Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

Atheism - any contradictions or 'problems'?


  • Please log in to reply
309 replies to this topic

#286    Frank Merton

Frank Merton

    Blue fish

  • Member
  • 12,586 posts
  • Joined:22 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

  • I dunno --

Posted 05 February 2013 - 06:01 PM

You want a definition of God.

God is a person with basically four infinities:  infinite power (omnipotent) -- there is nothing He can't do; infinite knowledge (omniscient) -- there is nothing that He doesn't know; infinite wisdom (or justice) and infinite beneficence (love).  One might also say something about transcendence, but that kinda comes with the territory.

For the reason of a number of hoary old self-referential logical contradictions that the above definition can be shown to lead to, I think such a being is impossible.

The rest of the things floating around with small "g" god in their title only refers to something with power or ability we can't reproduce, at least for the present.  They are not relevant.


#287    Frank Merton

Frank Merton

    Blue fish

  • Member
  • 12,586 posts
  • Joined:22 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

  • I dunno --

Posted 05 February 2013 - 06:04 PM

What is meant by "antichrist" I will leave to the Christians to argue among themselves about; I only tell you the meaning I pick up from my superficial knowledge of these things.


#288    David Henson

David Henson

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 126 posts
  • Joined:05 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bible Belt

  • "Seek freedom and become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and find your liberty." Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse: Dune

Posted 05 February 2013 - 06:20 PM

View Postscowl, on 05 February 2013 - 05:56 PM, said:

Doesn't this mean that Jews are the antichrist?

Not necessarily. Since Jesus himself was a Jew and so were the apostles, including Paul and most disciples in the beginning.

Posted Image

#289    David Henson

David Henson

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 126 posts
  • Joined:05 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bible Belt

  • "Seek freedom and become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and find your liberty." Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse: Dune

Posted 05 February 2013 - 06:33 PM

View PostFrank Merton, on 05 February 2013 - 06:01 PM, said:

You want a definition of God.

God is a person with basically four infinities:  infinite power (omnipotent) -- there is nothing He can't do; infinite knowledge (omniscient) -- there is nothing that He doesn't know; infinite wisdom (or justice) and infinite beneficence (love).  One might also say something about transcendence, but that kinda comes with the territory.

For the reason of a number of hoary old self-referential logical contradictions that the above definition can be shown to lead to, I think such a being is impossible.

I agree. The trouble is that those concepts or primarily religious from apostate Christianity, and not in agreement with the Bible.

Quote

The rest of the things floating around with small "g" god in their title only refers to something with power or ability we can't reproduce, at least for the present.  They are not relevant.

They are real so they are not relevant to the practical thinking atheist? The trouble is, the second definition is more accurate according to the Bible than the first. Jehovah became a God to Israel, but the unfaithful had other Gods, including, for example, Tammuz, who was an historical Sumerian king. A real person.

The writers of the Bible, like myself, are not monotheistic as such. They are henotheistic.

Posted Image

#290    Tiggs

Tiggs

    Relax. It's only me.

  • 8,957 posts
  • Joined:30 Jan 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orange County, California

  • Universe Service Pack 2 still needs patching.

Posted 05 February 2013 - 06:36 PM

View PostSeeker79, on 05 February 2013 - 05:17 PM, said:


Not at all. Im merely pointing out that it's not just theists that organize into destructive regimes and cultures. Atheists do it to.

That some political religions have an atheist as their founder is unremarkable. That these political religions would ban any competitive religion is also unremarkable.

However - alluding that those political religions are voluntary atheist organisations due to that ban - that doesn't seem like stretching the truth to you?


"What happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?" - Tiggs vs PA - Did Jesus Really exist? - The Formal Debate:
HERE
Posted Image


#291    Tiggs

Tiggs

    Relax. It's only me.

  • 8,957 posts
  • Joined:30 Jan 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orange County, California

  • Universe Service Pack 2 still needs patching.

Posted 05 February 2013 - 06:39 PM

View PostDavid Henson, on 05 February 2013 - 06:20 PM, said:

Not necessarily. Since Jesus himself was a Jew and so were the apostles, including Paul and most disciples in the beginning.

Surely - it covers anyone that doesn't believe that Jesus is the Son of God? Which would cover pretty much anyone that's not a Christian.

