The New Atheist Crusaders and their quest for the Unholy Grail
Offline Hey all. It's been a while since I've been on. I appologise, I've been busy.
The title of this forum is the title of a book I just finished reading. It's a catchy title, so I figured it'd be a good way to grab someone's attention on here. The book is written by Becky Garrison.
If her name doesn't sound familiar, that's fine, it shouldn't. So why am I wasting your time telling you about this book? Well, I'm glad you asked. This is a book written by a True Christian. HUH? For all of you who have discussed with me in the past, you understand what I'm talking about and for those of you who haven't you can research my blogs. Caposkia is my name.
Anyway, It's written from the viewpoint of how a true Christian feels about of course the atheists in the world today, but more importantly for you, how she feels about Christians in the world.
This is for all of you arguing with me about how Christians have to be black and white. How you have to follow a religion and there's nothing outside of religion etc. She touches on all of this. I truly think you'll enjoy reading this book and I would like to hear from those of you who have read it if anyone. If not, I"ll wait till someone finishes it. It's not a very long book.
When I first came onto this site, I wanted to discuss directly with those who were involved in the infamous television debate that RRS was involved in about the existence of God with Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron. They didn't have time and the other non-believers I came across were too opinionated to involve themselves in a conversation that made any progress. Instead I got into other debates which for the most part were a lot of fun, but I digress.
Becky mentions this debate as well in her book at the end. This is for all of you on here I've talked to who would not believe me or had other personal issues with the fact that my opinion didn't flow with their idea of a Christian. I will breifly say that I hold her viewpoint when she says that if she was at that debate, she would have "crawled out of that church in shame. "
Simply put, we both agree that both sides put forth deplorable excuses for their side and did not defend their side succesfully. I know I know, many of you will disagree and say that RRS did disprove the existance of God in that debate, but enough with the opinions, I'm saying the other side did just as good of a job proving God. This debate is a poor excuse to not follow Christ and this book talks about those types of Christians.
This book should clarify many misunderstandings of how True Christians are and I hope bring light to a new understanding of our following.
It is written differently than most books, but is an informational peice and uses a lot of researched information. It does focus on the "New Atheists" and is not a book preaching to the masses. As said, it is from the point of view of a True Christian.
enjoy, let me know your thoughts. I would also request, please be respectful in your responses. I'm here to have mature discussions with people.
- Login to post comments
Offline Brian37 wrote:"I don't know" from a theistic view is not a 50/50 proposition as compared to when a scientist says "I don't know"
Nothing is absolute, DUH, but we don't have to cling to the past or treat any absurdity as being anywhere near the same scale as scientific method.
Which is based on the physical and constants. Calling it an absurdity is already concluding... which at this time would be irrational and illogical.
Brian37 wrote:If nothing is absolute, then the earth is flat because scientists admit that there is no 100% absolute.
So.. you're saying that if nothing is for certain... then we should all come to our own conclusion and deny any outside evidence against it... Sure why not. It's what you keep trying to claim i do. if that's what works for you, go for it.
Technicalities are your specialty right? If you want to go there, the Earth isn't round either.
Brian37 wrote:I am not going to claim that I am going to get a blow job from Angolina Jolie. It "technically isn't impossible" because we both exist. But anyone placing their bets on that happening might as well believe in pink unicorns.
"So you're saying there's a chance" DUMB AND DUMBER!
Be it that Millions of people in the world beileve in the Christian God... and I will put money on the fact that less than 1/1000 of that population percentage I'm sure has even met Angolina jolie. Statistically speaking from your example, it is then logical to bet on the possibility of the existence of a metaphyiscal being be it that the odds of winning the powerball are much much less.
There certainly are people that exist that I will never meet. BUT I'm not claiming that ANY human being in human history that has ever existed, including the ones I have never met or will never meet, are capbable of hocus pocus or the product of a disimbodied being, or a magical smurf, or a pink unicorn or any absurd claim.
Humans are humans and humans have always made up crap and been capable of believing that crap. Anjolina Jolie exists, sure, and there WILL be people who will have never meet her or know of her existence. SURE. But if claimed that she was the product of Allah or Thor, or could fart a Lamborghini out of her ass, any sane person would want to have me committed.
