World views with no God

[Anfauglir]

Apologies for the gap in my responses - been away for the weekend.  But coming back, I see that your answers are all over the place.

I understand that the meteor story is hard to believe or all of them for that matter, but in all my doubt and disbelief at the time I knew he was telling me something and it wasnt just by chance.....

Since you "know" it didn't appear by chance, then you ARE saying that your god "engineered a significant change in the nature of reality purely to assist your faith". 

I'll start with saying yes I do believe he jumps in at certain times to do things but it is only on his limited basis because he can't just always jump in It would end up throwing to many other things out of balance..... In the many things it says on prayer one is how the more  doubt you have the harder it is for the prayer to be answered so in turn the more you trust in him the more likely it is.

Okay - so god is restricted in what he can do (!!! - but I'll let that pass), and that when you DOUBT, it is harder for the prayer to be answered.  You confirm this here:

According to the bible for a prayer to be answered one praying must sincerely believe in him and also in Jesus an put all other idols or gods or any thing we put before him material or not, aside and put him first.

But wait!!

.....I was very much doubting at the time and I said something along the lines of what if there isn't any real substantial good or joy for us in life or what if God doesn't really exist. Right as I said that last word as the last waves came out from me, I saw in the night sky the biggest and longest lasting shooting star I have ever seen.....

You were doubting as heavily as you ever were, actually saying "what if there is no god".....and yet there was no problem with god answering you there, was there?  Indeed, you weren't even praying at the point when your god popped along with the miracle - a miracle that would indeed throw a HUGE number of things out of balance.  You reinforce this with the lines:

.....it would be taking away from our free will and the cause and effect nature of our world if he answered every prayer in the way each person wants him to answer.

In the case of your meteor, not only did your god overrule cause and effect (did the meteor appear from nowhere, or did he just alter its course?), but apparently gave you (a doubter!) immediate and obvious proof of his existence.....overruling your free will.

It seems that - despite your protestations that you have thought deeply about these things - that you haven't really considered them at all.  So perhaps you can explain for me in a way that I can understand.

How was it that a god who does not want to overrule free will, does not want to put the universe out of balance, and who has decided he will be less likely to answer the prayers of doubters.....decided to award a unverse-changing, free-will denying, bona fide miracle to someone who was in the depths of doubt, about to renounce him, and who wasn't even praying for help at the time?

EVERYTHING you are saying completely contradicts your claim that your meteor sighting was a god-given miracle.   Are you wrong in everything you have been claiming about the way your god works?  Or are you wrong that the meteor was a miracle, and - in truth - just something that would have happened anyway?

[Anfauglir]

Quick question to all that this relates to in what you have said, how can you say that you have never heard, seen, or understood God or whatever he tries to get through to us if you have never actually taken that first step, in saying ok God I'm gonna trust you are actually here, then do some looking into the bible (or whatever religion you want to know about) ......

A very good question.  Since you say you have done a lot of research into religion, you will of course know that there are - at the most conservatire estimate - several dozen basic religions out there.....and literally hundreds of distinct and separate sub-divisions of them.  For example, if I were to examine American faiths, should I go with Kuksu or Lakotan as being correct??

What you are saying is that for "god" to become visible to us, we have to first choose a god; then, look seriously into that faith (to ensure we are doing it correectly); and then put what we have read into practice.

Well, actually, that sounds (almost) perfectly logical - the only way I could see the logic failing would be if the True God were one who was purportedly all-loving, and desirous of a relationship with him....such a god would not sit back passively while I worked my way through all the indigenous tribal religions of Africa....but I digress.

So okay - I'm up for it.  I shall begin with the Advaita Vedantu school of Hinduism....alphabetically seems as good a place to start as any.  Just a couple more quick questions.....

Firstly, you say that it is important that I place my trust in the god of that religion before finding out all about the religion.....well, its a big ask.  What worries me a lot is that with the hundreds of faiths out there, it will be progressively harder for me to place that trust and make the "leap of faith" as I go along.  I worry that if I happen to place the "one true faith" at number 34 (say) on my list, then the succession of 33 failures and wasted effort will make it very hard for me to summon up that trust for the 34th time.....and since you've said that "trust" is so important, it may be that despite giving it my very best shop, I will be simply unable to muster the level of devotion required.

