God: The Failed Hypothesis »
Posted By RickyDawkins 1 year, 2 months ago in News"How Science Shows That God Does Not Exist", by Victor J. Stenger. Well folks, I guess this settles it...
Read Full Story at colorado.edu »
395 Views Share Story 77 Comments Report
Submitted By:
RickyDawkins
Atheism can be either the affirmation of the nonexistence of gods, or the rejection of theism. It is also defined more broadly as an absence ...
Other Related Articles:
Why not submit a story?
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentShowing 446 of 447 Comments (view all)
-
0%
RickyDawkins1 year, 2 months ago
It is empirical fact that unnecessary suffering exists in the world.
An omniscient God would be aware of this unnecessary suffering.
An omnipotent God would have the power to eliminate or alleviate at least some of the unnecessary suffering.
An benevolent God would have the desire to eliminate or alleviate at least some of the unnecessary suffering.
It follows that a God with the attributes of the omniscient, omnipotent, and benevolent God does not exist.
----
The laws of physics look just as they can be expected to look if there is no God.
----
God does not deliberately hide from any human being who is open to finding evidence for his presence.
----
If God exists, then he is perfect.
If God exists, then he is the creator of the universe.
If a being is perfect, then whatever he creates must be perfect.
But the universe is not perfect.
Therefore, it is impossible for a perfect being to be the creator of the universe.
Hence, it is impossible for God to exist.
Reply-
0%
engineer1 year, 2 months ago
I understand your argument but disagree. Two sexes with the complexities couldn't come naturally,
Birds with their method of flying and the complexity of the aerodynamics couldn't come naturally.
God helped in the design but allowed for flaws. It's a hard concept to believe, but there are so many things which could have not occurred with out help. A supreme being of some sort if you don't want to say God.
Reply -
0%
Bkumm1 year, 2 months ago
This is mostly correct, but not entirely correct. It assumes that a 'god' fits the definition of an intercessory, personal god. It is indeed possible that a being that would be indistinguishable from a 'god' may very well exist in the universe.
However, it is a true that the intercessory, personal God of the Bible can not be true, if we are assured that this God is omnipotent, omniscient and benevolent.
Reply -
0%
disraeli1 year, 2 months ago
Ricky
A least one counter argument I can think of is that these arguments against the existence of God all have in common a humanizing of God, in other words attributing to God the actions and reactions that one would expect or anticipate of a rationale human endowed with the same attributes. But God can not be described or understood in human terms, divinity by it's nature transcends human experience or understanding.
Now I recognize that is not overly satisfactory, because it basically trumps all manner of argument, however some real world parallels do exist.
Reply -
-
0%
Dionys1 year, 2 months ago
The "question of evil" has been in theology for hundreds of years. Stenger's done nothing more than pour over old theological and philosophical texts and rehashed everything done to "disprove" God. If you don't believe in God, fine. No amount of "proof" will ever convince you. If you do believe in "God," fine.. It's unlikely any amount of disproof will convince you.
How about Quarks? You find any yourself yet?
Reply -
-
AtheismIsRealityComment removed: User banned.3 Replies
-
0%
ETproductions1 year, 2 months ago
All your arguments are for naught, because they presuppose you know the nature of God.
I come back to the basic premise of this argument. It is equally preposterous to say that:
1 - In the beginning God created all that there is.
2 - In the beginning there was nothing, then it exploded.
Both make no earthly sense to human understanding.
So all that we really know is that how this all came to pass is currently beyond human understanding. Even Albert Einstein concluded this to be so.
Science or religion or both meeting on common ground may someday answer it. But the only honest answer today is, "I don't know."
Reply -
0%
ppiittuu1 year, 2 months ago
"...God would have the desire to eliminate ... some of the unnecessary suffering."
- you are conceding that god would allow, to some extent, suffering? if so,
"...benevolent God does not exist."
- so why does it follow?
"If a being is perfect ... whatever he creates must be perfect."
- why?
"But the universe is not perfect."
- what would be the attributes of a perfect universe?
"The laws of physics look just as they can be expected to look if there is no God."
- how do you know that. we'll never know - we don't have another universe to compare with since we live in a God filled universe."
if one asserts that only the natural can be described and proven, and since god is supernatural, then by definition trying to prove that god exists is not possible.
TA-DA!! how do you like that!? sometimes i amaze myself :-)
Reply -
0%
JoseMadre1 year, 2 months ago
Weak in so many ways.
"It is empirical fact that unnecessary suffering exists in the world."
Might seem unnecessary from our finite perspective, but in order to know this as fact, one would have to possess complete knowledge of everything, everywhere, at all times.
"The laws of physics look just as they can be expected to look if there is no God."
Even if this were true or could be proven, it would simply fit either a theistic or atheistic worldview, not prove either.
"God does not deliberately hide from any human being who is open to finding evidence for his presence."
Aside from the fact that anything at all does exist is "evidence", the statement makes assumptions that may or may not be true. Is anyone capable of even seeking the true God on his own when his bias tends to create a god in his own image?
..continues
Reply -
0%
Muleskinner1 year, 2 months ago
Of course this discussion is a fruitless intellectual circle jerk :o)
Man is the only animal who is aware of his own mortality. He devised religion to help him cope with that awareness.
The bible is/was mostly a collection of folk tales & legends around Mesopotamia. It has been deciphered & re-deciphered over the milenia by countless men with all their prejudices & personal interpretations. It went un-recorded for @ 400 yrs. Can you imagine what happened to the actual original meanings? The dead sea scrolls gave us an idea of this. Aside from all the translation barriers. The Bible, as we know it, was written by men.
Evolution is a demonstrable scientific phenomenon. But you will never demonstrate it to the satisfaction of creationists. Because, by (some) definition, faith is a belief in things that cannot necessarily be demonstrated, seen or proven.
Reply
-
-
-
-
0%
Silverghost1 year, 2 months ago
Victor J. Stenger is a professor of physics, not biology, nor geology. His arguments are illogical, one-sided views & too numerous to answer in this forum.
I would rather converse with Ricky, which I have, to make individual points of discussion. Otherwise it would be too unwieldy. -Rev. S
Reply-
-
0%
Dionys1 year, 2 months ago
"Victor J. Stenger is a professor of physics, not biology, nor geology. His arguments are illogical, one-sided views & too numerous to answer in this forum. "
You forgot to mention he's not a professor of logic, philosophy or theology either. If he doesn't want Theology professors telling him about Physics, perhaps he shouldn't intrude on their parallell understanding of the universe.
Reply -
0%
hyperbola1 year, 2 months ago
Well Silver, you are correct that the "science" that needs to be applied here is mathematical logic rather than physics. Many scientists (not just physicists) are required to include mathematical logic in their studies.
