Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Reply to topic
Zzyzx
First Post
PostPosted: Fri Jan 27, 2017 12:12 am  Theists sometimes DO ask questions. Reply with quote

.
Theists sometimes DO ask questions. Here is an example from a current thread:

Volbrigade wrote:

And now, I ask you a question.

What if you’re right?

Right about what?

Reading my signature with some comprehension indicates that my position is that ANY of the thousands of proposed 'gods' MAY be real and may affect human lives – AND that I await verifiable evidence upon which to base an informed, intelligent, reasoned decision.

Is there any reason that I should 'hurry up' and make a decision when the ONLY 'evidence' presented consists of unverifiable tales and testimonials (ancient or modern) plus emotional appeals? I do not take anyone's unverifiable word as a basis for making ANY important decisions. Should I make an exception for religious matters? If so, why?

Volbrigade wrote:

What if mindless, random energy is “all there is, all there was, and all there ever will be”?

I take NO position regarding 'mindless, random energy'. Kindly debate what I actually present.

Volbrigade wrote:

What if all we are is a temporary arrangement of matter? A pattern, here today and gone, forever, tomorrow?

Notice that I take no position on that matter. Kindly debate what I actually say rather than things I do not say.

Volbrigade wrote:

What possible difference could that make? In fact — what possible difference could anything make?

My life and the lives of (some) others make a difference to me, as does the environment, because I (we) live in the real world.

Volbrigade wrote:

And what difference would it make if I believed otherwise?

What you believe could not possibly make any less difference to me. Discussing / debating these ideas with you involved is simply a way for me to present READERS with ideas that contrast with those presented by Theists.

I trust that some / many readers are fully capable of evaluating the merits, credibility, verifiability of what is presented and to use whatever they find has merit in their own thinking.

Volbrigade wrote:

If I chose to believe a complex, imaginary fable about an eternal Mind that created a space-time environment; a fable which explained the cause of man’s depravity, and the way out of it —even if it was all just an ancient and ongoing fabrication, what difference does it make?

That belief makes NO difference UNLESS and UNTIL it is presented in public debate as though true. In which case, I challenge any claim of truth and accuracy – asking for verifiable evidence to support the pronouncements.

When the 'evidence' presented is nothing more than unverifiable tales and testimonials (ancient or modern, oral or written), readers are invited to consider its credibility.

Volbrigade wrote:

And what difference does it make that energy occasionally arranges itself in patterns such as the deformed child you pictured?

I pictures no deformed child. Perhaps there are some wires crossed?

Volbrigade wrote:

Or generates patterns in the matter that composes human brains that motivates them to slaughter each other over territories or genetics or ideas?

Human brains have great potential to instigate actions in all manner of directions – which include slaughtering people or helping people.

Many Religionists seem to think that religion is what keeps them from slaughtering (or raping or stealing or whatever) and that religion is what motivates them to do benevolent things. Perhaps that is true for them personally – but does not extend beyond them to everyone else.

Volbrigade wrote:

What difference does it make what I do with my own little pattern of energy, during the brief period of time it is integrated and possesses the consciousness to make determinations as to what it does?

It makes no difference at all to me what you 'do with your own little pattern of energy' PROVIDED it does not affect me or others I care about.

Volbrigade wrote:

And if, for instance, someone should be in the way of my obtaining some objective that would please my consciousness, what difference does it make what I do to them in order to remove them as an obstacle?

If I am the 'obstacle to be removed' so someone can accomplish an objective, they are likely to 'meet their maker' before intended (any my attitude is not hypothetical).

Volbrigade wrote:

I’m just asking. Do you have an answer for me?

I typically attempt to answer coherent questions. I am always prepared to substantiate any claims I make or arguments I present.

Volbrigade wrote:

Is it possible that even if your belief system is true,

You have shown that you have absolutely no comprehension of my belief system.

Volbrigade wrote:

and mindless matter and energy is all that ever was or will be:

I do not and have not thought or said anything suggesting 'mindless matter'. That is a 'stinky fish' (red herring) thrown in, perhaps to try to make an argument.

