If You're a Christian, Muslim or Jew - You are Wrong (1 Viewer)

[Comrade nathan]

Funny isn't it? How atheists think that theists claim that they know everything,

No Atheist claim that, they claim that theist have a lacking in knowledge.

Religion HAS helped. I recall a book by Geoffrey Robertson that covers the history of how today we can put leaders of nations on trial, and it was the people's faith in God that empowered them with the ability (and bravery) to put their own king to court (I think it was one of the Richards of England).

State Atheism has helped even more. Throughout the world were secular and Atheist lead movements took place, the supression of the religious power brought many people freedom from religion and acces to the most simple education such as basic reading and writing. From years of cultural oppression forced down by the religious authorities, from foot binding to forced mariages people moved to an era of freedom from religion.

From countries like Spain to China the oligarchs held power with the use of religious groups. In France the people removed the ruling class and brought themselves into the new capitalist world on secular grounds.

The real gains for people was when they truely made religion a private matter, by removing any power the religious groups had.

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Pick any culture/society that had no influence from the big three (islam/jewish/christian), they all still have laws/morals. They all saw cold blooded murder as wrong + heaps of other things. The ancient Greeks did. The Romans did. The ancient Egyptians did. The aborigines did. Amazonian tribes did. Tribes in Papua New Guinea did.

Well it depends what you mean, many cultures have killed completely innocent people and have felt it was justified.

 

[MoonlightSonata]

sorry i do not agree with ur STATEMENT
"pretty weak to have a faith in any religion"- Have u belonged to any religion to feel weak...???

He means resorting to religion to answer the unknown, which is arguably weak. [Though it is quite arguable, I personally don't call it that, I prefer to think that some people just prefer comfort over truth.]

or have u never really understood what the religion wwas about???? in order live a life u need a religion to guide you....what about ethics, moral values were does this all come in?????

Incorrect. Ethics and morality can come from the application of reason. (Not only that but there are arguments to the effect that, even if God exists, morality is not dependant on God).

i dont wanna be a preacher. but i cant put forward a logical argument in faith in God simply because there is no evidence.

I am glad you concede that there is no reason to believe in the existence of God.

u just have to accept that some people have a "spiritual" connection.

What is this "spiritual connection"? To say that does not mean anything.

If I were to speculate I'd say that it seems it is some sort of gut feeling you have (stemming from the need for comfort). With respect, that is hardly persuasive.

some people do believe in UFO's, its wat they feel is right. like religious people believe in God cause they feel thats right.

The point is that no matter what they feel is right, they are most likely wrong, because they believe in something without any evidence or reason. You may think the person who believes in a UFO "feels right" about it -- it doesn't change the fact that they are deluded.

its u choice at the end. and as i said b4 having no evidence gives u that choice to do wat u want.

That's true - everyone has a choice. They can follow reason and evidence or they can believe in things without any reason whatsoever. Rational beings tend to base their beliefs on facts and logic.

If that means calling you irrational, then you are. This is not even ad hominem. You explicitly refuse to follow reason, hence you are acting irrationally.

u cannot prove to me god doesnt exist, i cant prove to u he does. however remember theres no reason why he cant exist. but then thats not the reason why people believe in God. i dont believe in god because i cant prove he exists,

The onus is on the believer to show that God does exist, not the other way around. As I said, you cannot prove that last night a UFO did not fly over my house. Doesn't mean we should believe it. The starting position is either (a) that God does not exist, or (b) that we don't know, so we must withhold judgment.

 

[StGeorgeDragons]

If that means calling you irrational, then you are. This is not even ad hominem. You explicitly refuse to follow reason, hence you are acting irrationally.
The onus is on the believer to show that God does exist, not the other way around. As I said, you cannot prove that last night a UFO did not fly over my house. Doesn't mean we should believe it. The starting position is either (a) that God does not exist, or (b) that we don't know, so we must withhold judgment.

if u can say 'that God does not exist' is a starting position, then equally u can say 'that God does exist'.

u cant prove or not prove either. so they are equal. ur making this very scientific.