And final question: once I have placed my trust in a particular god, read their holy texts, and determined I am doing everything right....how long should I carry on with that faith's style of devotion before concluding that THAT faith is false?  I'm more than halfway through my lifetime....with hundreds of faiths to try, how long can I afford to devote to any one particular god without success before I should move on to the next?

[Garja]

I don't understand the putting of blame on God, for how the occupants of this earth us human beings are the real the inflictors of almost one hundred percent of all carnage and evil unto ourselves. *snip* I think if we take a look at the number one source in all history that caused the most bloodshed is obviously war, can you really blame God for human egotism and greed?

You are right, war is a major cause of bloodshed.  Lets look at a list of wars fought in the name of God that GOD DOES NOTHING TO STOP (for brevity sake I will focus on the Christian version, but may throw in a few other gods for fun):


Albigensian Crusade
Almohad Conquest of Muslim Spain
Anglo-Scottish War (1559–1560)
Arab Conquest of Carthage
Aragonese-Castilian War
Aragonese-French War (1209–1213)
1st, 2nd, and 3rd Bearnese Revolts
Bohemian Civil War (1465–1471
Bohemian Palatine War
Byzantine-Muslim War (633–642) (14 separate campaigns)
Castilian Conquest of Toledo
Charlemagne’s Invasion of Northern Spain
Charlemagne’s War against the Saxons
Count’s War
Covenanters’ Rebellion (1666) x3
The Crusades x9
Crusader-Turkish Wars (1100–1146
Crusader-Turkish Wars (1272–1291)
German Civil War (1077–1106)
First Iconoclastic War
Second Iconoclastic War
Irish Tithe War
Lebanese Civil War
Wars of the Lombard League
Maryland’s Religious War
War of the Monks
Mountain Meadows Massacre
Crusade of Nicopolis
Portuguese-Moroccan War (1458–1471)
Portuguese-Omani Wars in East Africa   
Rajput Rebellion against Aurangzeb   
War of Religion (x9)
Roman-Persian War (421–422)
Roman-Persian War (441)
First Sacred War (x3)
Schmalkaldic War
Scottish Uprising against Mary of Guise
Spanish Christian-Muslim War (912–928) (x6)
Spanish Conquests in North Africa
Swedish War
Thirty Years’ War
Transylvania-Hapsburg War
Tukulor-French War



In deed, war is evil.

[Boots]

However, there is no contradiction to a God loving his creation so, that he gave his son unto us

you sure about that?  Becuase, a few lines up in this same post we have . . .

Yeah we have starvation all over the world and we also have millionaires and billionaires who won't spare a dime for a family member.
.
I think if we take a look at the number one source in all history that caused the most bloodshed is obviously war, can you really blame God for human egotism and greed?

How is the fact that there is starvation of innocent children NOT contradictng your claim of a loving benevolent god?  If your god created this world, this reality, then he created it the way it is--lumps and all.  You don't think that an omnipotent being could have created a reality that had less (or no) suffering?  One in which we *had* free will, but not have to suffer through the trials of this temporary life before getting eternal life? 

and you'd better believe that if god did create us, I'm sure as hell blaming him for egotism and greed.  If your car blows up due to a design flaw, don't you blame the designer???

It's often said that God speaks the loudest during suffering it can just be a hard time to listen to it.

Yeah. Hard ot hear that imaginary voice over the sound of your own anguished screams, or those of your children.

[Astreja]

It's often said that God speaks the loudest during suffering it can just be a hard time to listen to it.

I'd find it hard to listen, too, if I were suffering or in danger and a being of limitless power was just standing by with hands in Its divine pockets, trying to chat Me up.

[jdawg70]

I don't understand the putting of blame on God, for how the occupants of this earth us human beings are the real the inflictors of almost one hundred percent of all carnage and evil unto ourselves. Yeah we have starvation all over the world and we also have millionaires and billionaires who won't spare a dime for a family member.

If you put any blame on those millionaires/billionaires for not stepping in to help someone out, then you should automatically understand why I would blame an existing all-powerful, all-loving, all-knowing entity for not stepping in to help someone out.

