The Faith & Religion mega Thread

Originally Posted by bluegospel If he had not permitted evil, his character would not be magnified as victorious. His sovereignty would merely be to the extent which he wields over the animal kingdom, humans & angels; nowhere magnified; nowhere supremely sovereign; no beings maximally subjected to him. No opposition = No supremity. Humans were created for friendship with God, not subjection by God. The angels as ministers to God, those defying him as examples against rebellion, contempt & condemnation.

Yup, that sums up why anyone with a shred of decency and compassion should oppose religion at every turn. God permitted evil so we can better see what a swell guy he is in comparison. Sick. It amazing me that someone who would otherwise be a perfectly good person can spout this kind of evil rhetoric and not see it for what it is.

Originally Posted by sycamorex Well, that's even worse.

Another reason to actively oppose religion. I marvel at the number of times people ask me why I am a "militant" (ie, outspoken) atheist, and this is why right here.

Originally Posted by reed9 Yup, that sums up why anyone with a shred of decency and compassion should oppose religion at every turn. God permitted evil so we can better see what a swell guy he is in comparison. Sick. It amazing me that someone who would otherwise be a perfectly good person can spout this kind of evil rhetoric and not see it for what it is.

Exactly. As someone said: "Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion.”

Originally Posted by sycamorex Exactly. As someone said: "Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion.”

That was the physicist Steven Weinberg. I believe he said it, or wrote it, to Senator Lieberman.

Originally Posted by bluegospel If he had not permitted evil, his character would not be magnified as victorious.

Permitting evil is not act of "good" or "justice". Please note that according to bible nothing existed before god - it precedes everything. So your god did not permit evil. Your god created it. On purpose.

Originally Posted by bluegospel No opposition = No supremity.

Are you saying that (speaking within boundaries of your religion) your god created evil, devil/satan in order to feel supreme? That's not an act of "good".

Originally Posted by bluegospel Humans were created for friendship with God, not subjection by God.

Your argument contradicts the bible.
As far as I remember there are many places where it says "obey", not "let's be friends". By your faith, humans are god's slaves, not "friends".

Originally Posted by bluegospel The angels as ministers to God, those defying him as examples against rebellion, contempt & condemnation.

Rebellion is impossible if deity is omnipotent and omniscient. If there's a risk of rebellion, then deity is either not omnipotent or not omniscient. I believe I explained this part - to you - many times. If you still don't get it, it is no longer my problem.

Originally Posted by bluegospel Again SigTerm, I said that I don't have an answer that is satisfactory (to you or to atheists/agnostics).

Nope, and I advise to stop running away in order to save face - it wastes time. You either know the answer or don't. No gray area possible in this case.

Originally Posted by reed9 Another reason to actively oppose religion. I marvel at the number of times people ask me why I am a "militant" (ie, outspoken) atheist, and this is why right here.

There is such thing as "loud minority". I.e. small part of a group that does not represent the whole (and is not majority), but is most noticeable and creates negative impression of the group. There is a saying that roughly translates as "believe whatever you want but use your own brain/common sense". People you are against fail to think for themselves. In other words, I think it'll be a better idea to oppose idiots instead of opposing religion.

Your entire post is a load of bull and the issue now is that you yourself know this to be true

Originally Posted by SigTerm There is a saying that roughly translates as "believe whatever you want but use your own brain/common sense". People you are against fail to think for themselves. In other words, I think it'll be a better idea to oppose idiots instead of opposing religion - you'll be opposing the right thing, at least.

So are you are saying when you, yes you sigterm, argue something that you obviously haven't got a clue about (like licenses and copyright law) you are doing it just for the sake of arguing? What about when you pick at people personally? Is that just for your own kicks or is there some greater meaning to your actions?

Getting back on topic, athiest and agnostics always argue the same type of boring argument you are coming out with. Why don't you try a different tack? Try something original for once hey.

