ITT: Arguments for/against the existence of a god? Been questioning

Imo it can't really be proven one way or the other with any evidence we have. Personally, I feel like it's unlikely that the universe all came from nothing, but I also know I'm kinda biased since I live in said universe.

>>727022213
Doubt anyone could/will give you info our opinions that'll sway you here, you'll just get a lot of close-minded religious people arguing with hard headed science enthusiasts, it's really up to you. If being religious makes you a happier or more peaceful person, or pushes you to better yourself, go for it. If not, leave it out.

if god was real i would get dubs

>>727022213
DO it.

>>727022648
I know it can't be proven one way or the other I am just looking for the strongest point either side can produce.

>>727022749
True. /b/ surprises me sometimes though

>>727022806
I guess the best I can come up with is that life and everything seems complex enough that I would be surprised if there wasn't some sort of creator behind the whole process. (That might be more of an opinion than an argument but idk)

>bump

>>727022213
What religion are you considering OP? Straight Catholicism?

If God was real why aren't I hot

>>727024071
Because adam and eve ate the fruit

File: 1489884757801.jpg (38KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 480x480px

>>727022213

There is no evidence for a deity; do not believe until a theist can prove its existence.

That being said, you should always be open to people presenting new data.

>>727022213
Heres the kicker, and the reason why so many people dont believe in god. First you have to believe and have faith that he exists, then comes the proof. But so many people want proof before they commit to belief, but it doesnt work that way, so they end up never finding god.

>>727024035
Come from a Methodist family... Not super strict or anything.

If a god were to exist, he would most certainly be an asshole for allowing the amount of suffering he does.

>>727024071
Youre not hot BECAUSE god is real. Youre just a bad person and gods punishing you for it. By giving you ugly face.

>>727024216
Thanks dad

If God exists, he hates me, so I have nothing to gain either way.

>>727024492
I was religious for 15 years before I questioned aything and the only thing ever remotely good that happened after I prayed was someone returned my stolen iPod in 6th grade. Did I miss something or is it like rare... never really got into the whole god scene

Fuck, this thread again.

>>727024597
Getting real tired of this argument. All this suffering happens because morons like you continue to let it happen while you sit on your ass doing nothing about it.

File: 1489965874008.jpg (49KB, 477x480px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 477x480px

If god isn't real then how do you explain the Bible??

>>727024733
>I was religious
But did you believe?

>>727024500
I reckon speak to a pastor/priest/minister, they are usually surprisingly accepting and not pushy towards agnostics, and give you reasons religion helps them, rather than shoving religious text up your dickhole

>>727024733
Also, prayer isnt supposed to be about you. Gods not going to give you things. You need to put in the necessary effort. And that doesnt mean going to church every sunday and paying tithe like the majority of the false chirstians do.

File: human pregnancy is so fucked up.png (655KB, 1912x2832px) Image search: [Google]

655KB, 1912x2832px

>>727022213
Made in the image of God, sho' 'nuff.

>>727024874
Not really, just followed my parents to church like a good christian boy. Probably only ever truly believed when I was really young.

>>727024819
In the same way as the Koran

>>727024803
That's bullshit and you know it.
Suffering happens because the world is a chaotic place and nothing is perfect.
Every person you love will at one point die, and this will cause grief which is suffering built into life.
If there were truly a benevolent creator, suffering would not exist.
The fact that suffering exists means a creator is either evil for making beings that would suffer, unable to control suffering, or non existent.

>>727022213

Can you really choose to believe something though? You either are convinced something is true or not convinced. Just be discerning of what is trustworthy evidence.

>>727024819
>hey anon wanna write a story
>sure fellow anon
>*they write story*
>people think to themselves "hey! I have ideas for this!"
>they add on to the story
>and here we are.

A regular theory I think about, (not sure if it was ever said before so I can't credit) but imagine someone wrote Harry Potter back then, would modern society be praying to potter? With this said I'm pretty neutral either way. I don't care what you believe in just don't force it upon people, and have a open mind.

>>727025163
Well there you go. Believing in God isnt about going to church and listening to some guy talk your ear off with his own interpretation of Gods message. You need to find your own proof through your own faith.

>>727026066
k Thanks anon

>>727026066
Saying you only get proof of something after you commit to believing in it shows that you are just priming yourself for an extreme confirmation bias when examining the "proof" you are getting.

>>727025993
>fuck how do I get those guys to kill for me?
>Tell them they will live forever if they do
>they ain't gonna believe that shit man
>just make it a really good story

I've actually waited years to be given an opportunity to express how I feel about religion. To me, when the bible was written, they used stories to explain what they weren't able to back then. Similar to how the Greeks and Romans used several gods to explain things. Like apollo (?) Who drug the sun across the sky every day.

>>727026303
Kek

>>727025351
You have the wrong perspective, friend. When a friend or family member of mine departs, I am not filled with grief. I do not feel suffering at their loss. I thank God for the part they played in my own life and others, and celebrate that. Again, our suffering is not Gods fault. We are responsible for our own lives. We have free will. So if someone chooses to do evil, well, you must choose to combat him with good. Or just continue to sit there and do nothing but complain. It is your choice, after all.

>>727022213
A thesis needs to be proved, you cannot state it's valid just because you can't disprove it. In the same way i can state that the toothfairy is real, the easter bunny and whatever else i can come up with.
What is fake for sure is the god described in the bible, since that book went under so many changes and modifications. Mary wasn't Virgin until 1600 ad, dozens of gode more Ancient then christ were born on the 25th of december and so on. Religions have so many common themes, they developed absorbing previous religions and it's quite clear to see.

I could make the argument that God is real and Religion doesn't have clue who God is or what God wants.

>>727026457
If a young child falls in a pool and drowns while their parent watches, is it the child's fault? I think not. If an all powerful all benevolent being is supervising us, then we wouldn't be drowning.

>>727022213

According to quantum mechanics, our low-entropy, life-friendly universe is one among an infinite numbers of possibilities.
Imagine our " creator " as a formless and limitless CPU in another dimension, whose motto is " if it's possible, it will happen ".

If all this shit make u depressed , Jesus is fine imo

>>727026270
Non believers make this point a lot. And yes, confirmation bias is real and does effect us, but you need to learn how to sift through the BS and find what is real. You have to understand that not everything you see is a message from God. People do get fanatical sometimes when they fall victim to confirmation bias.

>>727026673
>while their parent watches
Well why the fuck werent they doing something about it?

>>727026953
Well, you are saying that you receive proof if you believe. I am unaware of any believer able to share any proof they were ever given. If their "proof" can not be verified by a third party can it really be considered proof? If I saw something that appeared magical I would assume its more than likely a fluke in my brain if it couldn't be verified by someone else.

File: 1490484114313.jpg (101KB, 500x666px) Image search: [Google]

101KB, 500x666px

>>727022213

if there is a higher power, it probably doesn't care about what you eat, read, fuck, or do in life

>>727026457
You're missing the core concept here.

If you create a being which will without a doubt experience pain and suffering you are not benevolent because you have just created pain and suffering.

If god were real and good life would be pure pleasure, there would be no need to live and we would all just start in heaven.

I mean if you can make heaven why send people to suffer on earth before eternal pleasure?

>>727027122
that's the whole fucking point

>>727026673
The bible doesnt say god is all benevelant. If youve read it, youd see that he tells his prophets to wipe out entire towns and cities. Youve heard the phrase the road to hell is paved with good intentions? Some believers tout the Lord as a peace-loving God. Not the case. But that doesnt mean hes not worthy of our praise.

>>727022213
An atheist sailor who is sailing his boat on a normal day, it gets windy at night, he's still in the middle of the sea, he can't get help, he can do nothing at this point. Does he just give up and stand and wait for his boat to sink? No, he starts praying, praying for something superficial out of his hand, he doesn't know what is he praying to but he still prays. That is God.

>>727027520
If youre saying the parent let that happen, then its because they are choosing to be evil. So what point are you trying to make? God doesnt exist because people die? Grow up.

>>727027549
We'll it still doesnt need to be all benevolent. It simply needs to be the creator of it all and all powerful to be held responsible for its creation... This is pretty straight forward. If you make something and you have full power over it, then you are responsible for it.

if a loving God existed he would either smite me or give me a normal life

>>727027732
This is called inner monologue. You talk to yourself when you are thinking all the time. If you desperately want something you say it desperately to yourself... this isnt anything...

>>727022213
Every god ever created (and there are thousands) comes with exactly the same amount of supporting evidence. That amount is zero. That is really all you need to know.

And if you have been conned by the scam that religions are all about helping the poor, remember that the most religious countries in the world have the most uneven distribution of wealth, and the least religious have the most even distribution. Look into Gini Index/Religiosity correlation.

Religions are scams designed to wield control over you, and to separate you from your cash.

I offer you these facts for free. Your priest will lie to your face, and then pass around the collection plate.

>>727027502
You are the one missing the core concept, bud. Youre upset because you feel you suffer needlessly. We suffer so that we can appreciate pleasure. A king who has known power his whole life would not appreciate it. If you had been born in heaven, if you had never known what life was like on earth, you wouldnt derive as much pleasure from being in heaven.

>>727027780
And who said thats how the world worked? You? Hohoh.

>>727027945
Hes not going to give you anything, because youre more than capable of taking what you need for yourself. Get to work.

