Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Why God Is Impossible (Article link)
Unexplained Mysteries Discussion Forums > Unexplained Mysteries > Spirituality vs Skepticism
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8
Desty
QUOTE(latsot @ Jan 11 2007, 10:28 AM) [snapback]1496947[/snapback]
If god already knows what is going to happen, in what sense is our behaviour a choice? God KNEW that whatever happened, you were going to eat the grape. Therefore your grape-eating behaviour was determined in advance. It was known before it happened that that is what you would do. Whether he influenced that decision or not, he knew what was eventually going to transpire, so in what sense did you have a choice about it?


Just because God knew you were going to make that decision does not mean that you did not make that decision, or that God made the decision for you by merely knowing it would happen.

QUOTE(Cadetak47 @ Jan 10 2007, 08:27 PM) [snapback]1496236[/snapback]
Free will and God's all knowing powers can coexist.


Ive already posted a theory on how this works, if you want to look back. I find it rather interesting.

edit: speling wink2.gif
latsot
QUOTE(brave_new_world @ Jan 11 2007, 07:27 PM) [snapback]1497032[/snapback]
A disbelief is a belief nevertheless.


Do you read what you write? Disbelief is belief, eh? By definition, clearly it is not.

QUOTE
No, I know people out there who are atheists who dont want to even know or look at other possibilities of alternative viewpoints of the universe other than there own. Hence they too are blind in their "disbelief". Atheism is a form of religion. It is that simple.


Some atheists you happen to know are idiots, therefore atheism is a religion? That's some nice reasoning right there.

Atheism is not a religion. By definition to begin with, but also practically. It doesn't require faith, whereas religion does.
latsot
QUOTE(Desty @ Jan 11 2007, 07:40 PM) [snapback]1497053[/snapback]
Just because God knew you were going to make that decision does not mean that you did not make that decision, or that God made the decision for you by merely knowing it would happen.


Why not? If god knew you were going to make the decision, then in what way is it your decision? He knew it was going to happen before it did, therefore it was inevitable. For it to be your decision, surely you need to be free to decide one way or another, but if god already knows which decision you are going to make, then in what way is it a choice? Its inevitable. Its already decided.

Therefore in what sense can you be said to be making the choice?

smallpackage
QUOTE(brave_new_world @ Jan 11 2007, 07:27 PM) [snapback]1497032[/snapback]
A disbelief is a belief nevertheless. No, I know people out there who are atheists who dont want to even know or look at other possibilities of alternative viewpoints of the universe other than there own. Hence they too are blind in their "disbelief". Atheism is a form of religion. It is that simple.

The essence of any religion lies solely in the answer to the question: why do I exist, and what is my relationship to the infinite universe that surrounds me?
.. It is impossible for there to be a person with no religion (i.e. without any kind of relationship to the world) as it is for there to be a person without a heart. He may not know that he has a religion, just as a person may not know that he has a heart, but it is no more possible for a person to exist without a religion than without a heart. (Leo Tolstoy, 1879)


So we are all religious to some degree rolleyes.gif


Please, get this through your head. Atheism does not provide us with an answer to our existence or our relationship to the universe. Atheists fall back on logic, evidence, and what's missing in this world: common sense to determine what can be considered true. Atheism is not a belief, it is pure skepticism.
JeremyGTS
so its kinda like in the matrix when neo was talking to the oracle and she said "dont worry about the vase" and he says "what vase?" and knocks it over and she said "would you have done that if i not have said that? i dunno anyone remember that part?
GoddessWhispers
QUOTE(smallpackage @ Jan 12 2007, 08:31 AM) [snapback]1497151[/snapback]
Please, get this through your head. Atheism does not provide us with an answer to our existence or our relationship to the universe. Atheists fall back on logic, evidence, and what's missing in this world: common sense to determine what can be considered true. Atheism is not a belief, it is pure skepticism.



I understood BNW's reference to Atheism being a religion of sorts, as relating to this part of religions definition : something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter of ethics or conscience.

Though to imply it is in anyways like institutionalized precepts, would be erroneous in describing Atheism. As stated, it's skepticism, but most certainly lack of belief in a supreme being, or supernatural sentient entity or overseer.
Desty
QUOTE(latsot @ Jan 11 2007, 12:24 PM) [snapback]1497139[/snapback]
Why not? If god knew you were going to make the decision, then in what way is it your decision? He knew it was going to happen before it did, therefore it was inevitable. For it to be your decision, surely you need to be free to decide one way or another, but if god already knows which decision you are going to make, then in what way is it a choice? Its inevitable. Its already decided.

Therefore in what sense can you be said to be making the choice?

Like ive said I already posted theories on how this works, Just a few human ideas. If I can come up with ideas Im sure God could come up with something bro...
Cadetak
QUOTE(latsot @ Jan 11 2007, 03:24 PM) [snapback]1497139[/snapback]
Why not? If god knew you were going to make the decision, then in what way is it your decision? He knew it was going to happen before it did, therefore it was inevitable. For it to be your decision, surely you need to be free to decide one way or another, but if god already knows which decision you are going to make, then in what way is it a choice? Its inevitable. Its already decided.

Therefore in what sense can you be said to be making the choice?


God is just observing your choices. If I where to give you a choice between an apple and an orange and knew that you would pick the orange does that mean I forced you to pick the orange? No, it just means I knew what you would do.

Predicting the future is easier then one might think. On a small scale you can predict that a ball will fall to the ground when you drop or the weather. On a larger scale you can predict someone's actions by their personality, environment, mood, genetics, history, etc. On an even grander scale you could predict things like world events if you somehow knew the personality, mood, environment, etc, etc. of each person in the world.
brave_new_world
QUOTE(latsot @ Jan 12 2007, 05:10 AM) [snapback]1497107[/snapback]
Do you read what you write? Disbelief is belief, eh? By definition, clearly it is not.
Some atheists you happen to know are idiots, therefore atheism is a religion? That's some nice reasoning right there.

Atheism is not a religion. By definition to begin with, but also practically. It doesn't require faith, whereas religion does.


Atheism requires faith in believing there is no godhead or whatever you wanna call it. Disbelief is a for of belief. Just silence is the sound of no sound. In a scripture from India it says this: Man is made by his belief. As he believes, so he is.----- Bhagavad Gita

Now this is a universal statement when one takes the time to think it over. It applies to both athiests, angnostics, christians, hindus etc. Our beliefs play a large part in defining us. Religion is one's beliefs hence why materialists and atheists are also religions.

w00t.gif

Also might I add. The science institutions around the world more often than not have a large or not so large consensus of followers of the particular principles and beliefs upheld by that scientific institution. The have Faith in those principals and methods for finding out the empirical facts they claim to discover. So science is itself a religion also. The atom is infact an abstract notion of the building blocks of matter, just as to some though not all jesus is a symbol of enlightenment. There is no difference between science and religion. Both are religions or if you want both are sciences.
Personally I say they are both the same thing. Both are science and religion.

Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.---Albert Einstein(Allah bless him) tongue.gif
brave_new_world
QUOTE(smallpackage @ Jan 12 2007, 05:31 AM) [snapback]1497151[/snapback]
Please, get this through your head. Atheism does not provide us with an answer to our existence or our relationship to the universe. Atheists fall back on logic, evidence, and what's missing in this world: common sense to determine what can be considered true. Atheism is not a belief, it is pure skepticism.


See you have to realise that you are not the only athiest. I have personally conversed many. And they actually think that classical physics and mathematics provides an answer(though i personally think a very obscure relationship) to our relationship with the universe and also many other athiests I know believe that the big bang theory provides an answer to why we are here. They have faith and believe in these mentioned doctrines or theories. So atheism is a religion in it's own right. Also I know people who talk about the darwinian theory as if life revolves around it and believe even though there is no absolute proof that definately we evolved from apes. Now I am niether for or against darwinism nor am I for a matter of fact for or against organised christianity. I sit on the sit on the fence. See it's ok to say that atheism is pure skepticism but what you have to understand is that you have faith in that pure skepticism and hence it is your own personal religion. When you get enough of a consensus that also agrees with you and they start an institution scientific or otherwise then that in effect is an organisation of that faith and belief and hence it becomes a form of organized religion.
Now I am not saying that your faith is open to new scientific facts and that your faith is dogmatic, no no no no no don't think that. But if according to your doctrine of pure skepticism you are open to new logical ideas, scientific discoveries etc all that means is that your beliefs change and in turn this justifies your faith in the doctrine of pure skepticism.

