The Achilles Heel of Atheism

[quatona]

Interesting....

You say you do not care, and yet you are demonstrating that in some measure, you do care because you have taken the time to register to become a member of Christianforums (a Christian website) compile several posts within various forums, and several of these posts/replies specifically deal with God.

I believe if you care enough to do what you have done, than in at least one way it could honestly be said that you do care if God exists. If you did not care, you would not act as if you did.

The various branches of Christianity are (more or less) powerful societal forces. This is reason enough to participate in discussions with Christians and discussions about Christianity, and to do that on a board owned by Christians. No caring for the subject of your doctrine ("God") required.

If I say to you:

"I do not care at all about Spain's soccer club, or any other soccer club for that matter."

And then you find me on Spain's soccer club website in their forum posting here and posting there, and talking about various topics about the soccer club and other topics, surely you would think I was not being truthful when I said "I do not care at all about Spain's soccer club".

In this analogy Spain´s soccer club would be analogous to Christianity, not to "God" (since this website isn´t God´s website but the website of people who consider themselves Christians).

And yes, the asssumption that everyone joining a Christian website is - for whatever reason - concerned (not: cares for) with Christianity (not: "God") is self-suggesting.

Opposing a particular view doesn´t mean you are caring for the subject of that view - it´s more likely that you don´t care for it at all.

If you join a Racists´ website because you are concerned with and opposed to racism doesn´t mean you "care for" the racial discrimination that is promoted there . More likely, it means that you don´t care for it at all.

 

[Cearbhall]

What I did say was that your presence here and your repeated postings here contradict the following statement which you have made, and I quote:

"No, I don't really care [about the existence of the Abrahamic God] more than I care about the existence of any other god in which people have belief."

That's not contradictory at all. I don't personally care about one god more than another, but I just gave the list of reasons why I logically should spend more time dealing with Christianity than other religions. Christianity literally runs my world, and that I care about.

Whether or not God (The Greatest Conceivable Being) exists or not should be your biggest concern. For if He does, then it is only rational to think He can communicate with us, and if He can communicate with us, then it is only rational to think that He would want to, and if He would want to, then it is rational to think that He has....

So all this time, you very well might be apathetic to the One who desires to communicate with you.

...say the followers of every deity ever. It amazes me how some of the Christians on here expect everyone else to value their words over the words of the followers of every other religion. I could say the same thing about you and Odin.

 

[Elioenai26]

That's not contradictory at all. I don't personally care about one god more than another, but I just gave the list of reasons why I logically should spend more time dealing with Christianity than other religions. Christianity literally runs my world, and that I care about.

Have you ever thought about the possible reasons why Christianity runs your world?

...say the followers of every deity ever. It amazes me how some of the Christians on here expect everyone else to value their words over the words of the followers of every other religion. I could say the same thing about you and Odin.

Do Hindus say that? Do deists say that?

No they do not. So you are wrong in saying that the followers of every deity claim the same thing that Christians claim.

You also fail to understand that if Christians are right, then it necessarily follows that the people who believe otherwise are wrong.

You seem to think that just because people have deep seated religious convictions, that these convictions cannot be wrong. If Christians are wrong, then they are wrong.

But....

If Christ was who He said He was, then yes, Muslims who die without accepting Him as Lord and Savior will perish.

If Christ was who He said He was, then yes, Buddhists who die without accepting Him as Lord and Savior will perish.

If Christ was who He said He was, then yes, Hindus, atheists, deists, wiccans, Sikhs, Taoists, and any other adherent to any other worldview will perish if they die without accepting Him as Lord and Savior.

If men actually did land on the moon, then all of the people who say it was just a conspiracy are wrong, however much they may believe in their conspiracy theories.

If the holocaust happened, then all of the people who say it never did are wrong, even if they deny it till their dying day.

Truth is truth and truth by definition is exclusive. It excludes its opposite/denial.

The most sublime question anyone could ever ask is: Why is there something rather than nothing?

Begin there...

With regards to Christianity, the question of paramount importance is: "Is Christ God Incarnate?" which follows from the question: "Are there good reasons for God's existence?"

Both of those I answer in the affirmative and will be debating the issue hopefully in the near future.

And still these posts are off topic.... I see no way to get it back.....