Occam's razor. Nothing will always be a simpler assumption over something. Personally, the deluge of suffering this world is drowning under helps reinforce that for me. Is God a moronic architect or just a total asshole? Hard to respect either way if it is real. Eternal punishment for not sucking divine sack exacerbates that. It'd be nice to be able to believe that stuff is real. Gives someone to point a finger at for all the problems and makes me feel better about all the kind people who are taking dirt naps.

>>727028260
But god decides how much pleasure I get in heaven, no my subjective experience of it.

Also what about the people who go to hell?

Did he create those souls to suffer forever without ever knowing his goodness?

>>727028316
If you cause something then you are responsible? these are true by definition.

>>727025993

there is historians working about this , to them the Bible is a book of fables written in some Mesopatamian king's court

File: ThisIsGodForTwoThousandYears.jpg (43KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 640x640px

>>727022213

>>727027315
Everyone has to find their own proof. What I have seen and heard that has led me to God is not necessarily what you will see. You must first believe and have faith, and the proof will come to you in time, when you need it. Some people go their whole lives just to find their beliefs confirmed right before they die. I count myself lucky that I was shown the light so early, but it was because I needed it.

>>727027950
I'm not talking about a situation where you are talking to yourself, like wishing being as rich as xxx, I meant the belief everyone has that there's some superficial power running around this world, the belief you get when you see oppression but you believe oppressors will pay, you believe there is some power stronger than ours that'll make them pay.

>>727028648

mesopotamian*

Best argument for the existence of an omnipotent being from one of the world's most recognized atheists: https://www.samharris.org/blog/item/is-religion-true-in-the-matrix

Vid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=buWKH66OhhQ

>>727028712
You didn't answer what I said about can it even be considered proof. But what do you even mean by because you needed it. Isn't it the people who don't believe in your religion the ones who reallly need the proof? It simply does not add up at all. Are you being honest with yourself or just trying to promote something.

>>727028481
What? God decides how much pleasure you get in heaven? Where in the bible does it say that? You have a lot of misconceptions about how God works. Im sorry to say you wont find the answers you seek by talking to a pastor, because theyre almost as clueless as you are. But if you truly want to find answers, read the bible, have faith, and the answers will come for you as they came for me. Maybe not in the same way, but in some way.

The logical problem of evil is one of the oldest arguments and has never been successfully argued against.

>God exists.

>God is omnipotent, omniscient, and
omnibenevolent.

>An omnibenevolent being would want to prevent all evils.

>An omniscient being knows every way in which evils can come into existence, and knows every way in which those evils could be prevented.

>An omnipotent being has the power to prevent that evil from coming into existence.

>A being who knows every way in which an evil can come into existence, who is able to prevent that evil from coming into existence, and who wants to do so, would prevent the existence of that evil.

>If there exists an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent God, then no evil exists.

>Evil exists (logical contradiction).

>>727028489
By human definition. Last I checked, God doesnt answer to you or your lame dictionary.

>>727028778
Not everyone has that belief. I can prove this because I do not... When I see oppression I don't believe the oppressors will necessarily pay because evidence shows often they do not.

>>727028979
Well yes, if he created you and created heaven he decided how much pleasure you would get in heave since he create all of it.

>>727029059
The original argument was god is either an asshole or nonexistent. If there is an all-powerful being able to stop suffering and does not this is called being an asshole. If you say the suffering is caused by people and god created people then god is still responsible because he created people who would cause suffering.

>>727028942
Youre thinking that proof needs to be peer edited. Maybe in science, but this is God we're talking about. And I was shown my proof because I believed, had faith, and was at deaths door. People who dont believe wont receive the proof because THEY DONT BELIEVE. So even if they were shown the proof, which they probably are some times, they wouldnt believe it. They wouldnt think twice about it.

>>727029138
Heheh. No. I refer you to my previous statement.

>>727029323
You had a near death experience?

>>727022213
It's all about having faith...give it a shot, what could it hurt?

If God existed it would be self evident. It would be impossible to not notice God.

>>727029323
So the proof you are talking about is so unconvincing that you already need to believe it, you have to feel the NEEED to confirm your belief, and people get the proof all the time and dont even notice it. If this is how powerful your proof is then it is simply confirmation bias. Its hard to recognize it when you are practicing it yourself.

>>727029319
He created us and gave us free will. If he were to intervene and stop us from exerting our free will, it wouldnt really be fair. At that point we're just puppets in his game of Doll House, which is not the point of God at all.

>>727028712
>Everyone has to find their own proof
this is the problem with religion, the exact issue we dont have with science. if i say objects fall to the earth at a speed of 32 feet per second squared, i can show you how i came to that conclusion. and if you copy my experiment, youll get the same number. if you say you know god exists and then say i may not get to the same conclusion if i do the same things you do, then you dont have proof. you have a belief. and believing something to be true does not make it true.

>>727028648
Neat!

>>727029387
But it's wrong,

God created you.
Therefore God created your ability feel pleasure.
This means that god decided how much pleasure you would feel at any time.
This includes when you are in heaven.
You're suggesting that there is a variable that god did not control.
That makes him no longer god.

>>727029415
A few

>>727029016

Hint: The definition of evil is wholly taken for granted.

If "good" is a higher moral concept that God is contingent to, then God is not omnipotent. If God is not omnipotent, then God does not exist.

Therefore, one cannot make the argument that God is contingent to a higher moral standard. God alone is the only standard of good by nature. Anything that opposes this standard is the definition of evil.

Thus, evil is not a problem, and can even be a tool for good. How? If God prevented all evils (instantly), then you would not exist.

Thus, allowing evil is an aspect of mercy. However, allowing evil to exist indefinitely is an injustice. Evil must eventually be dealt with, but it doesn't need to be "instantaneously," as PoE implies.

>>727029490
You can call it confirmation bias all day, but unless you experience it yourself, you really have no idea. What youre doing is providing yourself with an excuse to quit before you even begin believing.

>>727029458
What do you define as noticing God?

>>727029612
Did you see an angel or something?

Seeing anything is rare and it's thought to be related to the release of DMT in your brain.

>>727029498
For one thing you are completely missing all the nonhuman caused suffering in the world. Secondly if a god created humans then why would it have created some with the intention of doing harm? I dont go around killing things and my free will isnt restricted. However some people do go around killing people. Why was the serial killer created? There is no need to have serial killers and have free will. It is a lie to say there must be suffering if there is free will.

>>727029458
By definition, an omnipotent being is not limited to form. Thus, not self-evident. You could very well exist within an infinite mind that is not limited to form. Again, not immediately self-evident.

>>727029749
It is literally impossible for me to believe. Its not a choice you are either convinced or not. This is why its such a ridiculous litmus test. I literally can not choose to believe something.

>>727029563
Neither does disbelieving something. And why are we still even comparing science to religion? Its apples and oranges. Religion is based on faith, something so profoundly un-scientific that you could make arguments all day about how science can be proven, but it doesnt matter. Until science can objectively disprove God, I'll keep my faith.

>>727029916

>You could very well exist within an infinite mind that is not limited to form.

I would love to see you prove this statement. Can you give an example of a mind existing without form?

Also why do you say an omnipotent being is not limited to form by definition? The only thing it is by definition is that it must be all powerful. Can you prove that such a thing must have no physical form?

>>727029709

Allowing evil to exist at all is malevolent if you have the ability stop it, which as the designer of a system you would.

>allowing evil is an aspect of mercy

Evil for the sake of evil is not mercy, it's just evil.

A child born with HIV to a mother who is starving will suffer until it dies, it had no point on earth besides suffering.

This is evil.

>>727029927
You're confusing your subjective will with objective evidence.

>>727029797
No, but I was basically guided onto the path that I'm currently on through freak coincidences that have no explanation other than they were set up. And who the hell would care about me enough to set them up other than God?

>>727029709
What could it even mean for good to be a higher moral concept that God is contingent to?

If God exists, then he is perfect. He is perfectly good by definition. If he is perfectly good, there should be no evil.

Yet there is obviously evil.

>>727030257
What does that even mean? I didn't say subjective will or anything like it. I am saying its literally impossible to believe something if you are not convinced of it. And you are saying you have to be convinced of it to get the evidence. Which is insane thinking.

>>727029977
how might you objectively disprove the claim "humans are capable of unaided flight"?

>>727030263

It's like this, you are a proto god.
You are in this semi-physical form to learn lessons about consciousness before you are given to the power to create them.
You literally can not die, your soul just goes onto the next universe where it still exists.

>>727030146
>Can you give an example of a mind existing without form?

I stated, "infinite mind that is not limited to form," which you're confusing with a finite materialist brain. I was simply re-wording the definition of God. When communicating with atheists, I prefer to avoid names such as "God" or "Yahweh," and concentrate the the chief attribute of God instead, which in this case would be omnipotence.

If omnipotent, then by definition not limited to form.

>Also why do you say an omnipotent being is not limited to form by definition?

Because it's being honest about the term "omnipotent." For example. . .

>The only thing it is by definition is that it must be all powerful. Can you prove that such a thing must have no physical form?

To truly have "omni-potential," one would not be confined to any single particular form. I'm just being honest about terms here. Any "god-in-a-box" scenario would be contradictory to omnipotence.

