If there was a loving God, would you accept him?

[Esquilax]

The problem with your article and your comment is what is beauty, courage, right, wrong, good, and evil apart from God? If your paradigm is that all experience is simply chemical reactions than in your system these concepts don't exist. People are simply responding to stimuli. That is not a concept of beauty. These concepts only having meaning in world that has more meaning than simply chemical neurological reactions. Therefore, your article has little merit because it asserts philosophical ideas that has no basis within your paradigms. Arguably, these ideas have been borrowed from a theist world view. This is why I have not dealt with your article.

You really need to let go of this idea that if something conceptual isn't also magic, it's therefore worthless. Concepts don't have any inherent existence beyond the minds that consider them, and that's okay, because those minds do exist. If they didn't, then courage and beauty and all that would disappear, but that doesn't render those concepts nonexistent: as the old adage goes, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. That's very true, here.

Besides, your claim that these things would be worthless apart from god is completely nonsensical, because you haven't at all determined how god sustains those concepts. You might as well have asked what is cheese apart from pizza? Cheese can go on a pizza, but that doesn't mean that it ceases to exist if it isn't on one. You attach all these labels to god, and then mistakenly believe that they come from him, and that he owns them, but without some kind of establishing evidence that this is true, we don't really need to play your game.

Stop assuming christianity gets to dictate all the rules of debate.

[Coffee Jesus]

If your paradigm is that all experience is simply chemical reactions than in your system these concepts don't exist. People are simply responding to stimuli. That is not a concept of beauty.

Experience is the basis for our paradigm. Empiricism is knowledge through use of the five senses, i.e. sensory experience.

2) What basis do we have to put empirical investigation before any other alternative?

Many of you have challenged me on what basis could an alternative be made. Let me ask first, on what basis do we make empiricism the first paradigm for understanding the world? It is an assumption that empiricism should be the first criteria for there is no basis for There is no rational reason to do so above any other reason. You could argue that we can touch and feel it, but how often have we misinterpreted what we could touch and feel. The fact is we all work from a philosophy of history (atheist or theist) in which we interpret the world in light of. Therefore, if we began with empiricism it is not surprising we do not come to know God. God is beyond the physical realm that we are investigating. Many of you have challenged me where is the evidence? I propose that the reason you can't find the evidence is because you have elevated empiricism to a level that is in appropriate. Your method ignores anything that is not physically observable even though there are realities that are not physically discernible.

Conclusion:

My only hope from my postings is that I would bring awareness to the fact that there is a world that exists beyond empiricism. To rely on empiricism alone is to only evaluate half of reality. We all must also evaluate where our paradigm (empericism) breaks down to truly have an understanding of reality.

What other basis is there that doesn't first assume empiricism? Oh yeah... The Bible...

That option is interpreting the world not first on the basis of empirical observation, but on the the transcendent nature of God as defined by Scripture (Bible).

You can only see The Bible through use of vision. That's empiricism. You can only verify your reading comprehension by comparing your understandings to others' understandings, others whom you know to exist through empiricism. I'm sorry, but the word of God doesn't exist without empiricism. If empirical reality is a trick made by Satan, then so is the word of God.

[Brian37]

Ladies and Gentleman,

I would like to propose the following question to those who are Atheist:

If there was a loving God, would you accept him? Please explain why or why not.

I realize that this may seem like an overly basic question. But I am trying to better understand the presuppositions (metaphysical dream) that is behind the Atheist belief system. For this to help me improve my understanding of the Atheist belief system, I need everyone to be truthful and forthcoming about the question.

I look forward to hearing everyone's comments.

Thanks,

Nathan

If there was a loving unicorn, would you accept it? If there was a loving snarfwidget would you accept it? If Mickey Mouse were real would you accept it?

I'd love to give all 7 billion humans ice cream and have them have the ability to fart money out of their ass so they could buy food and pay their bills, but utopias do not exist.

Now, as a claimed attribute "all loving", just as a claim, is a broken claim which makes no sense, no matter what name you give this claimed god.

50 million people on average die worldwide from everything from disease, crime, war, in birth and old age. That indicates an unfortunate part of reality. It does not indicate a super hero that can protect us.

If we pretend for arguments sake a super natural being existed, there is absolutely no objective way you could say it loves us. No sane parent in reality could get away with what claimants of God say he can.

If a parent behaved in the selective deadbeat manor with the same spotty record as the claimed god does, the child would be taken away from that parent and they would be arrested for neglect and or abuse.

Oh and BTW the salutations at the beginning and end of the posts you make are superfluous. If you have already introduced yourself in the intro section of this forum, there is no need to repeat that in every post. This is not the Ritz Carlton 5 star Hotel. Relax, be yourself, no need to be formal.

[downbeatplumb]

What if there was an all loving god and it was Loki son of Odin would you accept him?

[LostLocke]

What if there was an all loving being and it turned out to be Bahamut?

Would you accept that?

[Brian37]

Ogar from Revenge Of the Nerds Part 2, while smoking pot with the Nerds, "Guys, what if C - A- T actually spelled D - O - G?"