Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
(July 27, 2015 at 1:38 pm)lkingpinl Wrote: "The suffering in the world is not evidence against a god, but it is evidence against a powerful being with our best interests at heart."
I go back to moral authority here. When you say there is evil, you must assume there is good. But if there is good and evil there must be a Moral Law to differentiate between the two. If there is a moral law there must be a moral law giver. But if there is no moral law giver (no God), there is no moral law, if there is no moral law, there is no good, if there is no good there is no evil.
Because you see such a thing as suffering and evil there must also be love, compassion and goodness. If a powerful being created a world where there can be no evil and suffering (and also no love, goodness), would that not be equivalent to a world of automatons? A world where we could only follow what was allowed and have no freedom to choose? But you ask why would a God create a world where his creation could disobey his rules and reject and hate Him?
Why do people have children? Do we not also run the risk of those children rejecting us and disobeying us? We certainly run the risk, but still feel they are worth creating.
So, you don't believe in heaven, if you keep your story consistent.
How do you come to this statement? I was responding to Rob's comment regarding suffering in the world being evidence of no God with our best interests in mind.
Look again at this bit you wrote:
(July 27, 2015 at 1:38 pm)lkingpinl Wrote: ... If a powerful being created a world where there can be no evil and suffering (and also no love, goodness), would that not be equivalent to a world of automatons? A world where we could only follow what was allowed and have no freedom to choose? ...
Heaven is supposed to be a world in which there can be no evil and suffering. According to you, that seems to mean that in heaven there is no freedom to choose. And you seem to think that would be a bad thing. Since heaven is supposed to be good, it cannot exist, as, according to your claims, it could not be good.
Also, the free will defense is ridiculous anyway, as explained here:
July 28, 2015 at 4:08 am (This post was last modified: July 28, 2015 at 4:35 am by robvalue.)
I wasn't raised anything, I was taught to think for myself. My critical thinking was sufficient by the age of 5 where I first encountered religious preaching at my school. I rejected it then as obvious nonsense. They kept on preaching, and I didn't even bother discussing it with my parents. They didn't "make me atheist" or tell me not to believe in it, clearly they could tell I'd dealt with it myself, using my own thinking.
I can easily imagine a world with no suffering, but where there is plenty of free will. It's not hard at all. Everyone can do whatever they want, be happy all the time, and no one even considers hurting each other. There's no such thing as hurt, in fact. There's no hunger, no violence. And we're not restricted to one tiny armpit of the whole universe either, we can float around wherever we want to actually explore all the rest of the stuff God made apparently for no reason. People often can't seem to decide whether God actually made the rules, or just showed up one day and is restricted by rules already in place.
The idea that you can't be happy without the possibility of someone being evil doesn't make any sense. I don't need someone to tell me that I'm happy when I'm happy. If we are made to only appreciate being happy because we can be sad, that's a design fault. I could be happy my whole life without ever feeling sad, should I be so designed.
But of course, we're not designed anyway, we evolved. And the earth is exactly what you would expect from a place with no one in charge.
If you're saying without evil choices we have no choices at all, that seems to be saying we only ever 2 actions possible at any given time, a good one and a bad one. But obviously we have billions of good choices and billions of bad ones. Who needs the bad ones? What sadist puts in suffering as a way of making people appreciate happiness, instead of just making them appreciate happiness in the first place?
Is my imagination, given to me by God apparently, more powerful than God himself? What kind of sick fuck is he to give me the ability to imagine the kind of world I'd much rather inhabit?
Feel free to send me a private message.
Please visit my website here! It's got lots of information about atheism/theism and support for new atheists.
(July 26, 2015 at 4:22 am)AtheistAspie Wrote: To the theists who frequent this board, I have a question for you. I haven't been around here long, so apologies if it's already been asked. My question is simply this. Why do you believe in god? Is it a simple matter of continuing the tradition of the way you were raised? Is it the result of scientific research in which you determined that religion answered your questions about life and the world more accurately than science? Something else? I have a difficult time establishing what specifically causes most people to believe. As a follow-up question, had you been raised atheist, what do you suppose the chances are that you would have found your god and converted to your religion in adulthood?
I converted in my 20s.
I wanted to know if Their was a God and if so which one.
So I researched each religion, and did not agree with most. Meaning even if their was a God I would rather be condemned than serve. Just when I was about to give up I was invited to church by a pretty girl so I went. Then I found God.
How did I use 'science.' No. Why? because 'science' in it's methods requires something we are not privy to with God. Control and expermintation. Perhaps that is why so many wanting to hide them selves from God use 'science' as a blanket in which to hide under. (People look for God where they know they can not find him so they can conclude that he can not exist.)
To find God one must simply follow the instructions He has left for us. After all can you 'science' your way to my house unless you follow the instructions I give.
(July 28, 2015 at 1:09 pm)TubbyTubby Wrote: No, I'd expermintate until I found it.
You stick with your god blanket Drich, the real world would be too scary for you.
Seriously? Do you honestly believe it is easier to be a Christian, than a member of pop culture?
Nice false dichotomy. One can be a member of "pop culture" or one can be a Christian (those bold counter-cultural heroes!). Seriously? You can't imagine other possibilities? Or is "pop culture" now the Christian buzzword for being part of the World and of the Flesh?
(July 28, 2015 at 4:02 pm)Drich Wrote: Seriously? Do you honestly believe it is easier to be a Christian, than a member of pop culture?
Question not addressed to me, but I'll answer.
1) What the hell is a member of pop culture? (Maybe this was defined earlier in the thread, but I just skimmed.)
2) To respond to this question: do you honestly believe it is easier to be a Christian, than [a non-Christian]? Answer: it depends.
But, the real question:
3) Do you honestly believe it is easier to be a Christian [in the United States], than [a non-Christian in the United States]?
Yes. Unequivocally, yes. You have free reign to practice your religion, you're the large majority, AND you get the psychological comfort of "knowing" there's someone watching out for you, and that dying isn't really the end, and that you're important and the universe was created for you (rather than having to come up with your own meaning as an insignificant part of a cold, uncaring universe), and that the consequences of things on earth aren't really that great, because the end goal is so much bigger than this.
Everyone, Christian or not, American or not, has their own problems. But, as far as we go: yes, it is much, much easier to be a Christian in America than not.
How will we know, when the morning comes, we are still human? - 2D
Don't worry, my friend. If this be the end, then so shall it be.