Also, do you know what being wrong feels like?  If you only pick one of the questions in this post to respond to, I do ask that you answer this one.
Be aware that I'm going to constantly ask you this until I get a response.

[Aaron123]

I don't understand the putting of blame on God, for how the occupants of this earth us human beings are the real the inflictors of almost one hundred percent of all carnage and evil unto ourselves. Yeah we have starvation all over the world and we also have millionaires and billionaires who won't spare a dime for a family member. Ancient man had it in a much different way but we can't be that fragile considering our domination of the entire world now. I think if we take a look at the number one source in all history that caused the most bloodshed is obviously war, can you really blame God for human egotism and greed?

In short:

1) Humans are often our own worst enemies, and the cause of much of our own suffering

2) We have to get our act together if we want to improve things

3) We cannot blame 'god' for our problems.

That's fine.  I actually agree with all of the above.  There's just one bit of unfortunate implication with the above.  Well, not really a problem for me, but unfortunate for you.

We cannot count on god for anything.

If we really want to improve things, there is no point in praying, worshipping, or otherwise hoping that god will do something.  This is fine for me, since from my viewpoint, god doesn't exist.  But for you, this means your god is completely useless.  Instead of praying, donate blood.  Instead of worshipping, volunteer at a soup kitchen.  Instead of hope/faith in god, give money to the Red Cross (I have done all of those things at least once, BTW).  All of those things, even if you only do them once in your life, will be a million times more productive than a million prayers.  I'm fine with that message, but I'm not so sure you are.

God does intervene as much as he can without losing the dignity of our free will in the process.

What does "dignity of our free will" even mean?

It's often said that God speaks the loudest during suffering it can just be a hard time to listen to it.

Again; what does this even mean?

[screwtape]

I don't understand the putting of blame on God, for how the occupants of this earth us human beings are the real the inflictors of almost one hundred percent of all carnage and evil unto ourselves. Yeah we have starvation all over the world and we also have millionaires and billionaires who won't spare a dime for a family member.

related to this.

If you had the super powers of god, if you had the magic to do anything, would you use them to help people?  Would it be immoral if you did not?

[pianodwarf]

If you had the super powers of god, if you had the magic to do anything, would you use them to help people?

Yes.  The first thing I would do would be to eliminate diseases and disorders such as cancer, polio, and the like.  The second thing would be to give all human beings full control over their fertility simply by choosing whether or not to be able to have children, in just the same way they can decide how to comb their hair.  Hunger would be next on the list.  There are other things as well, of course.  I'd be busy for a while.

This is yet another thing about belief in an omnimax being that I've never understood.  I, as a puny human, can easily imagine how this world could be a far better place than it is, and yet this is supposedly the best that Yahweh can do?

Would it be immoral if you did not?

Duh.

[Astreja]

If you had the super powers of god, if you had the magic to do anything, would you use them to help people?  Would it be immoral if you did not?

I'd absolutely use those powers... Preferably by creating teachable moments that would give people the clues to figure things out for themselves and, in effect, develop their own god-like powers for future use.

But in a situation of emergent danger I'd just plain bend the laws of physics or put in an impromptu guest appearance.

And yes, it would be immoral if I didn't help.  If it's My universe and I have the power to control it, I also must bear responsibility for any suffering that occurs on My watch.

[jynnan tonnix]

Yes.  The first thing I would do would be to eliminate diseases and disorders such as cancer, polio, and the like.  The second thing would be to give all human beings full control over their fertility simply by choosing whether or not to be able to have children, in just the same way they can decide how to comb their hair.  Hunger would be next on the list.  There are other things as well, of course.  I'd be busy for a while.

I might amend that to "I would let people choose whether or not to be able to have children, but would reserve the right to smite anyone with infertility if I knew they were going to abuse or neglect the child"

[screwtape]

Yes. ...

Would you hide from people?
Would you insist they believe in you without seeing you?
Would you destroy them if they didn't love you?

I really want Sam to answer all these questions.

[Truth OT]

As Mr. Scarface once said in 'Till I Seen A Man Die, "Life has no meaning." In of of itself, I believe life is utterly meaningless. But, because of what life has given rise to, thinking entities like me and presummably you, something called hope has come into existence. It is because of hope that folks like you, me, and great thinkers of our number have dared to dream and reach for possibilities beyond what our mortality reveals to us.