If you wish to assert that Stenger is "illogical" then please provide us with a logical proof of that assertion.
Reply
-
-
-
-
0%
memestryker1 year, 2 months ago
I'm frankly amazed that people really don't see the difference between religious belief and scientific hypothesis, or understand the very specific nature of scientific method and argument based on "scientific" evidence as opposed to courtroom arguments.
There seems to be a complete disconnect for some people, whether from fear, total cultural indoctrination to religious opinion, or whatever.
Reply
-
-
rdy2rckComment removed: User banned.
-
0%
Locky121 year, 2 months ago
Ricky.
You believe in God and have an UNSHAKABLE belief in Him.
How do I know?
You seem to talk abou Him an awful lot.
Much more than I do.
After all, how can you be an Atheist, if there was nothing to athiate?
How could we have prohibition if there wasn't alcohol?
Ricky, go to confession.
Tell the priest exactly what you think. He'll give you the guidance you obviously are dying for.
Reply-
0%
StillUnashamed1 year, 2 months ago
Funny comment. "After all, how can you be an Atheist, if there was nothing to athiate?"
Reminds me of a question I heard once, not sure if I have it exactly right, but it goes something like this: Who is crazier, the person who believes in an invisible supreme Being, or the person who fights against a Being he does not believe exists?
Reply -
-
-
-
0%
lvrofwolves1 year, 2 months ago
There are MANY purposes for a God, all man made purposes, some are good some are not, just as it's been throughout time.
And for what purpose would a God make man? he was bored? he needed his own creation to worship him?, and where in the world did he come up with the idea to create everything?
In whose image was Eve (woman) created?
Reply -
0%
StillUnashamed1 year, 2 months ago
I never said I had a total understanding of God. Must you understand something to believe it exists?
BTW, I know your second sentence is meant to be nothing more than an insult. To that I respond: May God bless you anyway.
Reply
-
-
0%
Locky121 year, 2 months ago
Exactly, Ricky.
Look at a Crucifix. That's God's son.
Through his suffering and death, he saved the world.
Reply-
0%
Locky121 year, 2 months ago
Or better yet. Google these words: Acts Apologetics Fulton Sheen.
These are MP3's given by the late Archbishop. Very eloquent explanations for any questions you have concerning God.
Reply -
0%
lvrofwolves1 year, 2 months ago
I must have missed that- when the world was saved! seriously I'm not trying to sound like a smart as s, but the world is saved??
Reply
-
-
0%
canadianrancher571 year, 2 months ago
Ricky- I always enjoy these submissions, makes a person think and I know I ask myself alot of the question in the artical every day, I'm trying to find the truth and science can explain alot. I have an uncle who spent alot of time in university and had a major position with our provincial government as one of it's top engineers, and I asked him once why he believed in God, His answer to me was something he always told his kids when it came to education. he said that the man who knows how does the work and the man who knows why bosses the jerk, I asked him what that had to do with religion and God, his reply was that science can explain how nearly everything happens and in some fields even why, but in most cases in cannot explain the why.
He asked why people were here and why we have our five senses he asked why certain chemicals are released in our bodies to produce pleasure so that we do certain things, or pain so that we don't do other things. (continued)
Reply -
0%
canadianrancher571 year, 2 months ago
He asked whe there were two sexes, most of the questions he had were about man and life and the old question why are we here and why have we developed to the state we are at and he said until he had the answer why to these questions he would continue to believe, and I think that it is the same with alot of us, knowing how is good, knowing why is better.
Enjoyed the artical and comments as always, Thanks.
Reply-
0%
hyperbola1 year, 2 months ago
But isn't the "god argument" simply a way of saying I don't know why and therefore will not ask any questions of those (other humans) who tell me they do know.
It seems much more attractive and challenging to adopt the view that there are many things we do not know (and will never know in our own lifetime), but can have great fun trying to find out.
Reply
-
-
0%
sotiris-k1 year, 2 months ago
People that often offer the argument that all out there is far too complex to have happened on 'its own' fail to realize the kind of math and physics as well as chemistry and biology one needs to be properly equipped to deal with such problems. You cannot begin to describe something as far too complex and unlikely to be the long term product of time until you have actually invested a decent fraction of lifetime in understanding how math can offer answers to such questions by properly evaluating probabilities. Indeed the nature of physical law is such that through mathematics one can eventually describe why things are what they are and how fast they can converge to the state we find them today. Until one proves they can handle such calculations they are unqualified to claim the world cannot be the result of physical law alone. For example modern humans are going back to 2000 generations 50k years ago in Africa. During this time races emerged! What can happen in 100000 generations then?
Reply-
0%
sotiris-k1 year, 2 months ago
The cardinal mistake people that discard modern science's explanations about the origin of the world is that they fail to grasp the vast period of time involved.
When you talk about 4.5 billion years you are actually dealing with 1.6 trillion days . If the natural cycle for the planet is the day you have 1.6 trillion such days (well at current rotation rates) . Can you realize how immense this number is? You know that the cycle of a small organism is only a few days. Forget about humans. Focus on something primitive that has cycle of a few days. That primitive thing then has available sequence of hundreds of billions of generations to evolve. If only something small happens occasionally there are so many generations involved that a lot of things can eventually happen from beginning to end to make something change properties in a dramatic way. Life essentially is an evolving complexity where over time originally impossible things become progressively likely.
Reply
-
-
0%
pismo1 year, 2 months ago
The Paradox of Omnipotence
"Either God can create a stone that he cannot lift, or he cannot create a stone that he cannot lift."
I've heard this argument before. The statement itself is a paradox. None of these statements prove God doesn't exist just as there are is no proof he does exist. I do believe God wrote the laws that govern the universe, but I also understand this is not proof. Just a belief.
Reply -
-
-
AtheismIsRealityComment removed: User banned.1 Reply
-
0%
Tangent0011 year, 2 months ago
You've hit on an important point here: If God created the universe, He created it with every appearance that He, Himself is entirely unnecessary. Some who call themselves 'faithful' seem uncomfortable with the notion that there is no empirical evidence for God. But then, why should there be? If there was all this 'solid evidence' for belief, then faith itself would have no meaning.
Reply
-
-
-
-
-
0%
RickyDawkins1 year, 2 months ago
I think it falls somewhere in the middle, but toward the religious side.
I have "spiritual" feelings sometimes, at least in some sense of the word. Perhaps "mystical" or "mysterious" would be better terms for someone such as myself, who remains convinced that science can explain any phenomena of human experience. For example, if I saw a pool of water form in the desert, I would suspect that it was an optical illusion caused by heat waves radiating off of the hot sand.
