Atheism/Existence of God Debates (Please Read OP)

J C

marienbad wrote: »

Amazing all those believers in the Koran think just like you !

Amazing allright!!!

... until you think about it ... and realise that Islam is a break-away religion from Christianity ... with the schism occurring about 620 AD.:)

kingchess

So he is predestined to behave in such and such a way all the time??He can not change what he will have for dinner next week/a thousand years in the future??

J C

lufties wrote: »

the invisible bearded man who lives in the sky, who wears the white tunic?

... that's just artistic licence.:)

J C

kingchess wrote: »

So he is predestined to behave in such and such a way all the time??He can not change what he will have for dinner next week/a thousand years in the future??

He behaves in accordance with His omnipotent and omniscient magnificent majesty.
... and He can have everything (or nothing) for dinner next week or a thousand years from now, if He so chooses.

marienbad

J C wrote: »

Amazing allright!!!

... until you think about it ... and realise that Islam is a break-away religion from Christianity ... with the schism occurring about 620 AD.:)

That is your version of history Islam might disagree with you , And then we have Catholics and Jews, Mormons ,Baha'i's and right on down to the tiny Rastafarians , are they all wrong too ?

J C

marienbad wrote: »

That is your version of history Islam might disagree with you , And then we have Catholics and Jews, Mormons ,Baha'i's and right on down to the tiny Rastafarians , are they all wrong too ?

... and the One God looks down on them all, God bless them.:)

marienbad

J C wrote: »

... and the One God looks down on them all, God bless them.:)

they are still wrong though according to you ?

J C

marienbad wrote: »

they are still wrong though according to you ?

I prefer to term it various degrees of right.:)

marienbad

J C wrote: »

I prefer to term it various degrees of right.:)

But not as right as you though

Brian Shanahan

ABC101 wrote: »

Premature to blow you trumpet.

You said god exists outside of spacetime. That is the exact same statement as saying that god exists outside of reality. Therefore I am right in stating that you admitted that god doesn't exist in reality.

Just because you don't understand the implications of the words you say and write doesn't make their meaning any different than what they are.

Safehands

J C wrote: »

... and He can have everything (or nothing) for dinner next week or a thousand years from now, if He so chooses.

I'm having Turkey, Happy Christmas JC and all our friends who spar with us throughout the year, hopefully the great debate will continue in a friendly and interesting manner, post Christmas and into 2015.

ABC101

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

You said god exists outside of spacetime. That is the exact same statement as saying that god exists outside of reality. Therefore I am right in stating that you admitted that god doesn't exist in reality.

Just because you don't understand the implications of the words you say and write doesn't make their meaning any different than what they are.

God is very real, do you seriously think that I do not believe that?

No thanks to you for the condescending comment about what you percieve to be a lack of understanding on my part.

J C

marienbad wrote: »

But not as right as you though

You are indeed correct ... but it goes without saying ... that nobody is as right as me ... :):eek:

Happy Christmas!!!

Brian Shanahan

ABC101 wrote: »

God is very real, do you seriously think that I do not believe that?

And that is all you have is belief. There is no evidence for god in the whole of the known universe, and while there is no evidence to preclude his existence, it is becoming increasingly obvious that there is no need for any sort of god and in that situation William of Ockham demands that we refuse to accept the god hypothesis (it doesn't satisfy the rule of least parts, of course we are ignoring the fact that a god centric explanation does not as satisfactorily explain reality as the naturalistic evidence based one, but as it is Saturnalia I'm in a generous mood) until we actually have evidence (and the bible is not evidence, in any unbiased version of what evidence means) that indicates he she or it actually exists (and I will guarantee you that if god exists it will have no relation to the spoilt five year old as depicted in the bible).

Oh and I wasn't condescending in my last few points to you, I was simply pointing out that through your scientific illiteracy (because in scientific terms space and time are the sum total of reality) you have inadvertently conceded the point to your opposition.

Safehands

ABC101 wrote: »

God is very real, do you seriously think that I do not believe that?