Who is the liar if it is not the one that denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one that denies the Father and the Son.


"What happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?" - Tiggs vs PA - Did Jesus Really exist? - The Formal Debate:
HERE
Posted Image


#292    David Henson

David Henson

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 126 posts
  • Joined:05 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Bible Belt

  • "Seek freedom and become captive of your desires. Seek discipline and find your liberty." Frank Herbert, Chapterhouse: Dune

Posted 05 February 2013 - 08:20 PM

View PostTiggs, on 05 February 2013 - 06:39 PM, said:

Surely - it covers anyone that doesn't believe that Jesus is the Son of God? Which would cover pretty much anyone that's not a Christian.

Who is the liar if it is not the one that denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, the one that denies the Father and the Son.

Absolutely. The entire meaning of the Bible, from Genesis to Revelation can be summed up in one sentence. "The vindication of Jehovah God's name through the ransom sacrifice of Christ Jesus." The first prophecy of a messiah in the Bible is Genesis 3:15. What this means, in a practical sense, is this, a somewhat more lengthy response if you care to indulge.

God created man without sin. The tree of knowledge was an actual representation of Jehovah's sovereignty. A reminder to Adam that he needed Jehovah's guidance and protection in order for him (man) to grow and learn and fill the earth and subdue it. The angels had lived in spirit form in heaven perhaps millions of years before the earth and man were created and without sin. (the word spirit simply means something that can't be seen by the naked eye but produces results. From the Greek pneuma comes the English words pneumatic and pneumonia. The Hebrew and Greek words for spirit can also be translated into wind, breath, mental inclination)  Adam didn't have to sin. Didn't have to die.

The nation of Israel was formed to present a nation of Laws in which there could be a messiah produced. The blood sacrifices etc. made them aware of sin and the need for a messiah. Blood is the soul, and sacred. Often the Hebrew and Greek words for soul will be translated as life. All breathing creatures have, or are a soul. The soul dies. (Ezekiel 18:4) So, when Jehovah gave Noah permission to eat flesh it was with the stipulation that the blood be drained because the blood was the soul, or the soul was in the blood.

The New Catholic Encyclopedia says: “Nepes [ne′phesh] is a term of far greater extension than our ‘soul,’ signifying life (Ex 21.23; Dt 19.21) and its various vital manifestations: breathing (Gn 35.18; Jb 41.13[21]), blood [Gn 9.4; Dt 12.23; Ps 140(141).8], desire (2 Sm 3.21; Prv 23.2). The soul in the O[ld] T[estament] means not a part of man, but the whole man—man as a living being. Similarly, in the N[ew] T[estament] it signifies human life: the life of an individual, conscious subject (Mt 2.20; 6.25; Lk 12.22-23; 14.26; Jn 10.11, 15, 17; 13.37).”—1967, Vol. XIII, p. 467.

When someone was found, without knowing who was responsible, murdered outside of a town or city the nearest city was blood guilty until a bull was sacrificed. This signified respect for life, which was sacred to God and which belonged to him. So life for life, soul for soul. Since Adam was created without sin only someone who was without sin could offer his blood in payment. This is justice. Jesus, who existed in heaven as the archangel Michael before coming to earth, volunteered.

In order to respect this arrangement, approved by Jehovah God, you have to be with Jesus. You have to respect that which Adam rejected. Sin equals death. Upon death sin is removed, for that debt is paid. Resurrection.

Romans 6:7: For he who has died has been acquitted from [his] sin.

Being acquitted one can't be further punished or indebted. Thus resurrection. Life forever without sin. If you are not within that arrangement the result is destruction.

Posted Image

#293    White Crane Feather

White Crane Feather

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,584 posts
  • Joined:12 Jul 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Potter: " is this real or is this in my mind?"

    Dumbledore: " Of course it's in your mind....., but that dosn't mean it's not real."

Posted 05 February 2013 - 09:35 PM

View PostTiggs, on 05 February 2013 - 06:36 PM, said:



That some political religions have an atheist as their founder is unremarkable. That these political religions would ban any competitive religion is also unremarkable.

[size=4]However - alluding that those political religions are voluntary atheist organisations due to that ban - that doesn't seem like stretching the truth to you?