 

[Comrade nathan]

This argument is pointless.

Not because of the idea one person can not prove or disprove god, but because there is no need for one to disprove god.

There is no god or gods.

This is evident in the variations of religions according to people, also the long period of time when first humans had no idea of God. Though this is not neccassary to even explain, however it is the basis of common sense as to not believe in a god, that the earth existed long before humans, so the earth was never created for humans.

The counter argument in this thread is a liberal argument. Some have even said "well if there is a god" or "well i can't disprove god". This means nothing. Finding the evidence, or claiming we will find evidence to disprove god has no bearing on whether our actions are right or wrong.

For instance, in the USSR many cultural practices were baned. Take any cultural practice in the pre industrial countries, it was forced down on the people by the religious authority with the claim it was a religious command.

When these cultural practices were finally banned and people re-educated then the religious authority being rightfully punished, they did this not on the basis god was not reall. They did not have to find passages, analysis it, discuss it then disprove it and give evidence for god not existing. There was no need to disprove foot binding made one more spiritual or that the hijab gives some a closer relationship with god.

What they did was find the actions of the religious authority to be harmfull to the people, they way it forced people into certain roles with the use of pointless practices. That was the reason, there was no need to disprove gods existance.

That is why we no longer have to prove that pagan rituals create rain. Do we have to go study every religion that ever existed to disprove them? No we don't as there is no need, just as there is no need to disprove god, as the religious just like all religions of the past have no real basis for argument. They are quick to make their own rules up, one being that you can just know god exists. So how can we really have a legitimate argument with them, if they are just wrong?

 

[MoonlightSonata]

if u can say 'that God does not exist' is a starting position, then equally u can say 'that God does exist'.

u cant prove or not prove either. so they are equal. ur making this very scientific.

No, you cannot start with the proposition that "God does exist."

The burden of proof lies on you - please see the argument guide. Similarly you cannot start with the proposition that "a UFO did fly over my house last night" and try and disprove it. You start with either the proposition that a UFO did not fly over, or that you do not know whether one flew over.

(I would also point out that science is the pursuit of truth, so complaining that I am taking an approach that seeks the truth isn't very helpful.)

 

[hipPo3]

Well it depends what you mean, many cultures have killed completely innocent people and have felt it was justified.

like human sacrifices ...

The funny thing is .. there is no evidence, and asking for evidence for gods existance is piontless. It's a faith/belief .. so the only evidence is subjective reasoning which poeple either have or lack off.

 

[StGeorgeDragons]

No, you cannot start with the proposition that "God does exist."

The burden of proof lies on you - please see the argument guide. Similarly you cannot start with the proposition that "a UFO did fly over my house last night" and try and disprove it. You start with either the proposition that a UFO did not fly over, or that you do not know whether one flew over.

why does the burden of proof lie on me? u have to prove he doesnt exist just as much as i have to proove he exists.

 

[MoonlightSonata]

why does the burden of proof lie on me? u have to prove he doesnt exist just as much as i have to proove he exists.

I never said God does not exist, I'm agnostic. Read the section in the argument guide I posted.


(Even if I was an atheist, the burden would probably still be on you.)

 

[MoonlightSonata]

I'm going to resign from this debate now, I've said all I want to say.

Besides there are exams to study for

 

[SashatheMan]

i saw a link from bos about a movie called "The God Who Wasnt There"
just watched it. its an alright documentary , but it needed more. it was too short , but told of things i didnt know about history.

for example the bible talks of jesus's birth and then a short period of his childhood. After that 30 years pass without a mention to where he was or what he did. Then he reemerges and throws miracles left right and center.

 

[Comrade nathan]

why does the burden of proof lie on me? u have to prove he doesnt exist just as much as i have to proove he exists.

Why does anyone need to prove god doesn't exist? Thats my point how this argument is stupid, we do not have to prove something does no exist to justify our lives.

Just as i don't have to prove pagan religion don't exist, i don't even have to look into them. So i have no reason to prove that god does not exist.

It is when you belief in something, you need proof to legitimise actions.

 

[Wesnat]

No Atheist claim that, they claim that theist have a lacking in knowledge.

