Atheism, Logical?

[Mr. P]

You find me arrogant: I suppose I will have to live with that.

That's an understatement.
About all I've seen so far is you refer
to books, authors, their views and apparently presenting them as your own.
Is that about right?

Now before ya respond, get off your
intellectual high horse pull the stick outta your ass and we can talk. Maybe.

 

[manu1959]

alrighty then....

 

[kassandra]

So, if I post my own view I am a plagerist and if I reference my ideas I am called arrogant. Still its nice to see such directionless criticism of the points I have raised. If you want my views here they are:

God is posited as an omnipotent, onniscient and trancendent being. Firstly I want to point out that a God outside time who knows everthing and can do anything is fine except for the problem of free will. While this sort of God could be posited by a determinist (and a rigerous one at that) for anyone who beleives in human free will it is clearly non-sensical as God would know all of our actions BEFORE they were taken. Even more alarmingly God created the universe Knowing our decisions. If I am Damned and there is an omnipotent, omniscient and trancendent God, then I would argue that God knew at the moment of creation that I was Damned, this is not my image of a loving and forgiving God.

To my mind the idea of God reduces our own capacities as individuals. Still if Christians want to enter into this bizzarre slave-mentality that's their own funeral. If there is a God I pray that he is nothing like his current representation(s) in Christian thought.

Furthermore the very claim that atheism is illogical is absurd. It is claiming that by failing to acknowldge a trancendent reality I am defying logic. Logic is merely a system of working to a conclusion from some accepted BUT UNJUSTIFIED premises. To show that athiesim is illogical you first need to come to an agreement about our premises. The problem is that the first premise of the atheist is that there is no God and the Theist that there is. Outisde of this initial observation there can be no serious debate as to the 'logic' of atheism, agnosticism or theism.

 

[manu1959]

thanks for clearing that up and invalidating the belief system of more than half the people in the world....

 

[kassandra]

The beleif system of the ancient world is not correct thanks to the numbers who beleived in them, neither is Christianity correct because there are Christians. And for that matter i make no comment on the truth of God and the Christian ideal, I am merely presenting my own views and opinions. I keep expecting someone to actually respond with a decent argument, now there's faith...

 

[dmp]

So, if I post my own view I am a plagerist and if I reference my ideas I am called arrogant. Still its nice to see such directionless criticism of the points I have raised. If you want my views here they are:

God is posited as an omnipotent, onniscient and trancendent being. Firstly I want to point out that a God outside time who knows everthing and can do anything is fine except for the problem of free will. While this sort of God could be posited by a determinist (and a rigerous one at that) for anyone who beleives in human free will it is clearly non-sensical as God would know all of our actions BEFORE they were taken. Even more alarmingly God created the universe Knowing our decisions. If I am Damned and there is an omnipotent, omniscient and trancendent God, then I would argue that God knew at the moment of creation that I was Damned, this is not my image of a loving and forgiving God.

To my mind the idea of God reduces our own capacities as individuals. Still if Christians want to enter into this bizzarre slave-mentality that's their own funeral. If there is a God I pray that he is nothing like his current representation(s) in Christian thought.

Furthermore the very claim that atheism is illogical is absurd. It is claiming that by failing to acknowldge a trancendent reality I am defying logic. Logic is merely a system of working to a conclusion from some accepted BUT UNJUSTIFIED premises. To show that athiesim is illogical you first need to come to an agreement about our premises. The problem is that the first premise of the atheist is that there is no God and the Theist that there is. Outisde of this initial observation there can be no serious debate as to the 'logic' of atheism, agnosticism or theism.

it's your 'attitude' - work on your communication skills? The reason nobody seems to give two shits about your 'facts' could stem from 'nobody likes to debate with an egotist'. That's how you present yourself. Take it for what it's worth.

 

[Zhukov]

Atheism is the world view that denies the existence of God. More specifically, traditional atheism argues that there never was and never will be a God. But is this position rationally justifiable?

Atheism positively affirms that there is no God. But can the atheist be certain of this claim?

Right off the bat it's all wrong.

World view, affirm, deny, never, argue, certain?

None of the above.

Atheism is a matter of faith, just like anyone else's belief system.

I can't prove there is no god, I wouldn't bother to try.

What this article does is arbitrarily assign attributes to a group and then attacks the group based on the fabricated attributes. Wow. How intellectually stimulating.

Believe what ever you want. You can even believe this article makes a logical argument for all I care.

I don't believe there is a god. I have faith there isn't. Care to try to disprove my faith?

Let's see a thread: "Buddhism, Logical?"

 

[manu1959]

The beleif system of the ancient world is not correct thanks to the numbers who beleived in them, neither is Christianity correct because there are Christians. And for that matter i make no comment on the truth of God and the Christian ideal, I am merely presenting my own views and opinions. I keep expecting someone to actually respond with a decent argument, now there's faith...

you present your opinions as facts and each time one of us has offered anything in the way of an opinion you offer more of your facts or offer what is percieved as an insult. I keep expecting someone to actually respond with a decent argument, now there's faith

 

[White knight]

Why would man need a God? What purpose would a God server? The fact is God will not revel himself to (most of us) in this life. You will live and die, moral or immoral, you will have a good afterlife experience or you will not, or no experience at all.
Why waste the time dwelling on this issue, when there are real problems to solve in this life? What will be, will be.