Not anymore than the taliban.  Look I'm just saying that there is little difference between atheists and theists. This notion that some atheists  don't congregate and exhibit cultish or fundamentalist behavior is unsupported. In fact we have a world power that shows us otherwise. I understand that moderate atheists will skwirm in their boots to avoid being associated with such behavior, just as moderate Islam will do the same to avoid being associated with radical islam... Or moderate Christians with fundamentalists. In fact your own opposition to the comparison (assuming you are an atheist) only confirms the point.

Many atheists have a pleasant fiction that they are on some logical and moral high ground, when in fact as a group they are just as capable of the problems with theocracies and theists. Why? Because its a human problem..., not a religious or non religous one. Erase religion from history, and make no spiritual culture whatsoever. I seriously doubt you are going to end up with a bunch of people getting along. You would have the same wars, the same problems, just under different guises. That's just a guess though ;) atheism dosnt get a free pass for their extremes sides transgressions any more than theism gets one for theirs. Sorry. I know atheists don't like it, but if they want to be honest and truely logical.....well.

"I wish neither to possess, Nor to be possessed. I no longer covet paradise, more important, I no longer fear hell. The medicine for my suffering I had within me from the very beginning, but I did not take it. My ailment came from within myself, But I did not observe it until this moment. Now I see that I will never find the light.  Unless, like the candle, I am my own fuel, Consuming myself. "
Bruce Lee-

#294    Tiggs

Tiggs

    Relax. It's only me.

  • 8,957 posts
  • Joined:30 Jan 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orange County, California

  • Universe Service Pack 2 still needs patching.

Posted 05 February 2013 - 11:58 PM

View PostSeeker79, on 05 February 2013 - 09:35 PM, said:

Not anymore than the taliban. Look I'm just saying that there is little difference between atheists and theists. This notion that some atheists  don't congregate and exhibit cultish or fundamentalist behavior is unsupported. In fact we have a world power that shows us otherwise.


In your opinion. In my opinion, the classification of forced atheism as being representative of voluntary atheism is nonsensical.

It's like a group of people being forced to wear ballet dress to kill people and then someone else declaring that as an example of a collective of ballet dancers being evil.


Quote

Many atheists have a pleasant fiction that they are on some logical and moral high ground, when in fact as a group they are just as capable of the problems with theocracies and theists. Why? Because its a human problem..., not a religious or non religous one. Erase religion from history, and make no spiritual culture whatsoever. I seriously doubt you are going to end up with a bunch of people getting along. You would have the same wars, the same problems, just under different guises.

I'm sure that there would still be wars without religion.

Intractable battles fought for centuries over holy ground? Possibly not so much.

Trying to make an end-of-the-world event happen so that their non-existent God can return? Definitely not.


Quote

atheism dosnt get a free pass for their extremes sides transgressions any more than theism gets one for theirs. Sorry. I know atheists don't like it, but if they want to be honest and truely logical.....well.

...then they'd be perfectly fine with being told that they have to take the blame for any Totalitarian dictatorship that's ever repressed any potential threat to their power?


"What happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?" - Tiggs vs PA - Did Jesus Really exist? - The Formal Debate:
HERE
Posted Image


#295    White Crane Feather

White Crane Feather

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,584 posts
  • Joined:12 Jul 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Potter: " is this real or is this in my mind?"

    Dumbledore: " Of course it's in your mind....., but that dosn't mean it's not real."

Posted 06 February 2013 - 12:40 AM

View PostTiggs, on 05 February 2013 - 11:58 PM, said:

[/size]

In your opinion. In my opinion, the classification of forced atheism as being representative of voluntary atheism is nonsensical.

It's like a group of people being forced to wear ballet dress to kill people and then someone else declaring that as an example of a collective of ballet dancers being evil.

...then they'd be perfectly fine with being told that they have to take the blame for any Totalitarian dictatorship that's ever repressed any potential threat to their power?
It's not at all. This is the double standard I was referring to.

Theists have to deal with it nearly every argument being compared the salem witch trials, crusades, jihad, etc etc etc etc etc etc...... But oh no.... mention that atheists are capable of atrocities as part of an atheistic ideology just as much... and its nonsensical.