See the simalarities with personal and organzied religion here?? rolleyes.gif
latsot
QUOTE(Desty @ Jan 12 2007, 01:44 AM) [snapback]1497542[/snapback]
Like ive said I already posted theories on how this works, Just a few human ideas. If I can come up with ideas Im sure God could come up with something bro...


Assuming god exists, of course, which I don't. I don't know where to go looking for your theories on this. Why not just answer the point directly, right here instead? If you've already written it down, you just need to cut and paste.
latsot
QUOTE(Cadetak47 @ Jan 12 2007, 03:29 AM) [snapback]1497684[/snapback]
God is just observing your choices. If I where to give you a choice between an apple and an orange and knew that you would pick the orange does that mean I forced you to pick the orange? No, it just means I knew what you would do.


In which case it was inevitable, so it was pre-determined, either by you or by something entirely different. Either way, if you *know* what is going to happen, then it must be predetermined in some way.

QUOTE
Predicting the future is easier then one might think. On a small scale you can predict that a ball will fall to the ground when you drop or the weather. On a larger scale you can predict someone's actions by their personality, environment, mood, genetics, history, etc. On an even grander scale you could predict things like world events if you somehow knew the personality, mood, environment, etc, etc. of each person in the world.


This is not prediction. It is deduction or induction. Yeah, OK, it is is fair to say that the ball falling is a prediction, but to get back to my point, I would say that it was inevitable (hence the ease of prediction). But this is a very general sort of prediction, like predicting the sun will come up. It is quite different from consistently making very specific predictions - KNOWING what will happen. If someone (i.e. god) consistently knows what is going to happen to the smallest detail, this is different from recognising general trends.
latsot
QUOTE(brave_new_world @ Jan 12 2007, 05:53 AM) [snapback]1497839[/snapback]
Atheism requires faith in believing there is no godhead or whatever you wanna call it. Disbelief is a for of belief.


I'm guessing that there is no point arguing this point. DISbelief is by definition the absense of belief. So, as I said, by definition, disbelief is not belief. However you want to describe this, not believing in something is not belief. Atheism as a world view relies on no belief. Atheists just don't believe that any kind of god exists. You can't say that disbelief in something is belief in it's non existance - that is a fallacy.

QUOTE
Just silence is the sound of no sound.
Actually, this is a good illustration. Silence is simply the absense of sound. It is not some kind of anti-sound. The same is true of belief: disbelief is the absense of belief, not anti-belief, which would presumably be some kind of belief.

QUOTE
Now this is a universal statement when one takes the time to think it over. It applies to both athiests, angnostics, christians, hindus etc. Our beliefs play a large part in defining us. Religion is one's beliefs hence why materialists and atheists are also religions.


Religion is NOT simply 'ones beliefs'.

QUOTE
Also might I add. The science institutions around the world more often than not have a large or not so large consensus of followers of the particular principles and beliefs upheld by that scientific institution. The have Faith in those principals and methods for finding out the empirical facts they claim to discover. So science is itself a religion also.


No, I'm afraid not. There is lots of stuff you can find on the web and elsewhere about why science is not a religion. Dawkins is my personal favourite. What *faith* do I need to have that stuff that keeps happening will probably need happening? I feel perfectly justified in believing that the sun will come up tomorrow because it has happened every day so far and we also know WHY the sun comes up every day, based on other observations and theories based on them and so on. It is faith in the sense that well, you never know it MIGHT not happen - the things we know about physics might suddenly turn out to be wrong - but it is a miniscule amount of faith because there is so much evidence that this won't happen.

QUOTE
The atom is infact an abstract notion of the building blocks of matter, just as to some though not all jesus is a symbol of enlightenment.
This is a silly analogy. They are completely different things. We can test for the existance of atoms in many, many different ways, which always work. We can't test for the existance of Jesus other than by reading the bible, which doesn't count as proper evidence.

QUOTE
There is no difference between science and religion. Both are religions or if you want both are sciences.
Personally I say they are both the same thing. Both are science and religion.


Say it if you like, but it isn't true. Religion is based on faith. Science is based on evidence. These are different things.

QUOTE
Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.---Albert Einstein(Allah bless him) tongue.gif


Ah, an appeal to authority. You see *this* is a large part of the difference between religion and science...
latsot
QUOTE(brave_new_world @ Jan 12 2007, 06:17 AM) [snapback]1497853[/snapback]
See you have to realise that you are not the only athiest. /quote]

Yeah, that's what the poster thinks - that he/she is the only atheist.

QUOTE
I have personally conversed many. And they actually think that classical physics and mathematics provides an answer(though i personally think a very obscure relationship) to our relationship with the universe and also many other athiests I know believe that the big bang theory provides an answer to why we are here.


Whoah, those are two very different points, aren't they? Why did you say 'classical' physics? I doubt that many atheists believe that physics that has been replaced by other physics is 'the answer' (although you don't say what this is supposed to be the answer *to*, rather oddly).

Anyway, big bang theory provides an answer to 'why we are here' only for a given definition of 'why'. Nobody seriously suggests that the theory itself answers all the questions. It doesn't, clearly and it doesn't try to. That isn't what it's about. It describes how the universe as we observe it today might have come about.

QUOTE
They have faith and believe in these mentioned doctrines or theories.


Wait a cotton-picking minute here. There is a *huge* difference between doctrines and theories. A doctrine is just decided in advance and can never change. A theory is based on observations and lives and dies on whether evidence does or doesn't support it. I wish you could see why these things are completely different.

QUOTE
So atheism is a religion in it's own right.
That just doesn't follow. Atheists may have beliefs, but that doesn't mean that atheism IS a belief and it certainly doesn't mean that it is a religion.

QUOTE
Also I know people who talk about the darwinian theory as if life revolves around it and believe even though there is no absolute proof that definately we evolved from apes.


Evolution by natural selection is as close to being fact as anything we know, simply because we have so much evidence in its favour. Just like gravity and relativity and so on.

QUOTE
Now I am niether for or against darwinism nor am I for a matter of fact for or against organised christianity. I sit on the sit on the fence. See it's ok to say that atheism is pure skepticism but what you have to understand is that you have faith in that pure skepticism and hence it is your own personal religion.


Just repeatedly saying that something is true doesn't make it so. You need something more.

QUOTE
When you get enough of a consensus that also agrees with you and they start an institution scientific or otherwise then that in effect is an organisation of that faith and belief and hence it becomes a form of organized religion.


No, it becomes a bunch of people working together to try to understand the truth about something. It just doesn't work how you suggest in practice.

QUOTE
Now I am not saying that your faith is open to new scientific facts and that your faith is dogmatic, no no no no no don't think that. But if according to your doctrine of pure skepticism you are open to new logical ideas, scientific discoveries etc all that means is that your beliefs change and in turn this justifies your faith in the doctrine of pure skepticism.


So are you suggesting that logic is a bad idea? Maybe being ilogical is a better way to understand the world? You are suggesting that requiring evidence before believing something is a bad idea?

All belief is not identical. All evidence is not identical. Science is not identical to religion. Atheism is not identical to religion. You are just deluded on this point, for the reasons I have stated.


smallpackage
QUOTE(brave_new_world @ Jan 12 2007, 06:17 AM) [snapback]1497853[/snapback]
See you have to realise that you are not the only athiest. I have personally conversed many. And they actually think that classical physics and mathematics provides an answer(though i personally think a very obscure relationship) to our relationship with the universe and also many other athiests I know believe that the big bang theory provides an answer to why we are here. They have faith and believe in these mentioned doctrines or theories. So atheism is a religion in it's own right. Also I know people who talk about the darwinian theory as if life revolves around it and believe even though there is no absolute proof that definately we evolved from apes. Now I am niether for or against darwinism nor am I for a matter of fact for or against organised christianity. I sit on the sit on the fence. See it's ok to say that atheism is pure skepticism but what you have to understand is that you have faith in that pure skepticism and hence it is your own personal religion. When you get enough of a consensus that also agrees with you and they start an institution scientific or otherwise then that in effect is an organisation of that faith and belief and hence it becomes a form of organized religion.
Now I am not saying that your faith is open to new scientific facts and that your faith is dogmatic, no no no no no don't think that. But if according to your doctrine of pure skepticism you are open to new logical ideas, scientific discoveries etc all that means is that your beliefs change and in turn this justifies your faith in the doctrine of pure skepticism.

