Author Topic: World views with no God  (Read 16191 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Garja

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 759
  • Darwins +38/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #232 on: August 16, 2012, 06:05:10 AM »
Sam,

Cant get into it right now as I have to walk out the door, but just wanted to tell you real quick that "no", I do not think the Bible tells followers to seek "truth", but does tell them to seek "God".  Which is part of the problem.  For centuries Christians (and other religious grps) have stood in stark opposition to scientific advancement for no other reason than new facts contradict old beliefs found no where but the bible... this is a problem.  Further, why would God create a universe, then create a book describing how he created the universe, then make it scientifically look like a complete fairy tale?  I mean, im sure God could have explained the big bang in appropriately flowery language to make it fit the mold of a creation myth.  God could have described any scientific fact in a number of different ways that would have left scientists puzzled as how someone that long ago could have known that without divine intervention.  But do we get that?  NO!  We get woman being created from a mans rib.
"If we look back into history for the character of the present sects in Christianity, we shall find few that have not in their turns been persecutors, and complainers of persecution."

-Benjamin Franklin

Offline Samuelke

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 95
  • Darwins +9/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #233 on: August 16, 2012, 09:26:45 PM »
Sam,

Cant get into it right now as I have to walk out the door, but just wanted to tell you real quick that "no", I do not think the Bible tells followers to seek "truth", but does tell them to seek "God".  Which is part of the problem.  For centuries Christians (and other religious grps) have stood in stark opposition to scientific advancement for no other reason than new facts contradict old beliefs found no where but the bible... this is a problem.  Further, why would God create a universe, then create a book describing how he created the universe, then make it scientifically look like a complete fairy tale?  I mean, im sure God could have explained the big bang in appropriately flowery language to make it fit the mold of a creation myth.  God could have described any scientific fact in a number of different ways that would have left scientists puzzled as how someone that long ago could have known that without divine intervention.  But do we get that?  NO!  We get woman being created from a mans rib.

Well for most of what you have said I would like to see your evidence, for things like the bible says nothing of seeking truth and knowledge and also for your claim on the bible contradicting science and what not. Because I see scientific fact in the bible, like how It describes the wind and ocean currents having certain patterns which we know now is true, plus it spoke of mountain ranges in the depths of the ocean. You can't find these facts in any other source until hundreds of years later, and now we can safely ride through much of the ocean floor and see these mountains.

Ok so of course the account of creation the bible tells us isn't as detail filled as we would like it to be but it does give us so key information I think. It agrees with science by saying there was a beginning to the universe, and like the big bang it says he created the earth and all of space right there at the beginning. There is much more but I'll move on for now.

I've heard many atheist say this but tell me if you disagree, the only absolute argument atheism has against the existence of God they say is there isn't enough, or to them not quality enough, evidence for his existence. This is to anyone I'm just curious about you all's thoughts on that.

Ok now I have a question for anyone who would like to answer. If you were god and you were to reveal yourself to the world how would you go about doing that exactly? How would you choose to get man, your creation, to believe in you?

Offline natlegend

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1656
  • Darwins +65/-0
  • Polyatheist
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #234 on: August 16, 2012, 09:57:47 PM »
Quote
Because I see scientific fact in the bible, like how It describes the wind and ocean currents having certain patterns which we know now is true

Please show where.

Quote
Ok so of course the account of creation the bible tells us isn't as detail filled as we would like it to be but it does give us so key information I think. It agrees with science by saying there was a beginning to the universe, and like the big bang it says he created the earth and all of space right there at the beginning.

Just because your book 'agrees' with science, that doesn't make it 'scientific'.

Quote
I've heard many atheist say this but tell me if you disagree, the only absolute argument atheism has against the existence of God they say is there isn't enough, or to them not quality enough, evidence for his existence. This is to anyone I'm just curious about you all's thoughts on that.

Yes, this is the crux of disbelief. Please show your evidence of any god's existence - and you should know by now that holding up the bible as evidence doesn't cut the cheese, as there are many, many other 'holy' texts in the world and they all claim the same thing as yours.

Also, when you say...

Quote
the only absolute argument atheism has against the existence of God

...you need to remember that all atheism requires is a lack of belief in god(s), nothing more.

Quote
Ok now I have a question for anyone who would like to answer. If you were god and you were to reveal yourself to the world how would you go about doing that exactly? How would you choose to get man, your creation, to believe in you?

Easy. All s/he/it needs to do is write on the moon in letters that can be read from the casual observer on earth, something along the lines of "Hi, God here, just a message to let you all know I love you guys" in special words that can be read in any language by everyone on the planet, even those who can't read.
« Last Edit: August 16, 2012, 10:01:43 PM by natlegend »
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Offline Samuelke

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 95
  • Darwins +9/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #235 on: August 16, 2012, 10:01:21 PM »
Quote from: Anfauglir on August 10, 2012, 04:56:47 AM
So you answer me honestly: are you REALLY trying to tell me that a world where your god stepped in and answered "big" prayers like the four I listed above would somehow be a worse world than the one where he sits on his cloud and does nothing?

Ok so I understand your deep concern here you have definitely asked a very well pointed question and one of, if not the most difficult and troubling question for any theist to answer. I think this is mainly due to the real and harsh way we all experience suffering and evil in our lives constantly to great extremes and it is terribly difficult to come to terms with.

But let me say that I do believe God answers all sorts of different prayers and I think he has good reasons to not answer the ones he doesn't. While I may not totally understand why I believe scincerely think his intellect and understanding is so beyond ours it is incomprehensible. Therefore, I think it is the way it is for good reasons and while this may not be the best of all possible worlds I strongly think, its the best of any other world as the means or way to the perfect and best of any worlds which is heaven.

Ever since I started to really develop this personnel relationship with God and pursue him more seriously, I've seen him answer more and more often as time goes on. There are certain times I go through struggle and pain and some times I get upset and frustrated. The times that are obviously worse and the more harsh of times I get to this place where I start to think I'm on my own with it entirely and there's no way God can bring his grace and love to me in or through this. And every single time now he proves me wrong and gives his grace and love abundantly, and I see that joy fills me in times that at first glance seem to posess any aspect of good and happy.

It isn't like there is nothing at all in my beliefs in God that are daunting or I can fully explain, and I think this shows that this is no kind of crutch for me or something I'm doing because it makes me feel good. I would love it to be at peace and understanding with every last bit of what I believe but to no believe it because of this makes no sense to me when everything in me tells me God is real and the relationship I have with him is and he proves it to me everyday. But God enrichs my life and my being in times of suffering and personally I don't think I would want a life that was just a walk in the park so to say, and void of all suffering. What do you think life would be like if there was zero suffering?

Offline Garja

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 759
  • Darwins +38/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #236 on: August 16, 2012, 10:48:53 PM »

Well for most of what you have said I would like to see your evidence, for things like the bible says nothing of seeking truth and knowledge and also for your claim on the bible contradicting science and what not. Because I see scientific fact in the bible, like how It describes the wind and ocean currents having certain patterns which we know now is true, plus it spoke of mountain ranges in the depths of the ocean. You can't find these facts in any other source until hundreds of years later, and now we can safely ride through much of the ocean floor and see these mountains.
*snip*

Ok now I have a question for anyone who would like to answer. If you were god and you were to reveal yourself to the world how would you go about doing that exactly? How would you choose to get man, your creation, to believe in you?

I assume this is what you are talking about?:
Ecclesiastes 1:6
The wind goes toward the south,
And turns around to the north;
The wind whirls about continually,
And comes again on its circuit.

I dont think this kind of knowledge is really all that special, its simply observational, and also VERY general and dependent on where on the Earth you are standing.

Jonah 2:6 (ESV)
6    at the roots of the mountains.
I went down to the land
whose bars closed upon me forever;
yet you brought up my life from the pit,
O Lord my God.

Also, super specific and inconsequential.

Contradictions.... really Sam, I believe you are smarter than that.  You have read Genesis, and I know that Theologians try their damnedest to try to make it fit with what really happened, but you reeeeaaaally gotta get creative to stretch that.

