Six Questions to Ask An Atheist
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
I spot a red herring. Anyway, Hitler may not have been an atheist but it would be a worst lie to claim that Hitler was a true Christian. Besides, the point wasn't whether Hitler was an atheist, but that millions died in atheistic regimes.
I am only
at your level of logic. From the looks of it, you really need a "god" in your life, it would be difficult for your existence if a "god" does not exist.
So if such a god exist.
What kind of religion does it belong to? Christianity, Roman Catholics, Hindu, Jainism, Taoist, Buddhist, Moonies, Islam, Seven Day Adventist, Scientology, Sikhism, ....?
Strangely enough, the multitudes of religion coincides with the distinct civilisational enclaves? There are as many religions as there are races, perhaps a manifestation of men.
There must be one true god, because some religious teachings conflict with each other. So which is the one true god? That is your $1 million question, you still have 3 help line.
-
Originally posted by βÎτά:
I am only
at your level of logic. From the looks of it, you really need a "god" in your life, it would be difficult for your existence if a "god" does not exist.
So if such a god exist.
What kind of religion does it belong to? Christianity, Roman Catholics, Hindu, Jainism, Taoist, Buddhist, Moonies, Islam, Seven Day Adventist, Scientology, Sikhism, ....?
Strangely enough, the multitudes of religion coincides with the distinct civilisational enclaves? There are as many religions as there are races, perhaps a manifestation of men.
There must be one true god, because some religious teachings conflict with each other. So which is the one true god? That is your $1 million question, you still have 3 help line.
Correction, from your kind of replies it looks more like you are BELOW my level of logic.
Truth is, we all need God in our lives. Atheists like you merely suppress that need and live in denial.
So you agree that there must be ONE true God? FYI I do not need a help line. But I think you do!
-
Religion is a practice of dumping what human folks can't explain at that particular point in time (with the level of scientific knowledge) into a big cauldron (god), so that even simpletons can accept.
Thunder is created by Thor.
Zeus in some cases.
Lei Gong.
Thunderbird.
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Correction, from your kind of replies it looks more like you are BELOW my level of logic.
Truth is, we all need God in our lives. Atheists like you merely suppress that need and live in denial.
So you agree that there must be ONE true God? FYI I do not need a help line. But I think you do!
Yah, maybe you don't help line but you sure need lots of ECT.
-
Originally posted by βÎτά:
Religion is a practice of dumping what human folks can't explain at that particular point in time (with the level of scientific knowledge) into a big cauldron (god), so that even simpletons can accept.
Thunder is created by Thor.
Zeus in some cases.
Lei Gong.
Thunderbird.
You are certain entitled to your opinion. You just haven't made any argument for anything at all.
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
You are certain entitled to your opinion. You just haven't made any argument for anything at all.
That's what usually people do when they lost all the points in a discussion.
You need English lessons too, you still can't see the points and questions raised.
Maybe you need opthalmologist too.
-
Originally posted by βÎτά:
Yah, maybe you don't help line but you sure need lots of ECT.
Electroconvulsive-therapy? If I need it then all the more you do!
-
Originally posted by βÎτά:
That's what usually people do when they lost all the points in a discussion.
You need English lessons too, you still can't see the points and questions raised.
Maybe you need opthalmologist too.
Were you even discussing? Nope, you were trolling and still are. Time to stop feeding the troll.
-
god is just an imaginery being created by ancient man kind, the way superman and batman was in DC comics
-
yes god "exist" when he allow this
and allow this guy to get a crown and throne..
While this is happening
yes...god "exist" and he allow a child to die of hunger-related causes every 6 seconds.
-
Originally posted by Summer hill:
yes god "exist" when he allow this
and allow this guy to get a crown and throne..
While this is happening
yes...god "exist" and he allow a child to die of hunger-related causes every 6 seconds.
Hi Summer Hill, I appreciate your efforts. I see the answer now.
-
Originally posted by Summer hill:
yes god "exist" when he allow this
and allow this guy to get a crown and throne..
While this is happening
yes...god "exist" and he allow a child to die of hunger-related causes every 6 seconds.
Firstly, your post is entirely IRRELEVANT to the six questions because you did not even attempt to answer them at all.