Volbrigade wrote:

that it would be BETTER if we lived as though we were subject to living forever, based on what we do during our temporary pattern of consciousness, before we revert back to our eternal elements of mindless matter-energy?

I see no 'better' in real life by those who profess to being 'subject to . . .” some sort of afterlife. Christians who preach such things are incarcerated at rates no 'better' than other groups, have divorce rates that are no 'better' than others, and have half a million abortions per year in the US (while condemning the practice).

WHERE is the 'better'?

Volbrigade wrote:

Even if that would mean “living a lie”, so to speak?

Those who find benefit in 'living a lie' are welcome to do so. I prefer to live by what I can understand and learn about the real world.

Volbrigade wrote:

Or would that make any difference, either?

Many would apparently be LOST without their religion telling them what to think and do.

Volbrigade wrote:

And if so — in what way?

Perhaps those who rely upon one of the thousands of gods or thousands of religions are well advised to keep doing so (to avoid running amok if they had to rely upon their own ethics, judgment, discernment, decision-making).

However, the dependent should not attempt to inflict their limitations and personal problems onto others – who do not share those limitations and problems.
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 11: Sat Jan 28, 2017 12:43 pm
Reply
Re: Theists sometimes DO ask questions.

Like this post
[Replying to post 4 by Volbrigade]





It's unsophisticated to demand verifiable evidence for the God hypothesis



Volbrigade wrote:


As I told the other guy (TotN), it is both sophist and unsophisticated to demand verifiable evidence for that which is outside the empirical, measurable confines of our bounded reality.



____________

Question:



    If it is unreasonable to ask for empirical evidence, what KIND of evidence are you able to give for "that which is outside the empirical, measurable confines of our bounded reality." ?


____________


Smile

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 12: Sat Jan 28, 2017 12:55 pm
Reply
Re: Theists sometimes DO ask questions.

Like this post
[Replying to post 6 by Zzyzx]

Quote:
Notice that people who cannot defend their own position often obsess / fixate on the position and personality of opposition debaters RATHER than focusing on ISSUES.


You mean, like you're doing here? Cool

The issue here is:

"What if you're right? What if mindless matter-energy is all there is?

What would it matter? What would anything matter? Everything that ever occurred -- from a black hole, to the assembly of a living cell, to the birth of a baby, to that baby becoming a serial killer -- would be nothing more than the inevitable (perhaps inexecrable?) writhings of matter-energy.

And what of it?

What does it matter?"

It seem to me that what's been addressed so far relates to everything BUT that issue.

If I mistakenly assigned such a view to anyone, then it seems to me the proper response is simply "you are mistaken. That's not my view."

And then, either address the issue anyway, or be silent toward it.

As I said, perhaps it was my mistake to bring the issue in from another thread, where I was addressing TotN (and he has responded. And we continue to discuss. Which is all gravy). It certainly seems to have caused confusion. Really, I was just interested in getting more perspective, while saving myself some typing.

DI -- thanks for understanding re the typo. I noticed another, HUGE one, from last night. It should be "exchange the truth for a lie".

The opposite is what I did when I accepted Christ! Wink

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
MPG Recipient Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 13: Sat Jan 28, 2017 2:29 pm
Reply
Re: Theists sometimes DO ask questions.

Like this post (2): Blastcat, benchwarmer
[Replying to Volbrigade]

Volbrigade wrote:

What would it matter? What would anything matter? Everything that ever occurred -- from a black hole, to the assembly of a living cell, to the birth of a baby, to that baby becoming a serial killer -- would be nothing more than the inevitable (perhaps inexecrable?) writhings of matter-energy.

And what of it?

What does it matter?"


Is it therefore better to make up an answer, an answer which one personally finds to be warm and comforting, and to then simply declare THAT to be the truth? That would lead to thousands of various and disparate beliefs, which, coincidentally, is EXACTLY what we find in the world. But the truth is simply whatever it is, and it is under no obligation to be what someone may find warm and comforting. And if one wants to actually know what the truth actually is, then one must be prepared to accept what the physical evidence is telling us. Even if the truth is that the universe is indifferent to our existence, and that there is not and never has been a preordained purpose for our existence.