See the simalarities with personal and organzied religion here?? rolleyes.gif


Anyone who believes without a doubt that the big bang theory (Yes, a theory, not a scientific fact) is true, is easily deceived by anyone willing to give them an answer. They might as well worship the 12 Olympians. Unlike a believer that is open to whatever is the most interesting and pleasant; I am a skeptic, and do not believe every theory and claim put to the table. I examine the evidence, try to debunk it, and if all else fails, I'm open to the possibility. There is no absolute proof to evolution, just as there is no absolute proof that dinosaurs walked the earth. The evidence is there (an overwhelming amount, in fact), it just comes down to what people are willing to accept.
If you feel the need to call it a religion, go right ahead. From a dictionary's description, there may be some small loopholes that fit the description of atheism, but it is NOT accepted as religion.

I guess I'm a very 'religious' person. huh.gif

By the way, you might want to get a spell checker.

And latsot, I know you're new here, but you should try and put your arguments into one or two posts, not four.
Tangerine Sheri
Actually, this is a good illustration. Silence is simply the absense of sound. It is not some kind of anti-sound. The same is true of belief: disbelief is the absense of belief, not anti-belief, which would presumably be some kind of belief. latsot quote..


exactly very good point......like hot and cold are varing degrees of the same thing..........or as you say the absence of not 'anti"
Paranoid Android
ON the most part I agree, but a lot of the time, atheists don't simply hold an absence of belief, but actively hold an anti-belief. THere are even atheist gatherings (the Atheist Foundation of Australia, for example) where they have prominent atheist speakers give sermons (they call them lectures), they pass money collections, they have fellowship meetings, one of the primary aims of the club (as stated in the charter) is to promote atheism in its form. By all accounts this form of atheism can be considered a religious institution.
smallpackage
That's creepy.
GoddessWhispers
QUOTE(Paranoid Android @ Jan 13 2007, 01:05 PM) [snapback]1499084[/snapback]
ON the most part I agree, but a lot of the time, atheists don't simply hold an absence of belief, but actively hold an anti-belief. There are even atheist gatherings (the Atheist Foundation of Australia, for example) where they have prominent atheist speakers give sermons (they call them lectures), they pass money collections, they have fellowship meetings, one of the primary aims of the club (as stated in the charter) is to promote atheism in its form. By all accounts this form of atheism can be considered a religious institution.



I've not heard of such a thing before, but my take on your accounting is that it's not religious institution in so much as it's exploitation of religious institutionalism. i.e. money. I wonder if they have the Australian equivalent of what is the 501c3 religious tax exempt status, for their organization. Also, while Atheists do have advocate groups that I am aware of in the States, the one's I've heard of aren't invested in spreading Atheism as does the evangelical religious , but to preserve the Atheist right to freedom from religion. The secular community being not immune to the applied influence of religious ideologies in public policy, etc...
Cadetak
QUOTE(latsot @ Jan 12 2007, 10:20 AM) [snapback]1498283[/snapback]
In which case it was inevitable, so it was pre-determined, either by you or by something entirely different. Either way, if you *know* what is going to happen, then it must be predetermined in some way.
This is not prediction. It is deduction or induction. Yeah, OK, it is is fair to say that the ball falling is a prediction, but to get back to my point, I would say that it was inevitable (hence the ease of prediction). But this is a very general sort of prediction, like predicting the sun will come up. It is quite different from consistently making very specific predictions - KNOWING what will happen. If someone (i.e. god) consistently knows what is going to happen to the smallest detail, this is different from recognising general trends.


The bolded is the key here...it may be inevitable but it is still free will. You can say we choose our own inevitabilities.

To to predict how exactly a ball will drop to the ground(how fast, how far, etc.) you have to know things like the ball's weight, the strength at witch it is dropped,
and so on. Predicting environmental happenings like weather, volcanoes eruptions, comet paths, etc. you will use similar principles. If you can find all the variables you can 100% accuretly predict how the ball will drop or what the weather will be.

You can predict human choices the same way. If you knew the person's personality, mood at the time, past choices, genetics, etc. and the environment at that time of the choice(if it is raining you won't choose to go play football). You would also have to know the variables of the other people in the environment(if I am choosing to buy an orange and someone tells me that I shouldn't it would effect my choice).

Simple human choices are easily predicted. For example, my mom can predict that I would choose an apple over an orange...not from guessing but she knows some of the variables that goes into my decision of choosing between an apple and an orange. Using the same principles and applying them to a bigger scale could provide similiar results...but knowing all the variables is near impossible unless you can read minds and are omnipotent.

But god doesn't predict the future he just knows it. The above is just to show that events and choices can be predicted way before they even happen.

Seeing the future doesn't imply fate...it just means someone or something knows the outcomes of free will choices.
Paranoid Android
For the record, a link to the Atheist Foundation of Australia website. Some factors I found of particular note:

~ In order to join you have to be atheist. You can join as an agnostic, but you cannot hold any political position within the organization.
~ Monthly meetings where like-minded atheists can meet and hear a sermon lecture from a knowledgeable atheist.
~ Monthly pub meetings where they have fellowship
~ Membership fees are $30 Austrlian per year, plus whatever donation you'd like to make at their meetings.
~ They have merchandising (T-shirts and such) for those who really want to let the world know they are atheist.
~ There are similar organizations all around the world, according to the website, which would put this group as a definition of "religion".

Check out some of the articles if you wish - among others, there's an article on "Evangelising Atheism", particularly the difficulties that one encouters when (or if) they decide to do so, and the "joys" (their word) of seeing people realise the truth of atheism.

As for the tax-exempt status, I have no idea about this group. Maybe they are and maybe they aren't. *sends email, waits for reply* If they aren't, they should consider applying to be so, they certainly exist under the "non-profit organization" category.

As an aside, if I lived in Melbourne and not Sydney, I'd very much consider attending one of these atheist gatherings, see how similar or different it is to a church gathering.
Tangerine Sheri
QUOTE(Paranoid Android @ Jan 12 2007, 05:05 PM) [snapback]1499084[/snapback]
ON the most part I agree, but a lot of the time, atheists don't simply hold an absence of belief, but actively hold an anti-belief. THere are even atheist gatherings (the Atheist Foundation of Australia, for example) where they have prominent atheist speakers give sermons (they call them lectures), they pass money collections, they have fellowship meetings, one of the primary aims of the club (as stated in the charter) is to promote atheism in its form. By all accounts this form of atheism can be considered a religious institution.

Or out grown the beleif, my athiest repose was a great healing and rest and a letting go of a beleif that no longer served my growth.....its not about anti's and hatred and proving wrong its a journey, a waking to true self for many..... Its joyous and liberating.. tehr are many ways to experince athiesm too so its not a one size fits all idea....
Cadetak
Some have noted that Atheism isn't a belief system its a disbelief system and since it isn't a belief it isn't a religion.

I would like to note that most religions like Christianity for example is also a disbelief system...they disbelieve in The Big Bang Theory like Atheists disbelieve in Genesis. So if you turned that around and said that Atheist believe in The Big Bang theory it would be a belief system...right?

Atheist BELIEVE that god doesn't exist...

Tangerine Sheri
QUOTE(Cadetak47 @ Jan 12 2007, 10:31 PM) [snapback]1499481[/snapback]
Some have noted that Atheism isn't a belief system its a disbelief system and since it isn't a belief it isn't a religion.

I would like to note that most religions like Christianity for example is also a disbelief system...they disbelieve in The Big Bang Theory like Atheists disbelieve in Genesis. So if you turned that around and said that Atheist believe in The Big Bang theory it would be a belief system...right?

Atheist BELIEVE that god doesn't exist...

Are you an athiest or is this hearsay????
Cadetak
QUOTE(Supra Sheri @ Jan 13 2007, 02:07 AM) [snapback]1499506[/snapback]
Are you an athiest or is this hearsay????


Does me being or not being an atheist effect my point?

My sig says: "I am half skeptic and half believer..." that applies to everything and anything. I half believe in Bigfoot, I half believe in ghosts, I half believe in Atlantis, I half believe that the moon landing was fake, I have believe in psychic powers, and I half believe in aliens. So i guess I am half atheist...but I'm also half theist.