Secondly, are you then saying that because of these things shown in your picture therefore there is no God?
Thirdly, if you are of the view that there is no God, what's your problem with all this? Why would it be wrong that children starve? According to atheism this is simply the survival of the fittest, nature working through natural selection. You should be happy with that, ya?
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Please understand that I am not saying that atheists have no morals. This is a common mistake that atheist make when they encounter our argument. It's a knee-jerk reaction along the lines of "How dare you say I have no morals! I am morally better than that Christian jerk who just stole something from the CD shop!"
Please read carefully what I wrote. I am saying that the atheist have NO BASIS for objective moral values. Can you explain what is the source of your moral values? Your parents? What the government says? What society at large says? Or is it the evolutionary survival of the fittest ethics?
If your gripe is with the inquisition then you have to take it up with the Roman Catholics. But most people would agree that no where in the Bible did it sanction the use of force against those who choose not to believe, or to compel people into belief.
You said chemicals provide you with the ability to discern values? How do you know that? That same chemicals tell you that? See the conundrum you are in?
No confusion on my part. You said that atheists live by morals borrowed from God, so I said
- I don't see how you keep saying that pure atheists are without morals because only God can provide them.
You didn't read carefully. Yes, the chemical balances in my brain give me the ability to think and discern values that I learn from society. Just like they give animals the ability to hunt or you the ability to walk.
What of their source? I approve of my heroe's values, I disapprove of the Church's, I disapprove but have to go along with the government's. Those left become my values.
What's so hard about thinking? Is thinking about morals so different from thinking in general?
-
-
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
Firstly, your post is entirely IRRELEVANT to the six questions because you did not even attempt to answer them at all.
Secondly, are you then saying that because of these things shown in your picture therefore there is no God?
Thirdly, if you are of the view that there is no God, what's your problem with all this? Why would it be wrong that children starve? According to atheism this is simply the survival of the fittest, nature working through natural selection. You should be happy with that, ya?
Why do you ask summer if she is happy?
We are not talking about whether atheism is good or bad, but true or false. Her evidence is consistent with the atheist claim.
(If there is a good God, going by the mix of good and bad in the world, I would conclude he is locked in battle with an evil demon of equal power. When the demon has the upper hand, there's world war or the bubonic plague. He gets beaten down but never defeated completely.)
The point is not how you feel about the facts, good or bad, but what they are.
This brings me to a point made by Bertrand Russel in the passage "Why I am not a Christian".
He challenged the proposition that the world and universe function according to natural law as created by God. He distinguished between two views of "law".
The Christian view of natural law takes the form of judicial law: laws are behests to do or abstain from doing certain things. Eg. God gave the planets a behest to move a certain way.
However, scientific laws are not behests but observations. Planets revolve and things fall down according to the forces of gravity. The observations hold true in every instance of like case. It is imaginative to think someone commanded the planets to move the way they do.
The former is how you feel about the observation, the latter is the way the observation is.
You can't say life has to have a meaning, just because you believe it is too meaningless for life to just come and go just like that.
Russel also pointed out that if natural law were designed by anyone, it would have been designed to be cruel. He pointed out the sufferings in the world and oiinted out the paradox that someone with omnipotence, omniscience and millions of years to perfect their world, could not do better.
-
Anything that TS has no answers for will be labelled IRRELEVANT, else it will be called trolling.
It's like his god thingy, anything that he has no answer for like the beginning of life, he conveniently throws it into this IRRELEVANT or god bin.
-
Originally posted by alize:
No confusion on my part. You said that atheists live by morals borrowed from God, so I said
- I don't see how you keep saying that pure atheists are without morals because only God can provide them.
You didn't read carefully. Yes, the chemical balances in my brain give me the ability to think and discern values that I learn from society. Just like they give animals the ability to hunt or you the ability to walk.
What of their source? I approve of my heroe's values, I disapprove of the Church's, I disapprove but have to go along with the government's. Those left become my values.
What's so hard about thinking? Is thinking about morals so different from thinking in general?
Yes you are confused. My point is that objective moral values exist because God exists. And this is why every human being is a moral being with a conscience, knowing right from wrong. Atheism does not supply the basis for why objective moral values exist.