Reply -
0%
memestryker1 year, 2 months ago
I think spirituality is a constellation of things that many people have been persuaded to believe are somehow the result of something supernatural, when in fact, they are very natural and just the chemicals doing what they do as a result of evolution.
I don't think the argument is circular. I think there is no evidence for a biblical or koranic or other supernatural sentient uber-being, and those who have developed beliefs in one based on indoctrination endlessly resist having to look at reality because of the way indoctrination works on the human brain.
Reply -
-
-
0%
quillyregnold1 year, 2 months ago
You would think in this day and age, people would have gotten past the great book of Fiction. I have read the bible...awesome Read! So is Pet Cemetery but I we don't bury our pets nor our people on Indian Burial Grounds hoping they will come back to life. Lets assume the bible is true, why don't most people follow the old testament??? Wouldn't it be the most accurate, since it was written first??
Ahh that is logic, which has nothing to do with religion. I hate religion, it is the cause of most if not all war. Jesus was a carpenter at best David Koresh at worst. Do you really believe there is an invisible man that lives in the sky, that not only made us and our planet...But can hear and see everything we do.?? They lock people up in the nut-house for less moronic beliefs!!! The most hilarious thing about religion is people mock, Moonie's, Maharishi's, Hari-Chrishna's as cults....Christian's: Hypocrites, Naive, disgusting! I use your own words..who died and made you all GOD?!??!?!
Reply-
0%
Dionys1 year, 2 months ago
"Lets assume the bible is true, why don't most people follow the old testament??? Wouldn't it be the most accurate, since it was written first?? "
I thought you said you read the Bible? If you're asking questions like this then you really must have just read one of those children's picture book versions.
How much more or less crazy is it to believe in invsible particles that live in the sky, that made us and our planet and can hear and see everything we do?
Reply -
0%
memestryker1 year, 2 months ago
And yet, when attempts are made to remove it, it just returns in other forms. Maoism, Shintoism, etc. are just evolving beliefs that suit those in power at the time and continue to feed the need.
People crave receiving "the answer" from someone else, are indoctrinated to want this as small children when their minds are easily shaped, and enough people recognize this that they bank on it through TV evangelism, etc.
The Pope, the Taliban, and the Southern Baptist Conference are all just different forms of people keeping folklore alive for the purpose of social control and keeping the priesthood in a position of power. And they use fear and intimidation, in the form of shame, threats, and actual punishment or death to keep it locked in people's brains.
Boys grow up to strap on bombs and blow themselves up for it; women submit to polygamy as breeder slaves so their husbands can find glory in heaven.
Reply -
-
-
0%
crghss1 year, 2 months ago
"it is the cause of most if not all war"
So religion caused the American Revolutionary War, The Civil War, The Spanish American War, WWI and WWII, The Korean War and Vietnam? I can't find a cause from religion in any of these wars.
"I hate religion"
So who runs the soup kitchens. Who volunteers at Habitat for Humanity, Who helps New Orleans rebuild, over two years later I might add.
Atheist like you? Hardly.
Reply-
0%
memestryker1 year, 2 months ago
crqhss,
yes atheists like us do those things. Unitarians, Secular Humanists, Brights, and other agnostic, atheist, or non-dogmatic groups do the same types of "good works" and share fellowship just like "religious" people do.
What religious people don't seem to realize is ethics, altruism, etc. occur with or without their "faith." Such acts are human, not religious.
Reply -
0%
quillyregnold1 year, 2 months ago
Awww crghss,
My aim was not insult you, just "enlighten" you. Just so you know, you can be a kind hearted, giving individual with out being in a cult. Being a bible-thumper doesn't give you the monopoly of being a good person. I can give you an example of this. It is a FACT that southern states are clearly more prone to Christianity, yet in the Civil War the South fought to keep black folks as SLAVES. Wow, you're right Christians are much better people that everybody else. Thank for clearing that up! I am sure African Americans will be happy they have people like you on their side!
The wars I listed, you don't believe any of these were do to religious beliefs. C'mon Man! Didn't we fight in these wars for our beliefs?
I think you would have been a good candidate to live in Jonestown! It has been my personal experience that people who call themselves Christians are usually the most hypocritical, intimidating, propagating people I have ever met.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
HannibalBarca1 year, 2 months ago
It is not foolish to believe, but maybe how you present it
Reply
-
-
0%
truthiness1 year, 2 months ago
well ricky, that was amusing to read. however, as a scientific proof it was flawed on the face of it. you can't "prove" something if you can't test it. since even those who believe in God don't expect to be able to use their five senses to interact with it...
it is also flawed from a theological standpoint. you are only attempting to disprove one particular deity, not all. the God of the Hebrews, for example, does not fit you proof as they do not worship a kind and gentle god. they worship a god who deals out a harsh reality and expects you to survive it by following his teachings, and if you don't follow his teachings then you suffer.
This is not a god which offers a better existence, this is the god of existence.
this god, of the jews, also is a reluctant god. Moses had to convince him to accept the Hebrews as his protected people. God finally assented and required a Covenant of laws they would have to obey; the Pentateuch (five books of Moses or Torah or Old Testament)
Reply-
0%
truthiness1 year, 2 months ago
there is a branch of judaism called Kabbalah (unfortunatley assoc. with Madonna). This is a type of mysticism which believes their is a soul in everything and that soul is a facet of the creator who gave up its existence as a singular "soul" to acuse creation. it did this so that it could experience suffering, and desire, and love, etc. all of which it could not experience in its "perfect" form which had no need of anything more (inherent contradiction noted)
Reply -
0%
memestryker1 year, 2 months ago
truthiness,
The "religious" people here have been arguing for biblical creationism from a fundamentalist Christian perspective (or it's shape-change, intelligent design), and everyone knows that.
We all know that we can apply the word "god" more like a "force of nature," etc., but that's a different conversation. This conversation concerns the god represented in Paulist doctrine, which is a male sentient being that is also the man Jesus of Nazarath.
This doctrine is used to justify all sorts of actions that continue to be used to dominate people--not just give them that "sense of the presence."
Reply
-
-
ranchhandComment removed: User banned.22 Replies
-
0%
wildman65571 year, 2 months ago
Oh gad, it Bertrand Russell again.
These kinds of arguments were first invented by Dr. Russell at the end of the 19th Century. At the same time, he was trying to place mathematics on a firm foundation with his Principia Mathematica.
Well, thirty years later Godel, the greatest mathematician in the 20th century, destroyed Principia Mathematica (and the no God Proofs) with his incompleteness Theorem which states that an argument is either complete or logically consistent but not both.
These arguments hold no water because they are incomplete. You can't logically prove something doesn't exist in all the Universe because logic is incomplete.
Reply-
0%
hyperbola1 year, 2 months ago
Curious how almost a century later, most of humans don't even know this history or conclusion.