Of course you do. I don't think anyone would doubt it. If you were born in Japan it is most likely that you would belong to the Shinto religion, because that is what you would have been taught as a child. You would probably speak just as trenchantly about the Shinto beliefs as you now do about the Christian beliefs.
If you were born in Saudi Arabia you would believe in Islam and assure us all that Muhammad was real and that his teachings were the way forward.
Religions indoctrinate young minds. The effects of that indoctrination usually lasts for life and forms the basis for the particular religious beliefs held as fact by religious people.

ABC101

Safehands wrote: »

Of course you do. I don't think anyone would doubt it. If you were born in Japan it is most likely that you would belong to the Shinto religion, because that is what you would have been taught as a child. You would probably speak just as trenchantly about the Shinto beliefs as you now do about the Christian beliefs.
If you were born in Saudi Arabia you would believe in Islam and assure us all that Muhammad was real and that his teachings were the way forward.
Religions indoctrinate young minds. The effects of that indoctrination usually lasts for life and forms the basis for the particular religious beliefs held as fact by religious people.

But if only it were that simple.

If faith in a higher being.... was just about believing. Nothing more. Then it is entirely probable.... that the number of believers would diminish, and eventually reduce to a minor number (perhaps insignificant number) of the planets population.

But faith... is not just about believing, as a person carries out / performs their faith in their lives... confirmations are given to the believer by God. Not only is there a inner peace, a inner certainity, a inner confirmation, a core confirmation, but a relationship develops between the believer and God. Problems get mysteriously solved, a great Joy can be obtained in trust in God.

Why else would there be so many believers?

I am aware of the Theory Argumentum ad populum... which I would assume all atheists to be familiar with.

But as I mentioned before.... the relationship between a believer and God is NOT a one way relationship. It is a two way street, a two way communication, not a one way communication.

When a believer desires to get closer to God, the distance between the two can narrow, so that the believer actually sees / experiences / witnesses God working in their life.

I think this could be one of the reasons why believers become missionaries, and debate with other people ( including atheists), because of the great joy they know exists... and rather than being selfish (keeping it to themselves), they share it among others.

You mention that Religion indoctrinates minds. No... I disagree... .Religion if thought in the correct manner (primarily by parents) actually opens the persons mind to spirtuality.

Your comment The effects of that indoctrination usually lasts for life and forms the basis for the particular religious beliefs held as fact by religious people is not true in all cases. For example I know lapsed Catholics (as I am sure you do too).

But for religious beliefs to be held as fact...... again... you are failing to understand the great joy which befalls the believer, the great Joy which occurs when the believer invites God into their life, when the believer attempts to understand God, when the believer tries.

marienbad

ABC101 wrote: »

But if only it were that simple.

If faith in a higher being.... was just about believing. Nothing more. Then it is entirely probable.... that the number of believers would diminish, and eventually reduce to a minor number (perhaps insignificant number) of the planets population.

But faith... is not just about believing, as a person carries out / performs their faith in their lives... confirmations are given to the believer by God. Not only is there a inner peace, a inner certainity, a inner confirmation, a core confirmation, but a relationship develops between the believer and God. Problems get mysteriously solved, a great Joy can be obtained in trust in God.

Why else would there be so many believers?



I am aware of the Theory Argumentum ad populum... which I would assume all atheists to be familiar with.

But as I mentioned before.... the relationship between a believer and God is NOT a one way relationship. It is a two way street, a two way communication, not a one way communication.

When a believer desires to get closer to God, the distance between the two can narrow, so that the believer actually sees / experiences / witnesses God working in their life.

I think this could be one of the reasons why believers become missionaries, and debate with other people ( including atheists), because of the great joy they know exists... and rather than being selfish (keeping it to themselves), they share it among others.

You mention that Religion indoctrinates minds. No... I disagree... .Religion if thought in the correct manner (primarily by parents) actually opens the persons mind to spirtuality.

Your comment The effects of that indoctrination usually lasts for life and forms the basis for the particular religious beliefs held as fact by religious people is not true in all cases. For example I know lapsed Catholics (as I am sure you do too).

But for religious beliefs to be held as fact...... again... you are failing to understand the great joy which befalls the believer, the great Joy which occurs when the believer invites God into their life, when the believer attempts to understand God, when the believer tries.

What relevance has this to the point it is supposed to be answering ?