Not knowledge, but rather, logic. This is arguable still. Some believe that it is more logical to believe in a higher power. Well, what do you know, even logic is subjective!

State Atheism has helped even more. Throughout the world were secular and Atheist lead movements took place, the supression of the religious power brought many people freedom from religion and acces to the most simple education such as basic reading and writing. From years of cultural oppression forced down by the religious authorities, from foot binding to forced mariages people moved to an era of freedom from religion.

I'm not sure about state atheism helping "even more" (I don't think none of us can say this objectively), but I believe that there is always 2 sides to everything, so yes I believe this side of the story as well. I acknowledge the negative consequences of religion, and I can see why people blame religion for the world's problems (an unfortunate view, but understandable nonetheless).

The point was made that religion has done some good to the world as well (aren't some parts of the UN declaration of human rights based on religious values?), so people shouldn't be blind to this fact.

The real gains for people was when they truely made religion a private matter, by removing any power the religious groups had.

Precisely what my opinion about religion (or, perhaps more appropriately, faith) is! Yes, I don't like the Church sometimes because of some bizarre actions or comments they make. I would like to think religion as something more personal. Close connection to God, something like that. Although some religions emphasise on communities (Catholocism included)... and I don't mind that at the same time, I suppose.

 

[Kaiser Zero]

Wow there's some neo-nazi band called ad-hominem?

There sure is

 

[Kaiser Zero]

sorry i do not agree with ur STATEMENT
"pretty weak to have a faith in any religion"- Have u belonged to any religion to feel weak...??? or have u never really understood what the religion wwas about???? in order live a life u need a religion to guide you....what about ethics, moral values were does this all come in?????

think twice buddy b4 u make such an inexcusable and appalling statement!

Yeah I was brought up a christian, now I'm old enough to realise what a pathetic joke it is.
Thats exactly what I'm talking about - you're so weak you can't make your own way in life, you need some religious institution to guide you. Ethics and morals don't have to be a part of religion at all, you can base them on logic and common sense.
You're taking the easy way out, because you're too WEAK to see it any other way.

 

[gerhard]

Not knowledge, but rather, logic. This is arguable still. Some believe that it is more logical to believe in a higher power. Well, what do you know, even logic is subjective!

No its not. Thats the point.
If two people disagree about something that can be found out by logic, that doesnt mean that logic is subjective. It means one of them is wrong.

 

[Kaiser Zero]

Or they're both illogical

 

[SashatheMan]

Originally Posted by Ev3
sorry i do not agree with ur STATEMENT
"pretty weak to have a faith in any religion"- Have u belonged to any religion to feel weak...??? or have u never really understood what the religion wwas about???? in order live a life u need a religion to guide you....what about ethics, moral values were does this all come in?????

think twice buddy b4 u make such an inexcusable and appalling statement!

you dont need religion to guide yourself in life and have ethics and morals. I am one of many examples of this. my family was not religion when i was growing up and i know right from wrong, i havent been to jail or light cats on fire. religion has nothign to do with guiding your life the accepted way in society

 

[boris]

That was a waste of 5 minutes of my life. I want it back.

 

[Wesnat]

The point is that the god is essentially a cop-out as it covers over the cracks. In effect, nothing is unknown because 'god knows all'. That's the point of the claim that theists claim to know all - not that they do personally, but that their structure of belief offers a simplistic way in which to explain all that is unknown with a degree of conviction.

That does not imply that theists simply believe in a higher power and that is the end of it, though.

Many religions believe that God knows all. However, we are still discovering how God works. For example, religious scientists would think that to research is to discover and appreciate God's work. We (well, not all of us, but many of us) do not dismiss scientific theories such as the Big Bang theory or theory of evolution/natural selection by resorting to the belief that 'it cannot be any of these things, it must be God and (for example) the Creation Story!'

We believe that God creates the world, but how he creates it is still left in the open.

Say, we all believe the Big Bang Theory, only monotheists believe that it's God's work, and atheists don't. But does this really, to put it in your terms, simplify our way of thinking?