I am an atheist thread 4

[_A]

In the above statement you are addressing my person and analyzing what I know to be true with your belief that I am “without suitable”. In essence you are doing what you accuse me of doing and in your accusation you are a prime example of ad hominem. My evidence works for me and in my logic it follows from my evidence that God is real. Your criteria for evidence is not my criteria for evidence therefore, I do not have to prove anything to you because your criteria does not fit into my paradigm for the existence of God. I know God and you know god or do not know God based on your criteria for evidence. You and I exist in different realms of reality based on our different ways of perceiving.

The thing is that your ‘evidence’ only works for you. I still haven’t found anyone here who can show a measurable difference between their god and an imaginary, non-existent god.
I am not addressing your person, but your belief in a violent myth about a god. It seems to be something that is not only not based on reason, but in active opposition to reason.

You use the word “attacking” to label my statements.

I started an argument by saying that if a fetus is going to be labelled a person, it has to take on the responsibilities of personhood.
You could address (or attack, if you prefer, which I think you don’t) this statement but instead, you make comments about my character. You still have not addressed that first statement, but you can if you have the means.
If not, you might try distracting everyone from the fact by shifting the focus off that question every chance you get.

 

[Pier]

The thing is that your ‘evidence’ only works for you. I still haven’t found anyone here who can show a measurable difference between their god and an imaginary, non-existent god.
I am not addressing your person, but your belief in a violent myth about a god. It seems to be something that is not only not based on reason, but in active opposition to reason.I started an argument by saying that if a fetus is going to be labelled a person, it has to take on the responsibilities of personhood.
You could address (or attack, if you prefer, which I think you don’t) this statement but instead, you make comments about my character. You still have not addressed that first statement, but you can if you have the means.
If not, you might try distracting everyone from the fact by shifting the focus off that question every chance you get.

The responses you’ve gotten haven’t suited you, A - God can not be made to fit your low opinion of Him…

Can you accept that we do believe, (it’s called faith) - and that the universe and our own existence (including yours!) are miracles? You’re not going to convince anyone here otherwise.

Do you** really** think there’s no intelligence behind the order of the universe?

 

[_A]

The responses you’ve gotten haven’t suited you, A - God can not be made to fit your low opinion of Him…

I haven’t gotten anything but personal testimony offered here. Just like anywhere else, there is no discernable difference between your god, other people’s gods, and imaginary, made-up gods.
Is there really any difference? Can you show any difference to an outsider? Or does someone have to believe before they will get any evidence?

Can you accept that we do believe, (it’s called faith) - and that the universe and our own existence (including yours!) are miracles?

Nope. Miracles are something else theists have invented to justify their belief in violent fiction. If you have evidence of a miracle, I will gladly examine it, but the last offerings were some quite corrupt ‘incorruptibles’ (which are claimed by more than one faith) and the idol-sales station at Lourdes.

You’re not going to convince anyone here otherwise.

I am not trying to convince anyone. Some people here are trying to convince me that their belief is reasonable. I am listening, but so far the ‘evidence’ everyone has presented amounts to personal testimony and faith.
This is not evidence of anything except the mind-virus of religion.

Do you** really** think there’s no intelligence behind the order of the universe?

I have never seen anything which would lead me to postulate an ‘intelligence’ or a ‘designer’ behind the universe. Why would it need one? What, to you, shows that there *must *have been one?

 

[Pier]

I haven’t gotten anything but personal testimony offered here. Just like anywhere else, there is no discernable difference between your god, other people’s gods, and imaginary, made-up gods.

It is your choice not to believe that Jesus Christ became a little clump of cells for our sake - the witnesses passed down the information, protected by the Church Christ began, which is overseen by Peter’s successor. Geez, do you believe that Cleopatra existed? Or Nero? How about Herod?

Is there really any difference? Can you show any difference to an outsider? Or does someone have to believe before they will get any evidence?Nope. Miracles are something else theists have invented to justify their belief in violent fiction.

Do you think the existence of mankind comes under the heading of “violent fiction”?!!!

So now you’re saying none of us exists! And our “non-existence” came about by violent means?!

If you have evidence of a miracle, I will gladly examine it, but the last offerings were some quite corrupt ‘incorruptibles’ (which are claimed by more than one faith) and the idol-sales station at Lourdes.I am not trying to convince anyone.

