Sending atheists to Hell is Evil

[bhsmte]

did you read about any of the rational arguments for God?
doesn't look it, because non of those are effected by evolution etc.
its just that a common-folk -not familiar with philosophy- on seeing evolution, would say that evolution effects anything.
that is why percents are higher in the educated

I have read many of the arguments for God and have listen to many apologists give them.

I have yet to see one, that did not operate on assumptions with no evidence to support the assumption and none of them stand up well to objective scrutiny.

Now, are Gods possible, sure they are, lots of things are possible. If one chooses to believe in a God on faith, that may be the best thing for them personally.

 

[Judean]

bhsmte:
but do you think its irrational to believe?

 

[ThinkForYourself]

Im not saying you should be religious, all i'm saying is that basic belief in the existence of God is not hard to believe.

For me, belief in the existence of God without evidence is impossible.

For instance, could you force yourself to sincerely believe the sky is green? (Thanks Sarah for the green sky. )?

 

[Judean]

For me, belief in the existence of God without evidence is impossible.

For instance, could you force yourself to sincerely believe the sky is green? (Thanks Sarah for the green sky. )?

there's visual evidence against that.
But existence is a different story.
There are some reasons to suggest that there is, no?

 

[bhsmte]

bhsmte:
but do you think its irrational to believe?

It would depend on the specific belief in question.

When it comes to religious fundamentalists, who deny well evidenced science and claim the earth is 6000 years old, yes, that sort of belief is irrational and requires a significant amount of; denial, confirmation bias and selective reasoning, all while warding off reality and cognitive dissonance.

Do I feel your average person who believes in a God and can still acknowledge well evidenced reality as irrational? No, not at all.

Nothing wrong with believing in a God on faith.

 

[ThinkForYourself]

there's visual evidence against that.
But existence is a different story.
There are some reasons to suggest that there is, no?

You are right about the green sky. I was trying to use something different. Back to my tried and true...

Could you make yourself sincerely believe that there are pink unicorns orbiting the earth, and that rainfall is a result of said unicorns peeing? That's what I encounter when I try to believe in a God, I just can't do it.

I'm not sure what you mean by reasons. Do you mean reasons, such as I'll go to Hell if I don't believe, or reasons as in evidence?

 

[Smidlee]

For me, belief in the existence of God without evidence is impossible.

For instance, could you force yourself to sincerely believe the sky is green? (Thanks Sarah for the green sky. )?

Colors are just perception. Outside your head there isn't any colors. You can trick your brain to see colors that's not there (the signal from the screen doesn't change while what you "see" does.)
Do you believe colors exist? To a blind man colors don't exist.

 

[ThinkForYourself]

Colors are just perception. Outside your head there isn't any colors. You can trick your brain to see colors that's not there (the signal from the screen doesn't change while what you "see" does.)
Do you believe colors exist? To a blind man colors don't exist.

You are right about the green sky. I was trying to use something different. Back to my tried and true...

Could you make yourself sincerely believe that there are pink unicorns orbiting the earth, and that rainfall is a result of said unicorns peeing? That's what I encounter when I try to believe in a God, I just can't do it.

 

[Davian]

Colors are just perception. Outside your head there isn't any colors. You can trick your brain to see colors that's not there (the signal from the screen doesn't change while what you "see" does.)
Do you believe colors exist? To a blind man colors don't exist.

Colours are an illusion. Are you saying that you cannot trust what you think you see?

 

[Usus Vox Tractus]

Colours are an illusion. Are you saying that you cannot trust what you think you see?

The appearance of different colors are the natural harmonic divisions of a priviously unified state. It does not matter whether you can perceive them or what you call them. There are other natural divisions above and below the visible spectrum.

I would describe the nature of color to a blind person like gradation of musical notes in an octave.

 

[Judean]

I'm not sure what you mean by reasons. Do you mean reasons, such as I'll go to Hell if I don't believe, or reasons as in evidence?

evidence, take for an example intelligent design.
if I told that no one built the Brooklyn bridge it just sprouted out out of nowhere you would say I'm dumb.No one can visualize the building of something complex on its own .
Yet we see before our eyes complex stuff coming into being naturally and especially in modern times with evolution etc., isn't it reasonable to suggest (not prove) that there is a force behind nature? or at least identify God with nature as did Spinoza.