But for the record I 100% believe in equality, freedom, and respecting others beliefs(unless those beliefs contradict equality and freedom).

But then again you can say I only half believe in what I am writing tongue.gif

P.S. Yes I half believe in Santa happy.gif
Tangerine Sheri
QUOTE(Cadetak47 @ Jan 12 2007, 11:33 PM) [snapback]1499526[/snapback]
Does me being or not being an atheist effect my point?

My sig says: "I am half skeptic and half believer..." that applies to everything and anything. I half believe in Bigfoot, I half believe in ghosts, I half believe in Atlantis, I half believe that the moon landing was fake, I have believe in psychic powers, and I half believe in aliens. So i guess I am half atheist...but I'm also half theist.

But for the record I 100% believe in equality, freedom, and respecting others beliefs(unless those beliefs contradict equality and freedom).

But then again you can say I only half believe in what I am writing tongue.gif

P.S. Yes I half believe in Santa happy.gif

everything is a construct....I just was wondering if you were speaking from experince or 'what you have heard".....

What is your point????
Cadetak
QUOTE(Supra Sheri @ Jan 13 2007, 02:38 AM) [snapback]1499531[/snapback]
everything is a construct....I just was wondering if you were speaking from experince or 'what you have heard".....

What is your point????


No offense but "my point" was the statement I made that you quoted and replied too. Me having any experience as an atheist or not shouldn't effect my post.

What do you mean by "everything is a construct"? Is that just a general statement or is it somehow applied to me?
Desty
QUOTE(latsot @ Jan 12 2007, 07:12 AM) [snapback]1498268[/snapback]
Assuming god exists, of course, which I don't. I don't know where to go looking for your theories on this. Why not just answer the point directly, right here instead? If you've already written it down, you just need to cut and paste.

I Hoped you had actually been reading and assimilating the information, but this post proves that you hadn't....

Here we go...

QUOTE(Desty @ Jan 10 2007, 08:01 PM) [snapback]1496213[/snapback]
This topic reminds me of the movie What the Bleep do We Know when they talk about 'Observer' we are all an Observer we have this experience of observing.

They say we were created in Gods image, God was a creator, he created the cosmos, us and everthing else we know of (and dont know of). The movie talked about how we are all here to become effective creators. In that sense I believe that yes we are created in Gods image, we Choose, we Create. "Does it not say ye are gods?".

At the end of the movie the question "Why do you think we are here?" was asked. "To become effective creators."

to clerify a bit, God beset upon humans this power, life. God enabled us to become creators, choosers, builders, ect. even though he could see the outcome of it all, he let us all go in this pool of infinite possibilities. We are here to choose 'create' from those possibilities to get the actual outcome that we experience.
This can be proven through quantum physics, more or less anyways.

We all have this 'God' power within us that enables it all to work.

The asked a scientist in the movie, what he thought god was. He said something to the effect "asking a human what God is, is like asking a fish, what the water in which it swims is." of course we know a fish isnt smart enough to explain anything of that magnetute (or any magnitude really)

thats just A theory, maybe the way free will is much more complicated or simple then I assumed. As I said before, if i can think of something I'm sure God can think of something.

As far as free will goes, I believe in it, but only for those who choose to accept its reality. I look around everyday and I see sheep who allow others to make their decissions for them. Although I suppose its their free will choice to allow themselves to be controlled by others too.
GoddessWhispers
QUOTE
to clarify a bit, God beset upon humans this power, life. God enabled us to become creators, choosers, builders, etc. even though he could see the outcome of it all, he let us all go in this pool of infinite possibilities. We are here to choose 'create' from those possibilities to get the actual outcome that we experience.
This can be proven through quantum physics, more or less anyways.


Believers "believe" god created us to exercise our free will. The fact that we exist, for some, means there must be a transcendent omnipotent anthropomorphic being responsible. The bible , for christians, describes that being as Jehovah, or Yahweh, even I AM. And the text invests that being with the characteristics of the humans for which it's words are to inspire salvation from themselves and it. Jealous, vengeful, angry, murderous, domineering. Some apologists<That is not a bad word, by the way. , would ask why "loving" "forgiving" or "benevolent" isn't included in that list. I would say because those other characteristics are predominant, in the texts.

Believers in any god invest that symbol with human characteristics because it's relatable. It's akin to the parent/child model. The child, being less wise than the parent, does what kids do. The parent, overseer and knower of all things in relative comparison to the child, watches, guides, disciplines, the behaviors of that immature spirit. And all the while , the construct imparts a relationship wherein the child is trying to find itself worthy in the parents eyes, of reward and blessings. It can not be said the child is always worthy, in this god/believer model, because otherwise there would be no punishment incurred from an omniscient god overseer, when it knows all that is to occur in it's domain and by it's children. God creates all things, and that means every hurdle faced by humanity is created by god and as such is known to exist as a hurdle for his children, long before they arrive. And that model is similar across all strata of god faith. Not just the christian.

And why? Because the one known fact about why "religion" exists, is it is a contrivance of man. People wrote the bible, the bagavaghita, the koran, (Interesting parallel to that with the christian Enoch adventures. Ascending to heaven, coming back with a book, etc...) , the Tenach, etc... To outline personal conduct so as to please the god form described by the book. People wrote these texts. People describe what "god" is, and people believe. And while some say those people wrote what was inspired by god, that isn't proof of truth. I could say god inspired me to write this reply. Believable? For some, yes. They would retort, all things are inspired by god. But that doesn't make it true, that makes it a conviction that it is true. Faith, there is a god, as imagined to exist.


And while Atheism is belief there is no thing to believe in called god, it is not a belief "system", as is religion. So the two convictions, in their own respect, are not in any wise related.
smallpackage
QUOTE(Desty @ Jan 13 2007, 12:58 PM) [snapback]1499687[/snapback]
thats just A theory, maybe the way free will is much more complicated or simple then I assumed. As I said before, if i can think of something I'm sure God can think of something.


Actually, if everything is predetermined, your mind's thoughts and ideas also fit into that bubble. So you can't come up with anything, God already did. tongue.gif
GoddessWhispers
QUOTE(smallpackage @ Jan 14 2007, 04:16 AM) [snapback]1499800[/snapback]
Actually, if everything is predetermined, your mind's thoughts and ideas also fit into that bubble. So you can't come up with anything, God already did. tongue.gif
Including the idea there is a god. devil.gif
latsot
QUOTE(Cadetak47 @ Jan 13 2007, 05:55 AM) [snapback]1499436[/snapback]
The bolded is the key here...it may be inevitable but it is still free will. You can say we choose our own inevitabilities.


When I said 'by you' I meant 'by you as god or an omipotent being, because I was replying to a hypothetical. I didn't mean 'you yourself as an individual'. I see this doesn't work within context and the slightly odd way this forum quotes stuff when replying might be responsible. But to clarify, I didn't mean the person doing the 'choosing' - I meant the person doing the 'predicting' as being 'you'.

QUOTE
To to predict how exactly a ball will drop to the ground(how fast, how far, etc.) you have to know things like the ball's weight, the strength at witch it is dropped,
and so on. Predicting environmental happenings like weather, volcanoes eruptions, comet paths, etc. you will use similar principles. If you can find all the variables you can 100% accuretly predict how the ball will drop or what the weather will be.
Well, probably not with the weather, even in principle.
Simple human choices are easily predicted. For example, my mom can predict that I would choose an apple over an orange...not from guessing but she knows some of the variables that goes into my decision of choosing between an apple and an orange. Using the same principles and applying them to a bigger scale could provide similiar results...but knowing all the variables is near impossible unless you can read minds and are omnipotent.


You can certainly make informed guesses. You cannot as a human understand all the things that influence someone's decision or the effect those things will actually have on the decision. It is very likely that it is impossible to know this, even in principle, like the weather.

QUOTE
Seeing the future doesn't imply fate...it just means someone or something knows the outcomes of free will choices.


I don't see why. If you KNOW what is going to happen in the future, then you KNOW what decisions people are going to make in the future. So when we reach that point, people can't make different decisions, otherwise you wouldn't know the future at all. I really do understand your point, but I don't think it makes any sense. If it is known in advance what will happen, then although we THINK and FEEL that we are making choices, we aren't really. Since it is already known what we will choose.

