(May 4, 2010 at 2:47 pm)tavarish Wrote:

(May 4, 2010 at 2:35 pm)Watson Wrote: Wrong. I can think of an apple that literally exists- it is conceptual in my mind, physical in reality. Similarly, in my mind the apple can be a metaphor for something else, but I acknowledge that physically it is another thing entirely.

And how the hell am I wrong for saying:

[the] apple can't exist as a physical entity and a concept at the same time

Why not? So a conceptual apple and a physical apple can't exist at the same time? If that were the case, then aren't you implying the moment a thought comes into our mind, the physical apple ceases to exist, or vice-versa?

Quote:The physical apple and the concept of the apple in your understanding are not one and the same.

No, but I change my mental concept of the apple to fit the physical reality. However, to me subjectively, the apple is representative of something completely not an apple.

I see what you're saying. My concept of the universe as a metaphor for God does not a metaphor for God the universe make. However, then we get down to intent; can we look at the universe and give it a conscious intention of metaphor? My answer would be yes, yours would likely be no.

Quote:

(May 4, 2010 at 2:35 pm)Watson Wrote: @EvF: God is actually quite simple, so I would contend your argument that He must be complex.

Yes, A being that willed the universe into existence is simple. Who cares if it raises way more questions than explanations?

What happened to 'question everything'?

Quote:

(May 4, 2010 at 2:35 pm)Watson Wrote: And, my evidence that God literally exists comes with my understanding of the metaphor- the metaphor's existance is proof of the literal existance, being that the literal is the universe, life, love, and everything here, all of which is a metaphor for God.

You literally haven't said anything. I can have a concept of a fire-breathing dragon, that doesn't mean that dragons necessarily exist.

See above.

(May 4, 2010 at 1:20 pm)downbeatplumb Wrote:

(May 4, 2010 at 12:27 pm)AngelThMan Wrote:

(May 3, 2010 at 12:13 pm)Watson Wrote: During my change from Atheism to Christianity, I began to notice things that confused me and startled me, that I could not explain from an atheistic, materialistic, or scientific viewpoint. Believe me, I did try to do so. I looked for refutation and explanation, and found none. Only when I applied God to the scenario did things begin to make sense. And with it, a lot more in my life began to fall into place as well. Keep in mind, I still considered myself Atheist up to a point, but there came a moment when it just was not possible to explain what was happening in this way any longer.

My experience is sort of similar. Big revelation: I'm a former atheist. It's the first time I've said this. I just didn't think the idea of God made any sense. But after further examination, I came to the conclusion that the idea of No God made even less sense.

Interesting.

And just how were you turned into a believer?

I searched deeply into our very own existence, and looked around me, and saw signs of intelligent design, not unlike the ones I'm trying to detail here. The concept of God had always felt odd, but I realized that the concept of 'no God' felt even odder.

downbeatplumb Wrote:was it:

...because you...
B: met a cute girly who was relgious and got you thinking...

Boy, if that were the case, I'd become an atheist right now. (Some of you may get that quip.)

(May 4, 2010 at 10:13 am)Watson Wrote: Well, seeing as you are human, you exist on this plain and if you had that power, you'd be something of a hero, I'd definitely expect you to do something to save my child.

But you don't expect your "all-loving" and "all-powerful" deity to do the same? Maybe if I save your child's life I am somehow going against this deity's "plan".

Quote:No, you'd pretty much be a dick. You aren't even going to explain yourself? You're such an asshole.

And, again, your deity gets a pass?

Quote:Actually, other than the 'stupid' part, that's pretty much it. You know, you can label it 'rationalization' if you want, but there is still the implied rational in there.

Oh, come on! Like "rational" and "rationalize" mean the same thing?

Quote:But I'll tell you this. Someone who understands God has a much better chance of comprehending why that child died and why that child was taken to Heaven(bare with me here, for the sake of our discussion) than does an Atheist who not only doesn't know God, but doesn't understand Him in the slightest.

How can you "comprehend" a being you have never met, seen, or spoken with? Substitute "the Easter Bunny" for "God" in your above statement and it's equally valid.

Quote:Who's to say? Our souls(again, bare with me) know better than we do. You've no idea what decisions were made before your birth, supposing God exists, as do souls.

Our "souls"? What the hell is that? As far as I know, people do not have "souls". Unless you can present any evidence to prove me wrong.