 

[Cearbhall]

Have you ever thought about the possible reasons why Christianity runs your world?

If you're suggesting that the philosophy of the majority is the correct one, don't bother. That argument is way too easy to shoot down.

History courses are required, so yes.

You also fail to understand that if Christians are right, then it necessarily follows that the people who believe otherwise are wrong.

What on Earth did I say that suggested that I don't understand this? That's my whole point. Not all religions can be right, and I haven't seen a reason to choose Christianity over all other religions.

 

[Dave Ellis]

Have you ever thought about the possible reasons why Christianity runs your world?

Probably the historical effects of indoctrination of children combined with the brutal suppression of non-believers over the course of centuries.

Only now is it starting to wear away now that much of the churches power is gone...

 

[Cearbhall]

The most sublime question anyone could ever ask is: Why is there something rather than nothing?

Begin there...

As if Christianity is the only religion with an answer to that question.

Probably the historical effects of indoctrination of children combined with the brutal suppression of non-believers over the course of centuries.

Only now is it starting to wear away now that much of the churches power is gone...

Yep. The past two millennia of western civilization in a nutshell.

Do Hindus say that? Do deists say that?

No they do not. So you are wrong in saying that the followers of every deity claim the same thing that Christians claim.

Ok, I apologize. There are plenty of other religions, so my point still stands.

 

[Dave Ellis]

Do Hindus say that? Do deists say that?

No they do not. So you are wrong in saying that the followers of every deity claim the same thing that Christians claim.

You know what he meant, quit the word games.

You also fail to understand that if Christians are right, then it necessarily follows that the people who believe otherwise are wrong.

That's correct... now what's the reasons for believing Christians are right?

You seem to think that just because people have deep seated religious convictions, that these convictions cannot be wrong. If Christians are wrong, then they are wrong.

But....

If Christ was who He said He was, then yes, Muslims who die without accepting Him as Lord and Savior will perish.

If Christ was who He said He was, then yes, Buddhists who die without accepting Him as Lord and Savior will perish.

If Christ was who He said He was, then yes, Hindus, atheists, deists, wiccans, Sikhs, Taoists, and any other adherent to any other worldview will perish if they die without accepting Him as Lord and Savior.

So much peace and love, it kinda brings a tear to your eye...

If men actually did land on the moon, then all of the people who say it was just a conspiracy are wrong, however much they may believe in their conspiracy theories.

If the holocaust happened, then all of the people who say it never did are wrong, even if they deny it till their dying day.

Truth is truth and truth by definition is exclusive. It excludes its opposite/denial.

That's correct, however, again, why should we assume Christianity is correct/truthful?

The most sublime question anyone could ever ask is: Why is there something rather than nothing?

Begin there...

Well, evidence so far points to quantum fluctuations in a vacuum, etc... But without being able to definitely prove how the universe came about, we can't say for sure.

I don't see any reason to assume the Christian creation story is correct though, and nobody has ever been able to account for where God came from.

With regards to Christianity, the question of paramount importance is: "Is Christ God Incarnate?" which follows from the question: "Are there good reasons for God's existence?"

Both of those I answer in the affirmative and will be debating the issue hopefully in the near future.

And still these posts are off topic.... I see no way to get it back.....

Well, I'd love to hear your reasoning, but you may be right that a new thread would be needed for that...

 

[Cearbhall]

But....

If Christ was who He said He was, then yes, Muslims who die without accepting Him as Lord and Savior will perish.

If Christ was who He said He was, then yes, Buddhists who die without accepting Him as Lord and Savior will perish.

If Christ was who He said He was, then yes, Hindus, atheists, deists, wiccans, Sikhs, Taoists, and any other adherent to any other worldview will perish if they die without accepting Him as Lord and Savior.

According to the Pope, it's not that simple.

 

[bhsmte]

Probably the historical effects of indoctrination of children combined with the brutal suppression of non-believers over the course of centuries.

Only now is it starting to wear away now that much of the churches power is gone...

Actually, the United States is unique in regards of the dominance of christianity compared to other advanced nations. The percentage of christians in the US compared to nations such as; France, UK, Germany, Switzerland, Sweden, etc. etc. is over double what it is in these other nations.

There is a deep cultural dogma in the US, where it is politically and personally not a good thing to not be a christian and much worse to be a non-believer.