ABC101

marienbad wrote: »

What relevance has this to the point it is supposed to be answering ?

Well if you look at the post of Safehands... it was an attempt to answer his / her comment

marienbad

ABC101 wrote: »

Well if you look at the post of Safehands... it was an attempt to answer his / her comment

It just ignores completely that post ! Safehand is making the point that what you believe is directly related to where you were born ,and you just ignore it completely and set out what belief means to you. Something totally irrelevant to the post .

ABC101

marienbad wrote: »

It just ignores completely that post ! Safehand is making the point that what you believe is directly related to where you were born ,and you just ignore it completely and set out what belief means to you. Something totally irrelevant to the post .

Let Safehands speak / write for himself / herself, unless you are both the same person / blogger.

marienbad

ABC101 wrote: »

Let Safehands speak / write for himself / herself, unless you are both the same person / blogger.

Not so, this is a public forum, we are all entitled to comment on any and all posts. Indeed if we didn't it would just consist in a series of separate conversations.

So in that spirit how about an answer ?

ABC101

marienbad wrote: »

Not so, this is a public forum, we are all entitled to comment on any and all posts. Indeed if we didn't it would just consist in a series of separate conversations.

So in that spirit how about an answer ?

I am not under any commitment to answer your baiting.

marienbad

ABC101 wrote: »

I am not under any commitment to answer your baiting.

May I ask why you take such an adversarial attitude to anyone you don't agree with ?

I am not baiting and never indulge in such ****e . So either participate in the conversation or withdraw.

ABC101

marienbad wrote: »

May I ask why you take such an adversarial attitude to anyone you don't agree with ?

I am not baiting and never indulge in such ****e . So either participate in the conversation or withdraw.

My comment to Safehands did not contain an adversarial attitude to him / her.

Of course you chose to ignore this fact.

You do not speak / write for Safehands. Your attitude has been consistantly hostile, demanding and arrogant to believers.

When a believer complains of insulting language used to describe believers of faith... you demand that they 'toughen up'.

Yet you fail to follow your own creed....why don't you take a leaf out of your own book....and Toughen up yourself.

In this forum I do not believe your intentions are genuine, as you consistantly place demands on those who offer the joy of belief to explain themselves to more and more to your one liner comments.

Safehands is more than capable of answering for himself / herself, without your input.

You are free to have the last word... however as I will not be answering your comments anymore... and I would politely suggest you desist from wasting your time answering mine.

marienbad

ABC101 wrote: »

My comment to Safehands did not contain an adversarial attitude to him / her.

Of course you chose to ignore this fact.

You do not speak / write for Safehands. Your attitude has been consistantly hostile, demanding and arrogant to believers.

When a believer complains of insulting language used to describe believers of faith... you demand that they 'toughen up'.

Yet you fail to follow your own creed....why don't you take a leaf out of your own book....and Toughen up yourself.

In this forum I do not believe your intentions are genuine, as you consistantly place demands on those who offer the joy of belief to explain themselves to more and more to your one liner comments.

Safehands is more than capable of answering for himself / herself, without your input.

You are free to have the last word... however as I will not be answering your comments anymore... and I would politely suggest you desist from wasting your time answering mine.

If you believe my posts are out of line then report them ,or if you like put me on ignore otherwise lets abide by the rules set out by the mods . This is just more avoidance

Safehands

ABC101 wrote: »

But faith... is not just about believing, as a person carries out / performs their faith in their lives... confirmations are given to the believer by God. Not only is there a inner peace, a inner certainity, a inner confirmation, a core confirmation, but a relationship develops between the believer and God. Problems get mysteriously solved, a great Joy can be obtained in trust in God.

I can understand the inner peace gained by a belief in many contemplative practices. That can be religion or meditation, or other methods of relaxation. The relationship you speak of is not actually a relationship with a God. For example, in Japan people who practice the Shinto religion believe in many Gods. Some problems are resolved, but think of the ones which don't get resolved, do you blame God for not solving those?

ABC101 wrote: »

Why else would there be so many believers?

There are many believers in many different religions. What you believe depends on where you were reared and indoctrinated.

ABC101 wrote: »

But as I mentioned before.... the relationship between a believer and God is I]NOT[/I] a one way relationship. It is a two way street, a two way communication, not a one way communication.