It never occurs to you that the bible was written at at time of ignorance by people who merely wanted a super hero to save them and were competing with the surrounding cultures of the time and were merely successful at marketing their book. Whatever tangential figures or places in human history that may or may not have existed have nothing to do with magic being real.
The earth was not made in 6 days. Muslims won't be saved by Allah, and Thor did not make lighting. Just because some morons put it in a book and believed does not make it true.
Peter Pan speaks of London but you don't believe that little boys fly like that. We see Superman flying around New York(a real city) yet you don't believe a man can fly like that. So sayin Jesus existed is a bullshit argument and wouldn't matter to me if he did(most likely not), but FOR ARGUMENT'S SAKE ONLY, still does not prove that a magical fictional daddy made him as a scapegoat so we could spend eternity in an afterlife.
The fact is there has NEVER been any human EVER that has special powers or is special to a non-existent super hero. It is all made up bullshit, yours and all others in human history. You simply got suckered into buying into one claim because the idea of a super hero swooping you off the tracks appeals to you.
You "Jesus existed"
Me, "That is distraction and meaningless even if it were true".
EVERY HUMAN EVER has done the same thing without magic. They are born and then die. I am sorry that isn't comforting, but that is reality and there is nothing else to life.
I am quite sure of the 6 billion you could find people who have never heard of George Washington and certainly neither you or I met him. But I would flat out laugh in your face and call you nuts if you said he was the product of a special deity(by any name).
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
- Login to post comments
Offline Stop it. All you are saying is that if you want to believe in Jesus you can. DUH! Your problem is that we have brains.
Oh... you do... well. that's a whole different thing then.
What is your excuse for those who do have brains, use them, and yet believe?
"Allah is with those who seek him"
"Yahweh is with those who seek him"
No different. If you really want to buy an absurd claim you will. Your problem is that we won't/don't allow our brains to fall out and accept a naked assertion.
and yet you expect me to accept it from you...
You honestly expect me to hear. I cant' fart a car out of my ass.. there is no God. and for me to go.. Oh... i guess he's right... and that's it huh?
Of course if you want to believe an absurd claim you will. It seems you have without any logical reasoning and people do that all the time. I don't blame you. It is the easy way out. Let me know when you want to start thinking. We'll make progress then 
Jesus is not "shy" anymore than he is an elf or a unicorn. Humans ARE capable and always have been capable of making up stories and selling them as fact. If I want to believe in a super hero named Jesus, sure, I guess I could, but why?
...and that's the pivotal point that we're trying to get past. Why. Why would you want to follow him any more if he did allow you to fart a car?
The book that claims such a person existed is a convoluted pile of garbage full of logical fallacies, scientific absurdedy and moral repugnancy. So even IF a man named Jesus existed, that still would not prove his parlor tricks of him or his "daddy" are repeatable or falsifiable, much less moral.
naked assertions again? or do you have something to back that up this time.
yes, can't prove a negative. It's one thing to say I haven't seen enough reason to believe. it's another thing to conclude as you did without evidence. that would be a perfect example of naked assertion. At least I'm willing to ask you what angle you'd like to go in. Then when illogical reasoning comes up, to confront you about it with a logical means of explanation.
Are you willing to do that yet? let's start with support for your belief. then we'll go from there.
The daddy depicted in this book goes out of it's way to oversee suffering with folded arms, condones violence in his name, keeps us divided by hiding in the shadows and in the end it all ends up in an orgy of violence where we all fight over him and trample over the "outsiders" to get into his ever lasting club.
in other words, people are innocent of any of that... it must be all God's doing. I fear this might go back to the free will discussion, but we'll see. For you to believe that, you must be a perfect person. No mistakes ever huh. nothing you believed was good at the time that you look back on and say oops?
If the bible were taken for the horrible episode of Jerry Springer it should be taken as, it would be laughable, the problem is you and others still sell it which is sad in our day of doctors and Ipods and computers.
