For all you atheists

[andross77]

Oh, but I certainly can think of things that are more blissful than your heaven, with its golden streets and perfect bodies. Your heaven is ALL about "self", about people basically staying who they are for eternity, with sensual gratification as the primary (or even only) source of bliss. Feasts, crowns, the whole plethora of useless, materialistic luxury.
Sounds like a very... AMERICAN heaven, I might add. Beverly Heaven, or something like that. Let me guess: the swimming pools are made of platinum and filled with celestial champagne?

heaven is not about self. it's about God. you are completely ignorant on the topic of heaven. but if you want to keep spouting on topics you know nothing about, go ahead....*sigh*

 

[b&wpac4]

no, it's why you have rejected Jesus and mock Christians on this site. Keep reading though. i hope sometime it will penetrate your heart.

Oh it has. Just not in the way you would think is "correct".

 

[mpok1519]

no, it's why you have rejected Jesus and mock Christians on this site. Keep reading though. i hope sometime it will penetrate your heart.

Its funny how many christians mock truth and science. Thats perfectly fine though?

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

heaven is not about self. it's about God. you are completely ignorant on the topic of heaven. but if you want to keep spouting on topics you know nothing about, go ahead....*sigh*

What do mansions, crowns, feasts and streets of gold have to do with God? Any suggestions?

 

[Belk]

i am the only one following the laws of logic here. My God has given me a moral code to follow. It is objective and it is truth.

Give me a logical proof or evidence for an objective moral code.

An atheistic worldview has nothing but the material. Therefore one man can decide one thing is right, while another can decide it is wrong. Neither is more right.

True, so what?

It is NOT logical as an atheist to say that one thing is "right" and one thing is "wrong." It's all purely a matter of subjective opinion.

Your conclusion does not follow from your premise. I am perfectly capable of stating what I believe to be right and wrong and giving my reasons for believing so. If the person I am dealing with follows reason as well they can be convinced, or they can try to convince me that their way is right. What I can not do is state that my opinion is the only correct way of thinking. You are correct there. It does not mean that I must suddenly accept something that goes against my code as correct. And If enough of my fellow social creatures agree, we will enforce those morals on others who might not agree. That is how society works.

Since we all know in our hearts things that are wrong (rape, child pornography, etc) it stands to reason and logic that atheism is false.

Got any actual evidence that this is ingrained and not learned behavior? Because I can come up with quit a bit of evidence that it comes down to the culture you where raised in.

In short, offer me some evidence rather then page after page of ipse dixit that you have provided so far.

 

[Mystman]

i am the only one following the laws of logic here. My God has given me a moral code to follow. It is objective and it is truth.

An atheistic worldview has nothing but the material. Therefore one man can decide one thing is right, while another can decide it is wrong. Neither is more right.

It is NOT logical as an atheist to say that one thing is "right" and one thing is "wrong." It's all purely a matter of subjective opinion.

Since we all know in our hearts things that are wrong (rape, child pornography, etc) it stands to reason and logic that atheism is false.

Let me restate your argument..

A) Atheists claim that 'rightness' is 100% arbitrary.
B) All humans feel that items like rape are wrong.
Therefore
C) Atheism is false.

That's your argument correct?

A: Is a difficult one, very much depending on your particular definition of 'rightness', the way you can measure it, etc.

B: Simply not true. There are plenty of people and even entire cultures who found rape to be perfectly acceptable when done to a particular group of people (same for murder, torture, killing people as 'collateral damage', letting people starve to death, etc etc)

C: Does not follow from A and B, even if A and B were true. All humans feeling something, does not make it true. Therefore, there is no contradiction between atheists finding a truth through reasoning, while feeling something else. When flying in an airplane from Los Angeles to Berlin, most people will feel that they've been flying in a straight line, while they've actually made half a circle and are now 'standing upside down' in comparison to their starting point. Does us feeling that we moved in a straight line mean that the earth is flat?

 

[Garyzenuf]

i am the only one following the laws of logic here. My God has given me a moral code to follow. It is objective and it is truth.

It is both objective and the truth only according to your own subjective morals, thats called circular reasoning and it's the very opposite of logical thinking.

*

 

[quatona]

i am the only one following the laws of logic here.

ROTF

 

[atomweaver]

He also quotes Dawkins in the videos. This man is up on "current atheistic scholarship." And yet he still has problem with the question of morality.

You didn't watch all the videos, so you can't properly comment on what Ravi is saying.

I am the only one following logic here. It is not logical to be an atheist and say one form of morality is better than another because morality is purely subjective from an atheistic point of view. This means that one action is no nobler than another.

No, for the 35th page worth of times, it doesn't.

Now we instinctively know this to be false. We know that rescuing a person from a fire is more noble than raping a person. But an atheist can not say that on LOGICAL grounds from its particular worldview. An atheist says it because he/she knows it to be right inside of them. Why? Because God placed that inherent understanding of right and wrong inside them to point them to Himself.

You, atomweaver, are the one who is being illogical.