File: b50f17e2db7dddb393fddb101034bbe9d3044669986af5c354d338d5f04d4719_1.jpg (97KB, 600x480px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 600x480px

So called atheists always turn out to be agnostic 'atheists'. They won't say there's no god and they'll try to weasel out of having to prove there's no god if you ask them to. Their arguments are so weak they can't even convince themselves that atheism is true. All they can do is whine that what the xians say isn't good enough to convince them.

>>727029811
The serial killer isnt born a serial killer. And as for nonhuman caused "suffering", you are liberally using the term suffering to describe natural occurences. Animals need to eat, so if you look tasty to them then theyre going to eat you unless you do something about it. It happens. Lets say a river dries up and thousands are without a source of water. Then they need to move out and find another place to settle, or ask for aid. The point is, suffering is there for us to conquer. You have the power to help yourself, or help others. Sitting and complaining about how God is a big bully isnt going to help starving kids in africa.
>"why doesnt god just give them food hurr durr hes all powerful hurrr"
Because we are his vessel on this earth. We are the ones who will give them food on his behalf.

>>727029977
Science has a lot to do with it actually. Science is a proven reliable way to gain knowledge about the world. When it is applied to religions claims it always comes out with there is no evidence to support the claim. Because science a proven reliable source of knowledge it is very telling that when applied to religion it gives no reason to support it whatsoever. If the claims of any religion were true you would think the best tool for understanding the world would give it support.

>>727029927
Of course you can, but you are choosing to believe that you cant. Thats self deception and self limiting behavior.

>>727030238
>Allowing evil to exist at all is malevolent if you have the ability stop it, which as the designer of a system you would.

- Only if the definition of evil were taken for granted.

- Only if God were subject to your stopwatch. Your false dichotomy is missing a 3rd option, that of overturning evil to God's advantage; making evil work for good.

>Evil for the sake of evil is not mercy, it's just evil.

^ I see you're still evading the definition for evil. Throwing around terms so carelessly as-if everyone knew what they meant. I'm not referring to the comic-book definition of disembodied good/evil. If you don't have a clear definition we can work with, then you don't have an accusation for logical contradiction.

The Tao of Spider Man
"With great power comes great responsibility"

God is suppose to be all powerful all knowing and everywhere.
= God is responsible for every bad thing ever. He knew it would happen, put the pieces in motion, was able to stop it, and chose not to.

Even if god exists he's a cunt.
Mix that with the utter lack of evidence for his existence and the awful shit that people do in his name.
Would you really want to worship him?

>>727022213

I think there could be a god like being out there. Certainly not one that governs over us and tallies our every mistake, though.

>>727030238

Not really since the child will get free tickets to Disneyland Heaven while us suckers have to earn our place. Quite the envious position really.

>>727030560
Omnipotence in itself is self contradicting.

>>727030534
Thanks, Ronald Reagan.

>>727030683
>suffering is there for us to conquer

Right, like those tsunamis that kill a hundred thousand people or cancer that kills children...

>>727030864
Even if it wasn't baptised?

>>727030373
> What could it even mean for good to be a higher moral concept that God is contingent to?

It doesn't. That's what I'm pointing out.

> If God exists, then he is perfect. He is perfectly good by definition. If he is perfectly good, there should be no evil.

You just made a jump to conclusions. There is no evil as-in corruption of God's own character, but there can be finite beings that fall short of God's character. That's the only consistent definition of good and evil.

>>727029977
Given that your belief in something is contingent upon science not disproving it, then you are forced to simultaneously believe in God and believe that he cannot exist.

You're also forced to believe in a lot of other things of which you would probably otherwise consider yourself agnostic.

>>727030996

Out of luck then but that would be the parents fault not God.

>>727030683
I am not convinced that you actually believe this. For one thing how am I blaming a god? I don't even believe in a god. I am just saying if a god existed it must be an asshole (doesnt care about human suffering)

>>727030660
I'll say there are no gods.

I say it for exactly the same reason that I say there is no tooth fairy.

Strange that nobody ever asks someone to prove that there is no tooth fairy.

>>727030423
>I am saying its literally impossible to believe something if you are not convinced of it.

A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.

That's the difference. The subjective will acts as the gatekeeper of the evidence. You cannot blame the evidence itself. The final executive decision is with the subjective will of the individual; regardless of the objective evidence.

>>727030849
OK fuck the general term of evil, let's go with something specific.

How about hemorrhoids?

What part of god's plan do the little red pains in the ass serve?

Why would a benevolent creator be such a pain in my ass?

>>727030711
Youre not really making any sense here. Im sure whatever youre saying made sense in your mind, but its falling flat for me. Science cannot prove or disprove religion, end of story, for now.

>>727030772
Can you please explain how you can believe something and not be unconvinced? This is impossible by definition. belief=convinced.

>>727031072
What if it died on the way to the church?

Another thing to think about is Heaven.
If the faithful really believe in eternal Paradise then why do they mourn their dead? Wouldn't it be a happy occasion?
"Hey my two year old daughter was killed in a horrible car accident"
"congratulations!"

If they believe in heaven then the shouldn't struggle to stay alive. Stop wearing seat belts and stop going to the doctors. If god wants you dead those wont help anyway.

>>727031078

I honestly don't see how people of faith don't at least acknowledge that fact, instead they need to find a workaround as to why a loving god would allow his children to suffer.

File: pj4nQ3w.jpg (85KB, 500x342px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 500x342px

>>727031015
If god is to be asserted as both omnipotent and omnibenevolent, then he doesn't exist. Natural disasters, disease, and freak accidents cause the suffering of millions of people every day, often to the point of death, and always either directly caused by or ignored by god, if such a being exists

>>727031015

I think you're actually right about my mistake, but I don't understand the creation of such morally imperfect creatures given God's perfection. Could you explain?

>>727030911
Please demonstrate. And if you're thinking of invoking the omnipotence paradox, then please do a bit of research on it before attempting to use it as an argument. It's not as effective as one might assume.

>>727030965
You cant stop the tsunami, but you can help the survivors. You cant cure the children, but you can make them smile if only for a moment. Im not saying ignore the bad things in life, but dont let them bring you down. Like I said, conquer that suffering. If you try it, you will see.

>>727031146
>A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still.

Then he is not convinced.

>>727031345
So god created evil to give man something to do?

>>727031151
> OK fuck the general term of evil,

Haha. See, you can't be lazy with this stuff.

>How about hemorrhoids?

No, and here's why. You're confusing JS Mill's Harm Principle with evil.

Seriously. Try again. If it gets frustrating, then talk to your guidance counselor about getting you into Philosophy 101.

>>727031019
I didnt say my belief was contingent on science not disproving it. I already believe and have found my own proof of Gods existence.

>>727031199

Then clearly God knew the child would become evil in the future so killed the child before he had to uphold his 'baptised kids go free' rule.

>>727031152
If we tested to see if people who used a medicine was more likely to recover from a disease than people who went without medicine at all and then the result came out that there was no evidence to support that medicine helped. Would that be telling? Yes. When we test things like prayer. It shows there is no evidence supports that prayer helps. In all these testable claims of religions it falls flat. This is why science is very relate-able. Most people are religious so but they believe in science so its propagated that well its just cause science cant really explain it. No science is very telling on the subject, its just that people are scientifically illiterate

>>727031215
The answer lies in the "whence cometh evi?" bit.

Evil comes from us.

According to God's holy righteousness and justice, we should not exist.

Thus, mercy. Remember, mercy by definition is not owed.

>>727031466
>Until science can objectively disprove God, I'll keep my faith.

Yes you did.

>>727031444
So suffering of any type is not evil?

So what in your definition is evil?

Does evil even exist to you?

>>727031258
This is why apologists dont even use omnipotent anymore they just say maximally powerful. Its because the classical properties of god are self contradictory.

>>727031206
I suspect it's because they privately know that it's a crock.

>>727031565
So god made a mistake in making us and it only by his mercy that we continue to exist?

>>727031565

We shouldn't exist? Then why did god choose to create us?

You're obviously wrong about that, because here we are.

Is it your word over god?

>>727031255
I can't answer that apart from say, Romans 9:14-24. There are vessels of mercy and vessels of wrath.

- So on the one hand, God is perfectly right to prevent/eradicate those who have fallen from His standard of holiness.

- On the other, He extends mercy to show the other aspect of Himself.

>>727031632

If he is not powerful enough to stop evil on earth how can he do it in heaven?

>>727031078
You can continue thinking that way, but you think that way because you dont know or understand who God is and what Hes all about. Im not here to convert you, but the sign of an intelligent mind is one who can entertain an idea without acknowledging it as fact, so if you find yourself to be a smart individual, pick up the bible and give it a read.

>>727031361
That is correct. Which is why it's a difference of subjective will vs. objective evidence.

I am just the messenger. I cannot convince you by force. Your entire will would have to be regenerated and your eyes opened by a literal act of God.

>>727031742

In the past God would of just caused your mother miscarriage. But because of all these medicines people are going against God and having Atheist babies.

>>727031842
I've read the bible and I have entertained the ideas. Also it is completely disconnected to the god concept entirely.... I am asking how is it possible to believe something and be unconvinced at the same time. It is impossible. If you are saying you have to know god and understand him then it literally sounds like knowing god is synonymous with double thought.

>>727031167
What I meant is you are choosing to believe that you cant just believe something without evidence. Plenty of people do, you dont because you choose not to.

>>727031627
>So suffering of any type is not evil?