I still don't know what you think we're selling. I'm not asking you to buy anything. You came on to this forum of your own accord if you remember. You're still here of your own accord. you can walk away at any time. I didn't seek you as someone who's selling something would.
It is 2010 not 329. You simply don't want to consider that you bought a myth and a horrible book with a horrible plot with an malevolent head super hero who is selfish desire is for us to suffer so he can have his ass kissed.
do you ever get tired of being redundant? Spinning in circles may be fun, but if you stay on too long, you puke.
What makes sense is that YOU simply buy the claim that such a god exists and want to gloss over all the violence depicted in that pile of trash.
yea, that's exactly what I've done. Quote me please.
Lemme try again.... eh.. redundancy can be fun when no progress if foreseen.
What makes sense is that YOU simply buy the claim that such a god doesn't exist and want to assume that if he did exist that all the violence depicted in the world would not exist and that he's a big Carebear in the sky.
For God to be real, he must be a big fuzzywuzzy and everyone would live in a warm bubbly bliss eating cake and icecream for breakfast every day and floating aimlessly about by noon... if there even was such a need for time and food.
hehe... you're right, redundancy is fun and ignorance is bliss!
- Login to post comments
Offline caposkia wrote:Brian37 wrote:"I don't know" from a theistic view is not a 50/50 proposition as compared to when a scientist says "I don't know"
Nothing is absolute, DUH, but we don't have to cling to the past or treat any absurdity as being anywhere near the same scale as scientific method.
Which is based on the physical and constants. Calling it an absurdity is already concluding... which at this time would be irrational and illogical.
Brian37 wrote:If nothing is absolute, then the earth is flat because scientists admit that there is no 100% absolute.
So.. you're saying that if nothing is for certain... then we should all come to our own conclusion and deny any outside evidence against it... Sure why not. It's what you keep trying to claim i do. if that's what works for you, go for it.
Technicalities are your specialty right? If you want to go there, the Earth isn't round either.
Brian37 wrote:I am not going to claim that I am going to get a blow job from Angolina Jolie. It "technically isn't impossible" because we both exist. But anyone placing their bets on that happening might as well believe in pink unicorns.
"So you're saying there's a chance" DUMB AND DUMBER!
Be it that Millions of people in the world beileve in the Christian God... and I will put money on the fact that less than 1/1000 of that population percentage I'm sure has even met Angolina jolie. Statistically speaking from your example, it is then logical to bet on the possibility of the existence of a metaphyiscal being be it that the odds of winning the powerball are much much less.
There certainly are people that exist that I will never meet. BUT I'm not claiming that ANY human being in human history that has ever existed, including the ones I have never met or will never meet, are capbable of hocus pocus or the product of a disimbodied being, or a magical smurf, or a pink unicorn or any absurd claim.
Humans are humans and humans have always made up crap and been capable of believing that crap. Anjolina Jolie exists, sure, and there WILL be people who will have never meet her or know of her existence. SURE. But if claimed that she was the product of Allah or Thor, or could fart a Lamborghini out of her ass, any sane person would want to have me committed.
It never occurs to you that the bible was written at at time of ignorance by people who merely wanted a super hero to save them and were competing with the surrounding cultures of the time and were merely successful at marketing their book. Whatever tangential figures or places in human history that may or may not have existed have nothing to do with magic being real.
The earth was not made in 6 days. Muslims won't be saved by Allah, and Thor did not make lighting. Just because some morons put it in a book and believed does not make it true.
Peter Pan speaks of London but you don't believe that little boys fly like that. We see Superman flying around New York(a real city) yet you don't believe a man can fly like that. So sayin Jesus existed is a bullshit argument and wouldn't matter to me if he did(most likely not), but FOR ARGUMENT'S SAKE ONLY, still does not prove that a magical fictional daddy made him as a scapegoat so we could spend eternity in an afterlife.
The fact is there has NEVER been any human EVER that has special powers or is special to a non-existent super hero. It is all made up bullshit, yours and all others in human history. You simply got suckered into buying into one claim because the idea of a super hero swooping you off the tracks appeals to you.