Reply
-
-
0%
ranger855_991 year, 2 months ago
If God could be examined by human wisdom then He would not be the creator of all things for His ways are beyond our comprehensive little minds. For instantance: How does a brown cow eat green grass and give white milk....hmmmmm only God can do and create such things that we can't understand.
Ranger855
Reply -
0%
ranger855_991 year, 2 months ago
If God had not given to man the powers of reason, thus higher intelligence than animals and freewill to serve Him, then we would be nothing more than living as robots, animals have insticts to survive but man has a brain to think, reason, and also to choose to belive in HIm who created us.
Ranger855
Reply-
0%
Coatl1 year, 2 months ago
Some animals also have brains and think, we're not the only ones.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
chuck-the-canuck1 year, 2 months ago
There's the rub. It is foolish to believe.
In any other realm of human endeavour it would be considered foolish to confuse wishful thinking with fact.
Reply -
-
-
0%
prettyfoods1 year, 2 months ago
I must agree. A book I read, THE HIDDEN KING JAME BIBLE: WHAT THE TRANSLATORS DIDN'T WANT YOU TO KNOW, by Deane E. Kogelschatz really opened my eyes. Everything he uses comes straight from the King James text.
Reply -
0%
Mdiar1 year, 2 months ago
An interesting, but overall failed, attempt. The problem with the experiment is because the very concept of a God is outside of our understanding. Being outside of our understanding suitable controls cannot be created to conduct an experiment upon which actual proof can be derived. Until an actual experiment can be conducted within the true nature of God is known we can't really determine a thing. The only way upon which a hypothesis or theory can be ultimately proven or dis-proven is through real experimentation. Until that point it is best said that not enough evidence exists at this time to either prove or disprove the existence of any God. All this ultimately does is show a failed understanding of God, not the actual lack of existence of such a being. Essentially you fall into the same arrogance as religion, the belief that you understand the attributes of God when no one does.
Reply-
0%
Mdiar1 year, 2 months ago
Oh, for those who may argue I don't understand the scientific method, I understand it perfectly well. I just believe the final conclusion of this shouldn't be "God" doesn't exist. It should be the "fundamentalist God" doesn't exist. To prove God doesn't exist would require more evidence. Think of it like this:
Science is our attempt to understand the methodology of God.
Religion is our attempt to understand the nature of God.
Clearly, as I've known for some time, the most fundamental definition of God is incorrect. That's why we still have philosophers trying to figure out God's nature.
Reply -
0%
doggammit1 year, 2 months ago
Yes Midiar - and on THAT you can rely... There are limits to empiricism, particularly on the quantum level. When you approach theoretical quantum physics you soon find a number of competing paradigms - which are not unlike the variations found in religious cosmologies. In fact. the monadic, dialectical, triume, quaternal and other multiple aspects of a many faceted "god" such as the one found in ancient Egyptian texts, exposes the pre-rational mathematical complexities that were used to describe the "Mirror of Tem" - or Re Atum - the "all that is" of ancient Egypt.
Reply
-
-
0%
Earplug1 year, 2 months ago
RickyDawkins, I'm impressed, this is averaging 10? comments an hour.
Here are my points in brief, while restating yours.
"It is empirical fact that unnecessary suffering exists in the world." Biologically speaking, I don't know what the use of "suffering" is. But death maintains balance in animal populations and even increases selection - applicable to humans? no too unethical
"An omniscient God would be aware of this unnecessary suffering." Yes
"An omnipotent God would have the power to eliminate or alleviate at least some of the unnecessary suffering."
Yes
"A benevolent God would have the desire to eliminate or alleviate at least some of the unnecessary suffering."
1)If god is omnipotent/ all powerful/ all encompassing then we can also assume that this rage of emotion for example is beyond our average max of 3,000 and to personify God even more benevolence is a only a minuscule fraction of his/her(?) character.
Cont...1/4
Reply -
0%
sotiris-k1 year, 2 months ago
I have yet to see in the article convincing self consistent arguments against the existence of God. Not all logical steps the author takes to form conclusions are in fact without problems of their own .
Based on scientific principle of economy there is no necessity to postulate the existence of God to explain the natural world we experience. This is the ultimate argument against the existence of God in my own eyes. It is an argument of economy. As long as there is no need to postulate the existence of God it makes no sense to assume it . But this itself doesnt prove that God doesnt exist. However if one starts designing and assigning properties to God according to the trends of all religions one quickly comes into trouble. By that i mean that all the ways God is introduced across all religions have internal self consistency problems. This does not prove that God doesnt exist but it certainly proves that the ways he is introduced are problematic.
Reply-
0%
sotiris-k1 year, 2 months ago
You can see the properties God is assigned as an evolving phenomenon. Originally the properties are those of vast capacity and range of abilities. They are designed to explain the complexity of the natural world in a simplistic way. As human civilization evolves the version of God evolves too. He is no longer malicious and vindictive. He becomes a God of positive optimistic intentions that embraces mankind and its promise and demands from it virtue in order for the totality of human society to experience social progress . He starts to forgive and offers salvation with change in behavior. He becomes a pragmatic God that accepts the possibility of errors in human conduct and expect remorse and improvement as the answer to those challenges. He becomes optimistic in that sense and places emphasis on future behavior on the eventual recovery of virtue and its implications on the world. There is something now more important than the original sin , the effort to correct and produce good.
Reply
-
-
0%
ThoughtfulPerson1 year, 2 months ago
I believe you must separate the concept and belief in a God, from the stories and myths of organized religion. While I doubt the possibility of the existence of a "God," even more so I doubt organized religious gropus. If you follow the stories of the Christian Bible there are some really questionable beliefs and "events." One of the most telling for me, is the story of Cain and Able. Now keep in mind that supposedly Adam and Eve, and sons Cain and Able were all there were at that point in time. So, after Cain killed Able, and was sent out, he married. Who did he marry if they were the only people? Seems to me like more of an interesting "family history," rather than a history of life on earth. Of course I also have many problems with the beliefs of organized religions, and there "God." I simply cannot believe that a supposedly loving and caring God would allow many of the things that have happended in history to happen.
Reply -
0%
ALL4IT1 year, 2 months ago
We need to define "God" first.
Is God a conscious entity? What we understand for consciousness is the sum of the constant interaction of millions of neurons, receiving information from other neurons and sending its unique impressions and feedback to others. Then what could make a God conscious of its own existing?
One could argue that God's mastery of "GOODNESS" is nothing but the result of knowing all the truth in contrast to us humans who can barely grasp a small portion of the whole.