Does that seem to be an unnecessarily harsh evaluation of the human condition? No more harsh than growing up and discovering that Santa is not real, and that make believe was just imaginary all along. It does not preclude anyone from finding and enjoying those things which give their life meaning, or from each of us attempting to construct a perfectly warm and comforting life for ourselves during the all too brief moment of time when each of us enjoys sentient consciousness.

Volbrigade wrote:

If I mistakenly assigned such a view to anyone, then it seems to me the proper response is simply "you are mistaken. That's not my view."


Which is the purpose of debate, the very function of this forum. We are a collection of individuals all claiming that their personal view of reality is the one that comes the closest to being true. And from this mix, this mishmash of ideas, the ones that make the most sense, that one's that most closely align with the physical evidence, reason and logic, are the one's that will emerge as the most likely candidates for being true. And as we who have been active on this forum for some years have noticed, there will be those who prefer to cling to their imagined view of reality and will inevitably reject any view of reality that does not correspond to their prefered view, physical evidence, reason, logic and common sense be damned. Because their emotional investment in their personal belief system is too strong, and they find the alternate possible truth to be too scary.

Volbrigade wrote:

The opposite is what I did when I accepted Christ!


And as long as you choose only to commune with others who hold similar beliefs, then reality will always be whatever you choose to believe that it is. If you choose to enter your beliefs into a free exchange of ideas with others however, then your beliefs will either stand or fall based on their relationship to the physical evidence, reason, logic and common sense. There is a valid reason why some beliefs fail to pass this test. And this reason must be considered, if only for the sake of intellectual honesty.

Volbrigade wrote:

As I said, perhaps it was my mistake to bring the issue in from another thread, where I was addressing TotN (and he has responded. And we continue to discuss. Which is all gravy). It certainly seems to have caused confusion. Really, I was just interested in getting more perspective, while saving myself some typing.


For those who are interested, Volbrigade and I have been involved in an ongoing discussion in the Resurrections and hyperdimensions topic on the General Chat subforum.
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=31694

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 14: Sat Jan 28, 2017 4:26 pm
Reply
Re: Theists sometimes DO ask questions.

Like this post
[Replying to post 1 by Zzyzx]

Quote:
Reading my signature with some comprehension indicates that my position is that ANY of the thousands of proposed 'gods' MAY be real and may affect human lives – AND that I await verifiable evidence upon which to base an informed, intelligent, reasoned decision.


Q: Are you able to pick just one idea of GOD from those 'thousands of proposed 'gods'' and therein say WHY that particular idea of GOD should logically be able to have verifiable evidence available to support its existence?

Secondary Q: Why have you placed the word [gods] between ''?

A coherent answer to this question may go a long way to allowing theists to understand atheists better.
Indeed, it might go a long way to allowing my thought processes to understand your thought processes better.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
MPG Recipient Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 15: Sat Jan 28, 2017 4:35 pm
Reply
Re: Theists sometimes DO ask questions.

Like this post (1): Blastcat
Volbrigade wrote:

The issue here is:

"What if you're right? What if mindless matter-energy is all there is?

What would it matter? What would anything matter? Everything that ever occurred -- from a black hole, to the assembly of a living cell, to the birth of a baby, to that baby becoming a serial killer -- would be nothing more than the inevitable (perhaps inexecrable?) writhings of matter-energy.

And what of it?

What does it matter?"

It seem to me that what's been addressed so far relates to everything BUT that issue.


I'll take that issue.

To begin with it's clearly wrong to call it "mindless matter". Since we exist and we have minds, and we are this matter, then it's clearly wrong to call it "mindless matter". Very Happy

In fact, I argue that this is actually evidence for a pantheistic worldview. And there are endless ways in which pantheism can be imagined. So there are infinite worlds for you to explore on that front.