Anyway, we are going to argue this back and forth forever, if we aren't careful. I'm going to leave it at that.
latsot
QUOTE(Cadetak47 @ Jan 13 2007, 06:31 AM) [snapback]1499481[/snapback]
I would like to note that most religions like Christianity for example is also a disbelief system...they disbelieve in The Big Bang Theory like Atheists disbelieve in Genesis. So if you turned that around and said that Atheist believe in The Big Bang theory it would be a belief system...right?

Atheist BELIEVE that god doesn't exist...


That might be the case if disbelieving in the big bang were a defining characteristic of christianity, which it certainly is not. My father considers himself a christian, for example, and he believes in the big bang. He doesn't believe literally in Genesis.

We may need some definition here. Technically, yes: atheism is an undefensible position. It is the utter disbeleif in god no matter what evidence presents itself. Practically, however, I personally don't know anyone who is that kind of atheist. All the atheists I know (a lot) are technically agnostics: we don't believe in god and will not unless proper evidence in the existance of god surfaced. And it hasn't yet. I myself am agnostic but a de facto atheist. I can defend this position because of the extreme unlikliness of the existance of god. If god is shown to exist tomorrow, then I will completely change my mind and accept I was wrong. But in the meantime, I will act as though god doesn't exist.

This is the true position of every 'atheist' I know. Better, perhaps, to call them 'de facto atheists'. They are technically agnostics.

Atheism does not imply belief in the big bang. Individual atheists may or may not believe in the big bang, but that does not imply atheism, much as christianity does not imply disbelief in it. Belief in something does not imply a 'belief system' as you put it. I believe in the big bang because there is a lot of evidence for it. My 'belief system' is one of accepting what the evidence tells me, not a belief in the big bang.

Lets go back to your main point to clarify: I don't believe in god because there is no evidence to suggest I should. I find it highly unlikely that any kind of god exists, for the same reason. In this sense, I disbelieve in god. However, if real evidence suddenly emerged for the existance of god, I would change my mind in a heartbeat. Just as if evidence that the big bang didn't happen or evolution couldn't work, I would abandon those ideas. I don't expect any of these things to happen, but if they do, I will change my mind. This is science.

I hope you see why this is different to you example.
latsot
QUOTE(Desty @ Jan 13 2007, 12:58 PM) [snapback]1499687[/snapback]
I Hoped you had actually been reading and assimilating the information, but this post proves that you hadn't....


There was no need to 'prove' I hadn't, since I freely admitted it. I didn't know where to look. You didn't say. I joined this forum very recently so have followed only the parts of the discussion I have seen.

QUOTE
Here we go...
This can be proven through quantum physics, more or less anyways.
Sorry, you are going to have to explain why quantum physics proves this, even if it is 'more or less', whatever that can possibly mean. How do you 'more or less' prove something? You either prove it or you don't.

QUOTE
The asked a scientist in the movie, what he thought god was. He said something to the effect "asking a human what God is, is like asking a fish, what the water in which it swims is." of course we know a fish isnt smart enough to explain anything of that magnetute (or any magnitude really)

thats just A theory,


No, it is absolutely NOT a theory. It is a meaningless bit of rhetoric. Someone said in a movie that people can't understand god. You really think that deserves the status of theory? Do you really think it deserves the same status as the theory of gravity, or relativity, or evolution? Whether you agree with these theories or not, you surely admit that they are well thought through. There is lots of maths behind them. And most importantly, there is lots of EVIDENCE. Simply saying 'well, people don't understand god' hardly compares to these, does it?

QUOTE
maybe the way free will is much more complicated or simple then I assumed. As I said before, if i can think of something I'm sure God can think of something.


I'm not sure I understand what you have 'thought of'. All I've seen so far is the amazing revelation that people can't understand god.

QUOTE
As far as free will goes, I believe in it, but only for those who choose to accept its reality. I look around everyday and I see sheep who allow others to make their decissions for them. Although I suppose its their free will choice to allow themselves to be controlled by others too.


OK. So you have wasted my time completely. You said you had a theory that showed that the things I said about free will and omnipotence were wrong. You don't have a theory and you have shown nothing.

That's disappointing.
latsot
QUOTE(smallpackage @ Jan 13 2007, 04:16 PM) [snapback]1499800[/snapback]
Actually, if everything is predetermined, your mind's thoughts and ideas also fit into that bubble. So you can't come up with anything, God already did. tongue.gif


Yes, this is the clear implication if you believe in an omnipotent god. This and free will are simply not logically compatible.
smallpackage
QUOTE(GoddessWhispers @ Jan 13 2007, 04:19 PM) [snapback]1499805[/snapback]
Including the idea there is a god. devil.gif


Giving me a headache. wacko.gif
Desty
QUOTE(latsot @ Jan 13 2007, 08:49 AM) [snapback]1499832[/snapback]
There was no need to 'prove' I hadn't, since I freely admitted it. I didn't know where to look. You didn't say. I joined this forum very recently so have followed only the parts of the discussion I have seen.

Sorry, you are going to have to explain why quantum physics proves this, even if it is 'more or less', whatever that can possibly mean. How do you 'more or less' prove something? You either prove it or you don't.
No, it is absolutely NOT a theory. It is a meaningless bit of rhetoric. Someone said in a movie that people can't understand god. You really think that deserves the status of theory? Do you really think it deserves the same status as the theory of gravity, or relativity, or evolution? Whether you agree with these theories or not, you surely admit that they are well thought through. There is lots of maths behind them. And most importantly, there is lots of EVIDENCE. Simply saying 'well, people don't understand god' hardly compares to these, does it?
I'm not sure I understand what you have 'thought of'. All I've seen so far is the amazing revelation that people can't understand god.
OK. So you have wasted my time completely. You said you had a theory that showed that the things I said about free will and omnipotence were wrong. You don't have a theory and you have shown nothing.

That's disappointing.

My theory as complicated as it was, was merely, we are all part of god, we are all gods. You didnt understand it then, even simplified you still won't understand it. The question then would be, why am I bothering to type this? Because I hope there is someone out there who now has a better grasp of this most complicated *gasp sarcasm* theory. Although its better stated Hypothesis.

and to answer your question about quantum physics, if you knew anything about quantum physics at all I wouldnt be explaining this, but here goes.
Through numerous experiments in the "quantum mechanics" area, they found out not only that classical physics is completely flawed. *big surprise* but that Objects can be and are(when not observed) in more then one spot at a time. They can produce this effect in labs where they force a single object to take 2 places at once, and it is visible by the naked eye. They have found that solid objects can pass through solid objects, ect. but the part that touches my point they found that the mere act of observing a phenomenon "any phenomenon" will alter that phenomenon.
if nobody is looking its a wave, if someones looking its a particle.
If a tree fell in the forest and nobody was around to watch the event then there wasn't actually a tree at all, just a wave. then when someone made the act of observing the tree automatically goes to its position as an object again, and is no longer a wave.
Maybe I'll have educated you today thumbsup.gif
If not... well atleast it cant get much worse wink2.gif
and to anyone else reading this, sorry if it seems so obvious, I just find myself breaking things down more often then i would be happy to do, (i try to keep it at atleast high school level) but sometimes i have to dip down low
Tangerine Sheri
QUOTE(Cadetak47 @ Jan 12 2007, 11:47 PM) [snapback]1499539[/snapback]
No offense but "my point" was the statement I made that you quoted and replied too. Me having any experience as an atheist or not shouldn't effect my post.

What do you mean by "everything is a construct"? Is that just a general statement or is it somehow applied to me?

i was seeking clarity, thanks..

all myths/systems are the illusions we construct, general statement.....not personal wub.gif
Desty
QUOTE(latsot @ Jan 13 2007, 08:54 AM) [snapback]1499839[/snapback]
Yes, this is the clear implication if you believe in an omnipotent god. This and free will are simply not logically compatible.

By your statement here you are saying that

God cannot ________
A Make toast
B Create free will.
C stand on his head and spin around in circles
D None of the above, He can do anything if he's GOD! Duh!

Thats correct you are saying god cannot make free will.

God is all powerfull you have already made yourself sound like an idiot.

Dont say "well thats if god exists" your statement already made the assumption that God exists, and yet cannot co-exist with free will.

That would be to say God cannot do something.

the Correct answer would be D, Therefore you failed your common sense test.