No. Because it could be justice. The thing we need to ask ourselves is, "Why has God allowed me to go on living for one more day?" We take his mercy too much for granted.

> So what in your definition is evil?

Falling short of the glory of God. "Missing the mark" of God's utterly perfect holiness.

>Does evil even exist to you?

Yes, but as a privation (classical theology).

>>727031933

Have you ever experienced an act that you absolutely knew was from whichever god you believe in?? Honest question here.

>>727022213
There is bacon

>>727032024

Why would god deliberately cause that suffering?

>>727032041
No, they believe and thats fine. They have been convinced. I am not convinced. I have to be convinced in order to be considered believing in it. This has nothing to do with evidence. It is just brain states and the definition of belief and convinced.

>>727031632
>This is why apologists dont even use omnipotent anymore they just say maximally powerful. Its because the classical properties of god are self contradictory.

This is why you're being deliberately vague about the "apologists" you're appealing to. Omnipotence paradox is not a contradiction and is actually easy to solve, because the paradox itself is a subtle contradiction. One is not obligated to answer a false and/or poorly constructed query.

>>727031434
Not just something to do, something that will better that man, make him stronger, smarter, and more able to appreciate his gifts of strength and smarts because he had to work for them. If everything were easy peasy lemon squeezy, what would be the point? Where would be the sense of accomplishment? The merit? It would all be worthless.

>>727031566
I say that because it never can and never will, so its a moot point.

I've been a staunch atheist my whole life. But recently after some major life changes, I'm apparently getting more religious by the day. Can't seem to shake the feeling that god has a plan for me. I don't relish the idea of being a Christian, but I can feel Jesus working his way into my heart.
Feels....good? I think? My whole family is gonna be disgusted with me, but whatever.

File: 1487326188307.jpg (145KB, 890x594px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 890x594px

Therre are none and that makes it heaven-like. If there were chosen People, People would just listen to them.
Even our mimicked behaviour rather suits Game Theory with forgetting.

>>727032063
So you admit that god created evil by making something lesser than himself.

The question continues to be why create evil at all?

Why create something lesser than yourself that will suffer by simply existing?

Isn't that an evil thing to do?

>>727031720
I didn't say mistake. I said elsewhere in the thread that He creates (a.) vessels of mercy and (b.) vessels of wrath. In both cases, we continue to exist through His mercy alone. In the case of "b," this is an example of what is known in theology as "common grace." But "a." is known as "special grace."

"Well what makes anyone so special to deserve the special grace?"

Absolutely nothing. Again, mercy by definition is not owed. God commonly shows mercy to the worst sinners imaginable.

GOD DOES NOT EXIST

YOU FUCKING RETARDED CHRISTIANS NEED TO WAKE UP AND REALIZE THAT YOU ARE ALONE IN THIS WORLD

FUCKIN PATHETIC

ATHEISTS UNITE DISCORD, GET REDPILLED YOU SLAVES TO THE CROSS

https://discord.gg/bp44v4s

>>727032274
How can you tell its a 2000 year old jew giving you feels or that its just your brain?

>>727032274
Ask jesus why he plagiarised the story of horus.

>>727022213
If Jesus loved you, he would've gave you penta. Apparently he does not.

Therre are none and that makes it heaven-like.
Even our mimicked behaviour rather suits Game Theory with forgetting.

Even our mimicked behaviour rather suits Game Theory with forgetting.
Therre are none and that makes it heaven-like.
If there were chosen People, People would just listen to them.
If there were chosen People, People would just listen to them.

Level5wailmerTwitch.tv

While I do believe in an afterlife, I do not believe is an omniscient being that created everything, but also has my well-being in mind.

If "He" created the very universe itself, then created the earth, then created a man and a woman, why did he have to bone Joseph's wife to create a son? Why didn't he just say "BOOM! I'm a daddy."

Religion has done amazing things for people in need. It's also probably caused the death of more people on the earth than any other cause.

>>727032152

When people have sex outside of marriage or in positions God disproves of God will abort the baby to give a small reminder that they are going against the will of God.

Back then people understood this and tried to improve their lives. Nowadays people don't understand and they suffer more than they should

>>727032274
Also why do people of other religions have those same feels except they are boner's for other things like Buddha or Muhammad or Zeus?

>>727032072
Yes. I can claim to have had a "conversion experience," after hitting an existentialist rock bottom.

But I didn't leave it at the subjective experience alone. Being surrounded by a peer group that was predominately secular, atheist, and agnostic, I still needed objective verification of my subjective experience.

Thus, I suspended judgment until I could be absolutely certain.

God exists, and he dosn't give a crap about us. He dosn't love us despite what the buble says. God is evil

>>727032408
What you call mercy is merely an excuse for the suffering of lesser beings.

It's no different than if I were to breed dogs with the sole purpose of breaking their bones to cause them as much pain as possible before I killed them.

>>727032038
Playing with semantics all day isnt going to get you anywhere. Belief is just the word we use to describe our conviction of faith. Dont get so caught up on the literal definitions. Religion isnt supposed to be mired in intellectual babble, its for the idiot masses.

>>727032537
>I'm a virgin because I'm a good christian boy
>You're a virgin because you desire losing your virginity but you can't

>>727032176
Like I said to another anon, dont get so caught up on literal definitions. This is religion we're discussing, not semantics.

>>727031080
Ok respect for not being the typical gutless fake atheist.
But now you have to prove there's no god/tooth fairy. And anything you say that's not backed up with citations of papers in recent (2016 or later) reputable journals (either Nature or Science) is automatically unfounded bullshit.

All my irl atheists are Cult of Dawkins, convinced they're hot shit intellectuals. Actually morons.

I would never argue for a benevolent creator.

I could imagine a conscious being with the amount of technology required to put into motion a series of events which would create sapient life just to have something to watch.

>>727032527
>Religion has done amazing things for people in need

This is the scam they want you to believe. Observable reality shows the truth:

......And if you have been conned by the scam that religions are all about helping the poor, remember that the most religious countries in the world have the most uneven distribution of wealth, and the least religious have the most even distribution. Look into Gini Index/Religiosity correlation.

>>727032637
Maybe this will help you understand. Can you believe you have 27 children without being convinced? Can you simply choose to believe that? No you cannot. You have to be convinced somehow that it is true in order to believe the statement. Just like it is true that you need to be convinced in order to believe that statement you also need to be convinced that a god actually exists to believe in a god.

>>727032404
> So you admit that god created evil by making something lesser than himself.

Not directly. God can create something that eventually goes bad on its own. And just because God created something finite doesn't make the finite being bad in and of itself.

> The question continues to be why create evil at all?

Again, Romans 9:14-24. Specifically, "Will the thing formed say to him who formed it, “Why have you made me like this?” Does not the potter have power over the clay, from the same lump to make one vessel for honor and another for dishonor?"

That's the point where one must accept that God doesn't answer to us for what He has chosen to glorify Himself with.

>Why create something lesser than yourself that will suffer by simply existing?

Isn't that an evil thing to do?

Again, imagine the created being shaking its little fist in judgment, "Why hast thou created me thus?" Just looking for any excuse to accuse the creator.

But what is that accusation based on? Some sense of justice that God should answer to, or is contingent to? Then He is not God. God does not answer to any higher moral authority.

In which case, we remain attempting to judge God.

>>727032782
You are being disingenuous. You would never, and have never asked someone to prove there is no tooth fairy. You know that it is a reasonable position. Yet you make an exception for something vastly, monumentally more ridiculous than the tooth fairy, the christian god.

Ask yourself why.

>>727032838
I already understand the point youre trying to make, but like I just said, dont get caught up in literal definitions of words used by the idiot masses to describe their conviction of faith.

>>727032971
So you 're saying god is above judgement, just take on faith that the suffering of mortals is just?

>>727033072
How can I have faith in something? What does that mean? Does it mean belief because we agree that belief means you are convinced you can't choose to be convinced. So can you choose to have faith? if so what does that mean?

>>727032624
> What you call mercy is merely an excuse for the suffering of lesser beings.

Here, you're using "suffering" as an implied accusation. You are simply resentful that God has not given you more. More of what you don't deserve already.

>It's no different than if I were to breed dogs with the sole purpose of breaking their bones to cause them as much pain as possible before I killed them

^ The argument would be valid here if, and only if, you as the dog-breeder were the only moral law giver in existence.

But you're not. You're using the dog breeding example within a greater assumed moral paradigm.

>>727022213
Even if you can't prove the existence/nonexistence of a god, we know there is no moral goodness in the bible at all.

1. Pacifism (no protection or defense of the weak)
2 . The Abrahamic god clearly intended for his followers to have slaves - Even Jefferson Davis used the bible in court to defend it.
3. Punishment for the imaginary crime of witchcraft is death.

Anything the bible teaches, it doesn't teach it very well.

41,000,000 christian denominations represents 41,000,000 deep disagreements about what a single book means or says.

Being a Christian, or Muslim or Hindu is more dependent upon where you and your family origin is, than the possibility of a particular religion being true or not.

>>727033196
Well thats the million dollar question isnt it?

>>727033424
>41,000,000 christian denominations represents 41,000,000 deep disagreements

41,000 not 41 million... sorry.. it's still a lot.

>>727033259
>you as the dog-breeder were the only moral law giver in existence.

But to the dog I am the only moral law giver, just as god would be the only moral law giver to me.

Does that make the pain of the dog insignificant?