You "Jesus existed"
Me, "That is distraction and meaningless even if it were true".
EVERY HUMAN EVER has done the same thing without magic. They are born and then die. I am sorry that isn't comforting, but that is reality and there is nothing else to life.
I am quite sure of the 6 billion you could find people who have never heard of George Washington and certainly neither you or I met him. But I would flat out laugh in your face and call you nuts if you said he was the product of a special deity(by any name).
yes, very conclusive as always from you.... poorly researched, but quite conclusive. As you always ask of me when confronted with any conclusive statement. where's your research and evidence for your conclusion.
For you to claim that you're actually using your brain, you must have research you can present... otherwise I fear that any rational thinking person would have to claim that you're crying wolf.
- Login to post comments
Offline Cappy cappy cappy,
You merely like your Jesus hero but have caught in a convoluted mind trap thinking that you are actually thinking. I am trying to WAKE YOU UP>
There is no super hero out to save humanity, NONE, ZIP ZILTCH! Not yours not any.
It is that simple. What you have done is confused the history of myth making as being actual history because the idea of someone swooping you off the train tracks is appealing to you. That is all that is going on here. YOU are merely banging your head against the wall wanting it to be real.
There is nothing out there involved in our mundane finite existence. There is nothing outside of humans capable of caring about humans. Wanting that is not evidence of anything except wanting it.
WHAT WE DO have evidence of are the lengths people will go, just like you here now, trying to sell something false because it "feels real" because the idea appeals to them. That is all you are doing. The sooner your realize that the better off you will be.
You are simply deep in it, thats it. God is a stupid childish concept and nothing more than you wanting a super hero. It was when the Egyptians claimed the sun was a thinking caring being, and your Jesus hero is nothing but a currently held popular myth. Face it and you will be much happier and you wont have to continue to defend your convoluted tripe.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
- Login to post comments
Offline jcgadfly wrote:Are the millions of believers due to God or his pitchmen being good workers?
Ah, good question. This is when it goes beyond the pitch to see what the 'pitchmen' are sacrificing for their cause. Be it that many have sacrificed their lives for this. I'm guessing it's more than just a paycheck they're promoting for.
jcgadfly wrote:As for your wife/girlfriend analogy - yeah we worked to get together. Once our intentions were made clear, though, she didn't play hard to get. "Boom here I am! now love me!" is exactly the game God plays in the OT - why does he become so reticent later?
i of course will ask to what you're referencing to here. I don't believe he's any different now than he was. He claims not to be Biblically.
The way I see it, as long as you're still making an effort to strengthen the relationship, God doesn't play hard to get either. One would have to get to that point first. I'm sure once she stopped playing hard to get, it wasn't a signal for you to stop improving the relationship or working at keeping it going.
jcgadfly wrote:Wouldn't you think that a God who knew his followers would have the burden of proof when witnessing would be kind enough to provide them the incontrovertible proof they needed instead of letting them flap in the breeze?
A true witness will have the burden of proof in their walk. The Bible even states that you will know his true followers in a crowd. So many people claim that it's a fantasy or dreamworld that we hold onto for comfort, but The Bible says followers will be slandered, persecuted put to death, etc. for the sake of God. Why would anyone possibly encourage others to follow such a God or continue to follow themselves when such horrific outcomes are likely?
jcgadfly wrote:Why do you have such a problem with people wanting an omnimax metaphysical being manifesting itself in a physical way? He's done it in the past, hasn't he? Are you saying we know too much now that God can't fool us with parlor tricks like he did back in the day?
I beleive Jesus addressed this. He was proof that "parlor tricks" didn't work and of course wouldn't work today. Many claimed they'd believe if he showed them magic. He explained that's not what it's about. when he's done it in the past, he's only revieled himself to those who already knew him.
it also shows that those people don't want to take the effort in seeking a relationship with Him. I understand that he wants his followers to make the effort.
1. I was talking about the modern pitchmen but OK. The early pitchmen were killed because they ticked of the powers that be. This is interesting because Paul told them and other believers to respect them because they were selected by God. And yes many people will risk significant amounts for comfort (be it real or contrived - here or in the hereafter).