Our greatest hope centers squarely on that which is most innate to us as living creatures, and that is our desire to survive. This hope has led to the formation of religions that promise an afterlife as well scientific breakthroughs which may once day solve the puzzle of our perceived limitations and lead us towards a tomorrow that may in fact never end where we are free to truly give meaning that endures to not only our lives, but the universe we are a part of as well.

[Samuelke]

I don't understand the putting of blame on God, for how the occupants of this earth us human beings are the real the inflictors of almost one hundred percent of all carnage and evil unto ourselves. Yeah we have starvation all over the world and we also have millionaires and billionaires who won't spare a dime for a family member.

If you put any blame on those millionaires/billionaires for not stepping in to help someone out, then you should automatically understand why I would blame an existing all-powerful, all-loving, all-knowing entity for not stepping in to help someone out.

Also, do you know what being wrong feels like?  If you only pick one of the questions in this post to respond to, I do ask that you answer this one.
Be aware that I'm going to constantly ask you this until I get a response.

I know exactly what being wrong feels like and if you could talk to my gf about it she would verify that. I don't think anyone on earth doesn't know what it feels to be wrong, it's only that some people can't admit to themselves that they are. But for me no one has given strong enough evidence that factually says there is no God and Jesus never walked the earth, I am very willing to give my own presupposition an evaluation but I have seen nothing but you all telling me that in your opinion what I actually believe is my imagination and like that of Santa. But last time I checked there was no world wide religion of people denying themselves and giving the authority of their lives over to Santa. That was very hard for me to do maybe harder then anything about my belief is to really accept this and come to terms with this.

[jdawg70]

I know exactly what being wrong feels like and if you could talk to my gf about it she would verify that. I don't think anyone on earth doesn't know what it feels to be wrong, it's only that some people can't admit to themselves that they are. But for me no one has given strong enough evidence that factually says there is no God and Jesus never walked the earth, I am very willing to give my own presupposition an evaluation but I have seen nothing but you all telling me that in your opinion what I actually believe is my imagination and like that of Santa. But last time I checked there was no world wide religion of people denying themselves and giving the authority of their lives over to Santa. That was very hard for me to do maybe harder then anything about my belief is to really accept this and come to terms with this.

Thanks for the answer, but the problem is that you've just described the feeling of knowing or thinking you're wrong.  The feeling associated with being wrong is exactly the same feeling associated with being right - because the truth of a claim is completely independent of the how you or anyone else feels about the matter.

Last time I checked there were several million people who subscribe to the Hindu faith.  The Hindu faith is very incompatible with your beliefs.  I suspect that there are many members of the Hindu faith that feel just as strongly as you do that they are right.  What's the resolution to this discrepancy?

Insofar as no one giving you sufficient evidence that there is no god, has anyone given you sufficient evidence that there is no Vishnu?  No Thor?  No Mithra?  No Santa?  No leprechauns?  No celestial teapot?  No Flying Spaghetti Monster?

You may wish to look into the meaning of the phrase 'proving a negative'.

Furthermore, have you been given sufficient evidence for the existence of god?  The divinity of Jesus?  After reading Anfauglir's analysis, do you still believe that the meteor you saw before was part of the chain of evidence?  Why or what not?

Look, Samuelke, here's the deal - I totally get it.  I understand how compelling it is to go with your gut when evaluating the truth/lack thereof of claims that impact your world.  In a sense it's how we're wired; my guess would be that if the human mind had to critically examine every piece of sensory input it was receiving it would burn out in no time.  Intuition is a useful cognitive shortcut and it does us well.  But when you're afforded the time and ability to critically analyze a claim, you'd do well to try to be as objective as possible in evaluating the truth value of that claim.  And an objective analysis should not ever include concepts that 'just feel right'.

It takes time...you feel like you're betraying your own intuition and implicitly distrusting yourself.  And that's not a good feeling so I really wouldn't expect you to simply discard your own experiences and intuitions outright.  But I'm not expecting you to do that - but you have got to at least start with accepting that some of the points that have been brought up to you throughout this thread should cause you to question the validity of the very strong gut feeling you have that you're right.  Because logically, objectively, some of the claims that you've laid down as part of your belief structure just do not add up.  If you honestly say to yourself that they really do add up, well so be it.  All I ask is for you to be honest with yourself, that's all.

