What's new
By:

Boston Marathon explosions......

AKMVP said:
Whats the difference may I ask?



It is easy to reject Loch Ness Monster until it is proven to be real;). Same with gods. They are creations by humans at the end of the day.
Click to expand...

We all agree that gods that exist in this universe like apollo and stuff are fake. But this isn't the type of god we believe in. We believe in a single god outside the universe as a necessity to explain reality. Theism is simply the recognition that no matter what there is going to have to be something unexplainable to explain reality at some point, otherwise it will be infinite regress. If you believe that the universe is simple that unexplainable thing then that is pantheism.

In regards to onebrow comment earlier that he simple believes one god less then we do.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W50yUVi2sgE

I have problems with WLC but lets not commit the poisoning the well fallacy which many atheists do.

We are all bachelors even married people because married people are only married to one person so they are a bachelor to the billions of other people in the world so they are really bachelors.
 
PearlWatson said:
There is no such thing as "immoral" if there is no God. There is just lawful and unlawful.

Your statement that God has not provided mankind with an absolute moral code assumes there is a God in order to "prove" there isn't one, so I don't know what to take from that.

Are you trying to explain your "rationality" or convert me to your way of thinking?
Click to expand...

There isn't a God. People created the concept of Gods, then decided another set of Gods made more sense, then decided that there must be one supreme God so they created the concept of monotheism, then they disagreed about what god wants us to wear and eat on Fridays so they all set up separate camps that claimed to know what God wanted. All the while doing exactly what people do with or without Gods, or God or Allah, or Thor or...well, any of the thousands of entities created in the imaginations of man and passed off as an actual being that is in some way involved in our life. We're all human, we all act human. God didn't give us morality any more than he gave me the can of beans in my cupboard. Morality is and has always been exactly what man says it is. And it does exist, even though God doesn't.

I'm not trying to prove there is no God. I know you believe there is one. I do not. I don't believe any amount of reason proves anything as far as faith is concerned so I seldom try to use an argument like "If there really was a God he would have provided us with an absolute moral code, since we don't have one there is no God." If that's what you heard, you read me wrong. First, God has not provided us with an absolute moral code. Man has always established what is right and what is wrong and sometimes they use parts of scripture to justify their distinctions, sometimes they don't. My point is not about the existence or nonexistence of God, but that morality exists with or without a God because morality is man-made and always has been...again, with or without a God.

Jumped in here not to discuss the possible existence of God. You can state your belief however you'd like and I'll continue not being bashful about saying God doesn't actually exist. It seemed you believed there were benefits to faith in and of itself, that the existence of God wasn't necessary for a person to benefit from faith. So I asked, "what if there is no God, should I still have faith for the benefits even if I don't believe?" You brought up Pascals Wager. Well, Pascals wager deals with this from a different angle. He asks "What if God does exist?" If it is at all possible that he does then we want to make sure to keep ourselves out of hell. Only problem is, I can't pretend to believe. If there was even a sliver of me that wondered if God existed I guess I could grab onto that and with the help of a really good imagination, tuning out reality, trying to enter a lucid dream state, etc. maybe I could get that special feeling in my bosom that religious people get (I get it too, but it's usually when I do something naughty, so I've never attributed it to a higher power). Until then, I'm stuck not believing in God. Understand please, I couldn't start believing in God tomorrow anymore than you could start believing in unicorns. I'd still want some reason to believe that any of it was true. As of yet I don't have a single reason, yet I still want to be good. You tell me I'm just trying to be legal? Yet I break a number of laws on any given day and I don't feel the least bit bad about it, but I still desire to be good. Yet you're telling me I can't because I don't believe in whatever ******** someone sold you on.
 
The Black Swordsman said:
We believe in a single god outside the universe as a necessity to explain reality. Theism is simply the recognition that no matter what there is going to have to be something unexplainable to explain reality at some point, otherwise it will be infinite regress.
Click to expand...

There are other options, such as a universe with the ability to create itself. However, even if the only other option were infinite regress, so what?

The Black Swordsman said:
In regards to onebrow comment earlier that he simple believes one god less then we do.
Click to expand...

I responded to a flippant, shallow, non-serious comment in a flippant, shallow, non-serious manner.

The Black Swordsman said:
We are all bachelors even married people because married people are only married to one person so they are a bachelor to the billions of other people in the world so they are really bachelors.
Click to expand...

I agree your misuse of definitions is of the same sort as Dawkins and the person asking the question.
 
One Brow said:
Everyone is a god-denier. I just deny more gods than most.
Click to expand...