 

[Davian]

it's not that hard to believe.
An example: before you leave for vacation your not 100% sure that you'll enjoy, the hotel, weather etc. suggests that you will but there is no concrete evidence, yet you seem to "believe" that you will.
The same here: you see an amazing design, the philosophical arguments made by pure rationalists such as Aristotle and you read about revelation Sinai etc., is it so hard to believe?

besides there are no evidence against the existence of God, so why not accept revelation?

It would not be free. It would cost me my intellectual integrity.

 

[Judean]

It would not be free. It would cost me my intellectual integrity.

there are quite a few intellectual believers out there

 

[Davian]

The appearance of different colors are the natural harmonic divisions of a priviously unified state. It does not matter whether you can perceive them or what you call them. There are other natural divisions above and below the visible spectrum.

I would describe the nature of color to a blind person like gradation of musical notes in an octave.

Or, with your hands, comparing sheets of sandpaper of differing grit sizes.

As with sound, we hear more of the difference between the notes (colors), than we do a specific frequency.

 

[Davian]

there are quite a few intellectual believers out there

Indeed. That brings in the concept of compartmentalization.

"Compartmentalization is an unconscious psychological defense mechanism used to avoid cognitive dissonance, or the mental discomfort and anxiety caused by a person's having conflicting values, cognitions, emotions, beliefs, etc. within themselves.

Compartmentalization allows these conflicting ideas to co-exist by inhibiting direct or explicit acknowledgement and interaction between separate compartmentalized self states."

Compartmentalization (psychology) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



I am still waiting for a response to post #151.

Where's my money?

 

[Judean]

I am still waiting for a response to post #151.

Where's my money?

I'm terribly sorry for ignoring I thought you were joking.
In civil disputes nothing can be done without concrete evidence.
"Better let a thousand guilty escape than one innocent suffer" (Maimonides) .
But in philosophical matters one accepts what seems most probable, or he thinks seems most probable.

 

[Davian]

I'm terribly sorry for ignoring I thought you were joking.
In civil disputes nothing can be done without concrete evidence.
"Better let a thousand guilty escape than one innocent suffer" (Maimonides) .
But in philosophical matters one accepts what seems most probable, or he thinks seems most probable.

For the balance of your life, you require concrete evidence, but when it come to theology, you drop your pants? How do "gods" become probable? Or even possible?

Do you mind if I continue to hold on to my intellectual integrity for now?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

No, you ask it because you don't want an honest debate. Let's be real. You want to prejudice the debate with emotion.

It's about the thrill of trolling Christians for almost a decade and the psychological rush of feeling like you proved them wrong.

You are being rude and presumptuous. I only left Christianity behind roughly 2-3 years ago. As you already know, because I've already told you, I joined this forum as a Christian.

Hell is where God isn't. God is good. Anywhere God isn't, has gotta suck. You call it punishment - God calls it your wages.

If there is a place where God isn't, then doesn't that mean God isn't omnipresent?

If you've made your mind up about God, He won't force you to come back home with him. The alternative is Satan's place of residence.

Hope you've brought a blanket...

Here's what I find baffling. You actually think that this act of divine vengeance is good.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

That's fine. I don't ignore them because I need the last word, I do it because they are debating/discussing in an grossly uncivilized manner.

And/Or...I find myself tempted to respond in kind and ignoring them would be better for both parties, (I and them.)

Uncivilised? All he did was point out the obscenity of the doctrine - that if you can call eternal torture good, then is there anything left to be called evil? I find your belief that this doctrine embodies justice to be "uncivilised," but I haven't ignored you. I guess some people just can't handle it.

 

[Blessedj01]

Uncivilised? All he did was point out the obscenity of the doctrine. I find your belief in it to "uncivilised," but I haven't ignored you. I guess some people just can't handle it.

Considering I've had to put you on ignore, you are not the best person to point out when others are being rude. You do not start calling people terrorists towards the end of a civil debate.