[Samuelke]

Think about how people would then start living their lives if God did the thing you all want him to do. We live In a cause and effect world it sounds like you all want to take the effect out of it, that we all can act however we please and God would just bail us out every time we were in a jam. I think this all is a very delicate subject and we gotta treat it as one, I'll try harder to not use so much of my own opinion I know I have already too much. I am not seeing the strength in the argument of you all saying what you would do as God to try and show there is no God, it's not that all the ideas of God are comforting to me but I believe what I do because I find it to be true, and nothing has proved to me otherwise not because it was all appealing to me. Gods judgement must always go hand in hand with his love and grace, in the old testament when he orders the armies to destroy a city it was because the people their were killing innocent babies and still he asked them to just believe and ask to be redeemed and they would be saved before the attack.

You all really think it would be possible for God to intervene constantly without having any implications on our own lives?

[Samuelke]

Ok so this whole time so far I have been defending what I believe now I will continue to do that but I think you all have some of that to do yourself. So then what outside the bible, whether it is another religion, naturalism, or whatever do you believe that you can show as to be the truth, and is coherent and also logically sound? I will still answer your questions like I said I just want to begin getting into this also.

[Garja]

I will respond with exactly what I said back on page 3:
My brother in law summed it up best for me anyway.  "I worship the gods of Logic, Reason, Rational Thought, Critical Thinking, and Empathy."

To me this gets at the core of what I have come to believe over the last few months.  Reasonable, objective, evaluation of scientifically proven facts (and history); while showing care and compassion for my fellow human beings.  I may be a godless heathen, but I'm moral damnit! 

I actually feel that my life has significantly MORE meaning now that I no longer believe in God.  This feels like my one shot, there is no eternal life, there is no being in heaven dictating the behavior and attitudes of those around me. WE JUST ARE.  We exist, we have one opportunity in life to make a meaningfully positive impact on the world, or to do x, y, z... whatever you want from your life do it, and let that give you meaning.

IMO "God", just strips a lot of the meaning from life.  Everything is either predestined or at least you were created with God having the knowledge that you would complete xyz in your life.  If that's true, what is the point really?  Do you really have a choice in your life, or do you live in an ant farm that a petulant child can shake up like an etch-a-sketch, or come up and poor water into at any time?

[jdawg70]

Ok so this whole time so far I have been defending what I believe now I will continue to do that but I think you all have some of that to do yourself. So then what outside the bible, whether it is another religion, naturalism, or whatever do you believe that you can show as to be the truth, and is coherent and also logically sound? I will still answer your questions like I said I just want to begin getting into this also.

Reality.

Start with a blank slate and build up from there.

[Samuelke]

I will respond with exactly what I said back on page 3:
My brother in law summed it up best for me anyway.  "I worship the gods of Logic, Reason, Rational Thought, Critical Thinking, and Empathy."

To me this gets at the core of what I have come to believe over the last few months.  Reasonable, objective, evaluation of scientifically proven facts (and history); while showing care and compassion for my fellow human beings.  I may be a godless heathen, but I'm moral damnit! 

I actually feel that my life has significantly MORE meaning now that I no longer believe in God.  This feels like my one shot, there is no eternal life, there is no being in heaven dictating the behavior and attitudes of those around me. WE JUST ARE.  We exist, we have one opportunity in life to make a meaningfully positive impact on the world, or to do x, y, z... whatever you want from your life do it, and let that give you meaning.

IMO "God", just strips a lot of the meaning from life.  Everything is either predestined or at least you were created with God having the knowledge that you would complete xyz in your life.  If that's true, what is the point really?  Do you really have a choice in your life, or do you live in an ant farm that a petulant child can shake up like an etch-a-sketch, or come up and poor water into at any time?

So basically you have just picked and chosen a few things to add together plus opinion and run with it? First do you all not agree that to have compassion for people and respect and value for each others lives makes no sense if there was no God, because it would then truly be our only goal to survive by all means necessary. So why then care for others why does life have value, I'm sorry but it is fact that science can not tell us that because it can not explain everything in life that's just how it is. It was Darwin who said that if what he was proposing was true then the ramifications would be disastrous, and then nietzsche said if we are to do away with God we first must do away with grammar.

