands of years old.

Whatever evidence you have is utterly and completely without hard basis. I would direct your attention to Descartes and Hume if you wish to disagree.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

RIGHT ! So this god of yours is no better than a human judge. Also, those 2 statements were contradictions of each other…
Unless of course, you get an apologist to stretch and twist enough to make it seem as if it were no contradiction.

You surprise me again, my good A! You are either not reading what i wrote, or not giving it any thought, or being facetious.



Please explain how is it a logical contradiction for a judge to give a stiffer sentence to a habitual offender. Please tell me why it is a contradictary to not forgive those who refuse to repent but forgive those who do.

 

[Armor_of_God]

Thanks for noticing. Add to that some flaring tempers, and you have a recipe for everyone having a lousy time.
Lets try to keep things happy. I vote that we tickle phooney until ontologysue starts laughing!

Poor phooney!

 

[Armor_of_God]

I meant to include in my “list”:

~On the third day, Jesus rose again, in fulfillment of the Scriptures

Which, of course, was the turning point in our redemptive history.

And thank you, BT - yes, He died so that our sins may be forgiven.

I’m sure that there are other things to be added or expanded on, and other people on this forum who can explain things much more eloquently than I can.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Socrates4Jesus forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_cad/viewpost.gif

Agreed. We might also discuss other possibilities, such as using another medium besides silicone-based processors. Carbon-based processors, for example, might be used if chemists and engineers find this possible, practical and beneficial. Indeed, some might say (perhaps with tongue in cheek) that geneticists are approaching something like programming for living creatures.

My thoughtful A, do you now see the relevance of this discussion and are you not astonished by the conclusions you and i might draw from it?



Nope. Is there a reason that I should find this astonishing?

Are you not surprised that your original assertion that there is no evidence that God created the universe is now shown to be false?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

@Socrates4Jesus

Indeed, but you must see that this whole paragraph is pure speculation. Even so, under this conception, I see no reason why this would have any impact on God’s knowledge of precisely when an event would happen. If he knows what he’s doing, he knows how people will react, he knows all the natural events that are going to happen, he knows when he is going to intervene again, and he knows how people will react to those interventions then he will know precisely when something will happen. Unless of course, somebody reacts in a way that God was unable to foresee, or a natural event happens that God had no knowledge of. Both of these possibilities I don’t think are compatible even with your slightly toned down version of omnipotence/omniscience. This condition remains pretty solid.

No, this is incorrect, I’m not even sure what you would call that. Perhaps “the person’s plans”. A self-fulfilling prophecy, for our purposes here, is a statement that may sufficiently influence people so that their actions or reactions ultimately cause the prophecy to be fulfilled. Therefore, I think this condition is still relevant grounds for skepticism.

You seriously can’t?:

“throw your stones, timber and rubble into the sea.”
“when I bring the ocean depths over you and its vast waters cover you”

There’s no mention of “he” or “they” when God is claimed to have said I bring the ocean depths over you

No, I am not, the God character doesn’t personify the ocean in the passage I mentioned.

Actually, thanks to the build up of sand, most of the causeway is under that spot on the map I linked you to. Under the land. Yes, I agree that the rubble was temporarily under the sea, and no this does not mean I agree that the prophecy was anything special.

Yet the threat to bring the ocean over the city, rather than to bring the city under the ocean was there. All the bases for a watery destruction of this coastal city are covered, with no time limit or window. The ambiguity, vagueness, repetition, theatrics and poetry rob this prophecy of convincing prophetic power.

This condition is still sounding very reasonable to me.

I’m impressed by the event, but still remain underwhelmed by the prediction. I’ll obviously be happy to look at your thoughts on the point you labeled 5b as well.

Well, i think we should agree to disagree, and that’s OK with me. You are an extremely rational and articulate thinker Phooney. The only point i find inconsistent in your reasoning is that you affirm both:

a) that you agree with modern historians that there is no credible evidence that Alexander the Great read Ezekieland b) Alexander the Great must have read Ezekiel prior to conquering Tyre and got the idea to build the causeway from himI do not see how both (a) and (b) can be true, as (b) is contradictary to (a). To put it in logical form, you appear to be asserting:

(b) = (a)and (b) = ~(a)i.e., ~(a) = (a)[in other words, not (a) = (a); that is, (a) is both true and false]

This, of course, is a logical contradiction. To reconcile this, you must either change your logical argument to say that (b) is false, or change your reasoning to say that (a) is false, for i do not see how they both can be true. Can you?

