|
Navigation
The Rational Response Squad is a group of atheist activists who impact society by changing the way we view god belief. This site is a haven for those who are pushing back against the norm, and a place for believers of gods to have their beliefs exposed as false should they want to try their hand at confronting us. Buy any item on AMAZON, and we'll use the small commission to help improve critical thinking. Buy a Laptop -- Apple |
Why do Theists care about atheists??
Posted on: February 19, 2007 - 11:46pm
  Offline
Why do Theists care about atheists??
If God has a planned and works in mysterious ways then he must have planned atheism, right??
|
|
Copyright Rational Response Squad 2006-2024.
|
Fucking frightening.
You've essentially completely dodged answering any of my points and said, the innocent people who get fucked had it coming. You're nearly as morally bankrupt as the figment you worship.
I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
If I were God, I would notIf I were God, I would not have let hundreds of thousands of people die in such a way. His indifference was cruel, if he had the power to change things. And you are saying he does have the power to change things. If anything, he caused millions upon millions who did have faith in your brand of theism to doubt his existence even more.
Ethics and aesthetics are one
-Wittgenstein
The science discussion is with the other guy. And I don't care if you think its cruel.
I honestly don't know why God let that many people die.
The above is why everyone doesn't subscribe to your theism. If God exists, he seems to be cruel, not good. Why would I worship someone who idly watched so much suffering happen?
Ethics and aesthetics are one
-Wittgenstein
Not "wrong" but flawed from a caring humanist point of view, we are trying to understand how sometimes a omnipotent being who supposedly "loves" "his creation" would allow such tragedy and human suffering. The reasoning "we do not understand his nature" is not convincing enough for the rest of us.
I don't believe I dodged your points and I'm going to ask you kindly to stop insulting me personally.
Here's the thing. It might not have even been God. Lucifer has his share of bad things going on too!
Let me ask you this:
If you were God, would you help out the people who call you fake and cruel and evil?
again how is saving the lives of innocent civilians who were shot helping killers?
i would definitely help the people who didn't do anything wrong in the first place (i.e. the children in the schools whose lives were lost, who did not intend on dying during those tragedies)
Ethics and aesthetics are one
-Wittgenstein
You completely failed to respond to my post to you on the last page. Other people got quoted replies, I got ignored. And I have not insulted you personally, I compared your morality to your god's - how is that insulting?
And who created Lucifer? Who KNEW what Lucifer would do before creating him? You've still got the SAME problem you've FAILED to address throughout this thread.
YES. If I had such power and knowledge, I wouldn't be a petty twat about it. What kind of all-loving, all-knowing, all-powerful being has such an inferiorty complex that he demands his creation kiss his ass? Personally, I'd have more respect for people who acted morally and decently out of kindness and empathy and reason, rather than those who did so mearly out of hope of reward and fear of punishment.
I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
If I read right, and I do believe I did, did you just say you wanted to help the killers?
And who created the weather and has the power to controll it? Can you imagine a world without natural disasters? I can.
I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
Now you're simply being obtuse.
He clearly was commenting on how, if god exists, he allows the freewill of evil people to destroy innocent people. We could have freewill without the ability to murder the innocent, one is not predicated on the other.
I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
You said I was morally bankrupt. I do believe that is insulting.
And explain my problem.
God created Lucifer. Since you know the answer, don't ask the question. If the people who did die in the Tsunami were Christians, then they have it better than you now.
And you wonder why I called you morally bankrupt (rollseyes).
I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
Yeah, I'm morally bankrupt because I believe the Christians who died in the Tsunami are now in Heaven...
[she]...
Ethics and aesthetics are one
-Wittgenstein
You said more than that. "If the people who did die in the Tsunami were Christians, then they have it better than you now."
IOW - the Christians are better off dead, and those who weren't are being tortured as we speak. How is this a practical or tennable notion of morallity? It isn't.
It's the sort of sentiment that gets people look forward to death, to avoid planning for the future, to avoid providing for those they leave behind or who will come after them. Why be responsible with the environment when Jesus is coming to take us all home any day now? Why work to resolve conflict when that very conflict could be what we need to kick off the Rapture?
That sort of thing sends shivers up my spine.
I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
My bad, Miss
I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
Pay attention to what I wrote. I was stating that they are better off than YOU. Not better off than when they were on Earth (though they are.)
no, the reason your morality comes into question is not because of your belief in the after life. It is because you fail to see the cruelty of an omnipotent being letting thousands upon of thousands of people die and suffer senselessly.
Ethics and aesthetics are one
-Wittgenstein
Ok i think some of your arguments are begging the question, i will address this question that i'm thinking of here.
Why does any omnipotent and omniesient being need to be worshiped? How can he have needs anyway? a need is according to answers.com :
So how can an omnipent being have a necessity? He can just create that necessity for himself and thereofre he has no needs that he himself cannot fulfill.