2. I was referring to the signs and wonders of the OT. God is a sign and wonder producing fool in those books. Jesus was less flashy but still pulled the occasional miracle (this is why I have a problem with your last statement - Jesus did do public "magic". His early pitchmen had some miracles recorded for them as well. Nowadays - it's next to nada. Are we looking too closely?
3. See number 1. People will put up with all sorts of things if they believe they will be comforted/the bad guys will get their comeuppance (even if it's in eternity). Also, if I have to pick out true followers based on how they live their lives - I have never seen one.
4. Isn't that a one-way friendship? If I'm seeking a relationship with someone, I'd like them to be doing the same. God seems to be expecting people to come to him while resting on his laurels from 2000 years ago. Is it a case of "I did so much for you back then I shouldn't have to do jack now"?
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
- Login to post comments
It would be very reasonable to claim that God (assuming for a moment that He exists) would have a choice. It sounds like you and I are in agreement here. So the question comes then because many seem to ask the same question. let's assume again that the God of the Bible exists. How would one expect me to "prove" he exists? What would you accept as evidence logically?
I'm assuming at this point that you and I agree that an empirical study wouldn't be a logical mode for studying the existence of a god.
That's it. I've lost all confidence in you. Not because you wont' believe in God because I know that's the angle you'll take from that statement, but because you can't think logically for one second to save your life!
Statistics and historical congruency tests have been done. You seem to think i don't have evidence and yet you don't want to work with me to come up with a logical means of going about it.
I actually thought maybe we'd be getting somewhere with you when you suggested an empirical study and gave such details. It was clear to me and to others here that it was a very illogical means of studying God. I was willing to play along and see if you could actually come up with answers to the quesitons that came with your challenge. You again conveniently avoided those questions probably knowing that you had no logical or reasonable answer to them and of course are going back to your comfort zone again claiming I'm wrong and your right with no reasonable basis on your part for your claim.
Do you not see it yet? I have been open and willing to go with anything you have presented unless blatently illogical where I'd heckle you for it. When I challenge you to work with me on discussing our beliefs, you do exactly what you try to blame on me for doing. You curl up into a little ball in the corner and say.
'you have no evidence and God can't be real. God's just in your imagination... trust me, I know.'
Cap says 'why do you think so'
Brian comes back with, "quit coming up with your naked assertions, Where's the God DNA? What proof do you have?"
cap says, 'what evidences will you accept? How do you expect me to get God DNA?"
Brian 'You don't have evidence. You can't come up with God DNA because God doesn't exist."
Cap 'but let's assume He does exist. how would I come up with God DNA?'
Brian 'your God doesn't exist and you're just to scared to admit it.'
cap 'you're avoiding the question'
I think if you look back on the many pages of this forum, you'll see a redundant pattern of our conversations very closely resembling that above. So. Whereto from here? Honestly Brian, if you don't want to believe, I don't care. It's your choice. The fact that you're still talking to me leads me to believe that you are curious... at least about me if not why I believe.
I've already told you and everyone I'm on here so that you all can 'challenge what i know'. I'm disappointed with your efforts to say the least. You talk to me with as much support for your belief as the Jehovah's Witnesses do for theirs. When a JW gets backed into a corner, they;
1. change the subject (or ignore the question)
2. come up with excuses
3. run you through the Bible so fast your head will spin in hopes that you might forget what you asked.
I say 2 out of the 3 listed above can easily apply to you. Would you disagree? If you do, I need a good explanation on why.
P.s. Again don't think any of this was said out of anger or frustration. I had no emotion toward any of these statements. The top was a bit of sarcasm because I'm sure there's more there than what you're showing.
The problem arises that the individual Christian is the sole arbiter of whether God chose not to do something or couldn't do it.
I don't really see a follower of God making a judgment that makes his God look bad.
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
How would you get God DNA? "whatever you ask for in prayer, believe that you have received it, and it will be yours" (Mark 11:24)
Now you know how to get it - why do I think that you will say that you asked and God chose not to do it?