>>727033196
Faith is required where reason and evidence are lacking.

Faith that the story writers about "Jesus" didn't just make that shit up decades after the supposed jesus was born, broke natural laws of physics, etc.

The scholars all agree none of the "gospels" were written during the time when the supposed messiah lived.

Josephus was an orthodox Jew, and Jews don't believe in Jesus, the divinity of Jesus.

>>727033084
Of course I am saying that an omnipotent being is above judgment. What possible standard could you hold over Him to begin with?

> just take on faith that the suffering of mortals is just?

Let's run with that.

Let's assume that suffering is an injustice. Well, okay. According to who's standard?

- If ours, then we're judging God for not giving us unicorns and rainbows 24/7. As a species, we demand more of Him than we deserve.

- If God's standard, then where is it written? Euthyphro's dilemma? But that's just another person's opinion with literally no answer, "Whence cometh evil?" Euthyphro cannot even define his own terms.

The only other conclusion via process of eliminiation is that suffering is just. We do not deserve the comfortable life God gave us last week, let alone the for the next five minutes. Sure, neither of us like or prefer the alternative, but then again, we're not God. I will simply praise him for the mercy that I do not deserve.

>>727033424
>Even if you can't prove the existence/nonexistence of a god, we know there is no moral goodness in the bible at all.
>1. Pacifism (no protection or defense of the weak)
>2 . The Abrahamic god clearly intended for his followers to have slaves - Even Jefferson Davis used the bible in court to defend it.
>3. Punishment for the imaginary crime of witchcraft is death.

Don't forget being burned and tortured f-o-r-e-v-e-r if you ever worked on a sunday.

And don't forget to gather your neighbours together and stone your own son to death if he is ever disobedient.

*christian morality*

>>727033680
>Faith is required where reason and evidence are lacking.

The great Martin Luther on reason:
"Reason is a whore, the greatest enemy that faith has; it never comes to the aid of spiritual things, but more frequently than not struggles against the divine Word, treating with contempt all that emanates from God.”

>>727033425
Is that supposed to impress me? So you are talking about something you have no fucking idea about? Maybe you shouldn't believe something that you dont have a clue about. You said dont get caught up with terms. but you are saying essentially that the most important thing. That you have right and have proof of. You use the same ambiguous terms that all religious use that you cant define. You dont know what the fuck you are talking about. Maybe I shouldnt be so hard on you. Because surprise no religious person knows what they are talking about.

>>727033680
YOU JUST COULDNT DEFINE FAITH AND YET YOU STILL USE IT! wtf dude. You are using it interchangeably with belief again. and belief requires convincing and you cant choose to be convinced of something.

>>727033002
Instead of proving god doesn't exist you call me disingenuous and the christian god ridiculous.

Typical 'atheist'.

>>727033687
Or the logical conclusion that god does not exist.

To state that suffering is just because god is infallible so it must be is circular logic.

Either he does not exist, or cares not for the suffering he caused to be.

So a sadist.

>>727033196
IMPORTANT: The history of the definition of "faith" splintered following Kierkegaard. Prior to existentialism, faith simply meant "objective trust," including all the latin variants.

"Fiduciary Trust." (as in banks)

"Semper Fidelis"

"Marital Fidelity" and/or fidelity to friends.

Then came the Kierkegaardian "leap of faith" into the irrational. Irrationality being defined as anything not empirically observed. But empiricism isn't perfect and has flaws. One can still be theistic and not have to subscribe to Kierkegaardian definitions of faith.

See: Fideism.

>>727033781
Yes, well.. some Christians continue to be Christians for the purpose of it's "utility", never bothering to check and see if any of it could possibly be real.

1. They say "look at all the good that christians do in the world"

2. They say that Christianity provides morals that you wouldn't have otherwise, but this falls apart with the slightest scrutiny.

>>727033916
You dont have to prove god doesnt exist to not believe in a god. This is basic logic. Do you have to prove there are no leprechauns to believe they dont exist? Is it illogical to believe leprechauns dont exist? The lack of evidence for something is logically sufficient enough to not believe in it. You dont have to have evidence of the contrary.

>>727033916
Why do you believe in god and not the tooth fairy?

>>727033818
>all that emanates from God
That would be nothing, since it does not exist.

What he should he said was "all that emanates from religion", and that richly deserves contempt.

>>727033878
>YOU JUST COULDNT DEFINE FAITH AND YET YOU STILL USE IT! wtf dude.

You're using an alternate usage of the word faith.

Matthew 17:20 "....faith as small as mustard seed can move mountains" right?

What part of that not mean belief?

>>727033916
You dodged my point, and we both know why.

>>727034262
>What part of that not mean belief?

What part of that does NOT mean belief.. ugh

>>727033612

>But to the dog I am the only moral law giver,

No. There are actually new studies on canine emotional intelligence where the dog ignores people they don't trust. That means we're being judged by our dogs based on a higher standard.

>Does that make the pain of the dog insignificant?

No. Only your hypothetical.

>>727034262
That doesn't help define it. It further obscures the definition. And I am not using the word faith. You are. I asked you about it and what it means. You don't have a clue other than to use it interchangeably with belief. The reason you can is because people use faith to mystify and obscure what they are talking about when they are clueless.

>>727033878
The guy who responded wasnt me, way to play into the bait. Anyway, ask a pastor about faith or one of the other anons here because Im going to bed. I hope God helps you clear the fog in this matter so you can grow closer to him.

>>727034470
Pastors are humans. They dont know any better than you. There is no reason to believe it.

>>727033926
>Or the logical conclusion that god does not exist.

Which is not even an option, because judging God according to a higher moral standard is also a contradiction; rendering God non-omnipotent.

> So a sadist.

Thus, you judge God. The problem is that you have no moral standard from which to even mount so high a horse.

>>727034444
How can your quads only make you look like you obfuscate more? not sure.

Instead of telling everyone they have no idea what faith is, why don't you just say what the fuck it is to you, since you believe it means something totally completely different than believing in the unprovable

>>727034444
Quads of quality

>>727034470
>I hope God helps you clear the fog in this matter so you can grow closer to him.

God is imaginary though. How can it help?

>>727034444
>what is 'projecting'

>>727034369
I am not here to debate what a dog considers moral.

To say evil exists to serve a greater unseen good is like a get out of jail free card for causing suffering.

What about the seven plagues was just?
Or sodom and gomorrah?

Why create those places to destroy them?

>>727034655
It cant not help.

>>727034578
>god is so powerful when he creates evils it's a good thing!

>>727034628
>Quads of quality
Quads of obfuscation

FTFY

>>727034655
> God is imaginary though.

^ Which is stated as a certainty. Surely that's a mistake, because if you were certain, you would have to have infinite knowledge of the entire universe yourself.

Thus, you really should clarify your position.

>>727034581
>>727034444

When people use the word faith and say its different than belief thats what im talking about because thats what im responding to. People use the word faith to make it special.

>>727034552
Then ask God

>>727034725
since supernatural beings are only the products of imagination, it's impossible for it to help.

Furthermore, it puts the locus of control out of this person's hands.

>>727034677
Anon is accusing you of a psychological problem http://psychology.wikia.com/wiki/Projection_%28defence_mechanism%29

on the other hand, simply accusing someone of projection constitutes a defense mechanism in and of itself.

>>727024492
this is so true. you have to believe to see the signs. call it confirmation bias if you want to but it is so true.

>>727034816
Thats not really true. Mental exercises have the potential to help you whether they are based on facts or falsehoods.

>>727034749
>^ Which is stated as a certainty. Surely


so, at least you got that first part right.

we know Christianity is a young religion, even the old testament.

we know the Hindus were practicing their religion long before the Jews were.

How do you know which religion is right?

Can they all be right? Is this a good question, since they make incompatible claims about the nature of the world, the cosmos and the history of it?

>>727025111
Checked and read. Well played

I'll just leave this here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGBxUNaQI1I

>>727034932
>Mental exercises have the potential to help you whether they are based on facts or falsehoods.

Which are more helpful, seeking truths about the nature of the world, or relying on lies? relying on books written a long time ago, by men - for men?

Can we get anything of value from books written... about 80 ACE and forward? about a guy that they say lived near 4 BCE?

I mean.. you have to consider the source document, and if it could possibly be real, then look at the actual teachings within it.

Does killing a fig tree, because figs aren't in season have a valuable lesson to it?

How about chasing demons into a herd of pigs that commit suicide right afterward?

What good can we learn from this nonsense?

How about all the dead saints walking around jeruselum after the "jesus death" thing?

What are we supposed to get from this?

>>727034696
>To say evil exists to serve a greater unseen good is like a get out of jail free card for causing suffering.

Well then you're just strawmanning. Evil does not exist to serve a greater unseen good. I'm arguing for the existence of God's mercy, which is not an unseen good.

Mercy is not justice, but at the same time it is not in-justice. Mercy is a benevolent alternative to justice.

> What about the seven plagues was just?

If one believes in the doctrine of total depravity, then this isn't a problem. The plagues were God's just punishment on Egypt.

> Or sodom and gomorrah?

Same thing, different cities.

> Why create those places to destroy them?

To demonstrate justice.

Once again, the tiny finite being in Romans 9 shaking his little fist up at God for creating vessels of mercy and vessels of wrath.

Admit it. You want a reason to hate a sovereign creator, and nothing more.