You are now at the level of Ignorant.
Who?
QUOTE(GoddessWhispers @ Jan 3 2007, 03:46 AM) [snapback]1482745[/snapback]
I want to preface this pasted article because reading many threads of late on the religious topics, I feel it may asuage a lot of defensive posturing. These materials, on my part, are not posted with the thought of changing anyone's mind about their theistic beliefs. I've read a number of posts in forums and it sometimes appears as if believers believe, in the reading of what some might call "controversial" religious material, that the material is applying a underlying message that believers are fools or should re-think their allegiance to their god and eternity.
Firstly, I don't know how an article in cyberspace could ever have that kind of power in itself. People process information and decide what they accept as true or untrue. If an article makes one think about the material and thereby causes them to share their Pov, alls the better. Because not everyone reads everything the same way. Thus, the subject matter of the OT oftentimes broadened in it's scope to include many other relevant issues that help to comprise, in those parts, the whole of the original topic. How lovely. To learn more about each other as we learn more about what we hold in common.

And that is how I see it when I post this work. It is not meant to engage those that would defend by bible verses how it is wrong. The title may address the christian patriarch but those traits attributed to a god image correlate to every deific model. Be it the jews, muslims, hindu, pagans, etc... It is in the spirit of the overall theme, a higher power, a god being, that this article is intended to address. Because the christian god is not unique. His image, like that of his savior son, is found in all those other correlative faiths mentioned earlier. Maybe that is the true meaning of the fabled words to Moses; "I am that I am". Perhaps that was an allusion, by the ancient scribes, that the god of Moses is the god in the face of all peoples idols. One and the same. I am that I am. Because if there is only one creator power, how can anyone on this planet have ever worshiped a different god power, save in name alone?!

Please take this thread in the spirit it is offered. To discuss god power and it's potential, or not, as being all that we surmise is worthy of that deific respect. It is not meant to generate bible verses to discount it because it does not include any to found it's basic premise. Is god possible.

Thanks for reading, I look forward to your thoughts. original.gif

Why the Christian God is Impossible
by Chad Docterman



Introduction

Christians consider the existence of their God to be an obvious truth that no sane man could deny. I strongly disagree with this assumption not only because evidence for the existence of this presumably ubiquitous yet invisible God is lacking, but because the very nature Christians attribute to this God is self-contradictory.




Proving a Universal Negative


It is taken for granted by Christians, as well as many atheists, that a universal negative cannot be proven. In this case, that universal negative is the statement that the Christian God does not exist. One would have to have omniscience, they say, in order to prove that anything does not exist. I disagree with this position, however, because omniscience is not needed in order to prove that a thing whose nature is a self-contradiction cannot, and therefore does not exist.

I do not need a complete knowledge of the universe to prove to you that cubic spheres do not exist. Such objects have mutually-exclusive attributes which would render their existence impossible. For example, a cube, by definition, has 8 corners, while a sphere has none. These properties are completely incompatible: they cannot be held simultaneously by the same object. It is my intent to show that the supposed properties of the Christian God Yahweh, like those of a cubic sphere, are incompatible, and by so doing, to show Yahweh's existence to be an impossibility.
Defining YHWH

Before we can discuss the existence of a thing, we must define it. Christians have endowed their God with all of the following attributes: He is eternal, all-powerful, and created everything. He created all the laws of nature and can change anything by an act of will. He is all-good, all-loving, and perfectly just. He is a personal God who experiences all of the emotions a human does. He is all-knowing. He sees everything past and future.

God's creation was originally perfect, but humans, by disobeying him, brought imperfection into the world. Humans are evil and sinful, and must suffer in this world because of their sinfulness. God gives humans the opportunity to accept forgiveness for their sin, and all who do will be rewarded with eternal bliss in heaven, but while they are on earth, they must suffer for his sake. All humans who choose not to accept this forgiveness must go to hell and be tormented for eternity.

One Bible verse which Christians are fond of quoting says that atheists are fools. I intend to show that the above concepts of God are completely incompatible and so reveal the impossibility of all of them being true. Who is the fool? The fool is the one who believes impossible things and calls them divine mysteries.


Perfection Seeks Even More Perfection

What did God do during that eternity before he created everything? If God was all that existed back then, what disturbed the eternal equilibrium and compelled him to create? Was he bored? Was he lonely? God is supposed to be perfect. If something is perfect, it is complete--it needs nothing else. We humans engage in activities because we are pursuing that elusive perfection, because there is disequilibrium caused by a difference between what we are and what we want to be. If God is perfect, there can be no disequilibrium. There is nothing he needs, nothing he desires, and nothing he must or will do. A God who is perfect does nothing except exist. A perfect creator God is impossible.


Perfection Begets Imperfection

But, for the sake of argument, let's continue. Let us suppose that this perfect God did create the universe. Humans were the crown of his creation, since they were created in God's image and have the ability to make decisions. However, these humans spoiled the original perfection by choosing to disobey God.



What!? If something is perfect, nothing imperfect can come from it. Someone once said that bad fruit cannot come from a good tree, and yet this "perfect" God created a "perfect" universe which was rendered imperfect by the "perfect" humans. The ultimate source of imperfection is God. What is perfect cannot become imperfect, so humans must have been created imperfect. What is perfect cannot create anything imperfect, so God must be imperfect to have created these imperfect humans. A perfect God who creates imperfect humans is impossible.


The Freewill Argument

The Christians' objection to this argument involves freewill. They say that a being must have freewill to be happy. The omnibenevolent God did not wish to create robots, so he gave humans freewill to enable them to experience love and happiness. But the humans used this freewill to choose evil, and introduced imperfection into God's originally perfect universe. God had no control over this decision, so the blame for our imperfect universe is on the humans, not God.

Here is why the argument is weak. First, if God is omnipotent, then the assumption that freewill is necessary for happiness is false. If God could make it a rule that only beings with freewill may experience happiness, then he could just as easily have made it a rule that only robots may experience happiness. The latter option is clearly superior, since perfect robots will never make decisions which could render them or their creator unhappy, whereas beings with freewill could. A perfect and omnipotent God who creates beings capable of ruining their own happiness is impossible.

Second, even if we were to allow the necessity of freewill for happiness, God could have created humans with freewill who did not have the ability to choose evil, but to choose between several good options.

Third, God supposedly has freewill, and yet he does not make imperfect decisions. If humans are miniature images of God, our decisions should likewise be perfect. Also, the occupants of heaven, who presumably must have freewill to be happy, will never use that freewill to make imperfect decisions. Why would the originally perfect humans do differently?
The point remains: the presence of imperfections in the universe disproves the supposed perfection of its creator.




All-good God Knowingly Creates Future Suffering


God is omniscient. When he created the universe, he saw the sufferings which humans would endure as a result of the sin of those original humans. He heard the screams of the damned. Surely he would have known that it would have been better for those humans to never have been born (in fact, the Bible says this very thing), and surely this all-compassionate deity would have foregone the creation of a universe destined to imperfection in which many of the humans were doomed to eternal suffering. A perfectly compassionate being who creates beings which he knows are doomed to suffer is impossible.




Infinite Punishment for Finite Sins


God is perfectly just, and yet he sentences the imperfect humans he created to infinite suffering in hell for finite sins. Clearly, a limited offense does not warrant unlimited punishment. God's sentencing of the imperfect humans to an eternity in hell for a mere mortal lifetime of sin is infinitely more unjust than this punishment. The absurd injustice of this infinite punishment is even greater when we consider that the ultimate source of human imperfection is the God who created them. A perfectly just God who sentences his imperfect creation to infinite punishment for finite sins is impossible.




Belief More Important Than Action


Consider all of the people who live in the remote regions of the world who have never even heard the "gospel" of Jesus Christ. Consider the people who have naturally adhered to the religion of their parents and nation as they had been taught to do since birth. If we are to believe the Christians, all of these people will perish in the eternal fire for not believing in Jesus. It does not matter how just, kind, and generous they have been with their fellow humans during their lifetime: if they do not accept the gospel of Jesus, they are condemned. No just God would ever judge a man by his beliefs rather than his actions.




