You contradicted yourself. Not believing in God is an opinion and not a fact as of right now. If it was proven to a full extent, everybody would stop believing. I'm an atheist as well and share similar beliefs, or non-beliefs. I would recommend reading the Bible. Along with any other religious book. Regardless of the fact that it may or may not be true, it is a great story. I look at religions more of as a myth or an epic poem. Similar to The Odyssey. If you believe, you believe. Good luck. If I go to Hell because I was not given faith then so be it. Phrase of the day; I dun kur... Sounds like you're pointing out Pascal's Wager. Wikipedia it people. lulfail.
No I didn't. I said it shouldn't be used as a reference, me being an atheist in no way undermines that. Atheism isn't used as a reference because there's nothing to reference. No, not at all.
You said that the Bible is opinionated. You expressed an opinion. I was just poking fun but I understand what you're getting at. It kind of is a "lulfail", a typo in the Bible... Tut tut tut.
And me! Anyways, While reading the first few posts, I saw an argument for god that could easily be also used against god. The person talked about how many people believe in god and how many religions exist. I have easy answers: the mass of people who believe in god: Its a remain of the past. People searched for protection and/ or answers; and church gave it to them. Think of a child who never has heard something about god and hears it when its grown up. I think he/she would just laugh. There is only such a great amount of people because they were told when they were children-and children believe what their parents tell them. And about the variety of religions: Which one is the right one. The religious person would answer: Mine! or All! (What person x told me lol: There is a god in all religions, he is every the same, just a different religion. I answered: In fact, there are religions who dont believe in a god. Like Buddhism or Hinduism. He answered: Then those are wrong. Later he asked me if I believe in the devil because im atheist lol.) And wouldnt god have destroyed the unbelieving religious people? Nothing has happened yet. Except in the book "The bible". Did you know that it was MADE in Rome after they declared Christianity as legal? What you read is a selection of stories that were written by humans and chosen by people who wanted power. ...finished.
It is rather odd that so many of you are trying to pick out faults in the bible or in gods actions. God is all powerful. If we truly are just guinea pigs made for his amusement then we can't possibly know anything for sure. People are quoting history to disprove the bible. God can make our history books tell us anything he wants them to. Earth itself could just be one big truman show. Besides disproving the bible proves nothing, God is capable of having the bible written and having it full of errors. People are pointing out contradictions in the bible or in Gods actions. God is capable of anything, He wrote the rules and can break them is he so wishes. If God could not change his own opinion or regret his own actions he would not be all powerful. God gave us free will so we can CHOOSE to follow him. It stands to reason that in order to truly CHOOSE we must have realistic and convincing alternatives. These alternative choices must disagree with the bible, if they did not they would only be proof that the bible is indeed correct. Science/atheism is an alternative to Christianity, it is a second path, the "wrong" one. If there were no second path there would be no choice. Btw, I am atheist lul.
Nice, you pretty much just elaborated on what I was going to say. Also, that coming from an atheist such as your self, has kinda pushed me farther into the realization that atheists aren't just complete non-believers, even as they don't believe in God, but ones who have learned religion, become opinionated, and chose themselves not to believe.
But people wrote the bible; if God made them write it the way he wanted them to, then that would take away their free will, wouldn't it? And about the "wrong" path: If this other choice he gave us were wrong, why would he make it so that the "right" choice is somewhat illogical? To toy with us, as you said? If so, then the God people believe in is definitely not what God is really like. (Some, who are part of a religion, say forgiving or punishing; not tricky.) So in effect, wouldn't everyone go to hell for believing the "wrong" thing? (Atheists would be wrong because there would be a God, and theists would be punished for believing in the wrong kind of God.) What you are saying is that he wants us to blindly believe in him, or choose the path of atheism and be punished... If that is what God is, then screw him.
Weak & Diversionary Weak and diversionary. Claiming that no matter what we know now, or learn in the future, that it is not debate fodder because it could just be god ****ing with us is a hollow and very cheap argument. I think your post is sarcastic and not really a reflection of your true beliefs, but I will try and respond. The guinea pig theory that humans are amusing pets is not a stance of any religion I know of, nor is it the view of atheists. Saying that we can't possibly know anything is a huge brick wall in the way of discovery. Will you agree that we know countlessly more information about our universe than we did when the bible was written? What kind of jibberish is this? How does god have the history books tell us anything he wants. Even if god did something so dickish, how does it support your statement of history books not being applicable to religious debate: Let's say your right. God causes the humans that pen history books to write inaccurate information that does not match actual events. The books then make it through various stages of editing and are reviewed by the public. Each time the book is viewed god intervenes and makes the people reading collectively accept incorrect versions of history. You're saying god did this to give us a realistic 2nd option. Something to test our faith. Your saying that he may have included 100's of errors in the bible on purpose, while creating airtight historical accounts and scientific papers that directly conflict with his supposed "word", the bible. He must want idiots in Heaven with him. Maybe he's entering us in some sort of special olympics against another universe where there is an IQ ceiling on all participants. Why would he deliberately fake so much evidence in the opposite direction of "the truth". Your stance that we can never know anything for sure, because god just messes with our heads, is more small minded, and more annoying than religion itself.