[Samuelke]

Ok so this whole time so far I have been defending what I believe now I will continue to do that but I think you all have some of that to do yourself. So then what outside the bible, whether it is another religion, naturalism, or whatever do you believe that you can show as to be the truth, and is coherent and also logically sound? I will still answer your questions like I said I just want to begin getting into this also.

Reality.

Start with a blank slate and build up from there.

So all reality which you can see you believe or no what do you mean?

[LoriPinkAngel]

I happen to be a Christian but I saw an interesting website called "Daylight Atheism".  The author of this site was a pretty mellow atheist.  Simply advocating the reasons that he does not believe there is a god without trashing those who do.

[Ambassador Pony]

in the old testament when he orders the armies to destroy a city it was because the people their were killing innocent babies

Which of the bible genocides are you referring to here?

[JeffPT]

Think about how people would then start living their lives if God did the thing you all want him to do.

Yeah, my mother wouldn't have had a stroke at 34.  My grandmother would have survived her cancer and my grandfather would be coming to his great grandson's baseball game this weekend.  How awful. 

Think about how much love God would get from us if he DID do the thing we all want him to do. 

The fact is, however, that God doesn't do anything.  We can play hypothetical all day, but the fact is that a good explanation as to why God doesn't step in and help everyone that's suffering is that God isn't real.  That's a pretty good explanation, don't you think? 

We live In a cause and effect world it sounds like you all want to take the effect out of it, that we all can act however we please and God would just bail us out every time we were in a jam.

Last time I checked, all you have to do is believe in Jesus and God effectively DOES bail you out; you just have to wait until you're dead.  You can be a mass murderer, but if you believe in God, you still get to go to heaven. 

And yes, we do live in a cause and effect world.  Completely natural.  There is no outside, intelligent, willful force changing that fact.  Couldn't the reason for that be that there is no God to begin with?

I am not seeing the strength in the argument of you all saying what you would do as God to try and show there is no God, it's not that all the ideas of God are comforting to me but I believe what I do because I find it to be true, and nothing has proved to me otherwise not because it was all appealing to me. Gods judgement must always go hand in hand with his love and grace, in the old testament when he orders the armies to destroy a city it was because the people their were killing innocent babies and still he asked them to just believe and ask to be redeemed and they would be saved before the attack.

The reason for this is because you have been seriously brainwashed to think of God as the ultimate force of good.  In doing that, you can't possibly see anything that God would do as inherently bad.  But that's a severely biased opinion.  And before you accuse me of being biased the other way, I want you to ask yourself a question that's been posed to you a few times in different ways.  If you had the power to help everyone, would you do it?  Better yet, if I had the power to help everyone, and I didn't do it, what would you think of me?  Now, if you first believed I was the ultimate force of good in the universe (if you believed I was God), you wouldn't see me as bad, but since you don't, you'd probably think I was not the ultimate force for good in the universe.  That's all we are doing Sam.  We hear one side say, "God is good and wise and loving", and then we look at reality and see the opposite.  We then form the conclusion that your side is simply wrong about it. 

You all really think it would be possible for God to intervene constantly without having any implications on our own lives?

Which is the worst one here... a God that intervenes to help anyone who needs Him, a God that selectively intervenes when he feels like it, saving those he likes best and ignoring the rest; or a God that doesn't intervene at all.  The first would be wonderful.  The last would, at the very least, play fair, but the middle one is just an ass hole.  He'd be like the doctor who invents a cure for cancer and only gives it out to people he likes.  I don't know how any person could worship that. 

I'm sorry Sam, but helping people is generally considered a good thing to do..  Not helping people is not.  No matter how much mental gymnastics you do, you're not going to get around that.  You can talk smack all day about how it would have implications, and how it would upset free will, or this and that (we've heard all the excuses), but the fact is that God (if we hypothetically say He exists) has the power to help and he doesn't do it.  That's not good. 

But again, keep in mind, one possible reason that God does not interfere in this world is because there is no God. 