The most obvious, the age of the Universe.
Science says 14.6 Billion years
The Bible says 6,000, lets even round up and call it 10,000. Even with generously rounding by 40%, the Universe is still 1.46 MILLION TIMES OLDER than the Bible indicates.

The Bible claims a worldwide flood and depends on one man to gather 2 of every animal from everywhere from the Arctic to Australia.  Millions of species, and thats just the bugs.
No evidence for this exists and is flatly laughable on the surface of it

The Bible paints the picture of a permanent Earth where everything is relatively static as far as what plants and animals existed.
well over 99% of all life the earth has ever seen is extinct.

Depending on where you look in the Bible the earth seems to be flat... some passages can imply spherical, but they always say "circular"  pretty sure God knows there is a pretty big difference between the two.


My point is - if God created the world, and he created us knowing our curious nature is inherent to who we are as a species - there is no logical reason to shroud our origins in mystery.  I have heard Christian apologists say that the Hebrews probably didn't even have a word for "Billion", and I will give you that, but I promise they could have said "many thousands upon thousands".  Later in the Bible there is something about 70,000 x 70,000 (I do not remember the context), but that would have at least lead us in the right direction.

Why say "God created man in a day" when even if he exists he DID NOT CREATE MAN IN A DAY.  Evolution happened, I haven't heard you come down conclusively against this, so I wont beat you over the head with it but its really important.  God could have been honest and said that he crafted humankind over centuries from lower life.  When I did believe in God I never thought that evolution necessarily diminished the wonder that we are here... even now its pretty damn remarkable... but God presumably has no reason to lie to us about our origins, yet seemingly does if you believe the Bible to be true.

If I was God, and I was bent on eternal torture for everyone who did not believe in me.... I would simultaneously appear to every man, woman, and child on earth, speak to them in their language, call them by name.  If they had a question or two, I would answer it.  I would say, hey, sorry I know it seems like I am being a dick, but I swear there is a reason for that.  Peace Out, see you at the Armageddon.
"If we look back into history for the character of the present sects in Christianity, we shall find few that have not in their turns been persecutors, and complainers of persecution."

-Benjamin Franklin

Offline JeffPT

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2028
  • Darwins +203/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm a lead farmer mutha fucka
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #237 on: August 16, 2012, 11:01:17 PM »
I've heard many atheist say this but tell me if you disagree, the only absolute argument atheism has against the existence of God they say is there isn't enough, or to them not quality enough, evidence for his existence. This is to anyone I'm just curious about you all's thoughts on that.

What do you mean by 'absolute' argument against God?  If you are asking us whether or not our main reason to not believe in God is lack of evidence, then for me, yes, that's a big one.  There are countless other arguments against God though.  That's just one argument.  The notion of suffering is really big for me as well. 

Ok now I have a question for anyone who would like to answer. If you were god and you were to reveal yourself to the world how would you go about doing that exactly? How would you choose to get man, your creation, to believe in you?

In order to do that, all you have to do is ask yourself how you would get someone else to believe that you exist.  Now, the methodology may be different from person to person, as some people are blind, some people are deaf, and some people are both.  You wouldn't scream, "I exist!" to a deaf person, and you wouldn't wave at a blind person.  You would have to vary the methodology you used from person to person that way. 

But.... Since I am God, and I know everything, I would know exactly what it would take for each individual person to believe in me, and I would provide that for each of them.  The very last thing I would do, however, would be to hide from everyone and make it appear as if I wasn't there.  Turning myself into a person in an ancient, highly illiterate desert region for a very short period of time and hoping they would take accurate notes that would survive intact over 2000 years is somewhere in between those two extremes; although it seems to me that that strategy would fall into the 'really stupid' range.     

Ok so I understand your deep concern here you have definitely asked a very well pointed question and one of, if not the most difficult and troubling question for any theist to answer. I think this is mainly due to the real and harsh way we all experience suffering and evil in our lives constantly to great extremes and it is terribly difficult to come to terms with.

It's difficult because your belief that God is good is often totally contradicted by our reality.  Suffering is easy to understand if you take God out of the equation.  Just break it down and examine it. 

Fact: Good and bad things happen all the time in our universe. 

Possible theories to explain why this is: 
1. God exists and he loves everyone. 
2. God exists and he hates everyone.
3. God exists and is indifferent to us.

1 and 2 require mental gymnastics to explain the fact that both good and bad things happen all the time.  3 doesn't require any of that, and explains quite well why both can happen.  Since 3 is functionally and measurably exactly the same as no god at all, then in the absence of proof of the God in 1 or 2, no god or an indifferent god are massively more plausible than 1 or 2. 

But let me say that I do believe God answers all sorts of different prayers and I think he has good reasons to not answer the ones he doesn't.

If God answers some prayers like you say he does, then he has the capability of answering all prayers.  And if he picks and chooses who to help, what makes him any better than a doctor who invents a cure for cancer, then only gives it out to the people he feels like giving it to?  Why would you ever worship a deity that picks and chooses who's prayer to answer?  And look at some of the prayers he's chosen to answer 'no' to?  Are you saying that there are good reasons not to answer YES to the paralyzed child in the wheelchair?  If so, you're a morally bankrupt person.   

While I may not totally understand why I believe scincerely think his intellect and understanding is so beyond ours it is incomprehensible.

The other possibility, Sam, is that God isn't real.  That would explain in great detail why some people suffer, others thrive, and it happens as a result of natural occurrences in our universe.  Doesn't it?  I mean, the child in the wheelchair that prays for the use of his legs... He doesn't get his prayer answered because there is no God to answer... that explains why the kid stays paralyzed, doesn't it?   Where does that logic break down for you?  Does that really not make sense?

Therefore, I think it is the way it is for good reasons and while this may not be the best of all possible worlds I strongly think, its the best of any other world as the means or way to the perfect and best of any worlds which is heaven.

I think that's an utterly disgusting thought.  To think that every bit of suffering that God allows is 'for good reasons' is a sick, sick thought.  Your religion makes you say things like this.  It's terrible. 

Let me ask you then... should we feel bad for the little girl who is taken from her family, beaten, raped and killed?  Or should we celebrate that as God's great plan for everything?  Screw that man.  Screw that. 

Ever since I started to really develop this personnel relationship with God and pursue him more seriously, I've seen him answer more and more often as time goes on.

Or maybe it's that you've learned not to pray for the things you know won't likely occur naturally. When was the last time you prayed for someone's limb to regrow?  Or to return from the dead?  Things you KNOW won't happen, no matter how hard you pray. 

Tell you what. Do a little experiment for me, will you?  Every day, pray for the end of cancer, the end of child suffering, and the end of starvation in our world.  Pray for it 50 times a day.  After a month, tell me if you still see him answer more and more often, or whether you're just getting better at praying for things that you know will likely get the results you expect and want.   

There are certain times I go through struggle and pain and some times I get upset and frustrated. The times that are obviously worse and the more harsh of times I get to this place where I start to think I'm on my own with it entirely and there's no way God can bring his grace and love to me in or through this. And every single time now he proves me wrong and gives his grace and love abundantly, and I see that joy fills me in times that at first glance seem to posess any aspect of good and happy.

You mean, when things are really bad, they eventually get better?  Gee, that's very strange indeed.  I'm sure that never happens to the rest of us.   &)

This type of paragraph is just trash, Sam.  It's meaningless.  It's all in your head.  God doesn't do any of that, because God isn't real.  You've conjured it all in your mind. 

Does God give his grace and abundant love to the 29,000 or so children that died today of starvation?  Does He give his abundant grace and love to the mothers of all of those children?  How about to the cancer victims that died today after fighting a long battle with a horrible disease?  What grace and abundant love is he giving them? 

The egoism of the religious mind is staggering.  God loves me, he gives me so much...  Screw that Sam.  Sleep well knowing that you worship a God that makes you feel better when times are bad, but fucks over millions of other people on a daily basis.  Either that, or stop thinking like a child and think like an adult.  Do you really, seriously think, that the most powerful being in the universe gives a crap about you and your rough times, when he doesn't lift a finger to stop the immense amounts of suffering and death of others?  Please man.  Think like an adult here.  Snap out of this. 