Life could be just a side effect of the existence of God. God could also be the result of the evolution of life. Could have been created by us animals as a result of our existence and not the other way around (not only as the archetype needed to make sense of ourselves and our groups)
Too broad a field for speculation, but in any case, the biblical God has as good a chance to exist as Thor or Zeus. Probably they have never been.
Reply -
0%
smartsweetheart1 year, 2 months ago
I knew already many of these arguments and I can follow them and agree with them intellectually. But, with all my heart, I hope, that God does exist. That´s what my experience teaches me day by day and this hope guided me through all my life. What has helped me very much, was the bet of Blaise Pascal: If god does not exist and you believed in him, what have you lost? Not much! But, if god does exist and you did not believe in him, you have lost everything. So, it is not against all reason to believe in god!
Reply-
0%
Tangent0011 year, 2 months ago
What about the consequences of not believing in Shiva, or Thor, or Allah? Seems you have to believe in all of them in case one of them is right?
Reply
-
-
0%
Poulenc1 year, 2 months ago
But what is the point of "proving" that god exists, as if some empirical (or philosophical) pinpointing could forever settle the matter?
Humans will always search for something "bigger" than themselves through which some promise of transcendence, immortality, comfort, freedom from fear and a sense of purpose can be had.
Of course that "something" is within rather than without--up there, in a fleecy heaven. But never mind....
Reply -
0%
rdb19601 year, 2 months ago
While it is possible to scientifically prove that something does exist, it is not possible to prove scientifically that something does not exist. Just reading the first few paragraphs, there were a number of glaring flaws in the logic. The author of this piece should get a life and try to spend his time on something more constructive.
Reply -
-
0%
Origin1 year, 2 months ago
Its astounding to me that in the year 2008 AD, approximately 13000 years since organized civilization began, that man is still debating this topic. Science has brought us deep understanding of the world around us. We now know how many things we attributed to GODS is just nature in all her glory. Through our immense ability to reason we have logically deduced a basic idea of existence. There are more unanswered questions and the mysteries of the universe are still well hidden. HOWEVER, Religion IS anti Logic, anti-humana and anti-life. Faith is the most brilliant and successful population control method.
Reply -
-
-
-
0%
Origin1 year, 2 months ago
Religious people, lacking the inner knowledge and courage to BE themselves, strive to make sense of this world. Heroes of invention take all the responsibility and pain out of life. "Put your life in God's hands" means like a computer without a person, we are incapable of any meaningful actions on our own. The great LIE of the soul, assures those who are downtrodden that they will be reward at some other time. Brilliant.
The truth is religious people are mystical fascist, who know the "truth" yet have no proof. They rely on intimidation, name calling and fear to prove their case, like all good fascists do. Logic makes sense, Man's invention of God no longer does. Remember, when Jesus says love thy neighbor? Turn the other cheek? It is for god to judge, etc.. Most christians DONT do that and fight for god like they are fighting for their favorite football team. It's time for humanity to move on. Please.
Reply -
0%
Origin1 year, 2 months ago
Religious people, lacking the inner knowledge and courage to BE themselves, strive to make sense of this world. Heroes of invention take all the responsibility and pain out of life. "Put your life in God's hands" means like a computer without a person, we are incapable of any meaningful actions on our own. The great LIE of the soul, assures those who are downtrodden that they will be reward at some other time. Brilliant.
Reply -
0%
Origin1 year, 2 months ago
The truth is religious people are mystical fascist, who know the "truth" yet have no proof. They rely on intimidation, name calling and fear to prove their case, like all good fascists do. Logic makes sense, Man's invention of God no longer does. Remember, when Jesus says love thy neighbor? Turn the other cheek? It is for god to judge, etc.. Most christians DONT do that and fight for god like they are fighting for their favorite football team. It's time for humanity to move on. Please.
Reply -
0%
Origin1 year, 2 months ago
Its astounding to me that in the year 2008 AD, approximately 13000 years since organized civilization began, that man is still debating this topic. Science has brought us deep understanding of the world around us. We now know how many things we attributed to GODS is just nature in all her glory.
Reply -
0%
Origin1 year, 2 months ago
Through our immense ability to reason we have logically deduced a basic idea of existence. There are more unanswered questions and the mysteries of the universe are still well hidden. HOWEVER, Religion IS anti Logic, anti-humana and anti-life. Faith is the most brilliant and successful population control method. Religious people, lacking the inner knowledge and courage to BE themselves, strive to make sense of this world.
Reply -
0%
Origin1 year, 2 months ago
Heroes of invention take all the responsibility and pain out of life. "Put your life in God's hands" means like a computer without a person, we are incapable of any meaningful actions on our own. The great LIE of the soul, assures those who are downtrodden that they will be reward at some other time. Brilliant.
Reply -
0%
Poulenc1 year, 2 months ago
Of course, the Wizard is shown to be...a blowhard, a deity undone.
That is, plain, cornfed sense, in the person of Dorothy, triumphs...and heaven is rejected (or, rather, found to be located in one's own backyard).
Reply -
0%
RickyDawkins1 year, 2 months ago
While most religionists today may not believe that the earth is a flat surface resting on the back of an enormous turtle which swims through the firmament, they cling -- to varying degrees -- to religious notions about how the universe operates. Angels, for instance, have never been detected or examined in a scientific inquiry; but a shocking percentage of Americans (about 65% according to some surveys), believes that these supernatural "pais" exist, running errands for god, or helping people in time of need. This whole belief system constitutes a throwback to earlier times in human history, when the world was "enchanted", populated with mystical and religious entities of all sorts. It's existence today is a shadow land of arcane beliefs which co-exist with our more enlightened views about the universe. For most people, their view of the world rests with one foot in the present, and the other deep in the past.
http://www.atheists.org/evolution/index.html#top
Reply -
-
0%
RickyDawkins1 year, 2 months ago
As scientific knowledge has expanded, it has confronted numerous religious doctrines and beliefs. To varying degrees, religionists have been uncomfortable with these new revelations. The more" fundamentalist" types -- that is, those who seek Absolute Truth in the pages of holy books such as the bible or Koran -- are left in a bit of a bind. How do they reconcile their beliefs and theistic interpretations with a growing body of scientific evidence?
One of the more curious artifacts of this murky realm of supernatural belief is so-called Scientific Creationism, a Quixotic quest to balance the fundamentalist interpretations of the Judeo-Christian bible with the findings of modern science. Decades after the famous "Monkey trial" which debated the pros and cons of evolutionary discovery, we are still repeating this argument in the nation's public schools.
http://www.atheists.org/evolution/index.html#top
Reply
-
-
0%
newbie04201 year, 2 months ago
Free will seems to be a difficult concept for some people to discern.
Reply -
0%
Poulenc1 year, 2 months ago
...well, to amend a bit in re things Oz: D. tangles with the murky unconscious and reconciles herself to its "dangers."