That was a cute little dodge. For a self-described "free thinker" you are extremely attached to people whose only commonality is the denial of God. That seems a piss poor place to find a sense of belonging. It is almost worse than the druggies gathering in the far corner of the high school parking lot.
 
Gameface said:
There isn't a God. People created the concept of Gods, then decided another set of Gods made more sense, then decided that there must be one supreme God so they created the concept of monotheism, then they disagreed about what god wants us to wear and eat on Fridays so they all set up separate camps that claimed to know what God wanted. All the while doing exactly what people do with or without Gods, or God or Allah, or Thor or...well, any of the thousands of entities created in the imaginations of man and passed off as an actual being that is in some way involved in our life. We're all human, we all act human. God didn't give us morality any more than he gave me the can of beans in my cupboard. Morality is and has always been exactly what man says it is. And it does exist, even though God doesn't.

I'm not trying to prove there is no God. I know you believe there is one. I do not. I don't believe any amount of reason proves anything as far as faith is concerned so I seldom try to use an argument like "If there really was a God he would have provided us with an absolute moral code, since we don't have one there is no God." If that's what you heard, you read me wrong. First, God has not provided us with an absolute moral code. Man has always established what is right and what is wrong and sometimes they use parts of scripture to justify their distinctions, sometimes they don't. My point is not about the existence or nonexistence of God, but that morality exists with or without a God because morality is man-made and always has been...again, with or without a God.

Jumped in here not to discuss the possible existence of God. You can state your belief however you'd like and I'll continue not being bashful about saying God doesn't actually exist. It seemed you believed there were benefits to faith in and of itself, that the existence of God wasn't necessary for a person to benefit from faith. So I asked, "what if there is no God, should I still have faith for the benefits even if I don't believe?" You brought up Pascals Wager. Well, Pascals wager deals with this from a different angle. He asks "What if God does exist?" If it is at all possible that he does then we want to make sure to keep ourselves out of hell. Only problem is, I can't pretend to believe. If there was even a sliver of me that wondered if God existed I guess I could grab onto that and with the help of a really good imagination, tuning out reality, trying to enter a lucid dream state, etc. maybe I could get that special feeling in my bosom that religious people get (I get it too, but it's usually when I do something naughty, so I've never attributed it to a higher power). Until then, I'm stuck not believing in God. Understand please, I couldn't start believing in God tomorrow anymore than you could start believing in unicorns. I'd still want some reason to believe that any of it was true. As of yet I don't have a single reason, yet I still want to be good. You tell me I'm just trying to be legal? Yet I break a number of laws on any given day and I don't feel the least bit bad about it, but I still desire to be good. Yet you're telling me I can't because I don't believe in whatever ******** someone sold you on.
Click to expand...

I guess I wasn't that clear when I say do whatever the hell you want if you are sure there is no God. I meant do what you want in the belief department...you don't have to fake anything. I don't care if you believe, and if there is no God then it doesn't matter. Some people like to hedge their bets is all.

If morality is man-made then there is no "good" there is simply "approved of by the humans around me." I get that we all want to belong but why make or allow other humans to be your moral authority if you've been freed-up from a belief in an ultimate authority? You've basically allowed other humans to be your God filler.
 
AKMVP said:
Whats the difference may I ask?
It is easy to reject Loch Ness Monster until it is proven to be real;). Same with gods. They are creations by humans at the end of the day.
Click to expand...

The difference is that you get a possible physical punishment from other humans for breaking the law if you are caught.
Right and wrong goes beyond human law.

I didn't ask why you reject God. I get that part. I asked why after you have denied his existence that you have allowed your fellow humans to take his place as a moral authority. In other words, "Why reject the existence of a supreme moral authority only to give it to your fellow humans?
 
PearlWatson said:
I guess I wasn't that clear when I say do whatever the hell you want if you are sure there is no God. I meant do what you want in the belief department...you don't have to fake anything. I don't care if you believe, and if there is no God then it doesn't matter. Some people like to hedge their bets is all.

If morality is man-made then there is no "good" there is simply "approved of by the humans around me." I get that we all want to belong but why make or allow other humans to be your moral authority if you've been freed-up from a belief in an ultimate authority? You've basically allowed other humans to be your God filler.
Click to expand...
Good post. Laws and rules must be established and enforced for society to exist and thrive. Even animals have societal structures. Whether it be a belief in God, tribal/familial affiliations, wealth or military might, some entity will gain authority. "Good" may not have moral ramifications, but "legal" and "illegal" will certainly be determined. As for the God argument, reason can neither prove nor disprove the existence of a Higher Power. I vehemently disagree with anyone who says "There is NOT a God." I fully support anyone who says "I do not believe there is a God." Was the concept of "God" created by people? I don't know. I wasn't there in the beginning. Do people sometimes attribute natural phenomenon to a higher power? Yes. Does that prove the absence of a higher power? No. Personally, I believe in God. I hope there is more to this life than just the survival of the species. I hope the friendships I've formed and the people that mean so much to me, namely my family, do not just vanish from consciousness. And what a waste life would be if our intelligence, our sentience, just disappears with death. To me, if this were true, if I were to believe this, life would be unbearable. If that makes me a weak person in the eyes of some, so be it.
 