Before you say,"But he wants us to love him and therefore its not a need." All wants have a basis in some need (http://www.solbaram.org/articles/motvtnsu.html) check this link for why that is, and as I believe i have established an omnipetent being cannot have a need, so therefore he can not have any wants either.
Wow, you managed to completely miss my point, fail to address said point and contradict yourself and admit to it all at once.
Impressive.
I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
I can't discuss anything about this kind of stuff without there being one jackass... Apparently you missed MY point.
Insult, Insult, Insult
When in Rome...
Dylan, you're actually the only one who has made a personal attack. In anycase your theism seems to necessitate a cruel God; this is still the point, and this is a huge barrier to anyone hoping to find solace in this faith;
ztneo-- i am accepting Dylan's premises as I understand them, and trying to show that even then (or especially then?) there are severe problems with the deity he's presented which not only make his worldview unreasonable, but also cruel and unjust.
Ethics and aesthetics are one
-Wittgenstein
I am accepting some of his premises. Spefically about the properties of god. but i do not accept that the god that he speaks of can have a want or a need.
yeah, you're right.
I did, but so did other people. The whole insult thing ends here.
And if you think He's cruel because you can't possibly think of a reason why His actions could be just, its your own fault.
Can you think of a reason his action or lack of action in disasters where innocents, children believers and non-believer alike suffer is just? I am sure you will say we cannot understand the will of god but I say these arguements make no real sensible case for a creator much less an omipotent, omniscent all loving being.
Maybe God is mad at people like non-believers and people who act on that.
I honestly wouldn't know because God doesn't really discuss these things with me...
So again, I will ask... He punishes believers and non-believers alike... women, children, whole families, animals and all innocents alike? I really do not see what point you are trying to get across. No, no one here has understanding of this supposed god's will, that is probably a huge part of what led us to non-belief.
What is your point... or what is your question?
I don't I'm defending myself.
What's your point? All your saying is that you don't believe. And I don't really care.
Whatever caused the tsunami, apparently God just wanted to let it pass for whatever reason. The point is, God let them die, for His own reasons.
That's my point. Maybe now, even though I've said this before, you will stop asking questions that you know the answer to.
You think He's cruel because you can't fathom what good killing 200,000 people could bring. To be honest, neither can I. I don't know God's agenda, but I'm sure He knows what He's doing.
Or.......... maybe he just does not exist!!!
can you at least try to understand how a lot of people can't accept these aspects of a God (a loving God who wants to be loved by his creation) as easy as you can?
'for whatever reason' is not sufficient for me personally. that's why i think that this paradigm of how the world works is prone to confusion, misunderstanding, sadness, and destructiveness.
Ethics and aesthetics are one
-Wittgenstein
Dylan:
The reason your logic is flawed is quite simple, and is why religion is illogical and irrational. Here is your logic.
Situation: Man kills kid.
Man had free will and will know be kicked out of heaven and placed in hell, unless somehow he is possibly forgiven.
Kid: God works in mysterious ways.
This is so circular, unscientific, and ridiculous. For every flaw in religion you come up with some absurd reasoning as an explanation and change your explanations to fit the situation.
Evolution says that every single being evolved, not just humans and the ones where this explanation may make sense.
"Those who think they know don't know. Those that know they don't know, know."
So dylan care to respond to my post ?
That's not my logic, and even if it was, God exists outside of logic.
Man kills kid? If man is saved, man goes to Heaven. Hopefully, kid is saved.
I don't even know where you got "Kid: God works in mysterious ways."
Its time for you to be rational and think to yourself how on EARTH could this planet, other planets, and even you could be an accident. Everything is so finely tuned and yet you still believe that it is a coincidence.
TELL ME WHERE I CHANGED MY EXPLANATION.
TELL ME WHERE MY ABSURD REASONING IS.
(Also, you have to remember, this isn't even my religion. I'm a Gnostic Christian and that, by far, differs greatly.)
To mouse: Yes, I do understand. However, I don't really need to base MY thoughts on a leap of faith, because I'm learning to experience everything first hand.
Telling you and other atheists about it would just be a waste of my time.
Let me find it.
God, by default, doesn't need.
He CAN want, however. You can't use that need being a want logic when God doesn't follow it.
He wants faith. Faith can't be created, but it has to be received. He wants people to have faith in Him.
This all begs the question on why He made anything He made in the first place. Hell if I know.
yes i can because all wants have a basis in needs if not what are they based in? If god wants something that means he needs to have it for some reason. How can faith not be created? Just make humans have faith in you. Now i know you will say but he wants use to have free will. But why does he want that? Why does it have to be received? because god says so? then why can't god just as easy say it doesn't have to be? and then his want would easily be fulled? You might say that he don't want to do that. Then it logically follows he just wants basically robots even if he supposedly gave us free will and this even contradicts the premise of free will.