(How'm I doin'?)
Reply -
0%
heavenbound1 year, 2 months ago
Quoted as written by Ray Comfort, author of the EVIDENCE BIBLE.
1. Only in recent years has science discovered that everything we see is composed of invisible atoms. Here, Scripture tells us that the "things which are seen were not made of things which do appear."
2. Medical science has only recently discovered that blood-clotting in a newborn reaches its peak on the eighth day, then drops. The Bible consistently says that a baby must be circumcised on the eighth day.
3. At a time when it is believed that the earth sat on a large animal or a giant (1500 B.C.), the Bible spoke of the earths free float in space: "He...hangs the earth upon nothing" (Job 26:7)
Reply-
0%
Origin1 year, 2 months ago
Explanations;
1. They are unrelated. In order to "answer" people's doubts, organized religion has always used the concept of the realm of the invisible. Doesnt matter whether we are talking mono or poly theism.
2. Simple trial and error. Observations dont prove god exists.
3. the bible also says that man built a ship and put 2 of every creature on it. that means he captured all that exists, like the elephant, the lion, the kangaroo, the cobra, the scorpion, etc..
Reply
-
-
0%
markmawn21 year, 2 months ago
Without imperfection we would have nothing to work for. Imperfection is built in to the perfect Universal scheme.
As for purpose, that is personal.
Reply -
-
0%
Tangent0011 year, 2 months ago
Problems creep in when faith and science/rationalism collide in matters of public policy (e.g. gay marriage and abortion). I think, ultimately, that's where a lot of anti-religious sentiment comes from.
Reply -
0%
markmawn21 year, 2 months ago
Then atheism and science are religions by their own definitions. Substitute "ideology" for "God" and it is identical in every aspect.
Reply
-
-
0%
heavenbound1 year, 2 months ago
Continued ...Quoted as written by Ray Comfort, author of the EVIDENCE BIBLE.
4. The prophet Isaiah also tells us that the eath is round:"It is he that sits upon the circle of the earth" (Isaiah 40:22). This is not a reffernce to a flat disk, as some skeptics maintain, but to a shpere. Secular man discovered this 2,400 years later. At a time when science believed that the erth was flat, it was the Scriptures that inspried Christopher Columbus to sail around the world ( see proverbs 3:6)
Reply-
-
0%
Mdiar1 year, 2 months ago
Heaven, you are incorrect in this. While ancient man DID know the world was round, this was established scientific fact long before Columbus and he knew that the world was round via the Islamic culture to the East (at least that is what he based his equations on for size). A pity he didn't use the science of Eratosthenes, he was almost perfectly correct in the third century BC. Then again maybe he used the scriptures as a sort of "confirmation" of the science.
Reply
-
-
eyesopenComment removed: User banned.
-
0%
Popeye20001 year, 2 months ago
I am not religious, but I am an engineer. The hypothesis offered is something of fuzzy logic. I'll give an example:
given x=y
therefore xx=xy
therefore xx-y^2=xy-y^2
therefore (x y)(x-y)=y(x-y)
therefore divide both sides by (x-y)
therefore (x y)=y. If x=1 therefore y=1
thus 1 1=1
so if I were to end this fuzzy logic structure like the author of this article.
then since 1 1 cannot equal 1, god does not exist.
Reply-
0%
sotiris-k1 year, 2 months ago
Like the author this example of course introduces a step that is prohibited. You divide by (x-y) which due to the x=y is 0 . This step is not proper. Everything else past this point is not secure as conclusion .
For example the author at some point talks about virtue as something that is property of a being that has suffered ie says ' But virtue involves overcoming pains and danger-Indeed, a being, can only be properly said to be virtuous if it can suffer pain or be destroyed. ' .
And then of course a rational observer of the argument steps in and asks why? Why is virtue defined that way? It is nt in fact. A virtue for example can be defined to be the ability to be self sufficient and not require too much from your environment to feel happy. In that sense there is no suffering involved or danger. Virtue can also be the ability to understand your lack of proper education at a point in time and demand from yourself to further work to acquire that knowledge. No pain involved again!
Reply -
-
-
0%
heavenbound1 year, 2 months ago
continued ....Quoted as written by Ray Comfort, author of the EVIDENCE BIBLE.
5. God told Job in 1500 B.C. "Can you send lightnings, that they may go , and say to you, Here we are?" (Job 38:35)
The Bible here is making what appears to be a scientifically ludicrous statement - that light can be sent, and then manifest itself in speech. But did you know that radio waves travel at the speed of light? This is why you can have instananeous wireless communication with someone on the other side of the earth. Science didn't discover this until 1864 when "British scientist James Clerk Maxwell suggested that electricity and light waves were two forms of the same thing". (Modern Century Illustrated Ecyclopedia)
Reply -
0%
heavenbound1 year, 2 months ago
Quoted as written by Ray Comfort, author of the EVIDENCE BIBLE.
6. Job 38:19 asks,"Where is the way where the light dwells?" Modern man has only recently discovered that light ( electronic radiation) has a "way", travelling at 188,000 miles per second.
7. Science has discovered that stars emit radio waves, which are received on earth as a high pitch. God mentioned this in Job 38:7: "when the morning stars sang together..."
8. "Most cosmologists ( scientists who study the structures and evolution of the universe) agree that Genesis account of creation, in imagining an initial void, may be uncannily close to the truth" (Time, Cec. 1976)
Reply -
0%
heavenbound1 year, 2 months ago
Quoted as written by Ray Comfort, author of the EVIDENCE BIBLE.
9. Solomon described a "cycle" of air currents two thousand years before scienists "discovered" them. "The wind goes towards the south, and turns about unto north; it whirls about continually, and the wind returns again according to it's circuits" (Ecclesiastes 1:6)
10. Science expresses the universe in five terms: time, space, matter, power, and motion. Genesis 1:1-2 revealed such truths to the Hebrews in 1450 B.C. "In the beginning (time) God created (power), the Heaven (space)and the
earth (matter).. And the Spirit of God moved (motion) upon the face of the waters." The first thing God tells man is that He controls of all aspects of the universe.
Reply -
0%
heavenbound1 year, 2 months ago
Quoted as written by Ray Comfort, author of the EVIDENCE BIBLE
11. The great biological truth concerning the importance of blood in our body's mechanism has been fully comprehended only in recent years. Up until 120 years ago, sick people were "bled", and many died because of the practice. If you lose your blood, you lose your life. Yet Leviticus 17:11, written 3,000 years ago, declared that blood is the source of life: "For the life of the flesh is in the blood."