You want to talk about illogical? First, you reject as illogical Hume's argument (as Russell presents it) that morality is an intrinsic/instinctual value to humankind, then right here you scotch-tape "...and God put it in us because the Bible says so" to the tail end of the exact same argument, and declare yourself to be on firm logical ground. Pathetic. Sorry andross, Invoking your Diety doesn't automatically make your position logical. Quite the opposite, Occam's Razor shreds your position vis a vis Russell's, invoking a diety is an unnecessary complication to the question of the nature of morality.
If God plants morality into both believers and non-believers, why is it done so selectively as to fall almost exclusively along social demarcation lines; why does God not put the morality of the shame for nakedness into native African tribes? Why does he put a strong sense of family fidelity into Asian cultures, and yet leaves them deficient on Biblical sexual mores? Why don't the Inuit keep Kosher? Simple; God doesn't implant morality. Morality isn't instinctual. Morality is behavior developed by society as a whole, and learned by growing up within a particular society.
Why are Christians themselves so selective about which Biblical morals they will choose to follow, and which they will ignore? Again, simple; they must respect the social contract that allows them to continue to thrive, although that doesn't keep them from pushing post hoc revisionist attitudes towards Biblical interpretations, once the fight against social change (like slavery, interracial marriage etc.) is lost...

 

[Fin12]

i'm submitting my will to God's. You are following your own will.

The only ones playing "angles" are the atheists and non-believers.

How, actually how?

What possible advantage does atheism give?

If you want to start a war, start a social movement, get people to listen to you....

Possibly one of the most effective strategies is to claim what you are doing is gods will.

If atheists wanted free reign, they wouldn't disbelieve in god, they would believe in god then use him to justify their actions.

That cannot be done with atheism, but it can and HAS been done with organised religion.

 

[andross77]

How, actually how?

What possible advantage does atheism give?

If you want to start a war, start a social movement, get people to listen to you....

Possibly one of the most effective strategies is to claim what you are doing is gods will.

If atheists wanted free reign, they wouldn't disbelieve in god, they would believe in god then use him to justify their actions.

That cannot be done with atheism, but it can and HAS been done with organised religion.

atheism is not playing an angle for a social movement, son. atheism is the ultimate "playing the angle" for ones desire to not have any ultimate accountability for their actions. Yes, there are worldly consequences but as long as you can get away with things and hide other things, you are ok.

Enter God into the picture, and now you are accountable.

Atheism is not about organizing society. In fact, it's logical conclusion does the exact opposite, as you can see from Hitler and Stalin's reigns which were most heavily influenced by Neitzsche and Sarte, respectively. Both of them being atheists.

Atheism is about self and no-accountability. It also can never answer the why of morals.

 

[Psudopod]

Andross, do you believe in Zeus?

 

[andross77]

Andross, do you believe in Zeus?

i believe he is a mythological figure made up by a culture. There may very possibly be a demon that Satan has "assigned" to the "post" of being Zeus.

But if you are asking do i believe in Zeus as the God of gods? Nope. That is the Father of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob only.

God's lightning bolt > Zues' lightning bolt

 

[b&wpac4]

i believe he is a mythological figure made up by a culture. There may very possibly be a demon that Satan has "assigned" to the "post" of being Zeus.

But if you are asking do i believe in Zeus as the God of gods? Nope. That is the Father of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob only.

God's lightning bolt > Zues' lightning bolt

Now a more interesting question: Did the followers of Zeus go to Hell? Most of them existed before Christ and the Jewish people did not proselytize their religion.

 

[andross77]

Now a more interesting question: Did the followers of Zeus go to Hell? Most of them existed before Christ and the Jewish people did not proselytize their religion.

If a person worships any god besides God, then no, they don't go to heaven. It's not complicated at all. Everyone will get an opportunity to believe in God or Jesus. He will judge them rightly.

We should be less concerned about generations past and more concerned with our current generation. Everyone in America today that doesn't believe in Jesus, is never going to see heaven. That is what people writing on these forums should be concerned about.

 

[b&wpac4]

If a person worships any god besides God, then no, they don't go to heaven. It's not complicated at all. Everyone will get an opportunity to believe in God or Jesus. He will judge them rightly.

We should be less concerned about generations past and more concerned with our current generation. Everyone in America today that doesn't believe in Jesus, is never going to see heaven. That is what people writing on these forums should be concerned about.

But it's clear they did not get that opportunity at that time.

 

[Andreusz]

I still don't understand how a person can will themselves to believe something.

 

[Belk]

I still don't understand how a person can will themselves to believe something.

Repetitive self indoctrination. It takes a lot of effort, but it can be done.

 

[Mystman]

I still don't understand why my awesome posts tend to stay unanswered

 

[Belk]

atheism is not playing an angle for a social movement, son. atheism is the ultimate "playing the angle" for ones desire to not have any ultimate accountability for their actions. Yes, there are worldly consequences but as long as you can get away with things and hide other things, you are ok.

Enter God into the picture, and now you are accountable.

Atheism is not about organizing society. In fact, it's logical conclusion does the exact opposite, as you can see from Hitler and Stalin's reigns which were most heavily influenced by Neitzsche and Sarte, respectively. Both of them being atheists.

Atheism is about self and no-accountability. It also can never answer the why of morals.

If I believe in God will I go to heaven? Even if I am a sinner?