>>727022213
GOD EXISTS but it's not the one you read about in the bible or any other myth, it's simply the entity that got the ball rolling in the first place, the thing that created the first big bang, as it's possible that there have been an infinite amount already, or maybe there is only one and after entropy takes its place there will be nothing. Who knows though, just don't believe in any religion unless you are weak willed and need it.

>>727035236
If you use words like "all powerful", and "merciful", and "benevolent" to describe your god and establish his "goodness"...

then, why is there 5 million children dying each year under the age of 5?

Didn't we use some powerful words to describe the goodness of your god?

Words that if applied to a human being would make them "good"?

But, instead we see god is "Lord Jealous" in the old testament, and it's demonstrated over and over again.

Jesus of the new testament doesn't come along an apologize for the old man's horrible barbarism of the old testament either...

He affirms over and over he is the SAME guy..

So, we can see that even if it was real, it wouldn't be good to serve the "lord jealous".

>>727035368
>GOD EXISTS but it's not the one you read about in the bible or any other myth,

How can you state this with any certainty?

>>727034955
>How do you know which religion is right?

"Religion" is merely what the finite beings do and/or claim. It has very little to do with the verifiability of an omnipotent being.

>How do you know which religion is right?

- Check their god's nature for a contingent beginning in time. If 'yes,' then non-omnipotent and not God according to any honest definition.

- Check the god if he/she is limited to form or timespace. If 'yes,' then non-omnipotent and not God in any honest sense.

- If the religion is a pantheon, then no single god can claim to be omnipresent, seeing as there are so many other contenders for omnipresence crowding each other out.

This narrows the field down significantly. Granted, it cuts into a lot of "judeo-christian" religions as well (sorry LDS), but many of those are left untouched as well.

>>727035236
Why would I hate that which does not exist.

To me the existence of suffering negates the idea of a benevolent god.

If god is not benevolent he is not deserving of worship, but scorn.

I also feel there is too much good in the world for a truly malevolent creator to be possible.

And if a creator exists that does not care one way or the other what's the point of worship?

The only reason I can think of for a greater being to create lesser ones is for entertainment, a type of cruel joke.

Some idiots believe in "intelligent design"

When we can see thousands of perfect examples of stupid design, and 99.9% of all species that ever lived are extinct.

How is that intelligent?

>>727034088
Nor do you have to prove that god does exist to believe in him. This too is basic logic.

This agnostic atheist "not believing" is worthless bullshit that wastes everyone's time. God either exists or doesn't, there's only those two options, and to stand a chance of being right you have to believe one of them. If you "don't believe" you have no chance of being right at all so there's no point listening to you.

>>727034139
Because I'm not a moron.

>>727034298
You were so off target I didn't need to dodge.

File: age of Religions.jpg (113KB, 953x852px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 953x852px

I'll just drop this off for the Christians or muslims or jews that think they have the "final revelation" or the "first revelation"

>>727035587
By God I don't mean a being, I just mean the something special that had to happen for existence to start existing. Whatever this something is is the same thing people associate with god, I think it exists 100% because without it there would be nothing, something unknown had to start existence.

File: 1440801644273.gif (2MB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 250x250px

>>727035885
>believes in god
>believes he's not a moron

Which god? There are thousands still being worshiped today, and many thousands more that were worshiped in the past.
None of them have any more evidence of their existence than the next.
As for the Christian god specifically, it's just the result of a cult stealing the cultural history of a small tribe of people, writing a sequel to their sacred texts, and through an odd series of events that became the biggest religion to win out Europe and spread to the Americas.

Doesn't make it any more or less real, just a series of unfortunate events.

>>727035885
so, you can just "decide" to believe, without evidence?

Decide that since it has the possibility of being good, or useful, that it might be worth simply "believing"

Like.. believing in anything just for the pure utility of it?

How the hell do you talk yourself into that?

>>727035236
>To demonstrate justice.

So I as god will make some people and make them able to do things I don't like.
Then when these people I made are doing the things I made them be able to do I will destroy them.

I destroy them because I want the other people I made who can also do the things I gave them the ability to do to learn not to do the things I gave them the ability to do.

The biggest two for me are the following.
1. Western religion is founded upon the principle that God is all knowing and all powerful.

but...

Satan is the source of evil. That doesn't compute because God created Satan, then lost control of him, yet is still all powerful? No. You can't have all of that. Either he created Satan and lost control of him, and is NOT all powerful, or he created Satan, and Satan is just another facet of God.

2. I thought for a while that evolution proved the existence of God - early man had no biological reason to evolve into modern man, and evolution/natural selection only occurs when an environmental reason forces it. So why are humans self aware, and with such advanced intelligence? There was no natural need for it, so God must have done it, right? Then I found out that there was a mutation in the jaw of the super, super early cro-magnon that caused for an incredibly weak jaw. Somehow, that trait prospered and it freed up the head for a much, much, MUCH larger brain. And here we are.

I don't know if this means much to you but these two are pretty meaningful to me.

>>727036091
>Somehow, that trait prospered and it freed up the head for a much, much, MUCH larger brain. And here we are.

Sentience will prove to be an evolutionary dead end.

>>727035517
>then, why is there 5 million children dying each year under the age of 5?

1. Because of your appeal to emotion fallacy.
2. Because "Safe in the Arms of God" by John MacArthur, solves the classical Augustinian dilemma. They receive mercy even if they're not old enough to be held accountable for their sin.
3. Because you're still too busy dodging the real question why anyone even deserves to live? Your implicit bias is that God owes you.

>Didn't we use some powerful words to describe the goodness of your god?

And yet they are mere descriptors. The descriptors themselves are not sovereign over the nature of God. Rather, the reverse.

> Words that if applied to a human being would make them "good"?

Again, I appeal to the doctrine of total depravity, and the truckload of bible verses from whence it's derived. Romans 3, "There is none righteous, no, not one." There is none that is good and none seek after God.

> But, instead we see god is "Lord Jealous" in the old testament, and it's demonstrated over and over again.

Oprah Winfrey once argued this as a bad thing, because jealousy was bad. The problem is that jealously is only a bad thing if you're among like-minded peers. God's jealously is justified in that He really is the only omnipotent being, since other contenders would contradict the very definition of omnipotence. Giving credit to anyone other than God alone would be a lie, thus, His jealousy is truthful and above reproach.

>>727034786
Which one? There are thousands. You should always specify which god, and also how you came to barrack for that particular one.

>>727035128
simpsons sucks. it was good before he went full liberal.

>>727035953
What is the utility of thinking you know that some unknown force started it?

What is the utility of spreading that around as though you possibly know something that you simply can't know?

I mean... look at science, right?

Science and scientists are man's best attempt at finding out the important things we want to know - things that have utility and goodness.

science is in the values business!

Science has always given us what we value.

Christianity tries to answer silly questions that it makes up - like 'why are we here?", and it's a horrible question.

Finding out how we got here is a better question. You know, people are still finding truths in Darwin's work today? Hypothesis he made in the 1800 are being proven correct today!

It's sad how many potentially great minds have been stricken by religion. Think of all the progress that could have been made if Arabs hadn't taken on Islam! They were some of the greatest minds on earth, while Europeans were busy disemboweling each other over religious error. Now, you see Islam is only concerned with religious error!

>>727036298
the impersonal god

>>727036297
>His jealousy is truthful and above reproach.

Why create something that would make you jealous?

>>727022749
yup there ya go

>>727036066
Not the same anon but that is a good point, its like a life long coping mechanism, but it's not nessecarily a bad thing unless they are fanatical and listen to someone who claims they can speak to their god. I guess the whole "opiate of the masses" thing is what he's getting at, it's useful to keep society in control, because not everyone can come to terms with reality

>>727036400
>Implying science even wants to know what happened before the big bang.
they arent ever going to look into it because they conceded they will never know.

File: Jesus.jpg (24KB, 474x345px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 474x345px

>>727036297
>sovereign over the nature of God.


So, if god is sovereign.. then why jealous?

If god knows the future for everyone, why be pissed off when they mess up?

If all gods are fake but him, then why be jealous?

This makes no sense what so ever.

>>727035617
> Why would I hate that which does not exist.

Why would you contend as-if it did exist? Methinks anon doth protest too much. If it were such a non-existent issue as you claim, then you wouldn't feel the need to contend.

>To me the existence of suffering negates the idea of a benevolent god.

- "To me" = You're your own sole arbiter of truth and morality.

- Your entitlement is showing. Pleasure and happiness aren't owed.

- Benevolence doesn't have to be universal either. If God showed mercy on just 1 person, and sent the rest of humanity who ever lived to Hell, then He would still be perfectly mercifiul.

>>727036477
Which one is that? Did you create that god, or has it been described already by someone else?

>>727036547
well, honestly there is so much more for science to help answer today that has much more utility, such as stem cell research that Christianity works diligently to stop.

So pissed off about 150 cells!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stem_cell_laws

>>727036067
> So I as god will make some people and make them able to do things I don't like.
Then when these people I made are doing the things I made them be able to do I will destroy them.

Why not? What higher moral justice will you appeal to in your tiny and resentful rage? Again, Romans 9, "Why has thou made me thus?" is stated in ineffectual anger.

> I destroy them because I want the other people I made who can also do the things I gave them the ability to do to learn not to do the things I gave them the ability to do.

No. Again, Romans 9 says He does so to demonstrate His justice on one hand and His mercy on the other.