Perfection's Imperfect Revelation


The Bible is supposedly God's perfect Word. It contains instructions to humankind for avoiding the eternal fires of hell. How wonderful and kind of this God to provide us with this means of overcoming the problems for which he is ultimately responsible! The all-powerful God could have, by a mere act of will, eliminated all of the problems we humans must endure, but instead, in his infinite wisdom, he has opted to offer this indecipherable amalgam of books which is the Bible as a means for avoiding the hell which he has prepared for us. The perfect God has decided to reveal his wishes in this imperfect work, written in the imperfect language of imperfect man, translated, copied, interpreted, voted on, and related by imperfect man.



No two men will ever agree what this perfect word of God is supposed to mean, since much of it is either self- contradictory, or obscured by enigmatic symbols. And yet the perfect God expects us imperfect humans to understand this paradoxical riddle using the imperfect minds with which he has equipped us. Surely the all-wise and all-powerful God would have known that it would have been better to reveal his perfect will directly to each of us, rather than to allow it to be debased and perverted by the imperfect language and botched interpretations of man.


Contradictory Justice

One need look to no source other than the Bible to discover its imperfections, for it contradicts itself and thus exposes its own imperfection. It contradicts itself on matters of justice, for the same just God who assures his people that sons shall not be punished for the sins of their fathers turns around and destroys an entire household for the sin of one man (he had stolen some of Yahweh's war loot). It was this same Yahweh who afflicted thousands of his innocent people with plague and death to punish their evil king David for taking a census (?!). It was this same Yahweh who allowed the humans to slaughter his son because the perfect Yahweh had botched his own creation. Consider how many have been stoned, burned, slaughtered, raped, and enslaved because of Yahweh's skewed sense of justice. The blood of innocent babies is on the perfect, just, compassionate hands of Yahweh.




Contradictory History


The Bible contradicts itself on matters of history. A person who reads and compares the contents of the Bible will be confused about exactly who Esau's wives were, whether Timnah was a concubine or a son, and whether Jesus' earthly lineage is through Solomon or his brother Nathan. These are but a few of hundreds of documented historical contradictions. If the Bible cannot confirm itself in mundane earthly matters, how are we to trust it on moral and spiritual matters?


Unfulfilled Prophecy

The Bible misinterprets its own prophecies. Read Isaiah 7 and compare it to Matthew 1 to find but one of many misinterpreted prophecies of which Christians are either passively or willfully ignorant. The fulfillment of prophecy in the Bible is cited as proof of its divine inspiration, and yet here is but one major example of a prophecy whose intended meaning has been and continues to be twisted to support subsequent absurd and false doctrines. There are no ends to which the credulous will not go to support their feeble beliefs in the face of compelling evidence against them.

The Bible is imperfect. It only takes one imperfection to destroy the supposed perfection of this alleged Word of God. Many have been found. A perfect God who reveals his perfect will in an imperfect book is impossible.

The Omniscient Changes the Future

A God who knows the future is powerless to change it. An omniscient God who is all-powerful and freewilled is impossible.

The Omniscient is Surprised

A God who knows everything cannot have emotions. The Bible says that God experiences all of the emotions of humans, including anger, sadness, and happiness. We humans experience emotions as a result of new knowledge. A man who had formerly been ignorant of his wife's infidelity will experience the emotions of anger and sadness only after he has learned what had previously been hidden. In contrast, the omniscient God is ignorant of nothing. Nothing is hidden from him, nothing new may be revealed to him, so there is no gained knowledge to which he may emotively react.



We humans experience anger and frustration when something is wrong which we cannot fix. The perfect, omnipotent God, however, can fix anything. Humans experience longing for things we lack. The perfect God lacks nothing. An omniscient, omnipotent, and perfect God who experiences emotion is impossible.


Ok.
First, no one knows how god thinks. He is a superior being who has many times more knowledge than the smartest person in the world. By judging him, you are comparing him to a person. He is not a person. He is god. Also, I don't recall that anyone's favorite verse is that Atheists are fools. You said that to discredit Christians. As a educated person, how do you believe the world was created. A big bang? Haha. As an educated man, you know how unlikely that the theory is, filled with many holes. Oh yes, I recommend a video called "100 reasons why evolution is stupid"(Yes it is called that). It is quite amusing, and you'll see the problem of what you believe in. If you believe in evolution, that means you believed a dog evolved from a rock. "Hey doggy! Oh wait... you're a rock."(Ok ok. Bad joke.) and you believe that ridiculous animals evolved into each other. And I will repeat, you don't know what's going on Gods mind(If he has one) because-

A. He's much smarter than you
B. He is omniscient. He knows everything and you don't
C. You have no idea what is going on in his mind again

Oh yes, and God is never surprised
God knows exactly what will happen, its that the people who wrote the bible did not.
Tell us your theory and I'll discredit it, instead of only debasing mine(or ours for other Christians)
And most of all,
An omniscient, omnipotent, and perfect God who experiences emotion is impossible.
Ok. Can you imagine an infinity? Can you understand "endless" You have a definition, but can you really. Can you imagine a God, who knows everything. And again, can you imagine your nearly as smart as he is. If you can, then... go see a doctor. You don't know what can exist if a gods omnipotent. So don't pretend to be an equal to god and judge him.
Desty
QUOTE(Who? @ Jan 13 2007, 12:32 PM) [snapback]1500047[/snapback]
Ok.
First, no one knows how god thinks. He is a superior being who has many times more knowledge than the smartest person in the world. By judging him, you are comparing him to a person. He is not a person. He is god. Also, I don't recall that anyone's favorite verse is that Atheists are fools. You said that to discredit Christians. As a educated person, how do you believe the world was created. A big bang? Haha. As an educated man, you know how unlikely that the theory is, filled with many holes. Oh yes, I recommend a video called "100 reasons why evolution is stupid"(Yes it is called that). It is quite amusing, and you'll see the problem of what you believe in. If you believe in evolution, that means you believed a dog evolved from a rock. "Hey doggy! Oh wait... you're a rock."(Ok ok. Bad joke.) and you believe that ridiculous animals evolved into each other. And I will repeat, you don't know what's going on Gods mind(If he has one) because-

A. He's much smarter than you
B. He is omniscient. He knows everything and you don't
C. You have no idea what is going on in his mind again

Oh yes, and God is never surprised
God knows exactly what will happen, its that the people who wrote the bible did not.
Tell us your theory and I'll discredit it, instead of only debasing mine(or ours for other Christians)
And most of all,
An omniscient, omnipotent, and perfect God who experiences emotion is impossible.
Ok. Can you imagine an infinity? Can you understand "endless" You have a definition, but can you really. Can you imagine a God, who knows everything. And again, can you imagine your nearly as smart as he is. If you can, then... go see a doctor. You don't know what can exist if a gods omnipotent. So don't pretend to be an equal to god and judge him.

HAHA ill have to go see that movie, however I do know that scientists found that the universe is cooling down. that is they look *** light years into space and view the heat from long ago, and then view it from here, and note the difference in temp.

My question from big bang theorists is "where did the big bang come from", Its like the turtle that earth is on, whats the turtle standing on. I bet if civilization doesnt get wiped out, in a few years they will be comparing the BBT to the turtle theory lol.

As far as those who try to judge God, well their time is coming, and its coming swiftly bro, they will suffer. And for all those who mock that last statement know it well.
Tangerine Sheri
QUOTE(Desty @ Jan 13 2007, 12:40 PM) [snapback]1500057[/snapback]
HAHA ill have to go see that movie, however I do know that scientists found that the universe is cooling down. that is they look *** light years into space and view the heat from long ago, and then view it from here, and note the difference in temp.

My question from big bang theorists is "where did the big bang come from", Its like the turtle that earth is on, whats the turtle standing on. I bet if civilization doesnt get wiped out, in a few years they will be comparing the BBT to the turtle theory lol.

As far as those who try to judge God, well their time is coming, and its coming swiftly bro, they will suffer. And for all those who mock that last statement know it well.

