Win Prizes Ask an Atheist II

[Gethelred]

Welcome to the Ask an Atheist thread II.

Previous part:

Win Prizes - Ask an Atheist - Shoe's on the other foot now!

Alright, we're going to have a change of tack. As I'm sure you can see, the thread title has been changed to Ask an Atheist. People who have a question to ask of the atheists who populate this thread - more than the christians do - should feel free to ask questions of them. If you've still got...

www.bigfooty.com

Standard board rules apply.

 

[Vdubs]

I exactly said what he meant. Objective and universal moralities don't exist. Aztecs practiced human sacrifice. Muslims practice polygamy, Majority of the indians favor the caste system etc etc.

The world sucks sometimes. Therefore my god exists is his argument.. Not one ****ing hint of logic in this entire god forsaken part of his rambling

Incorrect.
He deduces that he used to be angry that a God would allow atrocities to occur, wars, loss of loved ones, cancer, severe in juries, murder, rape etc. But on further thinking, where does this come from IF THERE IS NO GOD?
That got him thinking.
The rest is history, which I can not go into here, suffice it say that I am an unashamed C S Lewis follower

 

[Total Power]

Incorrect.
He deduces that he used to be angry that a God would allow atrocities to occur, wars, loss of loved ones, cancer, severe in juries, murder, rape etc. But on further thinking, where does this come from IF THERE IS NO GOD?
That got him thinking.
The rest is history, which I can not go into here, suffice it say that I am an unashamed C S Lewis follower

Nope.His answer to the question of evil boils down to "evil exists, but we only know that because good exists, therefore (our) god! Ta Da!" Of all the attempts to answer this question that I've read (omg, so many!) this one just made me wonder if he had a really low IQ and the Narnia books were only good because editors exist. (I don't like them, but many do)

He argued that his god is good, but by his own reasoning above... You can only know good if there's bad according to him, so his god is good in comparison to WHAT or WHOM?

Certainly not cause of the Bible.

 

[Vdubs]

It's illustrative of how people can get lost in something that isn't real.

or find themselves--

 

[Total Power]

Incorrect.
where does this come from IF THERE IS NO GOD?
That got him thinking.
The rest is history, which I can not go into here, suffice it say that I am an unashamed C S Lewis follower

As i said low IQ. Nature! cancer, murder, rape, brutality is in the nature. Nature doesn't give two hoots about whether you are a homo sapien or a chimp. It's the same for everyone.

 

[Vdubs]

Nope.His answer to the question of evil boils down to "evil exists, but we only know that because good exists, therefore (our) god! Ta Da!" Of all the attempts to answer this question that I've read (omg, so many!) this one just made me wonder if he had a really low IQ and the Narnia books were only good because editors exist. (I don't like them, but many do)

He argued that his god is good, but by his own reasoning above... You can only know good if there's bad according to him, so his god is good in comparison to WHAT or WHOM?

Certainly not cause of the Bible.

when you repeatedly question my IQ, I can accept that, but now you mention CS Lewis- that is not on. The guy was certainly a literary genius.

 

[Total Power]

when you repeatedly question my IQ, I can accept that, but now you mention CS Lewis- that is not on. The guy was certainly a literary genius.

Not from what i have read. He is a great writer but not a great thinker. He comes across as a very low IQ individual.

 

[Vdubs]

As i said low IQ. Nature! cancer, murder, rape, brutality is in the nature. Nature doesn't give two hoots about whether you are a homo sapien or a chimp. It's the same for everyone.

Are you for real about IQ?
Have you done an IQ test or 2?
It's not something I'm going to get into here again, just like dick-measuring contests, but let it be known that you should not keep bringing it up- (no pun intended) it's not the answer.

 

[Vdubs]

Not from what i have read. He is a great writer but not a great thinker. He comes across as a very low IQ individual.

Are you for real about IQ?
Have you done an IQ test or 2?
It's not something I'm going to get into here again, just like dick-measuring contests, but let it be known that you should not keep bringing it up- (no pun intended) it's not the answer.