PearlWatson said:
In other words, "Why reject the existence of a supreme moral authority only to give it to your fellow humans?
Click to expand...

huh maybe because it is real?

PearlWatson said:
The difference is that you get a possible physical punishment from other humans for breaking the law if you are caught.
Right and wrong goes beyond human law.
Click to expand...

So the first is real, more scary and can get you punished financialy, killed or jailed for life. Second is just tales/illusions/imagination. And even if you believe in it you can go to priest, confess your sins, pray for 5 min and be granted freedom from your "sins". Seems to me like a very easy way out.
There is a reason human law exists and no "supreme moral authority" can replace it. Just accept it.
 
AKMVP said:
huh maybe because it is real?



So the first is real, more scary and can get you punished financialy, killed or jailed for life. Second is just tales/illusions/imagination. And even if you believe in it you can go to priest, confess your sins, pray for 5 min and be granted freedom from your "sins". Seems to me like a very easy way out.
There is a reason human law exists and no "supreme moral authority" can replace it. Just accept it.
Click to expand...
I don't believe I can go to a priest, confess, pray for 5 mins and be granted freedom from my "sins." Furthermore, belief in a supreme moral authority does not exempt me from the laws and punishments that have been established by humans.
 
PearlWatson said:
For a self-described "free thinker" you are extremely attached to people whose only commonality is the denial of God.
Click to expand...

Not really. You won't find me hanging out with anti-vaxxers or Men's Rights Advocates, even though many of them are atheists. You'll find me among the people who accept science/evidence because there is nothing better, promote equality, and seek a better culture. It's not a bad place to hang out.
 
TBS, you forgot to copy the H at the end of the second Allah in your sig. Right now it reads as "Mohammad the prophet of the lol".

Edit: This isn't a trolling attempt. I'm really pointing out a funny copy/paste error.
 
AKMVP said:
huh maybe because it is real?
So the first is real, more scary and can get you punished financialy, killed or jailed for life. Second is just tales/illusions/imagination. And even if you believe in it you can go to priest, confess your sins, pray for 5 min and be granted freedom from your "sins". Seems to me like a very easy way out.
There is a reason human law exists and no "supreme moral authority" can replace it. Just accept it.
Click to expand...

In asking me to explain the difference between morality (right and wrong) and law you actually helped to validate my point that to God-deniers there is no morality outside human law. For them there is no "right" or "wrong" just lawful or unlawful. For you a "decent" person is merely a lawful person.

I'm not Catholic, which is what you describe.

There is a reason behind God's laws as well. Reasons you don't accept but reasons nonetheless.

Of course I accept most human law, but not always the reasoning behind it. For God believers God's laws go beyond human law. There are more behaviors "wrong" than unlawful.
 
Last edited:
PearlWatson said:
. For you a "decent" person is merely a lawful person.
For God believers God's laws go beyond human law. There are more behaviors "wrong" than unlawful.
Click to expand...

So are you saying that it is impossible to be decent person without being believer in god? As I stated before I have seen so many indecent god believers that I would not even call them human's. Why is that then? Why is USA being one of most religious country in the world is leading in such indecencies as gun related crimes, teenager abortions and STD's?
For example D.Fisher and M.Jackson are god's believers - do you think they are decent?
 
AKMVP said:
So are you saying that it is impossible to be decent person without being believer in god? As I stated before I have seen so many indecent god believers that I would not even call them human's. Why is that then? Why is USA being one of most religious country in the world is leading in such indecencies as gun related crimes, teenager abortions and STD's?
For example D.Fisher and M.Jackson are god's believers - do you think they are decent?
Click to expand...

No, I was talking about what you meant by "decent," because some of the things you bring up are not against U.S. law so to your way of thinking a teenager who had an abortion is still "decent" and a teenager who slept around and got a STD is also still "decent."

As for why the U.S. has a high incidence of those things is because we have allowed God-deniers to control our government schools, teach our kids faux science, and all things that go against the judeo-Christian moral fabric of our society. Basically the increased prevalence of Liberalism goes right along with the increase in "indecency."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top