Originally posted by Patient_Leech
Yeah, so saying it twice doesn't lend it any more credence.In the debate arena one usually has to back up assertions with reasons/evidence. 🙂
Ok then actually address the point and actually engage in an argument instead of just stating that your stance is intellectually superior.
EDIT: You know what nevermind.
Originally posted by SamZED
Can you elaborate why you think theism is the most rational position? Or point me to your earlier post if you already have done it (haven't read the whole thread). I don't see how it's more rational tbh.
Originally posted by DeadlineYou can deduce that beings like gods probably exist just by looking at nature. Bacteria exists, insects exist, animals exist and humans exist it stands to reason that more likely than not other beings out there more powerful than human beings exist. The reason why you come to that conclusion is because you can already observe a hierarchy of lifeforms that already exsist. So it's like this 2=bacteria, 4=insects, 6=animals, 8=humans whats the next number? The next number is probably 10. It might not be but it probably is. So belief in gods is based on inference while Atheism is based on.....I dunno i guess some strange vendetta you have with Christians.
To be honest I don't think this is going to change your mind anyway.
Originally posted by Deadline
To be honest I don't think this is going to change your mind anyway.
I mean, yeah there likely are lifeforms superior to humans in some sense in the vast cosmic reaches of space. But... that isn't a God, really.
God is, by definition, a "the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being". Just because there's beings superior to humans does not mean they're automatically Gods, because being better than us isn't the same as creating moral high-grounds, creating the universe, establishing the laws of nature, etc.
Now you could use a much more loose definition that a God is a spirit that commands some force of nature, or is something beyond human measure. But that's so vague that anything and everything humans can't explain yet would be referred to as a "God". So unless we wanna start worshipping black holes, this definition isn't gonna work either. We're left drawing arbitrary lines between what can pass as a God and what can't. We're left with scales measuring random metrics. We're left trying to classify stuff when humans were never really good at that anyways.
And then there's also accounting that there is prolly more than one superior being, so to worship them would be polytheistic, so Christianity, Islam and Judaism all become irrelevant.
Originally posted by SamZED
No reason we can't have a difference of an opinion. So here's my 2 cents:
On your scale cockroaches would be somewhere around 4. And since they've existed long before humans and will probably be here long after we're gone we can agree that those numbers are arbitrary. And one could argue that its not really a scale at all. Also, we didn't create cockroaches. But yes, if we decide to make an arbitrary scale strictly based on our understanding of intelligence then sure, in theroy there could be some advanced alien life form that you'd place at number 1000000. So if that's your only requirement to qualify as a deity/deities then yes, statistically it's probable. But at this point it has very little to do with what most believers mean when talking about "God" and has nothing to do with the existance of the universe, divine morality, personal relationship with humans/requirement for worship and does nothing to support Christian/Muslim worldviews. And since you never said that it is a requirement I guess i'm not really disagreeing with you. Atheistic position first and foremost is a rejection of those unlikely religious doctrines due to them being very specific with no evidence to back them up. Pretty sure that most atheists will gladly talk to you about the existence of some advanced alien species and it wouldn't conflict with their world view. The conflict arises when people go from "there's probably something out there" to "It's Jesus. He made you and doesn't want you to be a f@g". And it's not about Christian doctrine specifically, it just so happens that Christian is the dominant one these days and influences peoples day to day lives the most.
Which was my point. I'm firstly just talking about theism itself not the other beliefs that go along with it. As I stated before the concept of the existance of gods is likely, what you could argue is irrational is the exact attributes of what a god has eg caucasian appearnce, his name etc.
Also to an extent I'm throwing an olive branch I'm saying to an extent the reason why people are atheists is because of Christanity it's one thing to say that God exists it's another to say that Jesus died on the cross for our sins and you're going to hell if you don't accept that.
You see the problem here is this, normal atheists wouldn't neccesarily have a problem with this idea (however that would mean that they're not atheists anymore) but that's not what the modern incarnation of atheism is all about it has an agenda. It's about destroying Christanity and religion all together, so no they would have a problem with that because it could mean that Chistanity and oher religions might be more right than they think. A lot of modern athiests are not in any way shape or form interested in the truth they play semantics, they move goal post etc. There also seems to be a lot of scientfic evidence for the supernatutral as well but atheists constantly make excuses.
Originally posted by MythLord
I mean, yeah there likely are lifeforms superior to humans in some sense in the vast cosmic reaches of space. But... that isn't a God, really.
God is, by definition, a "the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being". Just because there's beings superior to humans does not mean they're automatically Gods, because being better than us isn't the same as creating moral high-grounds, creating the universe, establishing the laws of nature, etc.
Yes but you're specifically thinking about the Christian god, for example Norse gods weren't all-poweerful (depends on how you look at it) they aged and died. However maybe it could be argued that if you follow my logic at some point you're going to find some being that is going to be the most powerful.
Originally posted by MythLord
you could use a much more loose definition that a God is something beyond human measure. But that's so vague that anything and everything humans can't explain yet would be referred to as a "God".
Originally posted by Deadline
Which was my point. I'm firstly just talking about theism itself not the other beliefs that go along with it. As I stated before the concept of the existance of gods is likely, what you could argue is irrational is the exact attributes of what a god has eg caucasian appearnce, his name etc.Also to an extent I'm throwing an olive branch I'm saying to an extent the reason why people are atheists is because of Christanity it's one thing to say that God exists it's another to say that Jesus died on the cross for our sins and you're going to hell if you don't accept that.