 

[dilloduck]

Why would man need a God? What purpose would a God server? The fact is God will not revel himself to (most of us) in this life. You will live and die, moral or immoral, you will have a good afterlife experience or you will not, or no experience at all.
Why waste the time dwelling on this issue, when there are real problems to solve in this life? What will be, will be.

Spiritual ignorance is a necessary part of the whole. It must be accepted for what it is to become wiser.

 

[MissileMan]

But the real reason I believe there’s a God is that He has revealed Himself to me through the person and work of Jesus Christ. Jesus claimed to be God in human flesh (John 8:58). Now this is an astounding claim, but He supported the claim by His matchless personal character, His fulfillment of predictive prophecy, by His influence on human history, but most significantly, by His historical resurrection from the dead. Now, if you are looking for God — you need look no further than Jesus Christ Himself. He was either a liar, a lunatic , a legend, or He was, in fact, Lord. Now I think if you’ll examine the evidence, you’ll agree with me that He was the Lord, the one who spoke and the universe leapt into existence.

I don't believe in god, but I do believe that a man named Jesus Christ did exist. I find it amusing that 2,000+ years ago, a man claimed to be the son of god, and it is accepted as gospel. (pun intended) If someone was to make that same claim today, he'd be set up for several appointments with a shrink. The only "evidence" of these prophecies and resurrection come from the bible, a lot of which was written after Christ had died. It would be rather simple to write in these prophecies after the fact in a manner that suited the author's purpose. This falls more into the category of hearsay rather than evidence.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Why would man need a God? What purpose would a God server? The fact is God will not revel himself to (most of us) in this life. You will live and die, moral or immoral, you will have a good afterlife experience or you will not, or no experience at all.
Why waste the time dwelling on this issue, when there are real problems to solve in this life? What will be, will be.

Yeah. why look out a window when you can stick your head in a hole. tell me, what is an effective lib strategy of dealing with anything "in this life"?

On national security you think diplomacy is enough; it isn't.

Somehow you think raising taxes will create jobs; it won't. In fact, it will cause job losses.

And don't bother saying you're a conservative; we know that's a lie.

 

[-Cp]

I don't believe in god, but I do believe that a man named Jesus Christ did exist. I find it amusing that 2,000+ years ago, a man claimed to be the son of god, and it is accepted as gospel. (pun intended) If someone was to make that same claim today, he'd be set up for several appointments with a shrink. The only "evidence" of these prophecies and resurrection come from the bible, a lot of which was written after Christ had died. It would be rather simple to write in these prophecies after the fact in a manner that suited the author's purpose. This falls more into the category of hearsay rather than evidence.

Umm... if you actually go read the Bible, you'll see that Christ fullfilled every prophecy from the Old Testament - which was written CENTURIES before he lived...

 

[nakedemperor]

Umm... if you actually go read the Bible, you'll see that Christ fullfilled every prophecy from the Old Testament - which was written CENTURIES before he lived...

The only "proof" that he "fulfilled any prophecies" is in the Bible, and that's not proof. It may be a basis for faith, but a factual document it is not.

 

[alien21010]

Umm... if you actually go read the Bible, you'll see that Christ fullfilled every prophecy from the Old Testament - which was written CENTURIES before he lived...

And the Bible was consequently revised during the Middle Ages to exclude a whole bunch of things. Hmmm...

 

[alien21010]

Why would man need a God? What purpose would a God server? The fact is God will not revel himself to (most of us) in this life. You will live and die, moral or immoral, you will have a good afterlife experience or you will not, or no experience at all.
Why waste the time dwelling on this issue, when there are real problems to solve in this life? What will be, will be.

*Applauds*

By far one of the most intelligent posts on this forum.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

*Applauds*

By far one of the most intelligent posts on this forum.

How sad it is that you confuse idiocy with intelligence.

 

[nakedemperor]

How sad it is that you confuse idiocy with intelligence.

The line between madness and genius is thin :scratch:

 

[8236]

If individual atheists are serious about truth when it comes to God, let them consider the claims of Jesus Christ. He claimed to be none other than God in human flesh (John 1:1). This astounding claim was supported, however, by His matchless personal character, His fulfillment of predictive prophecy, His incredible influence on human history — and most importantly, the historical fact of His resurrection from the dead. The evidence is definitely there for the skeptic to analyze. As Francis Schaeffer, the noted apologist, stated: “God is there and He is not silent.” God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself (2 Cor. 5:19). .

Just listen to yourself! LOL no ROFL. If you are so certain of the existance of your super natural beings why do you sound so insecure. Simply quoting the alleged writings of a few people ad infinitum does not make anything 'true' or 'false'! If I tell you fairies exist are you going to believe me? NO you would say SHOW ME. (well I hope you would)

Ultimately man does not deny the existence of God for lack of evidence, but because man does not want to be accountable to his creator.

No I deny the existance of god until I can interact with him/her/it or detect his/her/its existance and then reproduce that interaction or detection. Simple! And a damn site more logical than your (non)logic.

Descartes started out trying to prove the existance of God but eventually gave up because every time he came up with an argument (a real, logical argument) 'for' he quickly managed to come up with a counter argument. And he was a lot smarter man than me or thee.

 

[8236]

Umm... if you actually go read the Bible, you'll see that Christ fullfilled every prophecy from the Old Testament - which was written CENTURIES before he lived...

More 'logical' proof? ROFL