How do chemicals give you any ability to discern and think? You have yet to explain that. How do you know chemicals give you the ability? How do you know that is true? On what basis?
-
Originally posted by alize:
Why do you ask summer if she is happy?
We are not talking about whether atheism is good or bad, but true or false. Her evidence is consistent with the atheist claim.
(If there is a good God, going by the mix of good and bad in the world, I would conclude he is locked in battle with an evil demon of equal power. When the demon has the upper hand, there's world war or the bubonic plague. He gets beaten down but never defeated completely.)
The point is not how you feel about the facts, good or bad, but what they are.
This brings me to a point made by Bertrand Russel in the passage "Why I am not a Christian".
He challenged the proposition that the world and universe function according to natural law as created by God. He distinguished between two views of "law".
The Christian view of natural law takes the form of judicial law: laws are behests to do or abstain from doing certain things. Eg. God gave the planets a behest to move a certain way.
However, scientific laws are not behests but observations. Planets revolve and things fall down according to the forces of gravity. The observations hold true in every instance of like case. It is imaginative to think someone commanded the planets to move the way they do.
The former is how you feel about the observation, the latter is the way the observation is.
You can't say life has to have a meaning, just because you believe it is too meaningless for life to just come and go just like that.
Russel also pointed out that if natural law were designed by anyone, it would have been designed to be cruel. He pointed out the sufferings in the world and oiinted out the paradox that someone with omnipotence, omniscience and millions of years to perfect their world, could not do better.
It was a rhetorical question. Only a person without a conscience would be happy at that. But if you think somehow that this is a world gone wrong, then you are right. And this is precisely what the Bible teaches! What Bertrand Russell, and all atheists who parrot his thoughts, missed is that the Bible teaches a perfect original creation that was later marred by Adam's sin and rebellion. We now live in a fallen cursed world. So when atheists complain about suffering and death and evil, they ask how this reflect a God of love, but they deliberately forget that the Bible does not teach that God did not create the world this way.
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
1. To think that science can answer all the questions in the first post is to misplace your confidence in science and also fail to understand the nature and limitations of the scientific method. But think about this, why can we even do science at all? Why is the universe capable of being studied and understood by humans? Again only the theist has the answer. It is because God made the universe and endowed us with the rational faculties needed to explore His creation.
2. The point is that if God does not exist, then there is no meaning in life. This is what atheists like Dawkins has conceded, if you have read some of his works. You insisted that you can still live a meaningful life. But why even bother? Why seek meaning in a meaningless world according to atheism? That's rather inconsistent, isn't it?
3. You missed the point here. I am not denying that horrors have taken place in the name of religion. What I am pointing out is that atheism should look back at their fruit in the last century alone before pointing fingers at religion. Fact is, atheism is every bit as religious!
4. Indeed, as an atheist the idea of fairness is moot. There is no such thing. If you suffer and die that's just it. If you were a victim of a murderer, that's just too bad. He's fitter than you. You did not survive his attack you are not fit. That's atheism for you. There is no justice, no fairness, no righting of any wrong. But of course in reality you don't live like this at all. Which is why I argue that atheism is not the right worldview to hold. Atheists are notoriously inconsistent.
5. Let me explain clearer. Whenever atheists tries to argue a moral point, they will fail. Simply because apart from objective moral values which presupposes a moral lawgiver, there is no standard of morality to judge, no standard of right or wrong. Only might counts. If something is good or true in your eyes, that's just your opinion. You can't insist that you are right.
6. You missed the point. The point is that if God does not exist, then nothing makes sense at all. There is no meaning in chemicals simply jostling around in our brains. There is no meaning in chance random processes. In atheism nothing ought to make sense because matter is all there is. No soul, no spirit, no God, no morals etc. And the fact is, atheists do not live like that at all. Again this is because they BORROW their values from theism, but then suppress that knowledge in denial.
"...because God made the universe and endowed us with the rational faculties needed to explore His creation..." You may think rationally, I hope, but why the writers of the bible made so many silly errors ? [No need for me to list down.. can google] This make christianity look so bad.You sound as if atheist has a wasted life. No soul no spirit no moral. Are you taunting or feeling sad for atheist? Why cannot atheist and theist agree on a moral point ? Is theist belong to educated class of people? Why can't you trust on atheist's point of view ? You belong in a higher class?