Because God doesn't make these decisions - Christians do.
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
Why is that even a factor? If God is real, is it not logical to conclude that he has a choice? and if he has a choice, what significant event would we try to manifest in order for us to guarantee that if there is a God he will choose to cooperate with our test?
These are all logical unbias questions.
I have not prayed for God DNA because I don't even know what that would consist of. I'm sorry to say again that I expect you know me better than that from these forums yet again.
Let's say you prayed for God DNA and it was given to you. First would you know you recieved it? What would it be? It couldn't be something physical so how would you contain it or study it? Would you just assume it was your imagination and dismiss it? Keep in mind you don't really comprehend anything that doesn't have some sort of physical attribute to it.
Is it really a logical thing to ask for and why?
If you can explain to me how these things could come to pass, I'll see what might happen. if not, then I wouldn't know any more than you would and would have no way of understanding how to pray for such a thing if it even existed in the first place.
Simple - we can't say for sure whether God can't do something or chose not to because we have no direct access to God to ask him.
All we have is the word of Christians who have a vested interest in keeping what they worship in a positive light. Rather than suffer the cognitive dissonance involved with thinking "God didn't do this - maybe he can't. What else can't he do?" they simply claim that God chose not to do it (even though he really could - trust me on this).
Basically the Christians make the decision for God - taking him out of the equation.
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
That's Brian's point - you can't prove his existence anymore than we can prove his non-existence.
Yet you and other Christians claim to know that God exists - Knowledge comes with the ability to back itself up. If you have knowledge you can provide the proof or the evidence. If you can't provide the evidence or the proof, a logical person would have to question and say "Maybe I don't know whether God exists"
Unfortunately, the danger of knowledge for the Christian is that it removes the need for faith and belief. If you know something you don't need the lesser standard of belief.
Christianity runs on faith and belief - knowledge about God would spell its doom. That's why the tendency is either to not seek knowledge or suppress it as heresy.
I thought you knew me better and would be willing to think more deeply. You guys are the ones with the guarantees from your God - you also have the rationalizations when the guarantess fail.
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
We would need a reliable means of identifying God or the effects of God -- some sort of God Detector. We'd need something that is neither reasonably explained more prosaically nor simply an appeal to ignorance. I don't know what that would be (I'm not worried about that; it's a burden that belongs to those who claim to have rational grounds for believing in God) but I suspect that, if God existed, he would know how to do it. So, the question that springs to my mind is this: why is God so shy?
Reality is the graveyard of the gods.
God is only bold in his dominance in the same way Isis and Apollo were once top dog. The same way McDonnalds doesn't care how much fat people they produce from their sales. Gods only exist as long as they can be sold.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
Well, proof is for pure mathematics (and the production of breads and liquor). Outside of that, in a probabilistic universe, we have to settle for what is most probably true or untrue. I think we can say with varying degrees of confidence that various god concepts have no referents. I find that, generally, the more specifically defined the god concept, the greater is the degree of certainty one can reasonably have in saying that the concept is without a referent.
For example, conservative evangelical Christians have a lot of very specific ideas about their God, which makes it relatively easy to show that there ain't no such critter. If they say, "You can't be sure!" I think we can safely respond that we're about as certain of it as one can be of anything.
On the other hand, very liberal Christians are quite difficult to pin down regarding the nature of their deity. A nebulous notion is difficult to refute definitively but one shouldn't interpret the lack of certainty in the refutation as an admission that such a being might actually exist. Rather, I think one can legitimately simply dismiss the belief because of it's nebulousness and the lack of supporting evidence. Ultimately, they, like the fundamentalists, have to fall back on faith.
Once they are able to acknowledge that theirs is a faith position rather than a rational and evidentiary one, we can safely assign that position to the realm of fairy tales and it has become not a matter of what is and isn't true but, rather, a matter of values. They value things like faith and wishes and tradition over reason and evidence while we aspire to do the opposite.
Reality is the graveyard of the gods.
Actually, that's not quite right. Some god concepts simply are logically in error and are without referents in the same sense that two plus two does not equal eleven.