But God enrichs my life and my being in times of suffering and personally I don't think I would want a life that was just a walk in the park so to say, and void of all suffering. What do you think life would be like if there was zero suffering?

When you suffer, God knows it.  Before you suffer, God knows you're going to suffer, and does nothing to stop it.  So there is no avoiding the conclusion that he wants you to suffer.  This is the God you choose to worship. 

We don't have to have a life devoid of suffering in order to eliminate a shit load of the suffering we now have, do we? 
Whenever events that are purported to occur in our best interest are as numerous as the events that will just as soon kill us, then intent is hard, if not impossible to assert. NDT

Offline jdawg70

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2003
  • Darwins +360/-8
  • Ex-rosary squad
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #238 on: August 16, 2012, 11:04:09 PM »
But let me say that I do believe God answers all sorts of different prayers and I think he has good reasons to not answer the ones he doesn't. While I may not totally understand why I believe scincerely think his intellect and understanding is so beyond ours it is incomprehensible. Therefore, I think it is the way it is for good reasons and while this may not be the best of all possible worlds I strongly think, its the best of any other world as the means or way to the perfect and best of any worlds which is heaven.
If incomprehensible, how do you deem his actions and reasons to be 'good', 'moral', 'worthy of praise', 'worthy of worship', etc.?
Quote
Ever since I started to really develop this personnel relationship with God and pursue him more seriously, I've seen him answer more and more often as time goes on. There are certain times I go through struggle and pain and some times I get upset and frustrated. The times that are obviously worse and the more harsh of times I get to this place where I start to think I'm on my own with it entirely and there's no way God can bring his grace and love to me in or through this. And every single time now he proves me wrong and gives his grace and love abundantly, and I see that joy fills me in times that at first glance seem to posess any aspect of good and happy.
Somewhere, someplace, RIGHT NOW, there is at least one 3-year old child suffering, slowly starving to death.  Would you mind using this personal relationship of yours to kindly ask god to stop showering you with gifts and to save that kid's life?  If his reason is so beyond us (includes you) and incomprehensible, how can you differentiate the response from 'God shall not for a good reason' to 'screw you, I am God.  He's going to suffer.  And I'm a douchenut.' to '<no response because entity does not exist>'?
Quote
It isn't like there is nothing at all in my beliefs in God that are daunting or I can fully explain, and I think this shows that this is no kind of crutch for me or something I'm doing because it makes me feel good. I would love it to be at peace and understanding with every last bit of what I believe but to no believe it because of this makes no sense to me when everything in me tells me God is real and the relationship I have with him is and he proves it to me everyday. But God enrichs my life and my being in times of suffering and personally I don't think I would want a life that was just a walk in the park so to say, and void of all suffering. What do you think life would be like if there was zero suffering?
Zero suffering?  You honestly mean to tell me that striving for a world free from suffering is not a laudable goal?

Or do you somehow believe that in order to learn, grow, and develop as a sentient, feeling creature, you require suffering and the suffering of others?

Are you equating 'suffering' to 'obstacle'?  Like, the suffering of having to figure out how to build an energy distribution system?  That's typically not the kind of suffering I'm referring to - I'm talking about suffering like...a child being raped, an innocent bystander getting shot in the gut, starving societies, disease, famine, turmoil.
"When we landed on the moon, that was the point where god should have come up and said 'hello'. Because if you invent some creatures, put them on the blue one and they make it to the grey one, you f**king turn up and say 'well done'."
- Eddie Izzard

Offline wright

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1819
  • Darwins +78/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • "Sleep like a log, snore like a chainsaw."
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #239 on: August 16, 2012, 11:15:00 PM »
Ok so I understand your deep concern here you have definitely asked a very well pointed question and one of, if not the most difficult and troubling question for any theist to answer. I think this is mainly due to the real and harsh way we all experience suffering and evil in our lives constantly to great extremes and it is terribly difficult to come to terms with.

But let me say that I do believe God answers all sorts of different prayers and I think he has good reasons to not answer the ones he doesn't. While I may not totally understand why I believe scincerely think his intellect and understanding is so beyond ours it is incomprehensible. Therefore, I think it is the way it is for good reasons and while this may not be the best of all possible worlds I strongly think, its the best of any other world as the means or way to the perfect and best of any worlds which is heaven.

Bolds mine.

Sam, if that's true, then it is logically impossible for you to have any kind of "relationship" with god. If something is beyond your understanding, you cannot relate to it in any meaningful way, and it cannot relate to you.

This is an apologetic I see a lot from Christians on this site. Those that use it don't seem to grasp how it's inherently self-contradictory, not to mention self-serving. That is, if confronted with the fact that tragedy happens to people, an apologist says, "It's part of God's plan: His mind is incomprehensible to us but ultimately working for the good."

But the apologist has surrendered their basis for "ultimate good" coming out of god, Sam. In terms of evidence and logic, anyway. Sure, it's a nice emotional refuge if you can ignore the glaring contradiction. I know that well, having done it from 1990 to 2005.

It isn't like there is nothing at all in my beliefs in God that are daunting or I can fully explain, and I think this shows that this is no kind of crutch for me or something I'm doing because it makes me feel good. I would love it to be at peace and understanding with every last bit of what I believe but to no believe it because of this makes no sense to me when everything in me tells me God is real and the relationship I have with him is and he proves it to me everyday. But God enrichs my life and my being in times of suffering

Sam, it's an inherent part of human nature (indeed the nature of all life) to prefer things that feel good and avoid things that feel bad. Without that, living organisms don't get very far at all. Your belief gives you a context that explains pain (physical and emotional); without it you would need to confront the fact that the universe doesn't care about you: a painful prospect indeed. Again, I speak from experience.

and personally I don't think I would want a life that was just a walk in the park so to say, and void of all suffering. What do you think life would be like if there was zero suffering?

What would you think of a parent that could prevent a child from making a mistake that would lead to permanent, life-long disability and pain, and didn't act to prevent it, didn't even bother to explain themselves? Because that is exactly the position you have put your god in. If he's understandable enough to love us and want us to love him, then he should be capable of explaining himself clearly.

You can't have it both ways. Either your god is comprehensible to human beings or he isn't.
Live a good life... If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones. I am not afraid.
--Marcus Aurelius

3sigma

  • Guest
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #240 on: August 17, 2012, 12:59:39 AM »

But let me say that I do believe God answers all sorts of different prayers…

And every single time now he proves me wrong and gives his grace and love abundantly, and I see that joy fills me in times that at first glance seem to posess any aspect of good and happy.

…everything in me tells me God is real and the relationship I have with him is and he proves it to me everyday.

I read this and your other posts, Samuelke, and I really have to wonder what sort of person you are. Are you an intellectually honest person or do you use misapprehensions, fallacies and misrepresentations to convince yourself that your God is real? Is your belief based on sound evidence and sound arguments or are the evidence and arguments you use to support your beliefs unsound and not worthy of consideration?

Is your God real or imaginary, Samuelke? Before you say, “It’s real to me” or “I believe it’s real”, that isn’t what I’m asking. I’m asking for facts, not beliefs, because no amount of belief can make something a fact. I’m asking you to tell me whether your God is actually real or merely imaginary? Does it actually exist as a thing or occur in fact—or is your God imaginary and you only believe it is real because your belief provides you with emotional comfort?

Is your belief in your God validated or is it just an unvalidated feeling or idea you have and you are engaging in nothing more than self-deception?

I would be grateful if you could give me some honest and direct answers to those questions.

Offline natlegend

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1656
  • Darwins +65/-0
  • Polyatheist
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #241 on: August 17, 2012, 01:10:03 AM »
What do you think life would be like if there was zero suffering?

I reckon it'd be fucking awesome, you horrible little git.
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Offline Samuelke

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 95
  • Darwins +9/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #242 on: August 17, 2012, 01:31:39 AM »

Well for most of what you have said I would like to see your evidence, for things like the bible says nothing of seeking truth and knowledge and also for your claim on the bible contradicting science and what not. Because I see scientific fact in the bible, like how It describes the wind and ocean currents having certain patterns which we know now is true, plus it spoke of mountain ranges in the depths of the ocean. You can't find these facts in any other source until hundreds of years later, and now we can safely ride through much of the ocean floor and see these mountains.
*snip*

Ok now I have a question for anyone who would like to answer. If you were god and you were to reveal yourself to the world how would you go about doing that exactly? How would you choose to get man, your creation, to believe in you?