This is a Catholic forum - you came here, no one pursued you - (although it is highly likely you are being pursued by the Holy Spirit! )…

Some people here are trying to convince me that their belief is reasonable. I am listening, but so far the ‘evidence’ everyone has presented amounts to personal testimony and faith.
This is not evidence of anything except the mind-virus of religion.I have never seen anything which would lead me to postulate an ‘intelligence’ or a ‘designer’ behind the universe. Why would it need one? What, to you, shows that there *must *have been one?

So it’s all just random and happenstance?

How likely do you really think that is?

 

[phooney]

What exactly are you referring to when you say “order” anyway?

 

[Ronald_E]

The thing is that your ‘evidence’ only works for you.

That is what I am saying.

I still haven’t found anyone here who can show a measurable difference between their god and an imaginary, non-existent god.

In your eyes. Now when you say an imaginary god are you attacking the person? Using the term imaginary implies through logic that the person thinks falsely, that there is something deficient in them for thinking falsely.

I am not addressing your person, but your belief in a violent myth about a god.

I do not have a belief in a violent myth about a god. That is clearly your belief that you have just expressed.

It seems to be something that is not only not based on reason, but in active opposition to reason.

I agree.

I started an argument by saying that if a fetus is going to be labelled a person, it has to take on the responsibilities of personhood.

Who says it has to? I do not say that. You say that.

You could address (or attack, if you prefer, which I think you don’t) this statement but instead, you make comments about my character.

I think you protest too much about feeling attacked when there is clearly no attack. You say you do not attack but look at the difference between my language and yours.

You still have not addressed that first statement, but you can if you have the means.
If not, you might try distracting everyone from the fact by shifting the focus off that question every chance you get.

I think you protest too much.
Hmm? The focus is on the belief of the human being that is labelled by you as nonhuman and your belief that it should take on responsibilities like other humans if it is to live. If that is an incorrect assessment of your statement please let me know.

 

[Pier]

What exactly are you referring to when you say “order” anyway?

Simply (not scientifically) put, there’s a place for everything, and everything in its place. As disfunctional as things can seem, they usually only operate within their capabilities as defined by the matter they’re composed of…

Yet, how could such complexity that comprises even the simplest of things seen and unseen, be of random origins?

 

[_A]

It is your choice not to believe that Jesus Christ became a little clump of cells for our sake - the witnesses passed down the information, protected by the Church Christ began, which is overseen by Peter’s successor. Geez, do you believe that Cleopatra existed? Or Nero? How about Herod?

Are you trying to suggest that a regular man names Jesus Christ existed? Or a god? If the latter, then evidence that a man existed and some people wrote about him starting decades later is not making your case. In fact, the fact that there are such great contradictions in the book he claimed was divine that it should be plain to anyone that he was wrong about his god, or infallibility.
Jesus was a regular guy, if he existed at all. You want to make claims about a god, so go ahead and present some real evidence.

Do you think the existence of mankind comes under the heading of “violent fiction”?!!!

You must already believe in god for this kind of argument to hold water. The book called the bible is the violent fiction I referred to. I don’t think the stories in there tell the real story of creation. It is utter nonsense when looked at critically. Why anyone would not be embarrassed to say they believe it is beyond me.
Do you think the earth rests on pillars, as was stated in the bible? How about talking snakes? Women being responsible for the ‘fall of man’? How about this one - would you believe that the god of the universe is all powerful, all knowing all wise and still can’t manage to eliminate sin.
If you say he wants it for free will or some such nonsense, remember that he (according to the bible) tried by murdering every living creature on earth once (the great flood) and next by making himself seem to die on the cross. Neither method seems to have worked. According to the church, sin is still out there.

So now you’re saying none of us exists! And our “non-existence” came about by violent means?!

You are saying this…I don’t even know where it came from.

So it’s all just random and happenstance?

I don’t know. If someone says that they do know, they are lying or mistaken. If they know and are right, well let’s go get them a Nobel prize!
Do you really think there is an invisible man in the sky watching you, and paying attention to your sexual habits? Is it not supreme arrogance to suggest that the creator of a billions of years old universe with billions of star systems is interested in you personally?

 

[phooney]

Simply (not scientifically) put, there’s a place for everything, and everything in its place. As disfunctional as things can seem, they usually only operate within their capabilities as defined by the matter they’re composed of…

Yet, how could such complexity that comprises even the simplest of things seen and unseen, be of random origins?

Sorry, I don’t mean to seem thick, but could you give an example of what you mean?