For example, the existence of evil makes it impossible for there to exist a God that is wholly good and omnipotent and omniscient. (Yeah, I'm aware of a variety of theodicies but I have yet to encounter one that stands up.)
Reality is the graveyard of the gods.
"I don't know" from a theistic view is not a 50/50 proposition as compared to when a scientist says "I don't know"
Nothing is absolute, DUH, but we don't have to cling to the past or treat any absurdity as being anywhere near the same scale as scientific method.
If nothing is absolute, then the earth is flat because scientists admit that there is no 100% absolute.
I am not going to claim that I am going to get a blow job from Angolina Jolie. It "technically isn't impossible" because we both exist. But anyone placing their bets on that happening might as well believe in pink unicorns.
"So you're saying there's a chance" DUMB AND DUMBER!
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
well, the Bible would be a good place to start if in fact He is real. it gives to me a pretty detailed description of His abilities.
I think the more logical question would be why would he choose X?
That would be the dispensationalist way and not the true following of Christ.
No, i think brians point is you cant' prove his existance therefore He does not exist.
My question to you is where to from here? I beleive he exists. you dont'. You seem to agree with Brian that I can't prove his existence anymore than you can prove his non-existence. Makes sense to me at least through scientific reproductive means.
Do we just part ways from here and just assume that each other is wrong and leave it at that? Or do we try to figure out a way around this?
I have taken lots of time attempting different approaches to the reasons why I believe. I have also learned from those experiences, it takes too much time to figure out the avenue the other side will take hold of. therefore, I will go way back to the start of the confusion and ask the same question again. To which logical focus would you accept for the reason why I believe in God? There are many to choose from. What would make sense to you? We can discuss from there.
I've always said it takes faith in something to believe anything. Of course faith plays a roll in my belief. Faith alone will keep me believing in Santa Clause. A relationship based faith helps me understand my faith is based on something real.
Speaking of the religious sects again. Sure. that's what makes them tick... now what about the Christian scientists or historians etc.? The ones whos job is to seek knowlege and have to face the truths and yet still believe? Can't claim all of them supress it.
I may have misunderstood you intention. what rationalizations and what guarantees that have failed are you refering to?
Well, there is a reason why there are millions of believers out there. My assumption is that he's doing just fine.
I wouldn't say he's shy, but he as said in the Bible, is with those who seek him.
I will add too that he seeks a specific type of relationship with each person. One that actually requires an effort on your part to initiate. think about it with our personal relationships. Which ones last longer and are healthier, the ones you work hard at to establish and perfect, or the ones you make the other side do all the work for?
right now everyone's been expecting God to say. 'Boom! here I am... now love me!' When we all know it doesn't work that way in real life. I'll be pretty frikken impressed if someone on here can honestly say it was how they got with their wife or girlfriend.
I get the idea that the burden is on me for proof. As i said to Jcadfly, I have tried to initiate, but it's so much easier for me to ask you where the focus should be. It has been very intreguing that when confronted with that simple question, mainly irrationalities get flung back.
It's like someone trying to find me in Florida when they know I live in California. It just doesn't make sense. You know that God is a meta-physica being and yet how many here have continuously resorted to physical evidence for His existence or a physical means of study?
Well put. Religion has that effect sometimes.
True.. now what of those who won't stick their head in the sand and actually think and confront the issue?
Why does faith and rationality have to be separate? does it not take faith in the source to believe it actually happened? Take history for example. You can't empirically prove that certain people or happenings in history actually occured, but because you have faith in the source, you believe. Was that not a rational means of faith?
If you're going to try to go the angle of supporting documents in history. There are a lot of supporting followings in history that would confirm the existence of this particular God if the seeker had faith in the sources. Same type of faith required to believe in any historical claim.
I'm curious on what those theodicies are. Sure evil exists, but free choice was the reason. People saw that as a flaw, but then again, what kind of relationship or life would you have without it other than what you have with your home pc or mac.
Are the millions of believers due to God or his pitchmen being good workers?