I assume this is what you are talking about?:
Ecclesiastes 1:6
The wind goes toward the south,
And turns around to the north;
The wind whirls about continually,
And comes again on its circuit.

I dont think this kind of knowledge is really all that special, its simply observational, and also VERY general and dependent on where on the Earth you are standing.

Jonah 2:6 (ESV)
6    at the roots of the mountains.
I went down to the land
whose bars closed upon me forever;
yet you brought up my life from the pit,
O Lord my God.

Also, super specific and inconsequential.

Contradictions.... really Sam, I believe you are smarter than that.  You have read Genesis, and I know that Theologians try their damnedest to try to make it fit with what really happened, but you reeeeaaaally gotta get creative to stretch that.

The most obvious, the age of the Universe.
Science says 14.6 Billion years
The Bible says 6,000, lets even round up and call it 10,000. Even with generously rounding by 40%, the Universe is still 1.46 MILLION TIMES OLDER than the Bible indicates.

The Bible claims a worldwide flood and depends on one man to gather 2 of every animal from everywhere from the Arctic to Australia.  Millions of species, and thats just the bugs.
No evidence for this exists and is flatly laughable on the surface of it

The Bible paints the picture of a permanent Earth where everything is relatively static as far as what plants and animals existed.
well over 99% of all life the earth has ever seen is extinct.

Depending on where you look in the Bible the earth seems to be flat... some passages can imply spherical, but they always say "circular"  pretty sure God knows there is a pretty big difference between the two.


My point is - if God created the world, and he created us knowing our curious nature is inherent to who we are as a species - there is no logical reason to shroud our origins in mystery.  I have heard Christian apologists say that the Hebrews probably didn't even have a word for "Billion", and I will give you that, but I promise they could have said "many thousands upon thousands".  Later in the Bible there is something about 70,000 x 70,000 (I do not remember the context), but that would have at least lead us in the right direction.

Why say "God created man in a day" when even if he exists he DID NOT CREATE MAN IN A DAY.  Evolution happened, I haven't heard you come down conclusively against this, so I wont beat you over the head with it but its really important.  God could have been honest and said that he crafted humankind over centuries from lower life.  When I did believe in God I never thought that evolution necessarily diminished the wonder that we are here... even now its pretty damn remarkable... but God presumably has no reason to lie to us about our origins, yet seemingly does if you believe the Bible to be true.

If I was God, and I was bent on eternal torture for everyone who did not believe in me.... I would simultaneously appear to every man, woman, and child on earth, speak to them in their language, call them by name.  If they had a question or two, I would answer it.  I would say, hey, sorry I know it seems like I am being a dick, but I swear there is a reason for that.  Peace Out, see you at the Armageddon.

Ok first I just want to say that isn't under question, that the absolute main belief in the christian theology is Jesus and his message and the belief and actual practice of belief is what gets you into heaven. Then I'd say you have to consider christian theology accepts the bible is word for word perfect or anything of the sort, where an Islam will attest their holy book is a perfect revalation as a whole, from Allah.

Also we all accept there is a large amount of the bible that you can not take literally. There is much debate as to the exact numbers stated in genesis about creation. Can we also consider that there have been many attempts of kings in the past that ordered the scribes to try and translate the true meaning out of it. Yet then counters were made like the reformers to get the original meaning back, and it is clear that the main message has not changed on Jesus and his message.

With all this in mind I'm sorry, but I have to qoute a good bit here I got to go to sleep, but I think at least one of these will be hard to shown false, I give you the challenge and I eagerly await you all's response. The first deals with science and the bible, how we don't believe it's a scientific book but I think it is very well shown here, That it does indeed contain scientific fact.

I can speak more tomorrow on the contradictions claimed that it makes but I will say now, much can rationally be explained by the true value in how you should read scripture and it even says never stop reading it because it can be very difficult sometimes to understand the true meaning and many times meaning the text implies literally or through literary devices.

Ok first this article please take the time to read it.

http://100777.com/node/534

Next I just wanna qoute CS  Lewis on the evolution of man in his own lovely way. Sorry again for referring to other sources but I felt these are worthy.

For long centuries, God perfected the animal form which was to become the vehicle of humanity and the image of Himself. He gave it hands whose thumbs could be applied to each of the fingers, and jaws and teeth and throat capable of articulation, and a brain sufficiently complex to execute all of the material motions whereby rational thought is incarnated.
The creature may have existed in this stage for ages before it became man: it may have even been clever enough to make things which a clever archaeologist would accept as proof of its humanity. But it was only an animal because all its physical and psychical processes where directed to purely material and natural ends.
Then in fullness of time, God caused to descend upon this organism, both on its psychology and physiology, a new kind of consciousness which could say "I" and "me," which could look upon itself as an object, which knew God, which could make judgments of truth, beauty, and goodness, and which was so far above time that is could perceive time flowing past. …
We do not know how many of these creatures God made, nor how long they continued in the Paradisal state. But sooner or later they fell. Someone or something whispered that they could become as gods …
– C.S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain, paragraph breaks and emphasis added

Offline oogabooga

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 457
  • Darwins +22/-0
  • Gender: Female
  • I doubt, therefore I might be.
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #243 on: August 17, 2012, 05:23:47 AM »
This will be huuuge, so bear with me, people, please.

Ok first I just want to say that isn't under question, that the absolute main belief in the christian theology is Jesus and his message and the belief and actual practice of belief is what gets you into heaven. Then I'd say you have to consider christian theology accepts the bible is word for word perfect or anything of the sort, where an Islam will attest their holy book is a perfect revalation as a whole, from Allah.
So again we're at the point where the question of who exactly is right comes to light. People who interpret Jesus' wishes in a way that makes them burn thousands on stakes were practising their belief as dictated in the Bible. A mass murderer who believed wholeheartedly will go to heaven while a member of another or no faith who has done nothing wrong in his life will burn forever. That's a question you have been asked before in this thread and haven't answered.

Quote
Also we all accept there is a large amount of the bible that you can not take literally. There is much debate as to the exact numbers stated in genesis about creation. Can we also consider that there have been many attempts of kings in the past that ordered the scribes to try and translate the true meaning out of it. Yet then counters were made like the reformers to get the original meaning back, and it is clear that the main message has not changed on Jesus and his message.
If the Bible is in any way authoritative, there should be no doubt as to which parts of it are literal and which aren't. And there's no place for fairy tales and metaphors in a document that's considered as important as a holy book. The mere fact that there are as many interpretations of the Bible as there are Christians and that there are over 30 thousand denominations of Christianity alone should tell you that there's something severely wrong with god's communication skills.

Quote
With all this in mind I'm sorry, but I have to qoute a good bit here I got to go to sleep, but I think at least one of these will be hard to shown false, I give you the challenge and I eagerly await you all's response. The first deals with science and the bible, how we don't believe it's a scientific book but I think it is very well shown here, That it does indeed contain scientific fact.
I'll go there a bit later. But suffice it to say, you're wrong.

Quote
I can speak more tomorrow on the contradictions claimed that it makes but I will say now, much can rationally be explained by the true value in how you should read scripture and it even says never stop reading it because it can be very difficult sometimes to understand the true meaning and many times meaning the text implies literally or through literary devices.
Read above. Why was it so hard for god to make his message clear so everyone can understand it? If he loves his creation, he should be the one taking care that we all get saved, not just select few - 144 thousand virginal men, to be precise, so being a female I'm doomed anyway.

Quote
Ok first this article please take the time to read it.
http://100777.com/node/534
Took the time, giggled a lot. But let's do this ...

Quote
The pagans said that the earth was supported by a giant man called atlas, while the Greeks had horses, elephants and snakes supporting the planet.
That's actually a gross generalization. Greeks were well aware of the fact that the Earth was spherical at the time when Christians still claimed it was flat. The idea of flat Earth was based on severely limited observational data. The planet is too large to actually see its curvature, therefore it seems flat to us. So what?