Tell me Sigterm seeing as you are the font of all knowledge, how did the universe come about? How did life come about on this planet? how did Homo Sapien Sapien come about and why is there NO actual real link between us and other species of "human ancestor". The time has come for you to start answering questions instead of calling others names like idiots how about you start showing what you know (or confirm all our suspicions and show us you don't have any answers either) Come on SigTerm put up.

Originally Posted by k3lt01 Your entire post is a load of bull and the issue now is that you yourself know this to be trueSo are you are saying when you, yes you sigterm, argue something that you obviously haven't got a clue about (like licenses and copyright law) you are doing it just for the sake of arguing? What about when you pick at people personally? Is that just for your own kicks or is there some greater meaning to your actions? Getting back on topic, athiest and agnostics always argue the same type of boring argument you are coming out with. Why don't you try a different tack? Try something original for once hey. Tell me Sigterm seeing as you are the font of all knowledge, how did the universe come about? How did life come about on this planet? how did Homo Sapien Sapien come about and why is there NO actual real link between us and other species of "human ancestor". The time has come for you to start answering questions instead of calling others names like idiots how about you start showing what you know (or confirm all our suspicions and show us you don't have any answers either) Come on SigTerm put up.

Seems to me that the same can be said verbatim for religious nuts too, after all these people always seem to claim there is a real god BUT give no proof aside from books claiming to be written by god's hand if you will. I for one have nothing but disdain for the preaching of some "holy man" as they seem to only be interested in fleecing the weak and downtrodden or the elderly for as much money as possible. Take a look at most churches even in places where poverty runs rampant these buildings are made 50 times as expensive as the neighbouring homes. The religions pay little or no taxes on monies they get so therefore could give back to the community but we all know that won't happen!

Originally Posted by tiredofbilkyyaforallican Seems to me that the same can be said verbatim for religious nuts too, after all these people always seem to claim there is a real god BUT give no proof aside from books claiming to be written by god's hand if you will. I for one have nothing but disdain for the preaching of some "holy man" as they seem to only be interested in fleecing the weak and downtrodden or the elderly for as much money as possible. Take a look at most churches even in places where poverty runs rampant these buildings are made 50 times as expensive as the neighbouring homes. The religions pay little or no taxes on monies they get so therefore could give back to the community but we all know that won't happen!

In some ways I agree with what you said but lets be fair here, Blue is being asked questions yet NO ONE else is giving an opposing side. I think it's about time we see who (from the extremely vocal atheists and agnostics group) knows what and where their evidence is. Lets get past this there is/isn't a god argument, as it seems no one is going to listen anyway without resorting to crap tactics and childish put downs, and move to a more adult discussion on the merits and absolute evidence that science gives for the origins of the universe and of our species.

So I'll ask the atheists and agnostics again because I don't see anyone rushing to answer the questions yet
How did the universe come about?
How did life come about on this planet?
How did Homo Sapien Sapien come about and why is there NO actual real link between us and other species of "human ancestor"?

Religion is in modern times a way of life, people follow sporting teams religiously, people follow entertainers religiously, people will religiously speak of the merits of one system of government over another or capitalism as against other financial methods. So lets open this up and lets see how religiously atheist and agnostic the vocal people are and how much they know about the scientific theories that are obviously incompatible with biblical texts.

Originally Posted by k3lt01 In some ways I agree with what you said but lets be fair here, Blue is being asked questions yet NO ONE else is giving an opposing side. I think it's about time we see who (from the extremely vocal atheists and agnostics group) knows what and where their evidence is. Lets get past this there is/isn't a god argument, as it seems no one is going to listen anyway without resorting to crap tactics and childish put downs, and move to a more adult discussion on the merits and absolute evidence that science gives for the origins of the universe and of our species. So I'll ask the atheists and agnostics again because I don't see anyone rushing to answer the questions yet How did the universe come about? How did life come about on this planet? How did Homo Sapien Sapien come about and why is there NO actual real link between us and other species of "human ancestor"? Religion is in modern times a way of life, people follow sporting teams religiously, people follow entertainers religiously, people will religiously speak of the merits of one system of government over another or capitalism as against other financial methods. So lets open this up and lets see how religiously atheist and agnostic the vocal people are and how much they know about the scientific theories that are obviously incompatible with biblical texts.

