Analysis of Christopher Hitchen's argument against God

[stu]

Quote from MarketMasher:

Oops - had to pipe in one more time on that.....

Cuz that statement is equating the existence of "God" with "Religion - and I'm not even sure there's a legitimate association there.....

In fact, if those debaters removed every reference to religion other than acknowledging it's historical existence (assuming they both agree it has existed in the past), it might have been better.

Isn't religion generally understood to be the belief in a supernatural power known as God , and don't most major religions and theists who haven’t even left their childhood, equate the word God with their beliefs?

The two are synonymous.
Except for deists maybe. Even they have religious belief which is essentially all about God though.

 

[OPTIONAL777]

While I appreciate your politeness, I am not going to honor your request.

While you might not wish to be "that wrong" when it is easy to show how you are often "that wrong" the call to duty takes a priority over your polite requests.

Quote from stu:

Just please don't ever step in to defend or agree with me on anything.
I certainly wouldn't wish to be that wrong about anything.

 

[OPTIONAL777]

No, religion is an organized process, organized by man.

Belief in a natural power (not supernatural, God is natural by concept) does not lead to collective action and political attempts to propagate onto others the belief system.

That is the work of organized religions...lead by men, typically not the same men who were around during the time of the founding of the belief system by a prophet of God.

So the corruption of religion is a man made problem, and it is logical to have a belief in God and a detest for organized religion which uses the political process to force those beliefs.

Just as I approve of the individual scientist doing their things, coming up with their theories, but I detest the political process by which their beliefs become part of the indoctrination process of children in the public schools.

Quote from stu:

Isn't religion generally understood to be the belief in a supernatural power known as God , and don't most major religions and theists who haven’t even left their childhood, equate the word God with their beliefs?

The two are synonymous.
Except for deists maybe. Even they are all about have religious beliefs to do with God though.

 

[MarketMasher]

Quote from stu:

Isn't religion generally understood to be the belief in a supernatural power known as God , and don't most major religions and theists who haven’t even left their childhood, equate the word God with their beliefs?

The two are synonymous.
Except for deists maybe. Even they have religious belief which is essentially all about God though.

I dunno...

IF (again - IF!) God existed, could God exist without Religion?

Can Religion exist without a God?

If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, can an oompah lumpha carry a tune...?

Ok - enuf....

 

[stu]

Quote from OPTIONAL777:

While I appreciate your politeness, I am not going to honor your request.

While you might not wish to be "that wrong" when it is easy to show how you are often "that wrong" the call to duty takes a priority over your polite requests.

My request was that you don't agree with me.
So you are going to?
I rue the day.

You've not made anything look easy by your "call to duty" .
Absurd, yes.

 

[stu]

Quote from OPTIONAL777:

No, religion is an organized process, organized by man.

Belief in a natural power (not supernatural, God is natural by concept) does not lead to collective action and political attempts to propagate onto others the belief system.

That is the work of organized religions...lead by men, typically not the same men who were around during the time of the founding of the belief system by a prophet of God.

So the corruption of religion is a man made problem, and it is logical to have a belief in God and a detest for organized religion which uses the political process to force those beliefs.

Just as I approve of the individual scientist doing their things, coming up with their theories, but I detest the political process by which their beliefs become part of the indoctrination process of children in the public schools.

Not so.
Religion if anything is a strong belief in a supernatural power, usually, generally and pretty much always called God, which is supposed to control human destiny.
Religion is of course also an institution to express belief in a divine power.

No wonder Christopher Hitchen's has an argument against God.

 

[OPTIONAL777]

The belief in God is not dependent on religion.

A person never exposed to any religion could develop a belief in God. That is a fact, unless you think God put the first concept of God into the first person who had the first concept of religion.

The concept, then belief in God comes first. Religion follows.

Additionally, most all religions are about creed and dogma, where simply believing in God is not about creed and dogma.

Quote from MarketMasher:

I dunno...

IF (again - IF!) God existed, could God exist without Religion?

Can Religion exist without a God?

If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, can an oompah lumpha carry a tune...?

Ok - enuf....

 

[killthesunshine]

Quote from OPTIONAL777:

No, religion is an organized process, organized by man.

Belief in a natural power (not supernatural, God is natural by concept) does not lead to collective action and political attempts to propagate onto others the belief system.

That is the work of organized religions...lead by men, typically not the same men who were around during the time of the founding of the belief system by a prophet of God.

So the corruption of religion is a man made problem, and it is logical to have a belief in God and a detest for organized religion which uses the political process to force those beliefs.

Just as I approve of the individual scientist doing their things, coming up with their theories, but I detest the political process by which their beliefs become part of the indoctrination process of children in the public schools.

oh! So, your God is natural not supernatural, operates within natural law and subject to natural limitation and, therefore, not omnipotent?

stu, have we made progress

 

[OPTIONAL777]

No, religion is an organization of ideas, a body of ideas filled with creed and dogma.

Not unlike the creed and dogma of some "scientific groups with unproved theories."

Religion is an institution, belief in God is just belief in God. Deism is without creed and dogma, and while it is considered a religion, deists simply have a belief in God.

Christopher Hitchens has a belief in non God, and a failed argument.

His gripe with organized religion is only true, if and a particular religion is not in fact the will of God, which can not be shown to be true or false.

When belief in God is kept personal, then religions don't try to force their beliefs on others.

They may offer it as a choice, but they would not be compelled reasonably to force the belief on others.

Would the world be a better place if institutions did not try to force nor indoctrinate their beliefs on others?

I think so, but that would be all institutions, like politics, religions, and unproved scientific theories, etc.

Of course if you want to come clean and admit that you are a member of the religion of atheism, we can discuss that.

Quote from stu:

Not so.
Religion if anything is a strong belief in a supernatural power, usually, generally and pretty much always called God, which is supposed to control human destiny.
Religion is of course also an institution to express belief in a divine power.

No wonder Christopher Hitchen's has an argument against God.

 

[OPTIONAL777]

Stujisms!!!

God operates within natural law, by definition, as natural law is within God.

God is not external when God is within the universe. Both within and without is the nature of God. The within aspect of God is subject to natural law, and the without aspect of God is subject only to God, which is natural, not external to God.

So God can make a rock so heavy God cannot lift it, and also lift the rock.

How is that?

That seems contradictory and logically impossible.

God is not limited to an either or situation, i.e. being within only, or external only to the laws of nature.

God is everywhere in a condition of complete wholeness. Every single part is not separate from the whole. The problem for you is that you see only relative situations, not whole conditions.

Quote from killthesunshine:

oh! So, your God is natural not supernatural, operates within natural law and subject to natural limitation and, therefore, not omnipotent?

stu, have we made progress