Quote
This 'knowledge' was well known and trusted at the time the bible was being written, yet one of the oldest books of the bible declares that:

 "He stretches out the north over empty space; He hangs the earth on nothing." Job 26:7 (NKJV) "He sits enthroned upon the circle of the earth" Isaiah 40:22*
Earth does not hang on anything and space is not 'nothing'. It's mostly empty of big chunks of matter, but it's chock full of particles. God should know that. He should also know the difference between a circle and a sphere. A circle is two dimensional, while the sphere occupies the whole three dimensions. So the Bible is wrong.

That same Bible also states that the Moon is a source of light (Genesis 1:16), which is scientifically horribly wrong. It also states that space is actually water, the Earth is there to divide them. And God made the firmament and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament: and it was so. That one you can read for yourself in Genesis 1:7. That would make god wrong, you know. And it would also produce a bit of a contradiction - does Earth hang on nothing or does it float in a bubble in water?

The next part of the article is some weird drivel that has absolutely nothing to do with its aim, that's why I'll skip it.

Quote
The Scriptures Speak of an Invisible Structure

Only in recent years has science discovered that everything we see is composed of things that we cannot see; invisible atoms. In Hebrews 11:3, written 2,000 years ago, Scripture tells us that the

 "things which are seen were not made of things which do appear."
This is a blatant lie and an actual misquoting of the Bible, which is something I find rather appalling. Hebrews 11:3 states the following:

Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

So the unseen things aren't atoms at all. It's god's word. There's a not so subtle difference between the two.

Then the author goes on again on the idea that the Bible reveals that the word is round. See, a circle is round, but it's flat.

Anyway, the Bible also suggests that Eve was created from Adam's rib and that's why men have one rib less than women. It took Christians 16 centuries to admit that's not true. That same scientifically accurate Genesis also puts plants on the planet before their life support was even enacted, living beings in completely wrong and illogical order and so on.

Quote
Matthew Maury (1806-1873) is considered the father of oceanography. He noticed the expression "paths of the sea" in Psalm 8:8 (written 2,800 years ago) and said, "If God said there are paths in the sea, I am going to find them." Maury then took God at His word and went looking for these paths, and we are indebted to his discovery of the warm and cold continental currents. His book on oceanography remains a basic text on the subject and is still used in universities.
Psalm 8 (6-8) states the following:

You let us rule everything your hands have made. And you put all of it under our power - the sheep and the cattle, and every wild animal, the birds in the sky, the fish in the sea, and all ocean creatures.
That's the CEV. KJV is not much different:

Thou madest him to have dominion over the works of thy hands; thou hast put all things under his feet: All sheep and oxen, yea, and the beasts of the field; The fowl of the air, and the fish of the sea, and whatsoever passeth through the paths of the seas.

So stuff passes through seas. What's that got to do with currents and, for that matter, why would currents (if that's actually what the passage refers to) be such a hard concept to grasp? If you stick a boat in the water, the current will push it around and then do it some more in some other direction. It doesn't even have to be a body of water as large as an ocean - a lake would do nicely. That's simple observational data that's not hard to come by. It doesn't make Bible special in any way.


Quote
God asked Job a very strange question in 1500 B.C. He asked,
 "Can you send lightnings, that they may go, and say to you, Here we are?" (Job 38:35).

This appears to be a scientifically ludicrous statement; that light can be sent, and then manifest itself in speech. But did you know that all electromagnetic radiation; from radio waves to x-rays; travels at the speed of light? This is why you can have instantaneous wireless communication with someone on the other side of the earth. The fact that light could be sent and then manifest itself in speech wasn't discovered by science until 1864 (3,300 years later), when "British scientist James Clerk Maxwell suggested that electricity and light waves were two forms of the same thing" (Modern Century Illustrated Encyclopedia).
This is, frankly, bullshit. And a lie. Job 38:35 clearly talks about lightning. CEV is even more dodgy to use in this respect, since it states:

Can you order the clouds to send a downpour, or will lightning flash at your command?

Anyway, that's the part of Job where god boasts what he can do (he can announce his presence by lightning, that's what the verse means, not as means of communication between people) and what Job can't. It's also a bit tasteless to use Job to illustrate the grandeur of god's work, don't you think?

Quote
Three different places in the Bible (Isaiah 51:6; Psalm 102:25,26; and Hebrews 1:11) indicate that the earth is wearing out. This is what the Second Law of Thermodynamics (the Law of Increasing Entropy) states: that in all physical processes, every ordered system over time tends to become more disordered. Everything is running down and wearing out as energy is becoming less and less available for use. That means the universe will eventually "wear out" to the extent that (theoretically speaking) there will be a "heat death" and therefore no more energy available for use. This wasn't discovered by science until recently, but the Bible states it in concise terms.
This statement is scientifically inaccurate because it's proposed explanation is simply wrong. The simplest possible explanation of the second law of thermodynamics actually states that without an external source of energy the temperature of everything eventually equals out. It doesn't talk of destruction or any kind of 'disorder'. If you put a cup of boiling hot coffee on the table, it will eventually cool down to room temperature (it will heat the surrounding air a bit, but since there's a lot more air than coffee, it'll win out at the end). That's what physicists would call a closed system, a system with no external source of energy. But, see, our planet is not a closed system. We get energy from the outside (before you start arguing think about sunburns). Our planet will not die out for lack of energy but because of severe over-abundance of it when the Sun goes nova. The planet will not 'wear out' its energy but will be first scorched and then swallowed by a huge energy source.

The next part on the water cycle is also ridiculous. First of all, not all rivers flow into seas. Second, it's not hard to conclude that the water that falls from the skies does something to water on Earth. The actual idea might not have been scientifically explained, but was well known. People also knew that gnawing on willow bark will reduce fever, inflammation and pain, but the actual effect of acetylsalicylic acid was explained a lot later. So? People who lived at the time the Bible was written were not stupid. They were severely uninformed on certain matters, but stupid they were not, neither were they uniformly blind. They could see that rivers flow into something else, they could see that water levels rise when it rains. A child could figure out some sort of connection without you having to explain it to him.

Quote
The Bible and the First Law of Thermodynamics

The Scriptures say,

"Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, and all the host of them" (Genesis 2:1).

The original Hebrew uses the past definite tense for the verb "finished," indicating an action completed in the past, never again to occur. The creation was "finished" ... once and for all. That is exactly what the First Law of Thermodynamics says. This law (often referred to as the Law of the Conservation of Energy and/or Mass) states that neither matter nor energy can be either created or destroyed.

It was because of this Law that Sir Fred Hoyle's "Steady-State" (or "Continuous Creation") Theory was discarded. Hoyle stated that at points in the universe called "irtrons," matter (or energy) was constantly being created. But, the First Law states just the opposite. Indeed, there is no "creation" ongoing today. It is "finished" exactly as the Bible states.
Again, scientifically inaccurate because of a false interpretation of the first law of thermodynamics. The first law that actually states that the energy of a closed system is constant. Earth is not a closed system, so the other part of the law comes into play, which states that the internal energy of a closed system is equal to the amount of heat supplied to the system, minus the amount of work performed by the system on its surroundings. All laws of thermodynamics are quite simply explained on Wikipedia.

Quote
In Genesis 6, God gave Noah the dimensions of the 1.5 million cubic foot ark he was to build. In 1609 at Hoorn in Holland, a ship was built after that same pattern (30:5:3), revolutionizing ship-building. By 1900 every large ship on the high seas was inclined toward the proportions of the ark (verified by "Lloyd's Register of Shipping" in the World Almanac).
And how many animals would fit on that ship?

But the question that arises when reading that passage is: so what? Someone made up a story about a guy building a gigantic ship and then, centuries later, when technology (which is actually the practical use of science) was advanced enough someone else actually builds such a gigantic ship. Well? People talked about flying for aeons and then they invented implements and machines with which they could do that. So?

