Miracles and Anti-supernaturalism

[Undeceived]

If there is no God, the only reason to help people is if the action --in some way, at some point-- serves me. How is that moral?

I find that most religions appeal to this part of our nature as well, offering a (very desirable) reward for following certain rules of behavior and offering a (terrifyingly horrible) punishment for refusing to follow those rules.

So you respond by denying that selflessness exists. Thanks for aiding my point. Either you worship yourself and serve yourself. Or you worship God and serve Him and all His creation. God is the life-giver. Of course I am going to gravitate toward the Master who gives me life. Not because I'm selfish, but because without the Master I would be incapable of acting selflessly. He gives me the fuel to love. "God is love" (1 John 4:8) "We love because he first loved us." (1 John 4:19)

With God there is at least a chance for genuine love. Isn't that better than no love at all? I believe God helps me to love others. Why do you crash my party by claiming my love is not real? (Correct me if my exposition of your reply is wrong.)

[pineapplebunnybounce]

I find that most religions appeal to this part of our nature as well, offering a (very desirable) reward for following certain rules of behavior and offering a (terrifyingly horrible) punishment for refusing to follow those rules.

So you respond by denying that selflessness exists. Thanks for aiding my point. Either you worship yourself and serve yourself. Or you worship God and serve Him and all His creation. God is the life-giver. Of course I am going to gravitate toward the Master who gives me life. Not because I'm selfish, but because without the Master I would be incapable of acting selflessly. He gives me the fuel to love. "God is love" (1 John 4:8) "We love because he first loved us." (1 John 4:19)

So you do good things because you're grateful of the ability to do good things? Like I said, atheists don't need to feel grateful to do good things. Personally I don't like it when others suffer or have a bad day, so if it's within my power i'd help them out. That in turn helps me out, because we live in a society. But that's not my motivation to do good things, i like to do good things because it's evolutionarily selected that humans like to do good things. I'm just another product of evolution.

With God there is at least a chance for genuine love. Isn't that better than no love at all? I believe God helps me to love others. Why do you crash my party by claiming my love is not real?

I'm capable of love. Why are you claiming my love is not real and crashing my party? If you need god to love someone, that's fine, don't claim that we need god as well.

Edit: I just saw your edit, I didn't realize you were asking for a specific someone's opinion. but you got mine because it's the middle of the night and i'm bored.

[Godscreated]

A belief in the Atonement and Resurrection of Christ is still self-serving, for it gets you to Candy Mountain, and all the nay-sayers go to Mordor.

Yes and no, one must die to self to reconcile one's self to God through Christ. One must die to self to be repentant of sin and through faith believe in Christ, so yes we get an eternal reward, but if you die to self do you really do it for yourself or is it for God.

[Undeceived]

So you do good things because you're grateful of the ability to do good things? Like I said, atheists don't need to feel grateful to do good things. Personally I don't like it when others suffer or have a bad day, so if it's within my power i'd help them out. That in turn helps me out, because we live in a society. But that's not my motivation to do good things, i like to do good things because it's evolutionarily selected that humans like to do good things. I'm just another product of evolution.

I'm capable of love. Why are you claiming my love is not real and crashing my party? If you need god to love someone, that's fine, don't claim that we need god as well.

Thanks for your input.

Above, you indicate that you love because it is programmed into you--i.e. you have no logical reason for it beyond preservation of the human race. So it seems it is you who claim your love is not real.

Let me put this another way. Without God, love has only one place to come from: within. But anything that comes from within must be inherently selfish, because your body is programmed to take care of itself. So genuine, unselfish love must come from somewhere else. God, for instance.

This isn't to say that programmed love is fake or pointless. But it is less free. Programmed love isn't a choice, in the way that selfless love is. Try this exercise: think of the person you hate most in life. Now love them, even to the point of death on their behalf. Can you do it?

[pineapplebunnybounce]

Thanks for your input.

Above, you indicate that you love because it is programmed into you--i.e. you have no logical reason for it beyond preservation of the human race. So it seems it is you who claim your love is not real.

You are human, love was programmed into you as well, whether you believe it or not doesn't change the facts. The bolded sounds rather logical to me.

Being born with the ability to love, and the reason for my having the ability to love is for the preservation of the human race, does not make my love unreal. Real, as opposed to what you're implying here, doesn't involve magic.

Let me put this another way. Without God, love has only one place to come from: within. But anything that comes from within must be inherently selfish, because your body is programmed to take care of itself. So genuine, unselfish love must come from somewhere else. God, for instance.

evolution has "programmed" (using your word here to avoid confusion) us to not only take care of ourselves, but also of our own. A lot of mothers are willing to die for their child, regardless if they're atheists or religious. Because preservation of your own is just as important for survival of the species in some cases. But you can bet that when a mum makes a decision like that she isn't thinking, ok, if i die for my baby, my species survives. It's emotional for her, it's barely rational (some would argue), because it's an instinct and a conscious choice fuelled by her desire to save her child, she doesn't need another reason. This is the product of evolution.

Now we love others for the same reason, because it's beneficial, whether we realize it or not.

This isn't to say that programmed love is fake or pointless. But it is less free. Natural love isn't a choice, in the way that selfless love is.

Love is a choice? Did you really say that? If it's a choice and i ask you to stop loving your mother for 10 seconds can you do it? You are no more in control of your love than I am. If I point to a woman you've never met before and say fall in love with her right now, then stop loving her after 2 hours, can you do it? What you have control over is your actions, not your love. And I fail to see why even if it's a choice, it'd be superior to godless love?