 

[Pier]

Is it not supreme arrogance to suggest that the creator of a billions of years old universe with billions of star systems is interested in you personally?

A, I have to go to work, but I will say that the Bible tells us He knows every hair on our head (can any of us claim that?), and nothing happens without His knowledge…

I believe it. We can’t be the highest form of intelligence - there’s no way any of us could come up with the creation of the universe, not if we were given a buh-zillion years to do it in.

ttyl &
God bless you,
Pier

 

[_A]

That is what I am saying.

If your evidence is not available for others to observe, it is all in your head.

In your eyes. Now when you say an imaginary god are you attacking the person?

No, and I will continue calling it an imaginary god until someone causes me to think otherwise. Just because I don’t believe in fairy tales does not mean that I am not respectful of people. I just don’t have any respect for fiction being passed off as fact. If your god is anything other than imaginary, it should be really easy to demonstrate.
Unless your god likes to hide.

Using the term imaginary implies through logic that the person thinks falsely, that there is something deficient in them for thinking falsely.

Not exactly, it just means that the being has been created from little more than imagination. I don’t doubt that people really believe it, but that doesn’t make it true. That the person thinks falsely is not what I am suggesting at all. It is not something that people seem to think about. They feel about it, but I don’t see much thiniking.

I do not have a belief in a violent myth about a god. That is clearly your belief that you have just expressed.

You could be right. Which god do you believe in? Where can I read about this god who is not violent the way the god of the bible is?

I agree.

You agree that it is not based in reason and is actually actively opposed to reason. Well, that makes it unreasonable.

Who says it has to? I do not say that. You say that.

You have yet to refute it. I have been welcoming you to try.

I think you protest too much.
Hmm? The focus is on the belief of the human being that is labelled by you as nonhuman and your belief that it should take on responsibilities like other humans if it is to live. If that is an incorrect assessment of your statement please let me know.

A little, let me tidy it up for you, if you don’t mind.
I say that if you are going to consider the developing fetus as a person, then that person should have all the responsibilities of personhood. That means to me that they have to use their own organs, or plead for the use of someone else’s organs. I say that if you want to share your organs, that is great, but it should always be your choice, all the time.
If you can’t refute this, that is okay, but what I am saying is that you should focus on the argument here, not the arguer.

 

[_A]

A, I have to go to work, but I will say that the Bible tells us He knows every hair on our head (can any of us claim that?),

Any of us could claim that. It doesn’t mean it is true. Can you ask your god to tell you how many hairs I have on my head, and how many are gray? Or is this just another bit of meaningless poetry?

and nothing happens without His knowledge…

Once again, if you can prove any of this, I would appreciate it. For now, I will toss it into the bin with Zeus, Krishna and alien abductions.
If you don’t assume a god first, then none of this will make sense.
Why not try assuming there isn’t a god and see what kind of answers come up?

I believe it. We can’t be the highest form of intelligence - there’s no way any of us could come up with the creation of the universe, not if we were given a buh-zillion years to do it in.

This logical fallacy is called ‘argument from incredulity’ and is not a valid argument. If you want to know more about why that is, I will try to guide you.
If you say that things are too complicated to have been made without a creator, that creator must have been even more complex than the universe. Which means he must have had a creator.
So who does your god worship?
Why don’t you learn more rather than saying that you can’t see how it could be, so it isn’t.
Would our great-grandparents have said that we can’t go to the moon?

 

[Pier]

Well A, although I understand your belief (or lack of one), which is not really an unusual viewpoint, I can’t begin from that point…

However, you do have a curiousity about God, as proven by the amount of time you have spent on this forum. I believe the Holy Spirit has touched you. Start by researching the Slaughter of the Innocents ordered by King Herod - a historical fact, not a fairy tale - that took place at the time of Christ’s birth.

Grace is an invisible gift, A (available to ALL!!!)- and not measurable (by human standards, anyway) although its effects are indeed bountiful and thereby measurable. And although we believe that we (again, meaning all) humans have eternal souls, our understanding of our Lord’s ways are limited (we Catholics call them “mysteries”).

Put another way, I like to say that we are much like the fictional Frankenstein monster, who (had it a thought process) - wouldn’t have been able to figure out (among other things) the seamless skin of his creator…

Okay, I know… ewwwww!!!

And I used a fairy tale to help illustrate a Most Profound Truth…

Imagine that…

but don’t hold it against me!