No it isn't. It is one way and the brain thinks that God is answering when it suits. If you pray for an illness to be cured and it is not, is God answering you? Is he saying sorry, I'm not going to cure this sickness? What if you are a believer in Shinto. Do such people have the same relationship with their Gods?

ABC101 wrote: »

Your comment The effects of that indoctrination usually lasts for life and forms the basis for the particular religious beliefs held as fact by religious people is not true in all cases. For example I know lapsed Catholics (as I am sure you do too).

Of course I do. That is why I said "usually" instead of "always"

ABC101 wrote: »

for religious beliefs to be held as fact...... again... you are failing to understand the great joy which befalls the believer, the great Joy which occurs when the believer invites God into their life, when the believer attempts to understand God, when the believer tries.

Does that apply to the Shinto religion too?

Harika

J C wrote: »

Mengele acted on pure reason ... scientifically identifying people that He regarded as 'unfit' ... and let's face it, all of us are 'unfit' at some time in our lives.
What he didn't do was to morally assess what he was doing ... which was treating people like animals to be experimented on to produce some supposedly 'Rational' medical results.

First of all the "assessment" of the unfit life was done by deciding in a split second when leaving the train, so I doubt that, but even worse this decision was based on the pretense that jews are inferior to nazis. Is this a fact or a feeling/pre-judice? Can this be scientifically be proven?

J C wrote: »

God has granted us free-will ... and of necessity, this means that we can choose to do good or evil.
... and if every time somebody chooses to do evil, God steps in and stops them ... we wouldn't have free-will at all ... we'd be just glorified robots pre-programmed to do as God commanded

God has chosen to intervene several times in the past, Adam and Eve got thrown out of paradise, the flood to cleanse the earth, Sodom was destroyed, Lot was saved, Jesus was send and so on but 2000 years ago such grave interventions have stopped, besides appearances in dreams and so on. But can you really compare those events to a complete destruction of a city? Was Sodom really so much worse than any other city nowadays?

J C wrote: »

Genuine liberalism and respectful tolerance of diversity of opinion is the solution IMO.

Genuine liberalism sounds good but how is this defined in your opinion? The only essay I found was: http://www.cato-unbound.org/2014/10/06/kevin-vallier/genuinely-liberal-approach-religion-politics
He points out the problem where religion and other non religions collide, offers a conclusion that again ignores the problem he points out. Also the Supreme Court in the USA already did this what he asked for and granted companies the right to deny their workers medical benefits on the ground of religious belief. (KUDOS to satanists here that play along with this nonsense perfectly)

Brian Shanahan

Harika wrote: »

Genuine liberalism sounds good but how is this defined in your opinion? T

You have to remember what JCs definition of genuine liberalism is Harika. To him liberalism, freedom of choice and freedom of speech means: "Everybody believes what I believe, all things I believe are the truth and only them. Anyone who disagrees with me in even the slightest fashion should be abominated in cast into the lowest dungeons".

He is very much a typical fundie.

J C

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

You have to remember what JCs definition of genuine liberalism is Harika. To him liberalism, freedom of choice and freedom of speech means: "Everybody believes what I believe, all things I believe are the truth and only them. Anyone who disagrees with me in even the slightest fashion should be abominated in cast into the lowest dungeons".

He is very much a typical fundie.

None of this prejudicial caricature applies to me.
I defend everybody's right to freedom of opinion and the expression of that opinion - and I am thus a liberal in such matters.
The pseudo-liberal only tolerates people with whom they agree ... and bad-mouths and name-calls those with whom they disagree.

A casual appraisal of the postings on this thread will easily identify the liberals and the pseudo-liberals among us.:)

Benny_Cake

Brian Shanahan wrote: »

You have to remember what JCs definition of genuine liberalism is Harika. To him liberalism, freedom of choice and freedom of speech means: "Everybody believes what I believe, all things I believe are the truth and only them. Anyone who disagrees with me in even the slightest fashion should be abominated in cast into the lowest dungeons".

He is very much a typical fundie.

Mod: Tackle the post, not the poster. Any more personal remarks such as that will lead to a ban, permanently.