Edit: ahaha, saw your edit, interesting that you asked me the same question. Nope, i can't, and i won't. Why would i cause grieve to the people i love for someone i hate? I wouldn't do something that would upset the people I love, especially so unnecessarily. Can you do it? Your scenario I mean.

[Tonus]

So you respond by denying that selflessness exists. Thanks for aiding my point. Either you worship yourself and serve yourself. Or you worship God and serve Him and all His creation.

Or you can worship god and serve yourself. Or worship yourself and serve others selflessly because that is how you believe you can better yourself. Or you can worship no one and experience love anyway, since we are capable of such. And so on. Why did you try to reduce it to only two options? That seems so... self serving.

[Bad Writer]

Yes, but I'm an atheist and do good deeds. No gods are required.

I'm glad. I think it is easier to love others when one's heart is overflowing with God's love and joy.

Why do you need a god to qualify your deeds as good or, I suppose in your mind, better? So when you have an abundance of love and joy in your life, you attribute that to something you can't know is real...but what if you were really sad and down in the dumps? Why do you not attribute that to some supernatural cause, like the Holy Ghost of Debbie Downer?

---

A belief in the Atonement and Resurrection of Christ is still self-serving, for it gets you to Candy Mountain, and all the nay-sayers go to Mordor.

Yes and no, one must die to self to reconcile one's self to God through Christ. One must die to self to be repentant of sin and through faith believe in Christ, so yes we get an eternal reward, but if you die to self do you really do it for yourself or is it for God.

Always for oneself, for we cannot prove/disprove that there is/isn't a god. Even if that person dying really was doing it all for his invisible god, he's still serving himself in the end, for it's a perceived mutual benefit anyway.

[Undeceived]

Love is a choice? Did you really say that? If it's a choice and i ask you to stop loving your mother for 10 seconds can you do it? You are no more in control of your love than I am. If I point to a woman you've never met before and say fall in love with her right now, then stop loving her after 2 hours, can you do it? What you have control over is your actions, not your love. And I fail to see why even if it's a choice, it'd be superior to godless love?

Edit: ahaha, saw your edit, interesting that you asked me the same question. Nope, i can't, and i won't. Why would i cause grieve to the people i love for someone i hate? I wouldn't do something that would upset the people I love, especially so unnecessarily. Can you do it? Your scenario I mean.

Jesus chose to love you, in spite of all the reasons he had not to. If he is in your heart, you have the power to forgive anyone, and love them too. I'm sorry you have not yet experienced this. When you are ready to meet the One who made you and loves you as you are, let me or any other believer know.

[Bad Writer]

Jesus chose to love you, in spite of all the reasons he had not to. If he is in your heart, you have the power to forgive anyone, and love them too. I'm sorry you have not yet experienced this. When you are ready to meet the One who made you and loves you as you are, let me or any other believer know.

So when he whipped the people in the temple, he was doing that out of love? "You guys, this is going to hurt me more than it's going to hurt you."

[BettyG]

Esquilax:
I have been posting about miracles, such as the Resurrection, that I do believe happened. None of the responses, such as "Jesus didn't really die. He never existed. The Roman soldiers were bribed, etc are unproved conjectures that go against 2000 years of history, so then you deny that one can know history.

Do you often see historical records espousing on all the things that weren't present at any given time? "The year is 03 AD, and there aren't any dragons. Nor are there leprechauns. End communication."

On the flipside, what we don't see, are any historical records that noted that Jesus did exist...

Yes, you can always rely on the credulous to refute the stories that are only aiding their cause. That's absolutely true.

You would need to provide evidence of miracles in history. From non-biased accounts, for which there can be no better explanation.

You seem to assume that reports of miracles from those who experienced them are too biased to tell the truth. Who could provide better evidence than eyewitnesses?
BTW, the Vatican requires non-believer doctors to examine the evidence and confirm there is no natural cause for healing.

Also, who could provide better evidence the apostles who were eyewitnesses to the life and death of Jesus? If anything, they would be the most concerned with accuracy, more so than some outsider. To say otherwise is denying 2000 years of history.

Please, proceed to tell us more about the magic you believe actually happens.

You have to deny that God acts in this world today.

No, you have to demonstrate it.

You demonstrated that these things are logical... how?

I have been posting about miracles, such as the Resurrection, that I do believe happened. None of the responses, such as "Jesus didn't really die. He never existed. The Roman soldiers were bribed, etc are unproved conjectures that go against 2000 years of history, so then atheists here deny that one can know history.

When you remember that you just posted this on a device forged from scientific understanding, powered by a natural force that science discovered and learned the rules thereof, and transmitted through yet a third technology developed through science, all the while being alive because medical and agricultural science allows you to stay healthy and well fed, you will understand how ungrateful and myopic you sound when you dismiss science because it doesn't know everything yet.

You have to have faith that science will someday understand everything. You have no proof for that. It is an assumption. Science seems to be your religion.
You seem to be assuming that the laws of nature are a closed system, therefore, nothing can act on it from the outside, so then a violation of natural law is impossible. However, within a theistic framework, natural law is not a closed system; and so a miracle is not a violation of natural law. (New Evidence that Demands a Verdict, p. 663.)
You have no proof that natural law is a closed system.

No no, you have to be honest enough not to profess absolute certainty in everything. You know what that's called? Keeping an open goddamn mind.

I hope your mind is open enough to realize the things you are assuming, but not so open that your brains fall out.

You have to believe that this incredibly complex universe is just an accident. This is totally irrational.

Which is why nobody but Mr. Strawman believes that.

So who created it? It seems common sense that a machine points to its designer and a building points to its architect. You observe a highly ordered universe. Who designed it? It would have to be a preexisting being that did not need to be created and on which all things owe their existence.