More on the point of god not following wnat and need logic. how can he not? The declinations of these words would have to be redefined if so. A need is an necessity something you must have meaning you lack it in some way. A want is defined as having a need. Here is a link to the dictionary def for want http://www.answers.com/main/ntquery?s=want&gwp=13. None of those definitions of want either do not explicitly say it has something to do with a need or explicitly implies a need.
edit did not see your last sentence for some odd reason. You seem to refute your own argument with it care to explain how you don't?
"Those who think they know don't know. Those that know they don't know, know."
The atheists are the irrational ones because you think we have an answer for everything. We obviously DON'T considering we don't know why God does what he does. How the hell is that circular? I'm giving possible explanations, but I guess that is illogical!
And God does want, but He does not need. For Christ's sake, the definition itself is illogical.
God created logic, that's why He doesn't have to go by it.
How logical are scientists? How can living come from unliving matter? How can you explain how thoughts were created by accident? The complexity of a human thought?
And about me going against myself on that last post, I never said I knew exactly why the Tsunami came. I never said I knew why God made the Earth. HOW IS THAT REFUTING MYSELF?
dylan, read through what you have just wrote. somehow you can rest easy with these inexplainable cruelties of the world and still believe in god. for many other people it is not as easy to accept these cruelties as a part of the nature of an intentional, sentient, loving god. the much more reasonable path to take is to relinquish this attachment to some being whose morality doesn't seem to make sense.
Ethics and aesthetics are one
-Wittgenstein
And he still wonders why I call him morally bankrupt.
I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins
Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.
Did you just say that the whole concept of God is Illogical? You just said that God Created Logic, so you are making assumptions about something that you have no idea about. You are making assumptions about what God is, what he does, and wants. READ WHAT YOU WROTE!!!!
Again, read a book on the scientific method and evolution before you make idiotic statements about unliving matter and generalizations to all scientists. The scientific method by definition is logical.
"Those who think they know don't know. Those that know they don't know, know."
Really atheists say we know everything? I have not heard this from any atheist please explain where you heard this from.
Hmm god created logic, not philosophers of the past, oh wait he created them right? Ever think that just maybe, maybe we created god? Did you ever even think of that possibility? Also, how is the definition illogical? I got it directly from a defination so explain how it's illogical.
You seem here to make that "living" is so different from non-living. The only difference is in that the living is a complex organiztion of nonliving. The last 2 questions are explained by evolution and that is a whole other thing then what we are talking about.
To RationalSchema:
What the hell... how am I saying God is illogical by saying that God created logic? I'm reading what I wrote... and? If I can't make assumptions, then this whole discussion is pointless. Would you much rather have me say "I don't know" to everything so it can make your job easier? None of my statements about unliving matter were "idiotic." Hell, they weren't even statements. They were questions... that you didn't answer.
To zntneo:
Please tell me where you heard me say atheists had an answer to everything. I NEVER said that.
Hm... did I ever think of people creating God... no... what the hell is your point?
Explain why it being a definition makes it logical.
Living is extremely different from nonliving. The main reason being we have a conscience.
BACK TO EVOLUTION:
Let me think... Hm... ok... Evolution... correct me if I'm wrong... started with a BIG BANG... good words for scientists by the way... everything settled into what it is now... a sun in the middle... planets orbiting it... an asteroid belt... and moons orbiting the planets... all by coincidence...
On our own little planet... we evolved... from unliving matter... somehow gaining a conscience... ok...
Care to explain for me?
You are wrong. Evolution and the Big Bang theory, although somewhat related are totally two different theories. We did not evolve from unliving matter, we evolved from single cell organisms that do not have a conscience. In case you were wondering that is what we are made up of. LIVING cells. A plant is alive, Correct??? Second we are made up of unliving matter such as hydrogen and oxygen. What do you think water and protien are??
Third you can't make assumption and yes I would like you to say that you don't know, because you don't fucking know. I don't claim to know everything and niether should you or any other man (hmmmmm, priests, rabbis, clerics all those fucking assholes). This is why your arguments are circular, because you make shit up when you don't have an answer. Does that answer your questions!!
Finally, there are many questions of mine that you have not answered and I did answer your questions. Why don't you have these same skeptical questions about religion? Why don't you learn about the scientific method? In science it is up to the people who support the theory to provide evidence, not the people who are against the theory to provide evidence to the contrary. This is not the legal system. We don't go by "It is true until proven otherwise". It is false until proven otherwise. So show me the evidence for God!!
"Those who think they know don't know. Those that know they don't know, know."
What defines our conscience? What difference is our conscince from a self aware robot?
no evolution did not start with a big bang. evolution started just after abiogensis.