Hmmmmm

"I wish neither to possess, Nor to be possessed. I no longer covet paradise, more important, I no longer fear hell. The medicine for my suffering I had within me from the very beginning, but I did not take it. My ailment came from within myself, But I did not observe it until this moment. Now I see that I will never find the light.  Unless, like the candle, I am my own fuel, Consuming myself. "
Bruce Lee-

#296    Tiggs

Tiggs

    Relax. It's only me.

  • 8,957 posts
  • Joined:30 Jan 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orange County, California

  • Universe Service Pack 2 still needs patching.

Posted 06 February 2013 - 02:21 AM

View PostSeeker79, on 06 February 2013 - 12:40 AM, said:

It's not at all. This is the double standard I was referring to.

Again. A double standard applied by whom?

I personally think that saying that Theists should have their religion held responsible for the Salem Witch Trial, Crusades, Jihad, etc in a blanket way is equally as nonsensical.

I believe that in many cases, religion is used as an excuse for people to do bad things, as opposed to being a direct cause.

However - now I'm curious:

Given your previously stated belief that atheists should have to take responsibility for the actions of Communism - in order for you to personally avoid that double standard that you're so keen on applying to others - I presume then, that you must actually believe that theists should have their religion held responsible for the Salem Witch Trial, Crusades, Jihad, etc?


"What happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?" - Tiggs vs PA - Did Jesus Really exist? - The Formal Debate:
HERE
Posted Image


#297    Zaphod222

Zaphod222

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,594 posts
  • Joined:05 Sep 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tokyo

  • When the gods wish to punish us, they answer our prayers.
    (Oscar Wilde)

Posted 06 February 2013 - 02:33 AM

Tiggs, I see what you are trying to do, but you should not even go there.

Yes, believers should answer for the behaviour of their co-believers, as long as it is caused by their belief system.

To ask Non-believers to answer for the behaviour other non-believers is a contradiction in terms.

They want to pull of the trick to present nothing as something, i.e. zero as a positive integer.

That is absurd.

The people who should answer for the behaviour of believers in communism and pol-potism are their FELLOW believers in communism and pol-potism. And not people who disbelieve in the Easter Bunny.

Do not fall for it.

"The moment you declare a set of ideas to be immune from criticism, satire, derision, or contempt, freedom of thought becomes impossible." (Salman Rushdie)

#298    Mystic Crusader

Mystic Crusader

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,015 posts
  • Joined:22 Apr 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Arizona

  • "What would you rather be, a bus driver, or a super terrorist?"

Posted 06 February 2013 - 02:46 AM

View PostSeeker79, on 06 February 2013 - 12:40 AM, said:

It's not at all. This is the double standard I was referring to.

Theists have to deal with it nearly every argument being compared the salem witch trials, crusades, jihad, etc etc etc etc etc etc...... But oh no.... mention that atheists are capable of atrocities as part of an atheistic ideology just as much... and its nonsensical.

Hmmmmm

The thing with atheism is they are individuals, they don't band together under their ideology, each one is unique, with a different perspective.  Where as religion there is only one view, "god's", most just parrot or emulate what their bible tells them.

Drunk with blood..
Danger cult leaders
Jewish gematria # 1162:
Who is like God
The epitome of evil

#299    White Crane Feather

White Crane Feather

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,584 posts
  • Joined:12 Jul 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Potter: " is this real or is this in my mind?"

    Dumbledore: " Of course it's in your mind....., but that dosn't mean it's not real."

Posted 06 February 2013 - 04:37 AM

View PostTiggs, on 06 February 2013 - 02:21 AM, said:



Again. A double standard applied by whom?

I personally think that saying that Theists should have their religion held responsible for the Salem Witch Trial, Crusades, Jihad, etc in a blanket way is equally as nonsensical.

I believe that in many cases, religion is used as an excuse for people to do bad things, as opposed to being a direct cause.

However - now I'm curious:

Given your previously stated belief that atheists should have to take responsibility for the actions of Communism - in order for you to personally avoid that double standard that you're so keen on applying to others - I presume then, that you must actually believe that theists should have their religion held responsible for the Salem Witch Trial, Crusades, Jihad, etc?
Yes it's both nonsensical... But as Im sure you realize many atheists use these kinds of arguments. Hence the double standard is applied. Are you denying that many atheist, when in debate with a theist do not bring these things up more than a few times?