Reply -
0%
heavenbound1 year, 2 months ago
Quoted as written by Ray Comfort, author of the EVIDENCE BIBLE
12. All things were made by Him (see John 1:3), including dinosaurs. Why then did the dinosaur disappear? The answer may be in Job 40:15-24. In this passage, God speaks about a great creature called "Behemoth." Some commentators think this was a hippopotamus. However, the hippo's tail isn't like a large tree, but a small twig. Folllowing are the characteristics of this huge animal: It was the largest of all the creatures God made; was plant-eating ( herbivorus); had it's strength in it's hips and a tail like a large tree. It had very strong bones, lived among the trees, drank massive amounts of water, and was not disturbed by a raging river. He appears impervious to attack because his nose could pierce through snares, but Scripture says, "He that made him can make his sword to approach unto him." In other words, God caused this, the largest of all the creatures He had made, to become extinct.
Reply -
0%
heavenbound1 year, 2 months ago
Quoted as written by Ray Comfort, author of the EVIDENCE BIBLE
13. Encyclopedia Brittanica documents that in 1845, a young doctor in Vienna named Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis was horrified at the terrible death rate of women who gave birth in hospitals. As many as 30 percent died after giving birth. Semmelweis noted that doctors would examine the bodies of patients who died, then without washing their hands, go straight to the next ward and examine expectant mothers. This was their normal practice, because the presence of microscopic diseases was unknown. Semmelweis insisted that doctors wash their hands before examinations, and the death rate immediately dropped to 2 percent.
Reply -
0%
heavenbound1 year, 2 months ago
continued...Look at specific instructions God gave His people for when they encounter disease:"And when he thathas an issue is cleansed of his issue, then he shall number to himself seven days of cleansing, and wash his clothes, and bathe his flesh in running water, and shall be clean" (Leviticus 15:13). Until recent years, doctors washed their hands in a bowl of water, leaving invisible germs on their hands. However, the Bible says specifically to wash hands under "running water".
Reply -
0%
heavenbound1 year, 2 months ago
Quoted as written by Ray Comfort, author of the EVIDENCE BIBLE
14. Luke 17:34-36 says the Second coming of Jesus Christ will occur while some are asleep at night and others are working at daytime activities in the field. This is a clear indication of a revolving earth, with day and night at the same time.
15. "During the devastating Black Death of the fourteenth century, patients who were sick or dead were kept in the same rooms as the rest of the family. People often wondered why the diease was affecting so many people at one time. They attributed these epidemics to "bad air" or "evil spirits". However, careful attention to the medical commands of God as revealed in Leviticus would have saved un-told millions of lives. Arturo Castiglione wrote about the overwhelming importance of this medical law: "The laws against leprosy in Leviticus 13 may be regarded as the first model of sanitary legislation", ( A History of Medicine).
Reply -
0%
heavenbound1 year, 2 months ago
Quoted as written by Ray Comfort, author of the EVIDENCE BIBLE
"Grant R. Jeffery, The Signature of God.
With all these truths revealed in Scripture, how could a thinking person deny that the Bible is supernatural in origin? There is no other book in any of the world's religions (Vedas, Bhagavad-Gita, Koran, Book of Mormon, etc) that contains scientific truth. In fact they contain statements that are clearly unscientific. Hank Hanegraff said, "Faith in Christ is not some blind leap into a dark chasm, but a faith based on established evidence."
Reply -
0%
heavenbound1 year, 2 months ago
" If God is perfect, why did He make an Imperfect creation?"
Answered by Ray Comfort the author of the Evidence Bible.
The Bible tells us that the Genesis creation was "good". There was no sin and therefore no suffering or death. Why then did God give Adam and Eve the ability to sin, knowing full well that they would sin and bring death and pain to the human race? Some believe that if Adam had been created without the ability to choose, then he would have been a "robot". A father cannot make his children love him; They choose to love him because they have free will. Others point out tahat humanity would never have seen the depth of the love of God, as displayed in the cross, uness Adam had sinned, and that fact could be one reason why God allowed sin in the world.
Reply -
0%
Mutainia1 year, 2 months ago
This evidence for the non-existence of God is compelling. However, when you study the reality of quantum mechanics, of how a particle of light can be in two different places at the same time (creating the notion of parallel universes), and SINCE it is believed the whole universe sprang from something "smaller than a proton" (contradicting the notion that nothing can escape from black hole), well, all these reasons for why God doesn't exist can possibly RATTLE a God believer's faith, but, ceertainly not destroy it. Quantum mechanics, bat wings, pteranodon, Venus Fly-Traps, Dark Matter and the "Law of Entropy", keep God fat and sassy.
Reply -
-
0%
Mutainia1 year, 2 months ago
This evidence for the non-existence of God is compelling. However, when you study the reality of quantum mechanics, of how a particle of light can be in two different places at the same time (creating the notion of parallel universes), and SINCE it is believed the whole universe sprang from something "smaller than a proton" (contradicting the notion that nothing can escape from black hole), well, all these reasons for why God doesn't exist can possibly RATTLE a God believer's faith, but, certainly not destroy it. Quantum mechanics, bat wings, pteranodon, Venus Fly-Traps, Dark Matter and the "Law of Entropy", keep God fat and sassy.
Reply -
0%
RickyDawkins1 year, 2 months ago
You are absolutely right when you say Christianity is a fairy tale. Jesus rising from the dead or walking on water are tales in the exact same realm as Rumpelstiltskin turning straw into gold. The problems start when the fairy tale believers assert the tales are fact by which the rest of us must run our lives. I don't care that someone worships his front door knob, for example. If that person claims to gain spiritual sustenance from it, who are we to comment. But as the response to your post shows, the same persons who "sunk" your story are the same collection of right wingers that regularly defend the Iraq war and Bush. They go so seamlessly from defending Christianity to defending Bush that one might think Bush and Christianity are one and the same.
And that may explain much of the blowback to your story. You've posted a treatise meant for students of theology, logic and philosophy that is being read and commented on by rabble eager to establish God as politics.
-anon
Reply -
0%
vor1 year, 2 months ago
If the Bible is correct we are all products of incest.
Where did man ever get the idea that he would learn the truth of his creation? Of course the whole idea spread from fear. "If we can just learn why we are here that will explain everything". Of course man of that era thought that a thunderstorm was directed from a p.o.'d God. They were ignorant, unaware. That's not to condemn ancient man it's just fact. Superstition ran wild.
It's the same reason anyone believed Joseph Smith's bizarre tales in the first place. The Holy Land was not that different from the "burned over district" of NY that Mormonism rose from. Superstition, confusion, and fear can make human beings do some bizarre things. Create some bizarre explanations. It was Mormonism that taught me, that no matter how bizarre the belief may be, with the proper manipulation man can be made to believe anything. There are currently an estimated 12 million Mormons in the world.