There's no way to prove or disprove the existence of god. I'm an atheist, but I do have respect for any religion that encourages followers to better themselves and hold a positive outlook. I was raised with a very religious family, and started to develop my doubts about god. I myself find it hard to take part in it because of the lack of proof; I feel like it's all or nothing for me, but I do understand why it's important in society. While it has and will cause conflict, it also not only encourages people to follow certain principles, but also gives them hope for the future and a feeling of security when faced with the death of themselves and their loved ones. Most people who practice christianity acknowledge the lack of proof, but find the rewards of the belief system more powerful and gratifying than facts and evidence.
I can't say I do believe in a god but if I did I wouldn't believe in a deceitful one. If he is deceitful, he is not god.
Why? Is God incapable of being deceitful? The God you are disproving is not an all powerful one then is it? Any flaw you find was put there by God to make your "path" your convincing to you. If there were no flaws and science, logic, history and religion all came to the same conclusions there would only one choice. If the choices are basically heart and faith vs. the mind and cold logic then it make sense for religion to appear absurd. This doesn't make it unaccessible though, I don't think you can deny that at some point we all feel a supernatural presence or connection or something. I bet every single person in this thread has prayed at some point in their lives. If you talk to any Christian they will tell you, I'm sure, that they have some indescribable benefit from their religion that allows them to know they are right. Something along the lines of being in touch with their soul or spirit, having a connection with God, a guiding hand easing their living. Whatever you want to call it. Science satisfies the mind and religion satisfies the heart, this is what makes them convincing "paths". Logical flaws in holy books are irrelevant because once your heart is satisfied and you have found this illusive "guiding hand" you have found the absolute truth and can overlook or disregard these flaws.
I didn't say he couldn't be, in fact I think if he were real he would be, however, if I were inclined to believe in a god he would be an honest one, if he were not honest I would not believe in him. Its as simple as that. I didn't claim objective reality, only a subjective belief.
Hmmm... what would you consider to be honest and deceitful in a Gods actions? If God were truly honest the whole point of having free will would be screwed up. Theres needs to be a "wrong" path for us to follow. If creating a wrong path is deceitful then God must be deceitful. He does not directly lie to us though, he has given us the "heart and faith" and "the mind and cold logic" and we choose which path to follow.
Cold Why call it cold logic? Why not say our choice is between "heart and faith" and "mind and logic". Besides, I feel that logic actually has a warming affect. It generates a comforting heat that melts the ice of cold faith.
No matter how much he has supposedly given us 'free will', and let's us choose which path to follow, he still supposedly punishes us after death if we don't follow the path that is to his satisfaction. Our supposed free will is tinged with a mandate to do as he says in many respects, that or face eternal punishment after death. I wouldn't say creating a wrong path is deceitful, it merely conforms to the idea of free will. The fact that he doesn't really give us true freedom is the real crux. As far as deceitful goes, how about things like fossils that supposedly support evolution, from our perspective dating back to before the earth is supposed to have existed? The only explanation for this I have ever heard is that it's a trick, a feint to test our faith. A direct lie to test our faith, that sounds pretty deceitful to me.
He doesn't have to be the one that makes the "wrong" though. People have created and done many wrongs, haven't we? That's what we are debating; whether religions, created by man, are right. What the bible is (or any religious text), is a creation by man. Religion is not the deceiving device of God, but our own creation. "Ok, but what if God made the bible (or religion in general) wrong to purposely test us?" That would be wrong, unless he took away the free will of those who wrote the bible and made them write it as he wanted; also, why would he want us to worship something wrong? Unless, as makisupa stated, he enjoys the company of unquestioning worshippers. If God's plan is to reward those who do not even bother to question themselves, and not those who looked at what they had factually rather than some mere speculation, then he is not even what theists believe in. Also, God doesn't have to be honest, because he hasn't even told us anything. What's to be honest or lie about?
To the eternal punishment point I can't really answer, it could easily be a device God uses to give non believers a route to religion and therefore to God. Humans are afraid of death and religion offers eternal happiness after death, turn to religion and you will hopefully find God. Both religion and the concept of heaven and hell could easily be a lie but they are lies which lead to a belief in God and the "guiding hand" and the stuff that God wants to us choose. What if science found the earth and fossil were 6000 years old just as the bible says? What if the bible said that the earth is billions of years old just like science has found? They must have contradicting facts in order to be separate paths. Eons Ive pretty much answered your post with the first paragraph there^. I can't tell you how much of science and religion is entirely man made and how much has been created or guided by God. It is the discovery, connection and love for God which matters and this is most commonly found through religion. Adam and eve may be wrong, noahs ark may be wrong, but by teaching and learning these stories we are able to find god and that is what matters.
That is what I think too. The only thing you said before that irked me was when you proposed God to be a trickster rather than a guiding force. (Deceiving is different from teaching what is "right", right?)