First do you all not agree that to have compassion for people and respect and value for each others lives makes no sense if there was no God, because it would then truly be our only goal to survive by all means necessary.

Totally disagree.  You don't need God to have values or to think of other people as important and worthy of respect. In fact, it's highly insulting for you to even insinuate that.  And as humans, historically our best chances of survival hinge around working together with others, not alone.  There is a distinct survival advantage if you're working together instead of working separately. 

So why then care for others why does life have value, I'm sorry but it is fact that science can not tell us that because it can not explain everything in life that's just how it is.

We care for others because there has been a survival advantage involved with working with others that favors it over not working with others.  Do you really not see that if we didn't care for each other, we would all be working on our own and the species would die off when the last person killed the second to last person off?  God didn't give us that.  It's an evolved characteristic.  A survival advantage.

It was Darwin who said that if what he was proposing was true then the ramifications would be disastrous, and then nietzsche said if we are to do away with God we first must do away with grammar.

Evolution does do a major number on religion.  Rightly so.  I have no idea what Nietzsche meant when he said that. 

The world would be better off if nobody believed in the Christian God.  It's trash.  It is a cancer on the world.  Or maybe, they could believe in it, but just keep it in the privacy of their own homes.  Keep it to themselves and it might be fine. 

I happen to be a Christian but I saw an interesting website called "Daylight Atheism".  The author of this site was a pretty mellow atheist.  Simply advocating the reasons that he does not believe there is a god without trashing those who do.

This post has an underlying tone that I want to pull out, just to make sure I'm not the only one seeing it.  Are you trying to say that this entire thread as a personal attack on Sam?  That we are 'not mellow' and are 'trashing him'?  Why?  What are we doing if not advocating reasons that we don't believe in God without trashing Sam?  It may appear as if Sam is getting trashed, but that's only because he's losing.  We aren't calling him names, calling him stupid, or anything like that.  We are giving Sam facts to work with. 

If that was not the intention, then I apologize for jumping to that conclusion, but it sure seems like an accusation is in there. 

[jdawg70]

Reality.

Start with a blank slate and build up from there.

So all reality which you can see you believe or no what do you mean?

What I mean is that all that is consistent with objective reality.  That which is inconsistent with objective reality is discarded.  That which has no effect on reality is indeterminate, unknowable, and therefore is something that can be affirmed by me.  Basically, if you're asking what my underlying ideology forms my perception of reality, it is that there exists a shared, objective reality, that my senses are not perfect reflections of objective reality, and that my thoughts and beliefs may not be reflections of objective reality.

[Garja]

So basically you have just picked and chosen a few things to add together plus opinion and run with it? First do you all not agree that to have compassion for people and respect and value for each others lives makes no sense if there was no God, because it would then truly be our only goal to survive by all means necessary. So why then care for others why does life have value, I'm sorry but it is fact that science can not tell us that because it can not explain everything in life that's just how it is.

You are making a couple logical fallacies here, there is no reason to nitpick, but the most egregious is you are starting the conversation with the assumption of God and drawing the conclusion that morality is a product of that assumed being.

But to answer your question, no.  I do not think that the human species would have evolved in such a way that morality could not exist without God.  I am not going to go into a long diatribe on this, but I think as I and others have pointed out going to God (or the Judea-Christian version) for moral guidance is like going to Jeffery Dahmer for dietary advice.  When you take the Bible as a whole (not just the good parts) it is not a moral book.  It teaches love, but then it also teaches genocide, rape, and slavery.

Science does not explain everything, you are absolutely correct.  But this is simply the "God of the Gaps" argument, where credit for everything that cannot be explained by science is automatically given to God.  If that is the way you chose to come at the problem so be it, but then your definition of God has shrank dramatically over the last few decades as scientific knowledge increases.

I think than answers your question, but if not let me know.

[Astreja]

Gods judgement must always go hand in hand with his love and grace, in the old testament when he orders the armies to destroy a city it was because the people their were killing innocent babies and still he asked them to just believe and ask to be redeemed and they would be saved before the attack.

Samuel, in My readings of the OT I don't remember many times at all where the god of the Bible held off the armies and gave the defending side a chance for redemption.