'god' and it can also be called life ... its the process, the process of formation ( a natural process that causes something to form) such as the big bang ...
The process has been called evolution, its a process that never ends......

that is the underlying understanding of the big bang....

often 'god' is misunderstood to be a person , 'supreme being' for many means a father in the sky or a creator that has feelings..this is a misunderstanding......

buts thats okay we are here to help you gain clarity....Life is 'god' interpreted into many forms ..this oneness is what i call life and you call 'god'.....
GoddessWhispers
QUOTE
I don't recall that anyone's favorite verse is that Atheists are fools. You said that to discredit Christians.
I never said any such thing. Therefore, your projection on a motive, for something I didn't do, is your discredit to christians. original.gif
smallpackage
QUOTE
If you believe in evolution, that means you believed a dog evolved from a rock. "Hey doggy! Oh wait... you're a rock."(Ok ok. Bad joke.) and you believe that ridiculous animals evolved into each other. And I will repeat, you don't know what's going on Gods mind(If he has one) because-

A. He's much smarter than you
B. He is omniscient. He knows everything and you don't
C. You have no idea what is going on in his mind again

Oh yes, and God is never surprised
God knows exactly what will happen, its that the people who wrote the bible did not.
Tell us your theory and I'll discredit it, instead of only debasing mine(or ours for other Christians)
And most of all,
An omniscient, omnipotent, and perfect God who experiences emotion is impossible.
Ok. Can you imagine an infinity? Can you understand "endless" You have a definition, but can you really. Can you imagine a God, who knows everything. And again, can you imagine your nearly as smart as he is. If you can, then... go see a doctor. You don't know what can exist if a gods omnipotent. So don't pretend to be an equal to god and judge him.
It's pretty funny that you're criticizing theories with supporting evidence yet believe in an almighty being (with absolutely no proof of existence) and [assuming you're Christian] the Bible which is full of mythical stories written by humans 2000 years ago.... Is there something I'm not catching onto here? A perfectly educated man would find this more logical than the Big Bang theory?


QUOTE(Desty @ Jan, 08:40 PM) [snapback]1500057[/snapback]

My question from big bang theorists is "where did the big bang come from", Its like the turtle that earth is on, whats the turtle standing on. I bet if civilization doesnt get wiped out, in a few years they will be comparing the BBT to the turtle theory lol.

As far as those who try to judge God, well their time is coming, and its coming swiftly bro, they will suffer. And for all those who mock that last statement know it well.


I still don't understand why people bring this up. It can easily be turned around to say 'Where did God come from?'. Don't even bother with it.

Is that some kind of threat that I'm going to hell? You might want to avoid posting comments regarding fear, seeing that Hell is considered a form of control, which makes you look foolish (Most of us stick by government law in fear of going to Jail wink2.gif).
So I hate to burst your bubble, but statistically, religion beliefs have No effect on the survival rate of a person.

edit: typo fix in paragraph wacko.gif
micklemas
QUOTE(smallpackage @ Jan 13 2007, 11:11 PM) [snapback]1500208[/snapback]
So I hate to burst your bubble, but statistically, religion beliefs have No effect on the survival rate of a person.

But they may have a massive effect on the eternal life of a persons soul.
smallpackage
QUOTE(micklemas @ Jan, 11:16 PM) [snapback]1500220[/snapback]
But they may have a massive effect on the eternal life of a persons soul.


That's what people have come to believe.
brave_new_world
QUOTE

I'm guessing that there is no point arguing this point. DISbelief is by definition the absense of belief. So, as I said, by definition, disbelief is not belief. However you want to describe this, not believing in something is not belief. Atheism as a world view relies on no belief. Atheists just don't believe that any kind of god exists. You can't say that disbelief in something is belief in it's non existance - that is a fallacy.
Disbelief in my logic is the belief of no belief.

QUOTE

Actually, this is a good illustration. Silence is simply the absense of sound. It is not some kind of anti-sound. The same is true of belief: disbelief is the absense of belief, not anti-belief, which would presumably be some kind of belief.
Religion is NOT simply 'ones beliefs'.
No, I'm afraid not. There is lots of stuff you can find on the web and elsewhere about why science is not a religion. Dawkins is my personal favourite. What *faith* do I need to have that stuff that keeps happening will probably need happening? I feel perfectly justified in believing that the sun will come up tomorrow because it has happened every day so far and we also know WHY the sun comes up every day, based on other observations and theories based on them and so on. It is faith in the sense that well, you never know it MIGHT not happen - the things we know about physics might suddenly turn out to be wrong - but it is a miniscule amount of faith because there is so much evidence that this won't happen.


So then explain disbelief without using it's opposite and explain silence without the use of the word sound or noise or it's opposite.

QUOTE
This is a silly analogy. They are completely different things. We can test for the existance of atoms in many, many different ways, which always work. We can't test for the existance of Jesus other than by reading the bible, which doesn't count as proper evidence.
Say it if you like, but it isn't true. Religion is based on faith. Science is based on evidence. These are different things.
Ah, an appeal to authority. You see *this* is a large part of the difference between religion and science...


No according to mysticism one can test for the existence of god or nirvana by fulfilling certain psychological conditions and "seeing for oneself". So you can experiement and see for yourself. This is science in it's own right. NO DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SCIENCE AND RELIGION. THE BIBLE IS MERELY A GUIDE TO HELP ONESELF ACHIEVE THOSE CERTAIN CONDITIONS JUST LIKE SCIENCE BOOKS ARE GUIDES SO ONE CAN DO A PHYSICAL EXPERIMENT AND SEE FOR ONESELF. SO RELIGION HAS EXPERIMENTS ONE CAN DO FOR PSYCHOLOGICAL EXPERIMENTS SO ONE CAN SEE FOR ONESELF.

BOTH ARE THE SAME. SCIENCE IS BASED ON FAITH IN ONE'S PHYSICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL EVIDENCE(for psychological branches of science). RELIGION(as in the perennial philosophy) IS FAITH IN BOTH PHYSICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL EVIDENCE THAT CONSTITUTES A MYSTICAL EXPERIENCE.

BOTH ARE THE SAME!!!!!!!!!!!!
Paranoid Android
QUOTE(smallpackage @ Jan 14 2007, 10:11 AM) [snapback]1500208[/snapback]
I still don't understand why people bring this up. It can easily be turned around to say 'Where did God come from?'.
That's the thing though - science maintains that something cannot come from nothing, and so the origin of the universe baffles, unless the universe just always was, which is impossible to imagine since everything also must have a starting point. However, admitting the existence of God is admitting the existence of a supernatural force that need not be subject to our own physical laws. One can simply claim "God always was" and it would make sense for a being not subject to physical laws (perhaps even the creator of those physical laws) to be just that.

Insidious, I know wink2.gif

QUOTE(smallpackage @ Jan 14 2007, 10:11 AM) [snapback]1500208[/snapback]
So I hate to burst your bubble, but statistically, religion beliefs have No effect on the survival rate of a person.
This article would appear to contradict that statement thumbsup.gif
smallpackage
QUOTE(Paranoid Android @ Jan 14 2007, 03:08 AM) [snapback]1500485[/snapback]
That's the thing though - science maintains that something cannot come from nothing, and so the origin of the universe baffles, unless the universe just always was, which is impossible to imagine since everything also must have a starting point. However, admitting the existence of God is admitting the existence of a supernatural force that need not be subject to our own physical laws. One can simply claim "God always was" and it would make sense for a being not subject to physical laws (perhaps even the creator of those physical laws) to be just that.

Insidious, I know wink2.gif

This article would appear to contradict that statement thumbsup.gif


'"Some people believe that religious involvement instills healthy beliefs and behaviors," Michael E. McCullough, PhD, who did the research while at the National Institute for Healthcare Research in Rockville, Md., tells WebMD. For example, religious people tend to smoke and drink less, and may be slightly less obese than nonreligious people.'

I was referring more to sudden death. A car crash, gunshot wound, violent stabbing...etc.
I'm happy to say I take care of my body by staying healthy. I do it because I want to, not because of a religious belief. sleepy.gif
Tangerine Sheri
QUOTE(Paranoid Android @ Jan 13 2007, 07:08 PM) [snapback]1500485[/snapback]
That's the thing though - science maintains that something cannot come from nothing, and so the origin of the universe baffles, unless the universe just always was, which is impossible to imagine since everything also must have a starting point. However, admitting the existence of God is admitting the existence of a supernatural force that need not be subject to our own physical laws. One can simply claim "God always was" and it would make sense for a being not subject to physical laws (perhaps even the creator of those physical laws) to be just that.

Insidious, I know wink2.gif

This article would appear to contradict that statement thumbsup.gif

then you aren't familiar with quantum physics ... the new science that aknolwedeges tthe old science has been wonderful but its growing. to new understandinfs, we aren't gonna do away with it but bring a new branch.........Read steven hawkings stuff....
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2008 Invision Power Services, Inc.