"...There is no justice, no fairness, no righting of any wrong...." This is happening in real life. A lady ran over by a bus recently. What can you do ? The life is gone, so what getting the driver to pay for his crime? I bet you theist will believe if this lady has a religion, she will now in a nice place with her god. This is fairness if you will. To atheist, this is delusional. Wake up.
-
Originally posted by laffin123:
"...because God made the universe and endowed us with the rational faculties needed to explore His creation..." You may think rationally, I hope, but why the writers of the bible made so many silly errors ? [No need for me to list down.. can google] This make christianity look so bad.You sound as if atheist has a wasted life. No soul no spirit no moral. Are you taunting or feeling sad for atheist? Why cannot atheist and theist agree on a moral point ? Is theist belong to educated class of people? Why can't you trust on atheist's point of view ? You belong in a higher class?
"...There is no justice, no fairness, no righting of any wrong...." This is happening in real life. A lady ran over by a bus recently. What can you do ? The life is gone, so what getting the driver to pay for his crime? I bet you theist will believe if this lady has a religion, she will now in a nice place with her god. This is fairness if you will. To atheist, this is delusional. Wake up.
This thread is not for discussing alleged errors in the Bible. Neither is this thread arguing that the Christian is superior to the atheist. In any case, the charge of elitism falls on the atheist who takes pride that he is intellectually superior to whom he called the delusional religious folks. Not only that the atheists also call themselves the Brights to insinuate that religious people the dimwitted or dull minded. So if anyone is guilty of taunting the other it would be the atheist.
Yes bad things happen. People commit offences, but it only makes sense to hold people responsible if there are objective moral values. It is wrong to take away another life because man is made in the image of God. And we feel angered because we are created as moral beings. It makes sense to have moral outrage in a theistic worldview. But an atheistic worldview does not offer any basis for moral judgement at all. If an atheist is making any moral judgement he is doing so not because of his atheistic worldview but in spite of it. He is actually exercising his God-given moral faculties but at the same time suppressing or denying God as Creator. But God is not any less God just because the atheist refuses to acknowledge Him.
-
I take my leave from this thread. Lord knows I've taken pains to be logical and you've made a mockery of this debate.
-
Life is surreal.
-
close and ban the topic starter for trolling
-
Originally posted by BroInChrist:
This thread is not for discussing alleged errors in the Bible. Neither is this thread arguing that the Christian is superior to the atheist. In any case, the charge of elitism falls on the atheist who takes pride that he is intellectually superior to whom he called the delusional religious folks. Not only that the atheists also call themselves the Brights to insinuate that religious people the dimwitted or dull minded. So if anyone is guilty of taunting the other it would be the atheist.
Yes bad things happen. People commit offences, but it only makes sense to hold people responsible if there are objective moral values. It is wrong to take away another life because man is made in the image of God. And we feel angered because we are created as moral beings. It makes sense to have moral outrage in a theistic worldview. But an atheistic worldview does not offer any basis for moral judgement at all. If an atheist is making any moral judgement he is doing so not because of his atheistic worldview but in spite of it. He is actually exercising his God-given moral faculties but at the same time suppressing or denying God as Creator. But God is not any less God just because the atheist refuses to acknowledge Him.
BIC started this questionaire thread for one purpose. To show that theist can have moral judgement by making use of god-given ability. Atheist thinks and discerns on matter using chemicals in the body, that he thinks it is not possible. Atheist is suppressing god-given ability and live in denial.
I urge BIC not to think so simply on this issue using his god-given power. Thinking and discerning making need more than chemical in the body. The world is more complicated than reading a bible and believing. I do not live in denial, and hope that god appear before me. Then I will believe religion.
I am not taunting any theist.
I take my leave from this thread.
Happy chatting.
-
Friedrich Nietzsche said that Buddhism is 100 times more reasonable than Christianity...........
psychiatrists say that Buddhism's ''No-Self Concept'' help them understand mental patients better........
No- Self = No Soul / Identity................= All Soul-based religions are man-made..........