In fact, there are more than a few instances where "innocent babies" were slaughtered.  Exodus 12:29 springs to mind.  Add to that Deuteronomy 2:34, Deuteronomy 3:6, Deuteronomy 20:16-17, Joshua 6:21... Shall I continue?

I also think it somewhat unlikely that all the cities targeted by Biblegod were hotbeds of infant sacrifice.  More likely this was a story that the priests told to the people to get them worked up into a frenzy.

You all really think it would be possible for God to intervene constantly without having any implications on our own lives?

Yes, I do think it's possible, and quite desirable.  We could apply our life energies to higher developmental stages, rather than struggling to stay alive or to defend ourselves against attack.

[jdawg70]

I happen to be a Christian but I saw an interesting website called "Daylight Atheism".  The author of this site was a pretty mellow atheist.  Simply advocating the reasons that he does not believe there is a god without trashing those who do.

This post has an underlying tone that I want to pull out, just to make sure I'm not the only one seeing it.  Are you trying to say that this entire thread as a personal attack on Sam?  That we are 'not mellow' and are 'trashing him'?  Why?  What are we doing if not advocating reasons that we don't believe in God without trashing Sam?  It may appear as if Sam is getting trashed, but that's only because he's losing.  We aren't calling him names, calling him stupid, or anything like that.  We are giving Sam facts to work with. 

If that was not the intention, then I apologize for jumping to that conclusion, but it sure seems like an accusation is in there.

LoriPinkAngel, I kind of got the same sensation that JeffPT is getting from your post.

Samuelke, should I go with my gut feeling here or should I go back looking through the archives of LoriPinkAngel's posts to see if that interpretation (i.e. my feelings that I am right about her intention) of her post is consistent with her past behavior?
<Don't be insulted by that - I'm using it for illustrative purposes regarding 'feelings of being right'.  If you feel the illustration is invalid please point it out how.>

[Samuelke]

This is from  Norman Geisler’s book, A Popular Survey of the Old Testament

A Moral Problem—the slaughter of the Canaanites (Josh 6, 8, 10).

Israel was commanded by God to completely exterminate the Canaanite inhabitants of the land including men, women, and children. This has been called a primitive and barbaric act of murder perpetrated on innocent lives.

Several factors must be kept in mind in viewing this situation. (1) There is a difference between murder and justifiable killing. Murder involves intentional and malicious hatred which leads to life-taking. On the other hand, the Bible speaks of permissible life-taking in capital punishment (Gen. 9:), in self defense (Exod. 22:2), and in a justifiable war (Gen. 14). (2) The Canaanites were by no means innocent. They were a people cursed of God from their very beginning (Gen. 9:25). They were a vile people who practiced the basest forms of immorality. God described their sin vividly in these words, “I punished its iniquity, and the land vomited out its inhabitants” (Lev. 18:25). (3) Further, the innocent people of the land were not slaughtered. The story of Sodom and Gomorrah clearly demonstrates that God would save a whole city for ten righteous people (Gen. 18:22f.). In that incident, when God could not find ten righteous people, He took the four or five righteous ones out of the place so as not to destroy them with the wicked (Gen. 19:15). On another occasion God saved some thirty-two thousand people who were morally pure (Num. 31:35). Another notable example is Rahab, whom God saved because she believed (cf. Heb. 11:31). (4) God waited patiently for hundreds of years, giving the wicked inhabitants of Canaan time to repent (cf. 2 Peter 3:9) before He finally decided to destroy them (Gen. 15:16). When their iniquity was “full,” divine judgment fell. God’s judgment was akin to surgery for cancer or amputation of a leg as the only way to save the rest of a sick body. Just as cancer or gangrene contaminates the physical body, those elements in a society—if their evil is left to fester—will completely contaminate the rest of society. (5) Finally, the battle confronting Israel was not simply a religious war; it was a theocratic war. Israel was directly ruled by God and the extermination was God’s direct command (cf. Exod. 23:27-30; Deut. 7:3-6; Josh. 8:24-26). No other nation either before or after Israel has been a theocracy. Thus, those commands were unique. Israel as a theocracy was an instrument of judgment in the hands of God. (Norman L. Geisler, A Popular Survey of the Old Testament, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, 1977, pp. 99-100.)