In other words, there is no justification for your argument: "I don't like the idea of pantheism, therefore Christianity must be true!"

What about people who don't like Christianity? Where is there any attraction in being the mindless slave to a jealous God who lusts to rule over humans and demand that they worship and obey him?

I don't personally find that to be attractive at all. Especially if this Christian God is anything like the God described in the Bible who I see as being extremely ignorant, selfish, and immoral.

Moreover, you can't just argue, "I don't like the idea of Secular Materialism, therefore Christianity must be true." You've skipped over far too many other possibilities, not to mention Judaism, and Islam in particular.

Why do you not chose to worship Allah and promote Islam? Do you think Allah does not represent a decent, loving and moral God? Think

If so, then you reject Islam for the same reasons that I reject Christianity. Wink

Finally the argument that life can't be meaningful unless it can be sustained eternally is an argument that fails miserably.

If a temporary life has no meaning then extending a meaningless life for eternity cannot make it meaningful.

And if a temporary life is so meaningful to us that we wish it could last forever, then clearly it already has meaning whether it is extended to last forever or not.

So your idea that the existence of a God would give life "meaning" fails. Life is either meaningful to us or it isn't. Whether or not a God exists cannot change that.

In short, a God cannot give meaning to life. Life is either meaningful all on its own, or it's not.

So your argument that a godless existence would be meaningless doesn't hold water.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 16: Sat Jan 28, 2017 5:08 pm
Reply
Re: Theists sometimes DO ask questions.

Like this post
William wrote:

[Replying to post 1 by Zzyzx]

Quote:
Reading my signature with some comprehension indicates that my position is that ANY of the thousands of proposed 'gods' MAY be real and may affect human lives – AND that I await verifiable evidence upon which to base an informed, intelligent, reasoned decision.


Q: Are you able to pick just one idea of GOD from those 'thousands of proposed 'gods'' and therein say WHY that particular idea of GOD should logically be able to have verifiable evidence available to support its existence?

A coherent answer to this question may go a long way to allowing theists to understand atheists better.
Indeed, it might go a long way to allowing my thought processes to understand your thought processes better.


This is an excellent question deserving it's own thread.

I'll give my answer here and I believe that my answer should be extremely easy for anyone to fully comprehend and understand:

To begin with, I only demand verifiable evidence from those who claim to know that their specific God exists. I simply, how do you know this? And I find that their answers are never compelling.

Those who openly confess that they merely believe on faith because they would like for the God of their choice to exist have no need to explain anything. They have already confessed that they are just wallowing in wishful thinking. Wink

And I would also like to hone in on a specific part of your request.

Q: Are you able to pick just one idea of GOD from those 'thousands of proposed 'gods'' and therein say WHY that particular idea of GOD should logically be able to have verifiable evidence available to support its existence?

Let's take a look at some specific gods.

The Christian God of Abraham (or any Abrahamic God)

In the Abrahamic religions the Biblical God proclaims to be a jealous God who gives us all manner of commandments, directives, and ultimatums. Therefore, I hold that this God must necessarily make himself known with verifiable proof.

Why? Well, becasue he's demanding that we must obey him lest he'll punish us. How can he expect us to take this seriously if there is no evidence that he exists at all? For all we know this is just a made up fable created by our peer mortal brothers who are trying to use this religious cult to control us by proclaiming that their authority is backed up by this invisible Boogieman God that doesn't even exist at all.

In short, any "REAL GOD" should realize that intelligent humans would be perfectly within their moral rights to challenge these unverifiable myths and reject them out of hand.

A claim that is made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

It's that simple. Therefore it is my position that if there were truly a God behind the Abrahamic religion that God would have most certainly proven his existence to us beyond any shadow of a doubt.

The fact that he hasn't done this actually serves as proof that the fables are false.

So Christianity (and any religion based on the Hebrew Bible) is clearly false.

Until they can PROVE that God exists. And the God himself is the one who should be doing the proving.