Quote
The Scriptures describe a "cycle" of air currents two thousand years before scientists discovered them:

"The wind goes toward the south, and turns about unto the north; it whirls about continually, and the wind returns again according to his circuits" (Ecclesiastes 1:6).

 We now know that air around the earth turns in huge circles, clockwise in one hemisphere and counter- clockwise in the other.
We now know that? No, actually we don't. Air circulates because of change in temperature somewhere else. It doesn't twirl around like a dervish or move about in any kind of orderly fashion. If it did, weather prediction would be ironclad and meteorologists would never, ever be 'wrong'. But they are, because they're trying to predict a chaotic system. Which, I repeat, does not even remotely work that way.

Quote
Jeremiah 33:22 (written 2500 years ago): "As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, neither the sand of the sea measured."

The Bible claimed that there are billions of stars ("host of heaven" is the biblical term for the stars). When it made this statement, no one knew how vast the numbers of stars were as only about 1,100 were observable. Now we know that there are billions of stars, and that they cannot be numbered.
Actually, almost every single dot on the sky you can see is either a star or a galaxy. At the time the Bible was written there was practically no light pollution so people could see quite a chunk of the milky way, not just 1,100 stars. But claiming that the Bible somehow 'predicted' the number of stars is just ludicrous. There's a lot of grains of sand and an awful lot of dots in the sky. A simile does not a scientific proof make.

Quote
Basic sanitation, such as burying human waste, was not introduced until the 1600s, when it helped to contain the plague. Before then, human excrement was dumped onto the streets, helping to spread many diseases. Some ancient peoples in the near east actually believed that excrement had healing properties if spread on the skin. Yet in 1400 B.C. the Israelites were told to:

"Designate a place outside the camp where you can go to relieve yourself. As part of your equipment have something to dig with, and when you relieve yourself, dig a hole and cover up your excrement." Deuteronomy 23:12,13
Wrong. Ancient peoples made the connection between human waste and disease. The dumping of it everywhere started when cities started to grow. There were vast civilizations that were far cleaner than the Israelites. Some did make remedies out of human excrement and animal dung. And they didn't even die out, interestingly enough. Ever heard of the idea that peeing on a see jelly sting would relieve the pain? Ever heard of people who believe in treating all sorts of diseases by drinking their own urine? Those ideas are dumb, but they still persevere.

Again, observational data was available, someone made the connection (not to mention the fact that the smell probably bothered people) and that was it. This does not, in any way, imply that the Bible was the first to decree this type of behaviour.

Quote
Another idea that was discovered during the plague was quarantine. In the 1500s, Worried Christians looked to the bible for help and were amazed to find it written so clearly. Nearly 3000 years earlier, The Israelites had been told:

"The person with such a disease must wear torn clothes, let his hair be unkempt, cover the lower part of his face and cry out, 'Unclean! Unclean!' As long as he has the infection he remains unclean. He must live alone; he must live outside the camp." Leviticus 13:45-46
<snip>
Communicability of certain diseases is not rocket science. Quite a few cultures figured that out and either isolated, shunned or killed the diseased individuals. Lack of hygiene actually came a lot later, in part even due to Christian beliefs. This post is long enough already, so I won't go into details, but I could if anyone wishes.

The next part is about blood being the 'source of life'. That kind of a statement is kind of ridiculous, because there are quite a few organs you'd die without. Say, brain, lungs, heart, kidneys, liver, pancreas and skin, to name but a few. So they're all source of life. But it also doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that you die if you lose enough blood. People saw it often enough to figure that one out. The Bible is in no way special by stating that. And it was the Christians who practised bloodletting the longest. Not to mention that only priests were allowed to perform it (most other people who tried to heal someone were burnt at the stakes for witchcraft). How does that compute then?

Quote
Why was circumcision to be carried out on the eighth day? Medical science has discovered that the eighth day is the only day in the entire life of the newborn that the blood clotting element prothrombin is above 100%.
Glaringly wrong. There is no one day when blood clotting is at its peak. At about that time newborns start clotting properly, that's all. And then they clot properly all their lives if they remain healthy. The above statement is a gross distortion of medical fact and an outright lie.


As far as I can see, the rest of the article is a rehash of everything that had already been addressed. All of it is either silly or simply wrong at best, but I have a sneaky suspicion that the author set out to intentionally deceive his readers by distorting evidence and lying, even when quoting the supposed word of god.

Quote
Next I just wanna qoute CS  Lewis on the evolution of man in his own lovely way. Sorry again for referring to other sources but I felt these are worthy.
<snip>

This is a typical case of wishful thinking and distorting facts in order to suit someone's beliefs. Just because CS Lewis said it, doesn't make it true or accurate.
Excreta Occurs

Offline Graybeard

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6645
  • Darwins +527/-19
  • Gender: Male
  • Is this going somewhere?
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #244 on: August 17, 2012, 05:54:17 AM »
Also we all accept there is a large amount of the bible that you can not take literally.
If this were: Also we all accept there is a large amount of the bible that you can not take literally. is wrong. Then I think we could start a real debate.
Nobody says “There are many things that we thought were natural processes, but now know that a god did them.”

Offline Garja

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 759
  • Darwins +38/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #245 on: August 17, 2012, 06:09:46 AM »
Also we all accept there is a large amount of the bible that you can not take literally.

This was kinda my point Sam.  Why have mankind write a book about you that doesn't say what it means?  You have admitted that the Bible contains errors (I think that was you, sorry if not).  Why?  Why, if you were God, would you allow YOUR book to have errors.  If some of it is divinely inspired, wouldn't you make damn sure that all of it was? 
"If we look back into history for the character of the present sects in Christianity, we shall find few that have not in their turns been persecutors, and complainers of persecution."

-Benjamin Franklin

Offline Anfauglir

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6198
  • Darwins +408/-5
  • Gender: Male
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #246 on: August 17, 2012, 06:17:29 AM »
Quote from: Anfauglir
So you answer me honestly: are you REALLY trying to tell me that a world where your god stepped in and answered "big" prayers like the four I listed above would somehow be a worse world than the one where he sits on his cloud and does nothing?

While I may not totally understand why I believe scincerely think his intellect and understanding is so beyond ours it is incomprehensible. Therefore, I think it is the way it is for good reasons and while this may not be the best of all possible worlds I strongly think, its the best of any other world as the means or way to the perfect and best of any worlds which is heaven.

I've cut the parts where you have ignored the question and decided again to waffle....except for this one line which is directly relevant.

What do you think life would be like if there was zero suffering?

Are you being deliberately obtuse?  I was quite, quite clear in my original question that I was NOT talking about god being the magic fairy who does everything for us.  I asked you to make sure you read the WHOLE posts containing the question extracts so that you understood it, but you have clearly not bothered to do so, otherwise you would NOT have - once again - included that ridiculous misunderstanding of my point.

I want you to be quite clear, Sam.  I said:

We're talking about things that actually matter.  Like, for example....

Prayer: "oh god, please stop this gang from raping me - I'm only 14 and I want to go home"
Yahweh: ""

Your assertion was - is - that if god intervened, the world would be worse than if he stayed out of things.  I want you to explain, clearly and precisely, exactly how that applies in the above situation.   Especially when

he proves me wrong and gives his grace and love abundantly
Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid.
Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?

Offline Quesi

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1986
  • Darwins +371/-4
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #247 on: August 17, 2012, 07:16:32 AM »

Somewhere, someplace, RIGHT NOW, there is at least one 3-year old child suffering, slowly starving to death.  Would you mind using this personal relationship of yours to kindly ask god to stop showering you with gifts and to save that kid's life? 

I can't think of a bigger question than this one.  What sort of a deity is up there answering your prayers to get you that promotion you want so badly, or answering your kid's prayers and getting her a Barbie Dream House for her birthday, while that same deity is ignoring the prayers of the mom of that 3 year old who just wants a a few spoonfuls of cornmeal, equal to the amount of cereal that your kid left in her bowl this morning before tying her sneakers and putting on her backpack and running to catch the school bus. 

How does your deity pick which little souls get to be born from the wombs of starving mothers, and which little souls get the designer, high thread count sheets in their cribs? 