Quote:No, because you're just stupid.

I'm not the one who believes in invisible deities.

Quote:Did I say the parent should do nothing for their child? No I did not.

But are we not "God's children"? Then why does he do nothing when they contract horrible diseases?

Quote: But a parent should definitely not be surprised when their child dies of a terminal illness.

Yeah... a TERMINAL ILLNESS that your deity could cure with a wave of his hand.

Quote:That's not to say they shouldn't be upset and mourn the child, but they should look at themselves and say 'What have I learned? What do I value more now than ever?'

If I walked up to parent who lost a child and sanctimoniously said, "Now what have you learned from your child's death? What do you value now more than ever?", I would expect to get a mouthful of fist.

And what does this mean anyway? That your deity allowed a child to suffer and die to "teach someone a lesson"? How incredibly cruel and immoral is that?

Quote:Perhaps that child isn't the one giving the lesson, but is the teacher...?

Oh, please. Gag me.

Quote: It's not for you or I to say.

I think I can say that what you're suggesting is complete twaddle.

Quote:A God who believes in free will?

What the hell does "free will" have to do with a child getting cancer?

Quote:Yeah! 'Cause fuck you, Nature! How dare I be born with brown hair! I want blonde hair! I'm going to whine and bitch about it when there's nothing I can do t- oh...there's this thing called hair dye? I can CHANGE MY HAIR COLOR?!

But yeah, still, fuck you Nature.

You don't get it, do you? We're not talking about NATURE! We're talking about your deity! A deity who can supposedly do anything. A deity who apparently chooses not to help children dying with a horrible disease. And being born with a certain hair color is not on the same level as getting cancer.

Quote:Do you understand where I am going with this?

Nope.

Quote:I'm not saying it isn't very sad that Billy has cancer. But I'm saying he, and his family, should make the most of what they've got. Instead of complaining that nature did what comes natural to it.

And, again, nature has nothing to do with this discussion. Let's say "nature" gave the kid cancer. Your deity can cure it in an instant! Why does he not?

Quote:Oh for fuck's sake. It's very sad that those people have to live in trailers, yes. But, again, should they blame Mother Nature and the EARTH ITSELF for their bad mood about it?

Where did I say anything about blaming "Mother Nature" and "the Earth"? I'm talking about your deity doing nothing to prevent devestating natural disasters. Again, if I had the power to prevent a hurricane from striking a populated area and I did nothing, I would be despised and villified. But you give your deity a pass. You simply spout platitudes like, "We can't understand why God does what he does". BULLSHIT! If this deity came down from the skies and explained why he allowed children to suffer with cancer, or why he did nothing to prevent natural disasters, we would certainly be capable of understanding it.

(May 4, 2010 at 2:54 pm)Watson Wrote: Why not? So a conceptual apple and a physical apple can't exist at the same time?

Sure they can, but that's a different conversation and not at all what I said.

Here's what I wrote:

[the] apple can't exist as a physical entity and a concept at the same time

Notice the bolded and underlined words.

The physical concept of the apple and your concept of an apple are different things. I'll repeat: They are NOT the same. They can exist simultaneously, but are not dependent on each other. You can have a concept of an apple without actually physically experiencing one, and likewise an apple can exist physically without a mind forming such a concept.

The apple cannot be physical and conceptual at the same time, as each of those have specific qualifiers, some of which contradict each other, for example, a concept can't be physical - among many others. An apple is NOT a concept. A concept of an apple is a concept.

This is a refutation that God exists literally and metaphorically. If God is indeed both an apple and not an apple, he is an illogical concept and holds no merit in methods of rational thinking. Not to mention NONE of that strengthens the argument that such a being actually exists.

(May 4, 2010 at 2:54 pm)Watson Wrote: If that were the case, then aren't you implying the moment a thought comes into our mind, the physical apple ceases to exist, or vice-versa?

Yes, my fruit goes missing as soon as I think about it.

(May 4, 2010 at 2:54 pm)Watson Wrote: No, but I change my mental concept of the apple to fit the physical reality. However, to me subjectively, the apple is representative of something completely not an apple.

You just acknowledged that mental concepts and physical reality are different things. What exactly are you trying to argue?

(May 4, 2010 at 2:54 pm)Watson Wrote: I see what you're saying. My concept of the universe as a metaphor for God does not a metaphor for God the universe make. However, then we get down to intent; can we look at the universe and give it a conscious intention of metaphor? My answer would be yes, yours would likely be no.