View PostTiggs, on 06 February 2013 - 02:21 AM, said:



Again. A double standard applied by whom?

I personally think that saying that Theists should have their religion held responsible for the Salem Witch Trial, Crusades, Jihad, etc in a blanket way is equally as nonsensical.

I believe that in many cases, religion is used as an excuse for people to do bad things, as opposed to being a direct cause.

However - now I'm curious:

Given your previously stated belief that atheists should have to take responsibility for the actions of Communism - in order for you to personally avoid that double standard that you're so keen on applying to others - I presume then, that you must actually believe that theists should have their religion held responsible for the Salem Witch Trial, Crusades, Jihad, etc?
Yes it's both nonsensical... But as Im sure you realize many atheists use these kinds of arguments. Hence the double standard is applied. Are you denying that many atheist, when in debate with a theist do not bring these things up more than a few times?

View PostTiggs, on 06 February 2013 - 02:21 AM, said:



Again. A double standard applied by whom?

I personally think that saying that Theists should have their religion held responsible for the Salem Witch Trial, Crusades, Jihad, etc in a blanket way is equally as nonsensical.

I believe that in many cases, religion is used as an excuse for people to do bad things, as opposed to being a direct cause.

However - now I'm curious:

Given your previously stated belief that atheists should have to take responsibility for the actions of Communism - in order for you to personally avoid that double standard that you're so keen on applying to others - I presume then, that you must actually believe that theists should have their religion held responsible for the Salem Witch Trial, Crusades, Jihad, etc?
Yes it's both nonsensical... But as Im sure you realize many atheists use these kinds of arguments. Hence the double standard is applied. Are you denying that many atheist, when in debate with a theist do not bring these things up more than a few times?

View PostTiggs, on 06 February 2013 - 02:21 AM, said:



Again. A double standard applied by whom?

I personally think that saying that Theists should have their religion held responsible for the Salem Witch Trial, Crusades, Jihad, etc in a blanket way is equally as nonsensical.

I believe that in many cases, religion is used as an excuse for people to do bad things, as opposed to being a direct cause.

However - now I'm curious:

Given your previously stated belief that atheists should have to take responsibility for the actions of Communism - in order for you to personally avoid that double standard that you're so keen on applying to others - I presume then, that you must actually believe that theists should have their religion held responsible for the Salem Witch Trial, Crusades, Jihad, etc?

Yes

Ummmm that was strange..

"I wish neither to possess, Nor to be possessed. I no longer covet paradise, more important, I no longer fear hell. The medicine for my suffering I had within me from the very beginning, but I did not take it. My ailment came from within myself, But I did not observe it until this moment. Now I see that I will never find the light.  Unless, like the candle, I am my own fuel, Consuming myself. "
Bruce Lee-

#300    White Crane Feather

White Crane Feather

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 10,584 posts
  • Joined:12 Jul 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Potter: " is this real or is this in my mind?"

    Dumbledore: " Of course it's in your mind....., but that dosn't mean it's not real."

Posted 06 February 2013 - 04:41 AM

View PostZaphod222, on 06 February 2013 - 02:33 AM, said:

Tiggs, I see what you are trying to do, but you should not even go there.

Yes, believers should answer for the behaviour of their co-believers, as long as it is caused by their belief system.

To ask Non-believers to answer for the behaviour other non-believers is a contradiction in terms.

They want to pull of the trick to present nothing as something, i.e. zero as a positive integer.

That is absurd.

The people who should answer for the behaviour of believers in communism and pol-potism are their FELLOW believers in communism and pol-potism. And not people who disbelieve in the Easter Bunny.

Do not fall for it.
Hmmmm I think you made my point.

View PostHavocWing, on 06 February 2013 - 02:46 AM, said:



The thing with atheism is they are individuals, they don't band together under their ideology, each one is unique, with a different perspective.  Where as religion there is only one view, "god's", most just parrot or emulate what their bible tells them.
Tell that to the communist atheists ;)

"I wish neither to possess, Nor to be possessed. I no longer covet paradise, more important, I no longer fear hell. The medicine for my suffering I had within me from the very beginning, but I did not take it. My ailment came from within myself, But I did not observe it until this moment. Now I see that I will never find the light.  Unless, like the candle, I am my own fuel, Consuming myself. "
Bruce Lee-




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users