You're missing one crucial bit:
Blue claims he KNOWS THE TRUTH (the bible tells us the ultimate truth), atheists, on the other hand, in this thread (or at least myself) don't claim anything like that. We may not know all the answers. Some answers may be turn out wrong in the future. At least we're honest about it and not delude ourselves that what we know/think must be 100% true.

If go many pages back in this thread, you'll see the whole argument with blue resulted from his ridiculous claims and attitude. If he came here with a more balanced view and said:

Listen guys, I can't know if my holy book is the true word of god and is 100% true (simply because neither blue nor anyone can know it). I can't prove if my god exists but because of ....... I deeply believe in it. It makes me happy and ... etc..
That would be fine. End of story. Instead, he arrogantly started claiming that he KNOWS the TRUTH spreading some ridiculous claims so that, as far as I remember, even some of his fellow believers had to point out some stuff to him (as I said many posts ago, I don't think blue is a religious person - seriously, he must be a mean trolling atheists trying to bring bad name to believers)

He brought it onto himself by being arrogant and, I must say, ignorant because anyone (believer/atheist) who claims to know all the answers has to be described using at least those 2 adjectives. Additionally, blue has shown to have a crafty way of avoiding questions he's not comfortable with.

Instead, he arrogantly started claiming that he KNOWS the TRUTH spreading some ridiculous claims so that

I thought Atheism by definition says there is no God as the absolute truth. Where is the question of Atheists having an open mind on the subject?

Originally Posted by vharishankar I thought Atheism by definition says there is no God as the absolute truth. Where is the question of Atheists having an open mind on the subject? ---------- Post added 11-26-11 at 03:45 PM ---------- I thought Atheism by definition says there is no God as the absolute truth. Where is the question of Atheists having an open mind on the subject?

Incorrect. An atheist doesn't say "There is no God". An atheist says "I don't believe in any gods". It's a very important distinction. I certainly doubt the existence of God but I cannot say that there isn't one with absolute certainty. I can say with absolute certainty that I do not believe in any of man made gods that are around today. Being an atheist isn't being someone throwing out claims, it's being someone who rejects the claims of others because he doesn't believe they're adequate enough for him to change his mind over. Until I am shown sufficient evidence that there is a God of some kind, I will not believe in one.

Incorrect. An atheist doesn't say "There is no God". An atheist says "I don't believe in any gods". It's a very important distinction.

What's the difference in actual practice? So it's all a personal stance. So where does that get us?

Originally Posted by vharishankar I thought Atheism by definition says there is no God as the absolute truth. Where is the question of Atheists having an open mind on the subject?

Absolute truths can only be present in Mathematics.

There's a difference between saying:

"Given the evidence (or lack thereof), I have no reason to believe in god, therefore in all probability there's no god (but given the appropriate evidence, I'll change my mind because I'm interested in the truth)"

= There's no god (sensible version)

and

"I know it for a fact that there's no god. I'm sure about it 100%. There's no way I'm wrong"

= There's no god (arrogant/ignorant version)


I believe you can see the difference. Besides most of the recent argument with blue wasn't about the existence of god but about the existence of christian god with all its divine attributes.

Absolute truths can only be present in Mathematics.

Isn't that statement itself a bit illogical? You say for a fact that absolute truth is only present in mathematics. You are making an absolute statement of fact. Your statement is not mathematics. So how can you be sure it's totally absolutely 100% true?

Do you recognize the logical absurdity we can drive this argument into?

Originally Posted by vharishankar Isn't that statement itself a bit illogical? You say for a fact that absolute truth is only present in mathematics. You are making an absolute statement of fact. Your statement is not mathematics. So how can you be sure it's totally absolutely 100% true? Do you recognize the logical absurdity we can drive this argument into?

That's a bit nit picking but yes, technically speaking you're right here. From the logical and linguistic point of view my statement was a contradiction in terms.

That's, however, going off-topic and diverting the attention from the main question.