Metaphor for what? I'd also ask you to shoulder the burden of providing proof for the claim of conscious intention for the universe.

Quote:

(May 4, 2010 at 2:35 pm)Watson Wrote: @EvF: God is actually quite simple, so I would contend your argument that He must be complex.

Yes, A being that willed the universe into existence is simple. Who cares if it raises way more questions than explanations?

(May 4, 2010 at 2:54 pm)Watson Wrote: What happened to 'question everything'?

1. It usually stops for theists once they conclude God did it.
2. I try to question everything, that's why I try not to come to unneccesary conclusions, such as the God of the Gaps or the Kalam Cosmological argument. Things, to have merit, need supporting evidence, not faith.

Quote:During my change from Atheism to Christianity, I began to notice things that confused me and startled me, that I could not explain from an atheistic, materialistic, or scientific viewpoint. Believe me, I did try to do so. I looked for refutation and explanation, and found none. Only when I applied God to the scenario did things begin to make sense. And with it, a lot more in my life began to fall into place as well. Keep in mind, I still considered myself Atheist up to a point, but there came a moment when it just was not possible to explain what was happening in this way any longer.

I am calling complete bullshit on this, just as I would any person stating that they were a "True Atheist" converting over to an actual "Religion"...

I do not doubt you had questions, I do not doubt that you misunderstood certain aspects of Christianity at the time of your doubts.....
However, what I state, is that you were never an Atheist if you claim yourself as being a "Christian" or for that matter; any claimed organized belief based on fucking ancient "BOOKS"......

I've heard this same BS statement from so many other "Known" Atheist Convert, Christian/Islamic/Judean....blah blah blah....

Please.............!!!!

You were never an "Atheist".......Agnostic, maybe......But not an Atheist.......

Quit trying to sale the personal hope and direct your opinions to rational conclusions....

(May 4, 2010 at 2:54 pm)Watson Wrote: Why not? So a conceptual apple and a physical apple can't exist at the same time? If that were the case, then aren't you implying the moment a thought comes into our mind, the physical apple ceases to exist, or vice-versa?

Of dear...

Quote:No, but I change my mental concept of the apple to fit the physical reality. However, to me subjectively, the apple is representative of something completely not an apple.

Word Salad...

Quote:I see what you're saying. My concept of the universe as a metaphor for God does not a metaphor for God the universe make. However, then we get down to intent; can we look at the universe and give it a conscious intention of metaphor? My answer would be yes, yours would likely be no.

Who cares what metaphors we can and can not give it? We ultimately don't know what it is so preferring one explanation over any other possible explanation at this stage is irrational. What we do know is that there is no evidence for the existence of any deity or any logical argument that necessitates it's existence, therefore assuming that this conclusion is correct rather stupid.

(May 3, 2010 at 4:10 pm)Thor Wrote:

---

(May 3, 2010 at 3:07 pm)Watson Wrote: And this, I'm afraid, comes from a very ingrained inability to accept or pin responsibility on yourself or those around you.

Bullshit.

Quote:God is loving and perfect, you don't seem to comprehend this.

You're right. I can't comprehend a loving deity who would sit idly by and watch children die horrible deaths. Imagine that I had the power to cure your child of a fatal disease. All I would have to do is snap my fingers and your child would be cured. You ask me to cure your child. You BEG me to cure your child. I ignore your request without explanation. Your child suffers for a few months and then dies. How would you feel about me? Would you think I'm a great guy? If not, then why would you worship your deity after he does the VERY SAME THING? (And here comes the rationalization that we can't know "God's" great purpose because we're just stupid mortals, or some other ridiculous crap.)

Quote:He created this world and He filled it with His children, and He gave His children options to take. The choices themselves are up to us.

And what "choice" did an unborn child make that resulted in being born blind?

Quote:A loving diety that created the entire universe? He would know better than you do, actually.

Yes, because I'm a stupid mortal who can't see the value in allowing a child to suffer and die.

Quote:He would know what lessons the child could learn from that disease or that problem, and would not interfere when nature took it's natural course and strickened the child.

And what the hell kind of lesson does a three year old learn when they have to undergo chemo, radiation and surgery? And where is there a lesson if the kid dies? And what would you think of a parent who lets "nature take its natural course" and does nothing for their ill child?