When your deity places a little soul into the womb of a woman who lives in a region with a huge infant mortality rate, does your deity know that the kid won't survive for three months?  Or is your god up there waiting to see what the family and community do with their free will and limited options? 

How could anyone worship a deity who creates these disparate realities, and yet uses the same set of standards to judge everyone's actions? 

Offline DumpsterFire

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 383
  • Darwins +61/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • The Flaming Duck of Death!
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #248 on: August 17, 2012, 08:57:39 AM »
I, too, checked out the link Sam posted and found its content sorely lacking. I considered crafting a rebuttal myself, but decided it would be way too much trouble. I applaud you (literally, +1 :)) for making the effort.

There is one thing I want to add regarding this:

Why was circumcision to be carried out on the eighth day? Medical science has discovered that the eighth day is the only day in the entire life of the newborn that the blood clotting element prothrombin is above 100%.
Glaringly wrong. There is no one day when blood clotting is at its peak. At about that time newborns start clotting properly, that's all. And then they clot properly all their lives if they remain healthy. The above statement is a gross distortion of medical fact and an outright lie.

Why would god put a foreskin on a baby boy's penis in the first place if he's just going to then tell his followers to cut it off? Seems like pretty poor design to me. I wonder why your loving god wants painful genital mutilation to be one of the first things a newborn will experience. Oh, I guess its OK because he is considerate enough to try and minimize the kid's chances of bleeding to death. Nice.
Providing rednecks with sunblock since 1996.

I once met a man who claimed to be a genius, then boasted that he was a member of "Mesa".

Think for yourself.

Offline Boots

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1289
  • Darwins +95/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Living the Dream
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #249 on: August 17, 2012, 10:11:49 AM »
What do you think life would be like if there was zero suffering?

Heaven?
* Religion: institutionalized superstition, period.

"Many of my ultra-conservative Republican friends...have trouble accepting the idea God is not a Republican. " ~OldChurchGuy

"We humans may never figure out the truth, but I prefer trying to find it over pretending we know it."  ~ParkingPlaces

Offline Anfauglir

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6198
  • Darwins +408/-5
  • Gender: Male
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #250 on: August 17, 2012, 11:15:57 PM »
What do you think life would be like if there was zero suffering?

Heaven?

But according to Sam, zero suffering is a BAD thing!  That means heaven is a BAD place!!
Just because you've always done it that way doesn't mean it's not incredibly stupid.
Why is it so hard for believers to answer a direct question?

Offline natlegend

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1656
  • Darwins +65/-0
  • Polyatheist
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #251 on: August 17, 2012, 11:28:36 PM »
What do you think life would be like if there was zero suffering?

Heaven?

But according to Sam, zero suffering is a BAD thing!  That means heaven is a BAD place!!

SNAP! I love a good contradiction...  :laugh:
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

Offline shnozzola

Re: World views with no God
« Reply #252 on: August 18, 2012, 10:48:27 AM »
How could anyone worship a deity who creates these disparate realities, and yet uses the same set of standards to judge everyone's actions?

You go girl - I can feel the anger and picture the sweat and the blood on your keyboard!  We are lucky to have the internet to get these things said, instead of a WWGHA building in, lets say Alabama.
« Last Edit: August 18, 2012, 11:07:03 AM by shnozzola »
“The best thing for being sad," replied Merlin, beginning to puff and blow, "is to learn something."  ~ T. H. White
  The real holy trinity:  onion, celery, and bell pepper ~  all Cajun Chefs

Offline kcrady

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1290
  • Darwins +403/-1
  • Gender: Male
  • Your Friendly Neighborhood Cephalopod Overlord
    • My blog
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #253 on: August 19, 2012, 05:13:39 AM »
What do you think life would be like if there was zero suffering?

Heaven?

But according to Sam, zero suffering is a BAD thing!  That means heaven is a BAD place!!

Aha!  Lucifer's rebellion explained at last!

LUCIFER AND HIS ANGELS: There's no suffering here.  This place sucks!  It's boring!  We're outta here.

YAHWEH: You want suffering, do you?  Well, OK...
"The question of whether atheists are, you know, right, typically gets sidestepped in favor of what is apparently the much more compelling question of whether atheists are jerks."

--Greta Christina

Offline LoriPinkAngel

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1215
  • Darwins +125/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • I'm Your Nurse, Not Your Waitress...
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #254 on: August 19, 2012, 03:37:38 PM »

Somewhere, someplace, RIGHT NOW, there is at least one 3-year old child suffering, slowly starving to death.  Would you mind using this personal relationship of yours to kindly ask god to stop showering you with gifts and to save that kid's life? 

I can't think of a bigger question than this one.  What sort of a deity is up there answering your prayers to get you that promotion you want so badly, or answering your kid's prayers and getting her a Barbie Dream House for her birthday, while that same deity is ignoring the prayers of the mom of that 3 year old who just wants a a few spoonfuls of cornmeal, equal to the amount of cereal that your kid left in her bowl this morning before tying her sneakers and putting on her backpack and running to catch the school bus. 

How does your deity pick which little souls get to be born from the wombs of starving mothers, and which little souls get the designer, high thread count sheets in their cribs? 

When your deity places a little soul into the womb of a woman who lives in a region with a huge infant mortality rate, does your deity know that the kid won't survive for three months?  Or is your god up there waiting to see what the family and community do with their free will and limited options? 

How could anyone worship a deity who creates these disparate realities, and yet uses the same set of standards to judge everyone's actions?

This is an excellent question to be asked by a theist.  To an atheist the question is moot.  Life is what it is.  There is no purpose, there is no reason.  Each person is born where they are born by random chance.  You just deal with whatever your life situation is and move on and don't worry about finding any meaning to it because there is none.  It seems so easy.
It doesn't make sense to let go of something you've had for so long.  But it also doesn't make sense to hold on when there's actually nothing there.

Online One Above All

  • Laureate
  • *********
  • Posts: 10969
  • Darwins +284/-37
  • Gender: Male
  • Supreme ruler of the multiverse; All In One
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #255 on: August 19, 2012, 03:49:02 PM »
To an atheist the question is moot.  Life is what it is.  There is no purpose, there is no reason.  Each person is born where they are born by random chance.  You just deal with whatever your life situation is and move on and don't worry about finding any meaning to it because there is none.  It seems so easy.

Wrong. There is no innate or objective purpose for life. Only life can give life meaning. Do not assume that lack of innate or objective meaning means there is no meaning. That's what we call "false dichotomy"[1].
 1. Sort of.
The truth is absolute. Life forms are specks of specks (...) of specks of dust in the universe.
Why settle for normal, when you can be so much more? Why settle for something, when you can have everything?
We choose our own gods.

A.K.A.: Blaziken_rjcf/Lucifer/All In One.

Offline LoriPinkAngel

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1215
  • Darwins +125/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • I'm Your Nurse, Not Your Waitress...
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #256 on: August 19, 2012, 09:39:34 PM »
I should clarify my use of the term "meaning."  I don't want to say    that life appears to have no meaning, but that events and occurances have no meaning behind them, they don't happen for any reason.
It doesn't make sense to let go of something you've had for so long.  But it also doesn't make sense to hold on when there's actually nothing there.

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3880
  • Darwins +257/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #257 on: August 19, 2012, 10:05:53 PM »
Sam...I know you've been inundated with our impertinent questions, and given the volume I've held off until now. I can only read your evasions and mistakes taken for truths for so long before I must chime in:

In order to show me your god is real, what you have to do is show me some evidence, objective evidence.


Objective evidence that isn't an appeal to ignorance, doesn't involve special pleading, circular reasoning...or any logical fallacy. It isn't proof, it is just evidence.

I give it to you:

(1)Define God. Do not use weasel words or circular definitions.
(2)Prove that that definition is not a logical paradox
(3)Show proof that differs from the other ten thousand dieties man
has worshipped, again without committing a logical error

Until you do those three things....your worship of that deity is the intellectual equivalent a gibbering tribal primitive bowing before their god, UGABUGA.
An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline JeffPT

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2028
  • Darwins +203/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • I'm a lead farmer mutha fucka
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #258 on: August 19, 2012, 10:11:30 PM »
I should clarify my use of the term "meaning."  I don't want to say    that life appears to have no meaning, but that events and occurances have no meaning behind them, they don't happen for any reason.