Here's another specific God

The God of Buddhism

The God of Buddhism is pretty easy. This God does not demand that anyone believe that this God even exists, much less obey and specific commandments or directives. Therefore this God has no need to prove itself to anyone.

The God of Buddhism only need to be believed if a person chooses to believe it. And there is no threat of eternal damnation to those who don't.

So there's not need for Buddhists to prove the existence of their God.

But at the same time, there's no reason for anyone to accept that this God must exist either. So Buddhism is entirely a faith-based religion and doesn't claim to be anything more than this.

The God of Wicca

Basically the same thing applies here as in Buddhism. The Goddess of Wicca is not demanding that anyone acknowledge or worship Her. If you don't believe She exists that's fine.

She only has one directive, "Do as you will, but harm none". She doesn't even say what might happen to you if you fail to follow this directive. It's up to you to guess what She might do to you if you harm others. Very Happy

There is no need to believe in the Goddess of Wicca, therefore there is no need to prove that She exists.

In fact, this too (like all religions) is entirely faith-based. Some people might say, "I know in my heart that the Mood Goddess is real", but that's just an emotional reaction to their deep desire to believe that She is real. Certainly not proof that She exists.

~~~~~~~~~

Bottom line for me:

I would never ask for proof of the God of Buddhism or Wicca because neither of those Gods are demanding anything from me. Except in the case of the Wicca Moon Goddess who suggests that I shouldn't harm others, but since I don't do that anyway I don't require proof that She exists in order to prevent me from harming others.

However, when it comes to the Abrahamic religions of Christianity and Islam in particular, these people are DEMANDING that their God has all manner of commandments and directive I must obey and follow. And many of them I even disagree with. So yes, in the case of these Gods I DEMAND PROOF that they exist, before I will obey their immoral directive. In fact, even if they do exist I might rebel against their immoral directives. Very Happy

In fact, in the case of these Abrahamic Gods I would like to speak to them directly! I have a lot of questions for them and if they are supposedly benevolent and righteous then they should not mind answer my questions at all.

In the meantime I have absolutely no reason to believe that these are anything other than highly immoral myths and there is no actual God behind them.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
MPG Recipient Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 17: Sat Jan 28, 2017 5:34 pm
Reply
Re: Theists sometimes DO ask questions.

Like this post
.
William wrote:

Are you able to pick just one idea of GOD from those 'thousands of proposed 'gods'' and therein say WHY that particular idea of GOD should logically be able to have verifiable evidence available to support its existence?

Heck no. I have no knowledge about any of the thousands of proposed 'gods' and, therefore, have no idea what verifiable evidence might be (or not be) available to support 'its' existence.

Perhaps there should be established a system of 'god for the day' wherein each of the thousands of proposed 'gods' would have its day every five and a half years (assuming about 2000 proposed).

William wrote:

Secondary Q: Why have you placed the word [gods] between ''?"

I use the quotation marks in the sense of a 'distancing quote' -- a valid use of the marks to indicate that I use the term provisionally or by convention, but do not agree that any such thing exists.

William wrote:

A coherent answer to this question may go a long way to allowing theists to understand atheists better.

How would that clarification help Theists understand Atheists -- when I do not speak for Atheists?

William wrote:

Indeed, it might go a long way to allowing my thought processes to understand your thought processes better.

My thought process includes not taking anyone's unverifiable word as a basis for making an intelligent, informed, reasoned decision on ANY significant matter. I do not join those who are willing to believe unverifiable tales, folklore, legends, myths, fables, oral tradition, and/or religion-promotion stories. I also do not buy oceanfront property in Arizona for the same reason.

I realize that many people are attached to the word 'god(s)' -- usually singular to indicate that they accept only one of the thousands (and typically are atheistic toward competing 'gods'). However, that attachment is not binding upon Non-Believers.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 18: Sat Jan 28, 2017 5:35 pm
Reply
Re: Theists sometimes DO ask questions.

Like this post
[quote="Divine Insight"]
Volbrigade wrote:

The issue here is:

"What if you're right? What if mindless matter-energy is all there is?