As for your wife/girlfriend analogy - yeah we worked to get together. Once our intentions were made clear, though, she didn't play hard to get. "Boom here I am! now love me!" is exactly the game God plays in the OT - why does he become so reticent later?
Wouldn't you think that a God who knew his followers would have the burden of proof when witnessing would be kind enough to provide them the incontrovertible proof they needed instead of letting them flap in the breeze?
Why do you have such a problem with people wanting an omnimax metaphysical being manifesting itself in a physical way? He's done it in the past, hasn't he? Are you saying we know too much now that God can't fool us with parlor tricks like he did back in the day?
"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin
Stop it. All you are saying is that if you want to believe in Jesus you can. DUH! Your problem is that we have brains.
"Allah is with those who seek him"
"Yahweh is with those who seek him"
No different. If you really want to buy an absurd claim you will. Your problem is that we won't/don't allow our brains to fall out and accept a naked assertion.
Jesus is not "shy" anymore than he is an elf or a unicorn. Humans ARE capable and always have been capable of making up stories and selling them as fact. If I want to believe in a super hero named Jesus, sure, I guess I could, but why?
The book that claims such a person existed is a convoluted pile of garbage full of logical fallacies, scientific absurdedy and moral repugnancy. So even IF a man named Jesus existed, that still would not prove his parlor tricks of him or his "daddy" are repeatable or falsifiable, much less moral.
The daddy depicted in this book goes out of it's way to oversee suffering with folded arms, condones violence in his name, keeps us divided by hiding in the shadows and in the end it all ends up in an orgy of violence where we all fight over him and trample over the "outsiders" to get into his ever lasting club.
If the bible were taken for the horrible episode of Jerry Springer it should be taken as, it would be laughable, the problem is you and others still sell it which is sad in our day of doctors and Ipods and computers.
It is 2010 not 329. You simply don't want to consider that you bought a myth and a horrible book with a horrible plot with an malevolent head super hero who is selfish desire is for us to suffer so he can have his ass kissed.
What makes sense is that YOU simply buy the claim that such a god exists and want to gloss over all the violence depicted in that pile of trash.
"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under Brian James Rational Poet, @Brianrrs37 on Twitter and my blog at www.brianjamesrationalpoet.blog
Which is based on the physical and constants. Calling it an absurdity is already concluding... which at this time would be irrational and illogical.
So.. you're saying that if nothing is for certain... then we should all come to our own conclusion and deny any outside evidence against it... Sure why not. It's what you keep trying to claim i do. if that's what works for you, go for it.
Technicalities are your specialty right? If you want to go there, the Earth isn't round either.
Be it that Millions of people in the world beileve in the Christian God... and I will put money on the fact that less than 1/1000 of that population percentage I'm sure has even met Angolina jolie. Statistically speaking from your example, it is then logical to bet on the possibility of the existence of a metaphyiscal being be it that the odds of winning the powerball are much much less.
Ah, good question. This is when it goes beyond the pitch to see what the 'pitchmen' are sacrificing for their cause. Be it that many have sacrificed their lives for this. I'm guessing it's more than just a paycheck they're promoting for.
i of course will ask to what you're referencing to here. I don't believe he's any different now than he was. He claims not to be Biblically.
The way I see it, as long as you're still making an effort to strengthen the relationship, God doesn't play hard to get either. One would have to get to that point first. I'm sure once she stopped playing hard to get, it wasn't a signal for you to stop improving the relationship or working at keeping it going.
A true witness will have the burden of proof in their walk. The Bible even states that you will know his true followers in a crowd. So many people claim that it's a fantasy or dreamworld that we hold onto for comfort, but The Bible says followers will be slandered, persecuted put to death, etc. for the sake of God. Why would anyone possibly encourage others to follow such a God or continue to follow themselves when such horrific outcomes are likely?
I beleive Jesus addressed this. He was proof that "parlor tricks" didn't work and of course wouldn't work today. Many claimed they'd believe if he showed them magic. He explained that's not what it's about. when he's done it in the past, he's only revieled himself to those who already knew him.
it also shows that those people don't want to take the effort in seeking a relationship with Him. I understand that he wants his followers to make the effort.