Reply -
0%
GnosisHolyGrail1 year, 2 months ago
Geeesch. People!! This riddle was solved 2000 years ago. Rediscovered in 1945. Read the Gnostic Gospels.
Reply -
0%
PainGoddess1 year, 2 months ago
I think that part of our evolution is that we outgrow superstition and belief in invisible forces. Just like we no longer really believe that the earth is the center of the universe. The sun is not a god, the moon is not a goddess etc. Eventually we will outgrow this version in all of its horrible manifestations for logic and understanding of ourselves and the universe around us. Or it will conquer human thought and freedom and we will be slaves to it. When the sun consumes our little planet our ignorance will keep us from knowing why.
Reply -
0%
2sidestoeverything1 year, 2 months ago
Ricky good submit and some very interesting post above.
Reply -
0%
sotiris-k1 year, 2 months ago
By the way through my point of view and given the high standards i want to place myself on such an attempt for a proof the article itself deserves a sink. However the discussion that emerged does not and this is the reason i refuse to vote either way. I applaud the discussion and dislike the web page because i find its logic faulty at several occasions.
Using modern science one can easily show the internal inconsistencies at philosophical and even at elementary level for the properties most religions assign to God and the special relationship they place between him and the humans. One can produce using modern biology and earth history a plethora of arguments against the versions seen in all main religions. However this ability to show inconsistencies doesnt extend to the full proof that there cannot be an entity of superior intelligence that is behind the structure of cosmos. After all our trajectory in time as humans is one that ultimately produces for us such Goldlike properties.
Reply-
0%
sotiris-k1 year, 2 months ago
So far there has never been a branch of science that has hit fundamental obstacles that can only be eliminated by postulating something like intelligent design. We continue to advance and explain things without the need for an external hyper natural influence. I fully expect eventually we will get an answer about how life starts on the planet and we will replicate the process in the lab. I think the emergence of intelligence life is an inevitable endgame of the level 2 star systems in the universe. It has very small but nonzero probability. It is also very likely we are the first to succeed or that we are separated by enormous distances or that they are so far advanced that they hide themselves realizing that the ultimate emergence of self awareness in the universe stems from one's own discovery of origin unaltered by external wisdom. I do indeed think that a very advanced civilization has no need to exploit others that are inferior.Any difference is in millions or billions of years.
Reply
-
-
0%
truthiness1 year, 2 months ago
(my theory) the primary difference btwn pagan faiths and western religiona which replaced them is the purpose of the myth.
pagan religions attempted to describe the workings of the world in a way that could be taught to the next generation through an oral tradition. by providing anthropomorphic metaphors for the varied concepts an adult needed to understand they were able to educate their children in a way that helped them make sense of the world.
do you really think that the Romans, inventors of indoor plumbing and republican government, believed the sun was pulled across the sky in a giant chariot? when you were a child did you really believe a giant stork carried newborn babies to their parents?
the abrahamic traditions attempted to not only explain life, but to give it meaning. while all faiths have creation myths, this was the first to suggest that the world was created for humanity. Which is why people cling so fiercely to modern religion.
Reply-
0%
hyperbola1 year, 2 months ago
First of all, the majority of people do NOT cling to the "abrahamic" traditions because the majority of people do not belong to those faiths.
Second, the idea that the world was created for humanity pre-dates the abrasmic traditions.
Zoroastrianism
The Zoroastrian story of creation has Ahura Mazda creating 16 lands, one by one, such that each would be delightful to its people....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_belief
Your "reasoning" sounds like narcissism to justify yourself.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
chuck-the-canuck1 year, 2 months ago
I think the major difference between the Christians and the non-believers is that non-believers have no stake in the truth. It isn't important for me to be right. I don't need to be right. My belief system doesn't hinge on whether the earth is 4 billion or 4 thousand years old. My belief system doesn't hinge on whether god created the world and everything in it in 6 days or aliens cooked us up in a microwave. It doesn't matter to me if Darwin is right or wrong.
It's the system of true believers that hinges on the details. For them is all or nothing. Either they are absolutely right or it is all smoke and mirrors. Tough system to defend given the biblical "facts" they are forced to work with.
Given that, why does this debate go on? A simple analysis of the" facts" should suffice. Here's the rub, some people are unwilling to accept the implications of the "facts".
And so it goes.
Reply -
0%
HannibalBarca1 year, 2 months ago
Well you mentioned him so maybe you have an explanation for him.
If God knows all, why would he create a plan that is flawed by throwing lucifer into it, I mean he was the first sinner, not Eve
Reply-
0%
lvrofwolves1 year, 2 months ago
why would a perfect god create lucifer or even allow him to foul up his creation? yeah Lucifer was all good in the beginning, where did such evil spring from if God created everything!!
Reply -
0%
Mutainia1 year, 2 months ago
IF there is eternal punishment, great question. IF there is eternal punishment.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
doggammit1 year, 2 months ago
Nature boy - the divine netjer (nature spirits) think differently about Jesus and his sky dad - despite that politically contaminated religious "experiments" of low order have somehow distorted the possibility of entertaining a somewhat more comforting and direct eXperience for you and many others. I understand how you feel and - to some degree- why you might feel as you do. Just keep an open heart, avoid churches and the mind's mule may eventually follow...
Reply -
0%
doggammit1 year, 2 months ago
midleft -It depends very much on "whose" Jesus you are talking about - but yes, there are those who use him as a battering ram - a war pig - and will be inclined to do so to the detriment of Jesus and all he taught- until they are given their moment of serious reckoning.
BTW - if you want to pick a bone with fundamentalist Christians - feel free - and I will gladly join you - with, of course, some major qualifiers that do not discount the prospect of a Christ and a kingdom that lie within. IMHO, exoteric dogma and brutish fundamentalisms of any kind were made to be fully transcended by the individual and the war pig attitude along with it - as I'm sure underrepresented Islamic Sufis and Jewish mystics do most certainly agree.
Reply -
0%
sotiris-k1 year, 2 months ago
This is not the Jesus that history recorded. He didnt start wars. He didnt lead violent conflicts. He embraced the weak and offered love to kids and demanded ethical responsible conduct from the average citizen and died offering love and forgiveness. True those are the properties Christians needed him to have to facilitate the emergence of the new religion. However historical, archaeological research has failed to prove otherwise. You can add Christ to the ancient philosophers that offered with personal example and teachings a proper altruistic way to construct the society of humanism and enlightenment that we are all so proud to be citizens of today even if at least in principle and not yet in perfect reality . Jesus improved the world he came into. It is the eventual leaders of all religious movements that finally betray the founder and enslave the movement to the power thirsty hands of political leaders that history however always punishes in the most enduring of ways!
Reply
-
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.