Because no one deserves mercy.

>>727036689
>murdering babies for knowledge money and power.
at some point science needs to be stopped. its why we have laws against human experimentation.

>>727036400
I think it's more philosophical than religious for me. I'm not religious at all if that's what you think, I just think that this is beyond science because there is no possible way to determine or measure this without time travel or something. There is no utility in it except for trying to find the truth, I'm not tricking myself I'm reasoning to try and understand the world I live in, and as far as I know something unknown has to exist that first set the universe in motion, as something not in motion cannot spontaneously start moving.

>>727036547
>>727036689
Additionally, it was a long long time ago... what 13 billion years ago?

But, many Christians are SURE that the earth was created after the Sumerians created gluten.. (around 10,000 BCE)

>>727036298
>Which one?

This was already answered in this thread. Has it ever occurred to you that you deliberately ignore the answer in order to force the question further as-if it were never answered to begin with?

>>727036607
>God showed mercy on just 1 person, and sent the rest of humanity who ever lived to Hell, then He would still be perfectly mercifiul.

Creating souls specifically for the purpose of eternal torment is diabolical.

If you seriously worship a deity that would do that I worry for your community.

You may as well be worshipping the devil.

>>727036514
The jealously in this case is not some anxiety or neurosis, but simply a brute fact.

>>727036547
This, I don't think science could ever help anyone determine the existence of god

>>727036797
>at some point science needs to be stopped

So, god, being the number one causer of infant death inside the womb, will be pissed off if we work with blastocysts to help cure some of the worst diseases known to man?

Blastocyst: 150 cells

There are 150,000 cells in a fly's brain, btw

>>727036937
It's enough for him to smite the unbelievers.
To demonstrate his wrath.
He made a reason to get mad, why?

>>727036848
Yea but that's faith, you are literally arguing that they are not using logic, when it's obvious that they aren't because that's how faith works in the first place, it's illogical.

>>727037053
>wants to talk about Christianity, doesnt know the story of adam an eve.

File: 1425542212978.jpg (63KB, 420x420px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 420x420px

>>727036797
>stem cell research
>murdering babies
Reported, because I'm quite sure your level of stupidity is against the law.

>>727036970
>I don't think science could ever help anyone determine the existence of god

it's not like there aren't "Christian Scientists" working to match the christian narrative though.

Jeebus... it's sickening and backwards, it's irritating.

>>727036875
You dodged the question and we both know why. The 'which god?' question is awkward for theists because it reminds them that not only is their favourite god one of thousands, but that their favourite god is equivalent to every other god ever created as it comes with the same amount of evidence as every other god ever created.

Zero.

>>727037136
The same question applies, why put the tree in the garden to begin with?
Why create a being you know without a doubt will betray you?
Why not just kill the snake?

>>727037157
whats your problem then, stem cell research being blocked how? the only stem cell research being blocked is human farms.

>>727037076
What's faith? The scientific discoveries that verify the age of the universe? or am I understanding you all wrong?

>>727037232
its not only literal its explaining ideas that are hard to understand for humans in human terms of the time.

>>727036585
>So, if god is sovereign.. then why jealous?

Because in this one case, the jealousy is justified, being that the creation is chasing after a lie and calling it "god," instead of the rightful creator. Not all jealously is wrong in every case.

>If god knows the future for everyone, why be pissed off when they mess up?

Again, you're (all of you) beating your heads against Romans 9, "Then why does He still find fault, for who is able to resist His will?"

But who are you, O man, to reply against God? Shall what is formed say to the one who formed it, ‘Why hast thou made me thus? Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for special purposes and some for common use?

You can't. The frustration comes from having to contend with the truth that you are neither special nor your own god. You are a sovereign pawn. A vessel for either sovereign destruction or sovereign mercy. Repent.

"No, I rather choose to hate!"

^ Then you're simply resentful you're under destruction. But remember, as long as God gives you one more minute on this earth. . .He is giving you more mercy; more time to repent.

>>727024819
Christian logic: if god didn't write the bible who did?.... common sense: people wrote it in the mideast back in those times. also common sense doesn't occur for religious fanatics

>>727037305
No my bad I'm not the same anon you were talking to originally, I'm just saying faith is based on being illogical in the first place, so I don't know if pointing that out to people that rely on faith is going to make them change their mind because they already "know" they are right. It's just dogmatism and it locks you into a chain of irrational thought.

>>727037272
It's still illegal, and criminal in some states, just check the legalities of it.

Additionally, in Guatemala if a woman has had an abortion and she shows signs of scarring, her body is treated like a crime scene, and she's handcuffed to the bed. Forensic scientist examine and determine if an abortion has been performed, and there are thousands of women in prison for getting abortions

It's illegal even if a father rapes his daughter and she'll die as a result of child birth.

There are Christians groups in the U.S. against the HPV shot, because they say it represents a good blockade against women being immoral.

They're willing to give women cancer to protect against it.

Watching my christain dad get pissed off at Feminists makes me giggle. also watching him pissed off at the LGBT and gender identity also makes me giggle. why can't my dad find something better to do other than subscribing to Televangelists 700clubb and watching bible movies/vids all day.. i would shoot myself from boredom.

>>727036891
> Creating souls specifically for the purpose of eternal torment is diabolical.

Observe how ^ the above statement here "is" stated as an absolute, and from no alternate universal moral foundation whatsoever.

>If you seriously worship a deity that would do that I worry for your community.

You may as well be worshipping the devil.

You have no bearing with which to tell the difference.

Christian apologist Doug Powell likens it to driving a stolen car. No, you must account for your own moral claim if there is no God. Otherwise, you're just a petty cheat. You cannot steal from your own culture.

>>727037536
sure kid.

>>727037614
why dont you come out of the closet if you are so proud of yourself. your dad deserves the truth.

>>727037614
>i would shoot myself from boredom.
and your father would if he was browsing 4chan all day

>>727037053
Again, Romans 9. The apostle Paul already states every one of your questions. The answer is to make His power known on both the vessels of wrath as well as the vessels of mercy.

>>727022213
Argument for:

>Logical infinity is impossible

>Therefore logical finity began

>Therefore something illogically infinite caused logical finity


Checkmate atheists

>>727036066
I mean if you decide to believe there are no leprechauns without proving the non-existence of leprechauns then you can, there's no rule that says you can't.

But 'do you believe x?' and 'have you proven x?' are different questions. Most beliefs are unproven.
Fact is that most atheists believe there's no god but are too cowardly to admit it because then they'd have to prove it.

>>727037379
There is no reason for the "creator of the universe" to be jealous ---ever.

Sorry pal. can't say your god is good, after he murdered 20 million plus, even if it is myths.

Did you ever notice how insurance companies insure against "Acts of God"... never against acts of Satan...

Because we know god is not good, and creates the havoc, right?

So, we cannot with our words establish that "Yahweh" is good by any recognizable definition.

We can establish that his definition of "evil" is simply a non-believer.

we can establish that "Yahweh" engineered the cultural isolation of Hindus that believed in there own gods well before the Jewish god came around, then said "you'll all burn in hell forever for worshiping the wrong gods".

This is not benevolent, good, just, or even fair.

God is all knowing, and all powerful. The thing that many seem to think is he doesn't care about our suffering. What they don't understand is that He is loving and kind, but He has rules to live by. If you don't live by those rules, you reap what you sow. He doesn't want that, but youre responsible.for.Your actions. He is love, but He is holy and just. And it's His creation so He gets to set the rules. You don't follow them, you get the switch. That's Him trying to get you to behave.

>>727037638
Yes it's still criminal in some states.

New Jersey's 2004 S1909/A2840 specifically permitted human cloning for the purpose of developing and harvesting human stem cells, and Missouri's 2006 Amendment Two legalized certain forms of embryonic stem cell research in the state. On the other hand, Arkansas, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, North Dakota and South Dakota passed laws to prohibit the creation or destruction of human embryos for medical research

>>727037853
insurance companies specifically dont insure against acts of god smart guy. that should tell you something right there.

>>727037747
So he made some people, and to teach the people that he made something he destroyed other people he made.

Why not just make people who already know what you want to teach them?

You version of god seems to do thing merely for the benefit of his own ego.

>>727037231
>You dodged the question. . .

lol

>>727035615

It's only a problem when atheists are evading a consistent definition of god to begin with. Once an omnipotent being is settled on, then the 'which god' question is easy to answer.

Don't make me repeat myself for the sake of your own intellectual laziness. It really was answered in the thread.

>>727032537
Ghengis khan

>>727037904
Are you really trying to argue that innocents never suffer and all suffering is caused by moral failings of those who suffer?

>>727037843
>Fact is that most atheists believe there's no god but are too cowardly to admit it because then they'd have to prove it.

We actually don't do that. We don't worry about trying to prove a negative.

We don't go around trying to prove Santa doesn't exist anymore than anyone else.

That simply doesn't make sense. Of course the burden of proof is on the person that asserts the claim that something exists, silly boy.

We don't have to go around proving anything doesn't exist, or everything that someone says exists... that's just silly.

>>727037957
I'm going to need a source on that. still dont understand why you would say this. are you advocating human farms as a good idea?

>>727037987
>insurance companies specifically dont insure against acts of god smart guy.

Sure they do. I just had my roof replaced from "an act of god" that destroyed part of it. You clearly don't own a house.