You see the problem here is this, normal atheists wouldn't neccesarily have a problem with this idea (however that would mean that they're not atheists anymore) but that's not what the modern incarnation of atheism is all about it has an agenda. It's about destroying Christanity and religion all together, so no they would have a problem with that because it could mean that Chistanity and oher religions might be more right than they think. A lot of modern athiests are not in any way shape or form interested in the truth they play semantics, they move goal post etc. There also seems to be a lot of scientfic evidence for the supernatutral as well but atheists constantly make excuses.
I don't dismiss that atheists have an agenda, but I don't see it as being deliberately dishonest or evil. If you're talking about the so called militant atheists or the"horsemen of atheism" I see them as a necessary opposition. We seem to agree on the key argument that "it is one thing to say that God exists it's another to say that Jesus died on the cross for our sins and you're going to hell if you don't accept that". The thing is noone of these atheists oppose individual rights to be religious or to believe in a deity. It's just people who actually say "Jesus died on the cross for our sins and you're going to hell if you don't accept that" have way too much power around the world. They get to dictate laws and sentence people to death based on their personal very narrow man made understanding of what God wants. Stopping that is those atheists agenda and imo it's the one worth pushing. There are too few outspoken atheists (compared to the number of religious people) in the position of power for them to be subtle about such things. That's why those atheist come of as arrogant dicks at times. They are vastly outnumbered and often shunned/descriminated against.
Also, if we're being truthful for those of us who grow up very religious the process of becoming an atheist involves a lot of anger and resentment. So it does come out from time to time especially during debates.
Imagine that for decades you've been told to climb up a 80 storied building every day to water some plants only to find out years later that those plants were fake the whole time. Something like that.
Originally posted by Deadline
You can deduce that beings like gods probably exist just by looking at nature. Bacteria exists, insects exist, animals exist and humans exist it stands to reason that more likely than not other beings out there more powerful than human beings exist. The reason why you come to that conclusion is because you can already observe a hierarchy of lifeforms that already exsist. So it's like this 2=bacteria, 4=insects, 6=animals, 8=humans whats the next number? The next number is probably 10. It might not be but it probably is. So belief in gods is based on inference while Atheism is based on.....I dunno i guess some strange vendetta you have with Christians.
Originally posted by MythLord
Now you could use a much more loose definition that a God is a spirit that commands some force of nature, or is something beyond human measure. But that's so vague that anything and everything humans can't explain yet would be referred to as a "God".
Originally posted by SamZED
Pretty much this. And since we know nothing about "what's out there" and it in no way effects our lives most atheists simply don't waste time believing it, let alone worshipping it, while rejecting very specific and unlikely man-made ideas of God. Seems like the most rational position to me.
Yup, exactly. Which is why I didn't bother addressing it. It was so obviously self-defeating.
Originally posted by Deadline
Yes but you're specifically thinking about the Christian god, for example Norse gods weren't all-poweerful (depends on how you look at it) they aged and died. However maybe it could be argued that if you follow my logic at some point you're going to find some being that is going to be the most powerful.
Originally posted by MythLord
Yeah, but again, you're going to have to stretch the definition of "God" if you want that to work. Also, how powerful would the "most powerful" being be?
It's all unquantifiable and arbitrary. So if you wanna use "God" to mean just really smart, powerful aliens then go for it but that still doesn't explain why we should worship them. And at what point in our evolution can we surpass them? Can we become "Gods" by that definition?
Possibly.
#off topic# That's why I thought Prometheus (the film) was such a cool idea, but then Ridley Scott went and fu#ked it. #off topic#
But most rational minds would see the all-too-human aspects of the Greek gods (for example) as evidence of them being creations of human imagination, not evidence that they're highly evolved beings that actually existed.
Originally posted by Patient_Leech
This is both a frustrating and interesting watch, but it does help one get into the mindset of the WBC. If you'll notice they always point to the Bible for answers to their reasoning. That's key. They are really not that different from any other evangelicals, they just go over the Bible with a fine-tooth comb because she's a lawyer. So it just seems a bit more extreme. But you'll see that there's no reasoning with this kind of crazy (WBC or regular Evangelical). Certain disasters (or gunmen/shooters) they think were sent by God, other terrible events weren't? I guess? I suppose they decide on which by what they find in the Bible. Like I said, there's no reasoning with that kind of crazy, but this girl does about as well as you can.I will at least give them credit that they don't seem determined to set out and get their views established in public policy or anything. They just want to get the word out. So that at least helps keep it contained somewhat.
Btw: [b]FAIR WARNING: THIS IS EDGY
YouTube video [/B]
Originally posted by MythLord
Scary stuff.
I wanted to reiterate that while the WBC may seem extreme, they really aren't all that different from typical fundamentalist evangelical Christians. They are a little more in-you-face and rude about it with their signs and everything, but they believe the same things. I grew up in fundamentalist Christian land, so I know.
Originally posted by Deadline
To be honest I don't think this is going to change your mind anyway.
I have a book that says pink elephants can fly. Do you believe there is such a thing as flying pink elephants? After all, animals exist. And some animals are elephants. And some animals are pink. And some animals can fly. So by your reasoning, it is entirely reasonable to believe that such an animal exists, because the concept of such an animal exists, and that concept is supported by a book.
Originally posted by MythLordWe all ready have better means of communication than many gods in mythology. I don't send messages with birds, i pick up a phone.
Yeah, but again, you're going to have to stretch the definition of "God" if you want that to work. Also, how powerful would the "most powerful" being be?
It's all unquantifiable and arbitrary. So if you wanna use "God" to mean just really smart, powerful aliens then go for it but that still doesn't explain why we should worship them. And at what point in our evolution can we surpass them? Can we become "Gods" by that definition?
Possibly.