My wife says that everything happens for a reason.  I agree with her, but not in the way she thinks. The universe is cause and effect.  Everything really does happen for a reason.  Just not a cosmic, ultimate, purposeful reason.  Drop a ball on the ground, if it's made of the right material, it will bounce back up again.  Cause, effect.  Fall off a 10 story roof, person dies.  Cause, effect. 

If there are 250 people on a plane that crashes into the ocean and 249 of them die, there is no meaning or purpose behind the survival of the last one, any more than there is meaning and purpose behind the 249 dead people.  There is, however, a reason.  And the reason could be anything.  Maybe they had their life jacket on.  Maybe they had an oxygen tank in their carry-on.  Or maybe they just happened to be in the right place at the right time.  While the theist may pipe up and say, "No, God is at work behind their survival! Look at the odds that one person would survive!", the reason we don't hear the other 249 people yelling 'fuck you' to that is because they're dead.  And it is so crazy that the Christian will look at the survival of the one passenger and thank God up and down for it, all the while God had the ability save the other 249 and did nothing.  THAT never registers with them, though.  That thought doesn't enter their mind, because it doesn't confirm what they already believe; that God is the ultimate good in the universe.  The lone survivor confirms what they think, so it only adds fuel to the delusion, and the loss of 249 lives is brushed off as a sad, but minor detail.

And believe me, it's far, FAR easier to think of things like that as 'purposeful'.  You have to work hard to remove it from your brain, because when the odds are low like that, our mind wants to attach purpose.  It's very good at that.  In that respect, being an atheist is much harder.  After all,  what is the one thing we know about most people in this world?  They like things to be easy.  God is easy.  That's why the concept has lasted as long as it has, even in the face of everything we know.  Few people want to put in the effort it takes to really understand things.  They're happy in their little world of ignorance.  Sorry, but that's not good enough for me.  I value truth more than that.   
Whenever events that are purported to occur in our best interest are as numerous as the events that will just as soon kill us, then intent is hard, if not impossible to assert. NDT

Offline DumpsterFire

  • Graduate
  • ****
  • Posts: 383
  • Darwins +61/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • The Flaming Duck of Death!
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #259 on: August 19, 2012, 10:12:32 PM »
I should clarify my use of the term "meaning."  I don't want to say    that life appears to have no meaning, but that events and occurances have no meaning behind them, they don't happen for any reason.

OAA is correct in the assertion that life has no intrinsic or objective meaning. Every person has the opportunity to pursue whatever it is they feel will give their lives meaning.

You are correct that events and occurrences (at least those of a random nature) do not have meaning behind them.

Every time someone here asks a "Why would god do this?" question, it is meant to be rhetorical. JDawg and Quesi's point is that it does not make sense that there are such enormous disparities, and disparate levels of suffering, in this world if an all-powerful and benevolent god exists.
Providing rednecks with sunblock since 1996.

I once met a man who claimed to be a genius, then boasted that he was a member of "Mesa".

Think for yourself.

Offline Samuelke

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 95
  • Darwins +9/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: World views with no God
« Reply #260 on: August 20, 2012, 02:00:51 AM »
Sam...I know you've been inundated with our impertinent questions, and given the volume I've held off until now. I can only read your evasions and mistakes taken for truths for so long before I must chime in:

In order to show me your god is real, what you have to do is show me some evidence, objective evidence.


Objective evidence that isn't an appeal to ignorance, doesn't involve special pleading, circular reasoning...or any logical fallacy. It isn't proof, it is just evidence.

I give it to you:

(1)Define God. Do not use weasel words or circular definitions.
(2)Prove that that definition is not a logical paradox
(3)Show proof that differs from the other ten thousand dieties man
has worshipped, again without committing a logical error

Until you do those three things....your worship of that deity is the intellectual equivalent a gibbering tribal primitive bowing before their god, UGABUGA.

Ok very fair questions I will take them one at a time each with great seriousness, they are very well pointed indeed.

You have asked me to define God, that which the bible described, it's a whole lot here I have to deal with let me forewarn you if it gets lengthy but I'll do my best. The bible to me is divinely inspired and i will present the many different ways it does so, but I can't essentially prove that it is to you just show why I think so, and I'll run through these as quickly as I can without distorting anything. First I'd like to point out that the God of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam is in one sense very similar but it others very different. Very much of this comes from the ot and Jewish people have this as their main book, each religion though think differently on very much of the ot.  From the very start in genisis however, you see one after another of prophecies of Jesus and they keep coming up, and the total number just about Jesus alone, not including the many other prophesies of the ot, is 300. So the ot I think we all can agree points to Jesus coming and doing everything he did just like it said , if not we can discuss.

So the Qoran says all the previous abarhamic doctrines(it was the last) were divinely inspired but only the Quran was a perfect miracle and revalation from Allah. But then the Qoran also says Jesus was born a virgin a miracle birth. The Qoran first uses the name Jesus more times then Muhammad, also it uses words to describe him as a messenger of God. But then Islams claim Jesus wasn't crucified it only appeared as he did, that maybe it was one of his followers in place for him. But the historical fact as stated outside the bible in countless places that Jesus did get crucified and died, and since no one has been able to produce his body or his bones to this day, and many have tried to do so and there has even been a tomb found with Jesus's name on one and the rest were his friends and loved ones, all remains we're there but Jesus's tomb was empty.

And I would just note that all the prophets and disciples and Jesus could have made it much harder to prove wrong, by saying Jesus would spiritually rise from the dead, but no they said he would bodily rise from the dead, so they new before all they had to do was find a body afterward, and all Christianity would be falsified. Unlike the Qoran the Bible says only it is the word of the living God, the Bible also states that it itself, the scriptures are living, this is quite the claim but it makes sense. It does because how could God begin to speak to us through something that is dead, we believe them to be written by men who were inspired by God so God didn't write them himself.

But we see in the bible that in the beginning was the word, The Greek translation for word is Logos meaning indwelling logic, the rational order of things. This is also telling us God is indeed eternal and outside of our reality of space and time. The bible tells us God is uncreated he himself is the only eternal being, and in him is the trinity, the whole 3 in one is all eternal. God has relationships within himself. None of creation in genisis conflicts with the bible when you take a look at the real Christian explanation. It gives a supernatural cause to the natural universe.

But I don't understand holy the ot, nt, and the Qoran all point to Jesus but only Christians believe what he really preached. But Christians believe the understanding of Gods nature is progressive from the start we know a less amount and by them end his nature is the most revealed to us mainly through Jesus and everything we understand about him and what he said. So I'll tell you Gods nature in my best understanding of what I just described, first he is righteous and we see it best through Jesus, there are secular sources that state things like no life was ever lived with such ethical purity as Jesus.

Next we see God is giving and merciful, we can see this clearly in the ot where in Jeremiah God is angry with the Isrealites and there is a moment of God making a choice as to whether or not he will save them and he then says yes he will, and he will pay the price not us, so he will give us the gift of forgiveness out of his deep powerful love for us. He gives much more then only that but that itself is very important seeing how it speaks about all throughout. Though he is both righteous and merciful he is also just in judgement. We see he love and justness in his judgement by seeing Jesus surrounding himself his whole life with evil, and only use his love for the people themselves to conquer the evil. In Luke the story about the women with the alabaster ointment I think we see this very well, when Jesus let this women put this ointment on his feet. One person watching said if only Jesus knew who this women was, because she was looked on very low by the religious people at the time like murderers and that kind of people. But Jesus knew exactly who she was and said her story would be preached anywhere the gospels where truly preached. So Jesus thought extremely high of this person who the religious people and phrasees of the time thought the very lowest of.

God we see is extremely merciful to all people and very much so for those who don't believe even though it can be very hard to see.  His dignity for our free will or respect for it, comes from his righteous justness, but I hate I gotta stop here gotta get sleep I'm sorry but I will respond to more tomorrow sorry again I didn't get as far as I'd like but I'm trying my best here to be clear thanks to all of you for reading Any of this.