 

[phooney]

Poor phooney!

NOT TICKLING!!!

 

[_A]

And I’m sure they create the water ex nihilo too.

Claiming that goddidit is somehow a more reasonable position?

I think that this is a nonlogical response to a logical argument.

Right, what I should have said is that, since your god claims to heal, why does he demonstrate an inability to cure amputees?

And by becoming human, he gave himself just those abilities.

He didn’t. He is still alive, and still a god (if you believe the bible)

Which he would have had whether he had come down here or not.

So why the big production, then? The most reasonable answer seems to be that he likes torture and suffering.
Now that’s a kind of love I can do without. (the Marquis de Sade must have been close to your god)

Without him allowing it, yes, though not necessarily without him willing it. You can allow something that you don’t want

According to your god myth, he is all-powerful and all-knowing. Nothing could be done to him except what he planned.

Oh I’d have another look anyway, but it would be incidental as part of rolling my eyes.

I am not surprised. I see you have applied the same rigorous thinking to your belief in a god, too.

Whatever evidence you have is utterly and completely without hard basis. I would direct your attention to Descartes and Hume if you wish to disagree.

The evidence I have has some basis, I direct your attention to the internet, and to medical science.

 

[_A]

You surprise me again, my good A! You are either not reading what i wrote, or not giving it any thought, or being facetious.



Please explain how is it a logical contradiction for a judge to give a stiffer sentence to a habitual offender. Please tell me why it is a contradictary to not forgive those who refuse to repent but forgive those who do.

That does not invalidate the contradiction I found. Why should the bible need someone to apologize for it’s lack of clarity?

 

[_A]

Are you not surprised that your original assertion that there is no evidence that God created the universe is now shown to be false?

It is not.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

That does not invalidate the contradiction I found. Why should the bible need someone to apologize for it’s lack of clarity?

Perhaps i am misunderstanding you. I define a logical contradiction as:

(1) asserting that a proposition is both true and false

How do you define contradiction?

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

It is not.

That remains to be seen. Would you care to consider how what you and i know about binary code and other systems of code demonstrates the existence of God?

If i’m wrong about this, i’m sure you will do me the service of pointing out my error. I, then, will be better off for having this conversation with you.

 

[_A]

Perhaps i am misunderstanding you. I define a logical contradiction as:

(1) asserting that a proposition is both true and false

How do you define contradiction?

those 2 bible verses I gave you are a good example of contradiction.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

@Socrates4Jesus
… I’m impressed by the event, but still remain underwhelmed by the prediction. I’ll obviously be happy to look at your thoughts on the point you labeled 5b as well.

I’m having difficulty remembering what exactly was my point (5b) – it’s ironic, as i numbered them to make them easier to referrence in our discussion! Please tell me if i’m mistaken, but was (5b) regarding the the following verses of Ezekiel 26?“For this is what the Sovereign LORD says: From the north I am going to bring against Tyre Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, king of kings, with horses and chariots, with horsemen and a great army. … They will plunder your wealth and loot your merchandise; they will break down your walls and demolish your fine houses and throw your stones, timber and rubble into the sea. I will put an end to your noisy songs, and the music of your harps will be heard no more. I will make you a bare rock, and you will become a place to spread fishnets. You will never be rebuilt, for I the LORD have spoken, declares the Sovereign LORD.”
Was your rebuttal that the last verse of this quoted passage cannot be true because Tyre has been rebuilt?

 

[_A]

That remains to be seen. Would you care to consider how what you and i know about binary code and other systems of code demonstrates the existence of God?

If i’m wrong about this, i’m sure you will do me the service of pointing out my error. I, then, will be better off for having this conversation with you.

I think you have a hard time with evidence. Phooney showed that Ezekiels prophecy was not a ‘good’ prophecy, and you are still unconvinced. I have already told you how codes can be selected by physical facts where you see design.
I think that nothing can convince you that you have the wrong book in hand.

 

[Socrates4Jesus]

those 2 bible verses I gave you are a good example of contradiction.

Mr. A:

Yes, i understand, but i did not ask you to give me an example of a contradiction; i asked you to explain what a contradiction is. You and i must agree on what a contradiction is before we can agree that the Bible has such a thing, don’t you agree?