2 books is clearly not enough. He is not perfect, not God, but his works are very influential to the extent that many scholars and Universities pay tribute to him every day, even now, 60 years after his death.

 

[Vdubs]

As i said low IQ. Nature! cancer, murder, rape, brutality is in the nature. Nature doesn't give two hoots about whether you are a homo sapien or a chimp. It's the same for everyone.

Does your dog, or any pet think about the meaning of life?

 

[Total Power]

Are you for real about IQ?
Have you done an IQ test or 2?
It's not something I'm going to get into here again, just like dick-measuring contests, but let it be known that you should not keep bringing it up- (no pun intended) it's not the answer.

His reasonings are not sound. I gave you the reasons above. I can also give you more. lets think about his “Lunatic, Liar or Lord” argument: in brief, Jesus either was who he said he was, or not. If not, he either knew he wasn’t (that is, he lied) or he didn’t know he wasn’t (he was deluded). But, says Lewis, how could a liar live the perfect life that Jesus did? Or how could a lunatic come up with his teaching? This eliminates these two possibilities—therefore he was who he said he was.

He doesn't take into consideration Paul never met Jesus. the key weakness in the argument is this: the only detailed information we have about the life and teaching of Jesus is in the New Testament, which written by Christians to explicitly present him in the best possible light.

There's been no mention of Jesus outside of the Gospels which was written 100 years after his death.

 

[Total Power]

Does your dog, or any pet think about the meaning of life?

Plenty of species can. Recently we found out crows can. They can contemplate death, meaning of life etc.

Ignorance is not an excuse, internet is a vast resource, you can educate yourself.

 

[Vdubs]

Plenty of species can. Recently we found out crows can. They can contemplate death, meaning of life etc.

Ignorance is not an excuse, internet is a vast resource, you can educate yourself.

Interesting you did not mention COWS

His reasonings are not sound. I gave you the reasons above. I can also give you more. lets think about his “Lunatic, Liar or Lord” argument: in brief, Jesus either was who he said he was, or not. If not, he either knew he wasn’t (that is, he lied) or he didn’t know he wasn’t (he was deluded). But, says Lewis, how could a liar live the perfect life that Jesus did? Or how could a lunatic come up with his teaching? This eliminates these two possibilities—therefore he was who he said he was.

He doesn't take into consideration Paul never met Jesus. the key weakness in the argument is this: the only detailed information we have about the life and teaching of Jesus is in the New Testament, which written by Christians to explicitly present him in the best possible light.

There's been no mention of Jesus outside of the Gospels which was written 100 years after his death.

What happened to Paul on the Road To Damascus?
Why his dramatic conversion that is an inspiration to all atheists who convert?

 

[Total Power]

What happened to Paul on the Road To Damascus?

I had written about this serial lies multiple lies..you do not read

Religion - The Bible: Literal, figurative, bulldust?

To clearly delineate conversation between threads, this thread is for specifically bible talk; if you're debating biblical historicity or lack of it, if you're talking interpretation, this is the thread for you. Standard board rules apply. Go nuts.

www.bigfooty.com

Why his dramatic conversion that is an inspiration to all gullible people, who doesn't believe he was a charlatan who convert?

fixed it for you.

Answer my question, Jesus had 12 apostles. Why would Jesus choose a convict/murderer to spread his word?

Please believe i am not lying is what Paul kept telling people. He was trying to save his arse.

Also goes to show why his teachings are in contrast to Jesus'.

As i said C.S Lewis is just not very bright. It's the same story as Moses, Mo and Joseph Smith. All of them were fleeing persecution. And all of them received a revelation. Apparently.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

And yet again, where does it all stem from?

We don't know.

But there is zero reason to believe it was "god".

Ask yourself, which is more healthy for the human race, moving forward: A realistic admission of the limits of our knowledge (but an unswerving commitment to deepening it as much as possible)?