What would it matter? What would anything matter? Everything that ever occurred -- from a black hole, to the assembly of a living cell, to the birth of a baby, to that baby becoming a serial killer -- would be nothing more than the inevitable (perhaps inexecrable?) writhings of matter-energy.

And what of it?

What does it matter?"

It seem to me that what's been addressed so far relates to everything BUT that issue.


Quote:
I'll take that issue.

To begin with it's clearly wrong to call it "mindless matter". Since we exist and we have minds, and we are this matter, then it's clearly wrong to call it "mindless matter". Very Happy


In context the matter that has mind can only be verified presently through biological life forms, here on this planet.
In relation to the universe those life-forms are within, this amounts to next to nothing and in that context cannot be seen as 'the mind of the universe', other than through presently verifiable evidence, in which case amounts to 'a mind in the universe,' when taken collectively. (when observed as a whole thing happening)

Quote:
What about people who don't like Christianity? Where is there any attraction in being the mindless slave to a jealous God who lusts to rule over humans and demand that they worship and obey him?


Objection;

You are making the presumption that this is what Christianity is about. Do you have the evidence to support that this is the case regarding Christianity?

It appears to me that it is not the case. Christians come in all shapes and sizes and have varying belief systems and by the evidence do not altogether believe in what you referred to as "a jealous God who lusts to rule over humans and demand that they worship and obey him?"

This seems to simply be your personal interpretation of Christianity, rather than anything based upon the actual verifiable evidence.

You contend that...
Christians are "mindless slaves"
...and that what they all are doing is
allowing themselves to be enslaved to a "a jealous God"
...when many Christians understand the jealousy in terms of something along the lines of a mothers love for her child and her need to protect the child from reprobates, (Something akin to the Pinocchio story where the father wanted the real boy to behave and watch out for the reprobates) which is a reasonable interpretation and something altogether humanly understood to being a virtuous aspect which supports social harmony. Jealousy is not always a bad thing.

You also contend that;
The God "lusts to rule over humans" and this paints a picture of an idea of a GOD which cannot control himself in relation to humans which appears not to be the case, as the GOD is long-suffering and does not wish anyone to miss out on the reward of doing things the way the GOD intends humans to behave. The GOD obviously wants individuals to CHOOSE to do the right thing in regard to that, and this amounts to the individual therefore being able to feel that they have done the right thing voluntarily after being given the data regarding 'what is the right thing to do as a human being' WITHOUT being forced to do the right thing.

You also contend that;
The God "demands that humans worship and obey him"
but ignore that many Christians understand this 'worship' to mean 'through actions which promote good report in the name of that GOD' related to the same teachings Jesus is attributed to giving regarding that particular subject.

Obedience in itself is not a bad thing if indeed the individual has used reason and has been logical about it, and decided that all in all it is the best option available under the circumstances.

Therefore the objection I have with your reasoning here is that your claim is far too sweeping to be of any honest use in relation to truthful debate.

You are simply stating that Christianity amounts to all of those things when the verifiable evidence say's otherwise. In doing so you have profaned the idea of the GOD through the lens of your own interpretation, obviously heavily biased at that.

Fallacy is about all your statement is Divine Insight. 'Divine Insight' actually allows someone to be able to understand how not to profane the idea of GOD.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile Visit poster's website 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 19: Sat Jan 28, 2017 6:00 pm
Reply
Re: Theists sometimes DO ask questions.

Like this post
.
Volbrigade wrote:

The issue here is:

"What if you're right? What if mindless matter-energy is all there is?

I addressed that in the OP

Volbrigade wrote:

What would it matter? What would anything matter? Everything that ever occurred -- from a black hole, to the assembly of a living cell, to the birth of a baby, to that baby becoming a serial killer -- would be nothing more than the inevitable (perhaps inexecrable?) writhings of matter-energy.

And what of it?

What does it matter?"

Matter to WHOM?