You can buy flood insurance, and we all know who causes floods, right?

>>727038019
>It's only a problem when atheists are evading a consistent definition of god to begin with.


Atheists don't evade shit. In fact, to say someone is atheists says almost nothing about them.

It simply means they've looked at the claims and found them ridiculous.

>>727037853
>There is no reason for the "creator of the universe" to be jealous ---ever.

Unless someone is lying about a created object and/or creature and calling it "God." Thus, the jealousy in this case is morally justified.

> after he murdered 20 million plus, even if it is myths.

The definition of murder is unjustified killing. But God, being the sovereign judge, ultimately decides who lives and who dies. Being omniscient/omnipotent, God cannot be accused of unjustified killing.

>This is not benevolent, good, just, or even fair.

If God were perfectly fair, then no one would be allowed to live for even a second. That's why it's called "common grace." God is perfectly just in that everyone deserves punishment for their sin.

>>727038019
You dodged it again

>>727038224
youre a fucking idiot. stop posting.

>>727038159
>are you advocating human farms as a good idea?

to potentially stop a shit ton of diseases that cause lots of suffering... yes, and I don't mean human farms, I mean blastocyst farms.

That little group of 150 cells holds the key to a lot we can't even fully appreciate just yet. Those cells have the power to become anything in the human body, and they can't suffer.

>>727038353
So are you arguing that a newborn baby has sin the moment its born?

>>727038398
how would you feel if we took a race of people and used them for human experiments?

>>727038391
No thanks. I'm having fun fucking with you, you fuckin idiot.

>>727038472
I'm pretty sure you didn't read what I said. Go back and examine it. It's blastocysts. not humans.

>>727037990
>You version of god seems to do thing merely for the benefit of his own ego.

And you're saying it as-if it were a bad thing. But if God's opinion of Himself was perfectly true and without deceit, then praising and worshipping Him would be nothing more than stating the fact of who He is.

See, you want a reason to hate God, but can't find any once the excuse for resentment is compared with omnipotence. He is King of Kings and Lord of Lords, and you're mad about it. So why is that anything even worth considering? Why does your personal hatred of sovereign omnipotence matter at all?

>>727038474
I'll give you a little heads up becuae I feel bad that you are so uninformed and willing to spout your garbage on the internet like you are educated or something. acts of god arent covered by insurance. that's why the coined the term.

>>727038297
You skipped my own link to earlier in this very thread. In which case, you're deliberately evading in front of everyone else. lol

>>727038453
You know what's funny.. is that Muslims, who represent the absolute dumbest most violent backward religion in in the world, do not have a dog in the fight against stem cell research.

They believe the "soul" doesn't enter the body until the child is 180 days old.

>>727038644
Well, tell that to my theist neighbor who just got paid 3800 for the damage to his roof from "ACTS OF GOD", you blissful idiot.

>>727038453
Yes. That is the doctrine of total depravity. The baby is born in sin and is under the curse of Adam, just as we are. However, having not grown to an age of accountability, God still shows the baby mercy.

Undeserved mercy. All babies get mercy. =)

>>727038647
>In which case, you're deliberately evading in front of everyone else. lol

OK.. I'm not evading. What do you want?

>>727038565
If there were a creator I would hate him because he did a shit job.

>>727038521
fortunately because of the stem cell laws they have actually found out you don't need blastocycts to study stem cells. if you want this then you are a shill or horribly uninformed. sure you get a shit ton more if you harvest the human lifecycle but thats only needed to maximize profits dipshit.

Wow, you're dense.

> >>727034955
> >How do you know which religion is right?
> "Religion" is merely what the finite beings do and/or claim. It has very little to do with the verifiability of an omnipotent being.
> >How do you know which religion is right?
> - Check their god's nature for a contingent beginning in time. If 'yes,' then non-omnipotent and not God according to any honest definition.
> - Check the god if he/she is limited to form or timespace. If 'yes,' then non-omnipotent and not God in any honest sense.
> - If the religion is a pantheon, then no single god can claim to be omnipresent, seeing as there are so many other contenders for omnipresence crowding each other out.
> This narrows the field down significantly. Granted, it cuts into a lot of "judeo-christian" religions as well (sorry LDS), but many of those are left untouched as well.

Thus, answered.

>>727038714
you can stop posting any time you lying faggot.

>>727038889
But then you would literally be putting yourself in the position of God's supervisor. Which is egomaniacal, to say the least.

File: ichthus_jesus_fish_symbol_mouse_pad-r65edd3676af340559e12f055e58758b3_x7ef8_1024.jpg (157KB, 1104x1104px) Image search: [Google]

157KB, 1104x1104px

>>727038453
He probably is not.

But I will.

What most pastors fail to do is understand the stories we are being told in the Bible.

We do not come in to existence at our birth.

Our souls are old and were created long before the corporeal universe was.

There was a war in Heaven lead by Lucifer he had activly deceived one thord of the souls in Heaven. Another third refused to choose sides. And the final third while Loyal to God they were arrogantly demanding the deaths of the other two groups.

God make humanity as a simple l;lesson about suffering and death.

Sadly far too many men in funny hats have hijacked and perverted religion.

Which is why it is interesting to read the words in the Bible that say "Religion is the teachings and traditions of man that make void the word of God.

Or further to realize that the only time Christ truly became angry was when he overturned the tables and whipped the money changers in the temple.

Most do not understand that these merchants were selling animals for sacrifice that did not meet with the requirements and that God was more angry at the High Priests who took a cut of this money and allowed the temple to become little more than a slaughter house.

The Bible speaks of the Souls of Jacob and Essau and that God like or hated them before they were in the womb.

Sin is not just about what we do after we are born but also relates to our actions beofre we are born.

We agree to this life and its lessons in advance it is just that at birth we are made oblivious to out prior existence.

May Peace be with you.

>>727038960
They all lay claims to being "the one true religion"

They all make claims that are incompatible.

They can't all be true.

None of them can be true.

We're all atheist with respect to all the other possible religions out there.

I believe in one less god than you.

>>727039029
No, it's only natural since it is an ability i was given by my creator.

If he has a problem with it, I assume he would not have given me that ability.

>>727039007
When you simply don't have an argument, and you know you're wrong, simply attack the other person's character.

You're learning from the Regressive Leftists of the U.S.

Next, you'll be calling me a "Racist", LOL

>>727039074
So god has so little power he loses his creations to another one of his creations and never predicted this would happen?

>>727039074
>Or further to realize that the only time Christ truly became angry was when he overturned the tables and whipped the money changers in the temple.


I always liked this, when people say "WWJD?"

What Jesus might do is beat the shit out of people for almost nothing, because they didn't all have farms and ranches for sacrifices... LOL

>>727039144
You're not even reading my answers. I explicitly stated that the individual religious claims matter less than the nature of the god they take for granted.

You claim to believe in one less god than me, but you're not even open to a consistent definition of "god" from which to begin discussing.

The only definition I will choose is, "an omnipotent being." No names. No religion. Just one consistent attribute that can be compared to all the other religions.

Yahweh clearly intended people to have slaves

President Jefferson Davis:
Jefferson Davis Quotes on Slavery
Jefferson Davis was a natural leader and is highly quoted for the wisdom he displayed.

"[Our situation] illustrates the American idea that governments rest on the consent of the governed, and that it is the right of the people to alter or abolish them whenever they become destructive of the ends for which they were established." With the politically correct controversy on slavery, it is noted that the unusual statements that Jefferson Davis makes are interesting, and many do not seem to fit into the mold that they try to put him in.
~Davis

"Neither current events nor history show that the majority rule, or ever did rule."
~Davis

"If slavery be a sin, it is not yours. It does not rest on your action for its origin, on your consent for its existence. It is a common law right to property in the service of man; its origin was Divine decree."
~Davis

"African slavery, as it exists in the United States, is a moral, a social, and a political blessing."
~Davis

"My own convictions as to negro slavery are strong. It has its evils and abuses...We recognize the negro as God and God's Book and God's Laws, in nature, tell us to recognize him - our inferior, fitted expressly for servitude...You cannot transform the negro into anything one-tenth as useful or as good as what slavery enables them to be."
~Davis
Jefferson Davis Quotes the Bible

"[Slavery] was established by decree of Almighty God...it is sanctioned in the Bible, in both Testaments, from Genesis to Revelation...it has existed in all ages, has been found among the people of the highest civilization, and in nations of the highest proficiency in the arts." - Jefferson Davis

>>727039157
https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/131/Naturalistic_Fallacy

>>727039558
OK.. well, I'm not really interested in trying to make up some god just for my own purposes. It's fine if you want to do that. I don't care.

The god of Abraham is either evil, or impotent, and probably, most likely.. absent.

>>727039247
I didnt realize you didnt know how to use google. I thought you were a science guy like bill nye.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=does+insurance+cover+acts+of+god%3F

>>727039657
That does not actually apply here.

The argument was why would a creator give me the ability to question him if he did not want me to do so?

>>727039807
>The argument was why would a creator give me the ability to question him if he did not want me to do so?

That used to be illegal, even in the U.K. not long ago. it was called "blasphemy" to question the voracity of biblical miracles.

File: Capture.jpg (79KB, 1264x670px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 1264x670px

>>727039786
>http://lmgtfy.com/?q=does+insurance+cover+acts+of+god%3F

Wasn't that particularly helpful, just like the rest of your posts.