Or a compulsion to create a fantasy figure to attribute unexplained things to without evidence?

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

These are embarrassing and all presuppositional.
Not one of those premises lead to the conclusion “there is a god”.

I agree. Weak as urine.

 

[liz]

Incorrect.
He deduces that he used to be angry that a God would allow atrocities to occur, wars, loss of loved ones, cancer, severe in juries, murder, rape etc. But on further thinking, where does this come from IF THERE IS NO GOD?
That got him thinking.

That’s the second daftest argument I think I’ve ever read.

The daftest is something along the lines of:

• God is perfect
• existing is better than not existing
• since perfect is the best there can be, God must exist.

 

[Vdubs]

We don't know.

But there is zero reason to believe it was "god".

Ask yourself, which is more healthy for the human race, moving forward: A. A realistic admission of the limits of our knowledge (but an unswerving commitment to deepening it as much as possible)?

Or B. a compulsion to create a fantasy figure to attribute unexplained things to without evidence?

prove the zero
A. A no-brainer
B. God can still exist and be part of A.ie prove He is fantasy, beyond all doubt. Living without God is easy, and a copout, and for many, it has adverse sequelae; for you lot, liberation it seems. If you atheists are not trying to deconvert Christians, why inhabit the original thread? Ask a Christian?? Surely some doubt lingers. The bunkum about enjoying an argument is exactly that.

 

[Vdubs]

That’s the second daftest argument I think I’ve ever read.

The daftest is something along the lines of:

• God is perfect
• existing is better than not existing
• since perfect is the best there can be, God must exist.

That line of thinking there that I attributed to Lewis is very abbreviated.

 

[Vdubs]

I agree. Weak as urine.

I ask you devout atheists again, prove the never existence of God. For the duration of your lives, and all your family trees, there has been knowledge of God; He predates everyone you can think of, so it's up to you to disprove Him, without asking a believer any questions.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

I ask you devout atheists again, prove the never existence of God. For the duration of your lives, and all your family trees, there has been knowledge of God; He predates everyone you can think of, so it's up to you to disprove Him, without asking a believer any questions.

I already addressed this above, in post #1359.

 

[Vdubs]

LOL.

Humans exist. We know that for a fact.

The universe exists. We know that for a fact.

Introduce anything else into the equation (like "god"), and the onus is on those doing the introducing to do the proving.

When you were born, people knew about God, same with your whole family tree. That you have "outgrown that tradition" is your choice, not based on evidence. You have faith in that decision because it works for you now.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

When you were born, people knew about God, same with your whole family tree. That you have "outgrown that tradition" is your choice, not based on evidence. You have faith in that decision because it works for you now.

No, they didn't know about god, they believed in god.

Believing something is not knowing a fact.

The bar for fact is high. The bar for belief, by definition, isn't even there.

 

[Vdubs]

No, they didn't know about god, they believed in god.

Believing something is not knowing a fact.

The bar for fact is high. The bar for belief, by definition, isn't even there.

Exactly, you believe in atheism without all the facts and knowledge- you can never disprove God that your family believe in is not real, yet you believe that.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

prove the zero
A. A no-brainer
B. God can still exist and be part of A.ie prove He is fantasy, beyond all doubt. Living without God is easy, and a copout, and for many, it has adverse sequelae; for you lot, liberation it seems. If you atheists are not trying to deconvert Christians, why inhabit the original thread? Ask a Christian?? Surely some doubt lingers. The bunkum about enjoying an argument is exactly that.

Not sure I understand what you're saying here, but in answer to your final question at least, nothing gives me more pleasure than stimulating discussion. Locking intellectual horns is one of the greatest satisfactions in life.

Of course doubt lingers. I said as much in the post you're replying to here. Science never pretends to have all the answers. Your mistake is to assume that's proof of the existence of god.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

Exactly, you believe in atheism without all the facts and knowledge- you can never disprove God that your family believe in is not real, yet you believe that.

Wrong. I don't believe in anything.