It seems as though some sort of sentient minds would have to exist to decide what 'matters'. If / since multiple sentient minds exist what 'matters' may be different between them.

Various world cultures and the individuals within decide what 'matters'.

To me, personally, it does NOT matter to my real life decisions and actions how the universe originated or life began. That might be 'nice to know' information but certainly not essential. I do not pretend to know such things. Others seem to think it IS important and that they KNOW (after reading ancient texts and listening to sermons).

Volbrigade wrote:

DI -- thanks for understanding re the typo. I noticed another, HUGE one, from last night. It should be "exchange the truth for a lie".

The opposite is what I did when I accepted Christ!

Kindly substantiate that claim. So far it is just an OPINION stated as though it was a fact.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Post BBCode URL - Right click and save to clipboard to use later in post Post 20: Sat Jan 28, 2017 6:09 pm
Reply
Re: Theists sometimes DO ask questions.

Like this post
William wrote:

In context the matter that has mind can only be verified presently through biological life forms, here on this planet.
In relation to the universe those life-forms are within, this amounts to next to nothing and in that context cannot be seen as 'the mind of the universe', other than through presently verifiable evidence, in which case amounts to 'a mind in the universe,' when taken collectively. (when observed as a whole thing happening)


Well, how would this be any different from the fact that our bodies have a brain that appears to be conscious?

If only our brain is conscious, then how would this be any different from the universe being the "body" and human brains being the multiple "brains" of the universe?

I don't see where there is any difference at all. In fact, can you draw a line between where our bodies stop and the rest of the universe begins? I think not.

William wrote:

Quote:
What about people who don't like Christianity? Where is there any attraction in being the mindless slave to a jealous God who lusts to rule over humans and demand that they worship and obey him?


Objection;

You are making the presumption that this is what Christianity is about. Do you have the evidence to support that this is the case regarding Christianity?

It appears to me that it is not the case. Christians come in all shapes and sizes and have varying belief systems and by the evidence do not altogether believe in what you referred to as "a jealous God who lusts to rule over humans and demand that they worship and obey him?"

This seems to simply be your personal interpretation of Christianity, rather than anything based upon the actual verifiable evidence.


Your objection has been noted. I simply disagree with your objection. Not only does the Bible verify my description of the Biblical God, but the Christians support this view as well whenever they demand that every knee will bow and ever tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is the Lord or Lords and King of Kings. Rolling Eyes

It's all about fascist totalitarian dictatorship. You're kidding yourself if you think otherwise.

William wrote:

Fallacy is about all your statement is Divine Insight. 'Divine Insight' actually allows someone to be able to understand how not to profane the idea of GOD.


If the Christians can ever come up with a picture of a truly sane and loving God that can be genuinely supported by the Hebrew Bible I'll consider your opinion on this. Until then the Bible itself supports my views and I'm simply not interested in Christian opinions that can't be supported by the Hebrew Bible.

If they want to create a picture of a genuinely loving intelligent God they would be far better off tossing the Bible out entirely and starting over from scratch.

So your claim that I simply have a wrong picture of the Biblical God doesn't fly with me.

In fact, if that's true then the Christians should be able to CORRECT me on that, and they haven't been able to do that for over 4 decades.

In fact, back when I was a Christian I tried my very best to make the Bible out to be about a genuinely intelligent loving God and found that to be IMPOSSIBLE.

So I reject your opinion. The Bible cannot be used to support an intelligent loving God.

By the way you are more than welcome to try to make a case for an intelligent loving Biblical God. I would suggest starting a new thread for that however.

And don't forget, if you start a thread on that you are going to be having tons of Christians chiming in disagreeing with your views on the Biblical God as well. Even they can't agree on what constitutes an intelligent loving God.

Goto top, bottom
View user's profile 
Display posts from previous:   

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

Jump to:  
Facebook
Tweet

 




On The Web | Ecodia | Hymn Lyrics Apps
Facebook | Twitter

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group.   Produced by Ecodia.

Igloo   |  Lo-Fi Version