Regarding the Existence or Absence of God

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally posted by rs7
Seems like MissedTheBoat has not missed a beat in this thread.

It is certainly unwise to claim with certainty that one can know absolutely whether or not God exists.

It seems to me personally that there is not much compelling evidence that the Biblical god exists, but again, who really knows?

So this deserves my attention to the extent I will actually spend my money on "Religion for Dummies". I wish I had thought up the concept.


More...

rs7,

obviously i am quite convinced of the correctness of my beliefs - or, more accurately, justified in my absence of certain beliefs.
but, for the record, no, i cannot state them with 100% certainty.

for man to survive (and thrive), however, he doesn't need 100% accuracy. we can use our rational faculty to weigh up the evidence for and against an idea and make a decision based on that. such a decision would be called RATIONAL. insofar as a person wants to remain rational, he must surely reject maintaining a positive belief in a "god", on the grounds of the overwhelming case against it. If he wants to leave the door open for the possibility of such a "god" existing, fine.

just think about this for one moment - all of you:
if someone had come along TODAY and discovered the bible, or invented the idea of a god, how many people do you think would take it seriously? you know the answer


re: reading a book on religion. you're seriously unlikely to get the whole story out of one of those, unless it's written by a secular, unbiased author. such books routinely either gloss over or ignore the GLARING (not hypberbole, honest truth) inconsistencies and outright self-contradictions of the bible. (why do you think there are armies of theologians to "interpret" (creatively!) what it says??)

as far as answering goldenarm, who, i think, asked why can't we all just get along? dude, that is exactly the whole reason i became an atheist in a first place... do you really think that religion is a prescription for people getting along? nothing could be further from the truth! nothing has caused more divisiveness, mistrust and hatred among men then religious differences..
 
Originally posted by stu


You need a definition to test. You dont wan't to test fine. Then don't call it the truth. Because you can't prove doesn't mean therefor it is. You don't need definition?, just be happy to be carried along fine. But can't say you have the truth.

More...

I'm not calling it YOUR truth. But it is MY truth. Our versions of the truth happen to differ. I have no problem with that.

I agree that religious differences have caused much of mankind's strife. But again, this boils down to political agendas being carried out in the NAME of religion. If religion wasn't around, man would still fight each other based on ethnic and numerous socio-political differences. Religion is just a convenient scapegoat. But saying the world's ills are caused by religion is a vast oversimplification.

As far as religion and science, I belong to the camp that says that they are not mutually exclusive and CAN peacefully co-exist. There are many leading scientific thinkers who feel the same way.
 
Originally posted by goldenarm


...... You can take it or leave it, but don't try to force feed your athiestic beliefs on religious followers by engaging in tit for tat philosophical wordplay. You have your beliefs and I have mine.

More...



but don't try to force feed your athiestic beliefs on religious followers by engaging in tit for tat philosophical wordplay. You have your beliefs and I have mine.


I resemble that remark :D

Please read my posts more carefully if you are going to put words in my mouth ....." I beleive it's no longer necessary to hold superstitious beliefs which cannot be substantiated, or to necessarily leave go of them even though they can't.
But to call such things TRUTH when they patently are not, is an insult to intelligence"

I started that setence with the words " I believe " ie: that is what I think. I do not call it the truth. I did not try to force feed anyone you'll notice I also said ....... or to necessarily leave go of them that is clearly NOT , unlike most religions like to do, forcing any opinion on anyone

I also said
"Devout Christian and other main faith believers have favorite phrases and tricks of the trade spoon fed to them, which they regurgitate when confronted in order that they are instinctively able dismiss the need to argue........ They are also keen on sidestepping discussion "

Your reference to ".....engaging in tit for tat philosophical wordplay" is a sidestep. Always to avoid taking the debate, that's fine but you calling all debate on your religion as engaging in tit for tat philosophical wordplay is weak minded response.
 
Originally posted by daniel_m


just think about this for one moment - all of you:
if someone had come along TODAY and discovered the bible, or invented the idea of a god, how many people do you think would take it seriously? you know the answer
More...

If there was no Christianity until this point, you would be VERY surprised. People would gravitate towards it like white on rice.
 
Originally posted by stu





Your reference to ".....engaging in tit for tat philosophical wordplay" is a sidestep. Always to avoid taking the debate, that's fine but you calling all debate on your religion as engaging in tit for tat philosophical wordplay is weak minded response.
More...

Sorry if it seems weak minded to you but your arguments against a God seem to stem from the unfairness of the fact that the majority of the world is doomed to hellfire. Well, life is not fair so you'll just have to deal with it. If that's your best ammunition in this debate then it's just not worth arguing with you.
 
Originally posted by goldenarm


I'm not calling it YOUR truth. But it is MY truth. Our versions of the truth happen to differ. I have no problem with that.

I agree that religious differences have caused much of mankind's strife. But again, this boils down to political agendas being carried out in the NAME of religion. If religion wasn't around, man would still fight each other based on ethnic and numerous other differences. Religion is just a convenient scapegoat. But saying the world's ills are caused by religion is a vast oversimplification.

As far as religion and science, I belong to the camp that says that they are not mutually exclusive and CAN peacefully co-exist. There are many leading scientific thinkers who feel the same way.
More...

If religion wasn't around , that would be one LESS reason to fight. Religion IS the scapegoat. So is a god. That's why they were created. That's where mankind can conveniently put the blame and give the glory always, instead of at his own feet and facing up to his own weakness and strengths.
 
Originally posted by goldenarm


Sorry if it seems weak minded to you but your arguments against a God seem to stem from the unfairness of the fact that the majority of the world is doomed to hellfire. Well, life is not fair so you'll just have to deal with it. If that's your best ammunition in this debate then it's just not worth arguing with you.
More...


goldenarm,

"...unfairness of the fact that the majority of the world is doomed to hellfire. "

Thats it ? End of story. Then I was right. Spoon fed absurdities to protect a stance and stifle debate.

I never even hinted that any of it was unfair, just extremely unrealistic is as far as I went.

You' right It's not worth arguing as you have nothing to debate. Just the same stock response So you Kill debate as you have little to debate.
 
Religion has been around since the discovery of fire. It is a natural response to man's need to explain the unexplainable. You can't subtract religion from humanity any more than you can take oxygen away from mammals. Can you please accept reality?

Even in your fantasy world, if you could remove religion do you really think there would be one LESS thing for man to fight about? A hundred other things would take it's place!! Get a grip, buddy, and give me some thoughtful topics for debate, not idealistic crap. And lay off the Ayn Rand books. She was a kook!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top