Quote:No, God did not 'give' the child cancer, the child was just subjected to natural laws and ended up with cancer.

I never said your deity "gave" the child cancer. I said why would he allow a child to suffer with cancer and die?

Quote:Deal with the cards your dealt.

My, what a "loving" deity ya got there!

Six year old Billy: "Dear God, please make my cancer go away. It hurts a lot. I don't like going to the hospital and getting stuck with needles. And my mommy cries all the time."

GOD: "SUCK IT UP, KID! YOU EXPECT ME TO HELP YOU? DEAL WITH THE CARDS YOU"VE BEEN DEALT!"

Quote:Again, I know you don't believe, but think about it. If an all-powerful, perfectly loving God existed, He would know better than you. And He would be waiting for those thousands dead with open arms when their mortal bodies are shed and their souls go to Him. It is the sweetest kind of redemption for such a tragic end that I can think of.

What a bunch of unsubstantiated hooey.

Quote:As for those homeless? They are lucky they still have a life to live and to breathe, so that they may have the opportunity to enjoy themselves in whatever way possible.

GOD: "QUIT WHINING! YOU'RE LUCKY TO BE ALIVE! TAKE A LOOK AT THOSE PEOPLE WHO HAD CHUNKS OF CONCRETE FALL ON THEIR HEADS! I DID NOTHING TO HELP THEM! SO WHY DO YOU THINK I'M GOING TO HELP YOU?"

Quote:You seem to forget there's an entire universe out there away from our societal constructs. Who's to say a man can't leave a disaster area all on his own and find a new home, somewhere far off, more at one with nature?

Yeah.... tell that to the victims of Hurricane Katrina who are still living in FEMA trailers.

Quote:I disagree whole-heartedly. It is man and nature which makes no sense sometimes.

---

I agree with you about man, but nature makes PERFECT sense.

Thor I have a queston for you. If all the childern of the world were to be cured of their disease over the next year would you believe in God or say that is a mystery for science to yet discover?

(May 4, 2010 at 11:54 pm)Godschild Wrote: Thor I have a queston for you. If all the childern of the world were to be cured of their disease over the next year would you believe in God or say that is a mystery for science to yet discover?

If all children of a particular religion were cured of disease within a short time frame and the results were testable and repeatable, then that would be some interesting evidence indeed for a God's existence - at least it could hint at something supernatural or having to do with the power of prayer.

Has such a thing happened? If so, I'll alert the hospitals that everyone will be OK. It'll make the doctor's lives easier.

(May 4, 2010 at 11:54 pm)Godschild Wrote: Thor I have a queston for you. If all the childern of the world were to be cured of their disease over the next year would you believe in God or say that is a mystery for science to yet discover?[/b]

I would not immediately assume all the children were cured because of the actions of a deity. If I did, then I would have to question why this deity did not cure all the children since the beginning of mankind. Why did he do nothing while, throughout history, children died by the wagonload of smallpox, diptheria, plague, etc...?

What MIGHT convince me is if there was some organized national (or even international) prayer effort that asked "God" to cure all the children in the world of whatever affliction they might have, and the next day hospitals all over the world were reporting that patients in the children's ward were suddenly showing no signs of disease. But until something like that happens, I'll continue to be highly skeptical of any claims involving a deity as the cause.

(May 4, 2010 at 2:35 pm)Watson Wrote: @EvF: God is actually quite simple, so I would contend your argument that He must be complex.

A supernatural being that is there right from the beginning without any explanation whatsoever for its existence (it's 'just there' or it 'created itself' or whatever) that creates an entire universe, is omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent - all without explanation - is about as complex a thing as I can think of. How is that simple?

Quote:And, my evidence that God literally exists comes with my understanding of the metaphor- the metaphor's existance is proof of the literal existance, being that the literal is the universe, life, love, and everything here, all of which is a metaphor for God.

How does using the universe as a 'metaphor for God' give evidence for God's literal existence?

(May 4, 2010 at 3:34 pm)AngelThMan Wrote: I searched deeply into our very own existence, and looked around me, and saw signs of intelligent design, not unlike the ones I'm trying to detail here. The concept of God had always felt odd, but I realized that the concept of 'no God' felt even odder.

Who cares what you 'feel' about the matter, personal credulity/incredulity is not a rational reason to believe in the existence of something.