With this said, this is likely to change (dramatically) in the next 10-20 years as it already has in the other nations I mention.

 

[Sectio Aurea]

There is a deep cultural dogma in the US, where it is politically and personally not a good thing to not be a christian and much worse to be a non-believer.

With this said, this is likely to change (dramatically) in the next 10-20 years as it already has in the other nations I mention.

As the statistics suggest-

How Will The Shocking Decline Of Christianity In America Affect The Future Of This Nation?

 

[bhsmte]

As the statistics suggest-

How Will The Shocking Decline Of Christianity In America Affect The Future Of This Nation?

Indeed.

There is a University of Chicago study on "belief in God" which is very in depth and actually gets into the a variety of questions on belief in God.

IMO, the 76% number that your statistics state, is artificially inflated for this reason; many who claim to be christian, really don't believe in the basic christian story, but they say they are christian out of habit or simply don't want to come out of the closet. I saw one study, where less then half of Americans who claimed to be christian, didn't really believe that Jesus was the son of God. If that is the case, how can they be considered christians?

Younger people are not believing because there is access to information that wasn't as readily available 20 years ago and is now at anyone's finger tips on the internet. These numbers will change dramatically in the next 10 years.

 

[Eudaimonist]

The most sublime question anyone could ever ask is: Why is there something rather than nothing?

That's actually the most silly of all philosophical questions.

If you are asking "why" something exists, you are asking for an explanation for something's existence. An explanation implies a cause, and a cause must exist, meaning that a cause is already part of some realm of existence.

That means that you are asking for some form of existence to explain all of existence, which is a contradiction. You are asking a question that literally can't be answered, because it requires that someone contradict themselves.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Dave Ellis]

Actually, the United States is unique in regards of the dominance of christianity compared to other advanced nations. The percentage of christians in the US compared to nations such as; France, UK, Germany, Switzerland, Sweden, etc. etc. is over double what it is in these other nations.

There is a deep cultural dogma in the US, where it is politically and personally not a good thing to not be a christian and much worse to be a non-believer.

With this said, this is likely to change (dramatically) in the next 10-20 years as it already has in the other nations I mention.

No question, seeing as I don't live in the United States, I'm very aware of that...

I was talking more about the historical spread of Christianity, and how it gained the power that it did. Realistically, even in Europe the Church still held a fair bit of power until a few decades ago. I believe the US will eventually lose it's religiosity just like the European Nations and most of Canada, it'll just take more time.

 

[Sectio Aurea]

No question, seeing as I don't live in the United States, I'm very aware of that...

I was talking more about the historical spread of Christianity, and how it gained the power that it did. Realistically, even in Europe the Church still held a fair bit of power until a few decades ago. I believe the US will eventually lose it's religiosity just like the European Nations and most of Canada, it'll just take more time.

Dont forget Australia

Yes I agree, the US still has a very large following of Christianity, I suspect the decline of Christianity in the US will eventually be exponential, but it is still in its infancy stage.
Australia on the other hand is just now surpassing its infancy stage in the exponential decline of Christianity. People of no religion are the largest group in five of of the eight states and territories while Islam and Hinduism are the faiths likely to expand in the future.

 

[KCfromNC]

As if Christianity is the only religion with an answer to that question.

How does Christianity explain why and how god exists? I thought it was just an assertion that had to be taken on faith rather than a belief with any sort of reason behind it.

 

[Cearbhall]

How does Christianity explain why and how god exists? I thought it was just an assertion that had to be taken on faith rather than a belief with any sort of reason behind it.

My understanding is that Christians think that God has always existed, so I don't think they have a "why" and I don't accept their "how," but I recognize that they have their own answer to the question of why everything else exists.

 

[Elioenai26]

If you are asking "why" something exists, you are asking for an explanation for something's existence. An explanation implies a cause, and a cause must exist, meaning that a cause is already part of some realm of existence.

I agree.

That means that you are asking for some form of existence to explain all of existence, which is a contradiction. You are asking a question that literally can't be answered, because it requires that someone contradict themselves.


eudaimonia,

Mark

There is no contradiction if there are two different realms. Your reasoning assumes there is only one realm (natural). This is fallacious however.

In order for this argument to be sound, you would have to demonstrate that there is no supernatural or transcendant realm as well as demonstrate how a natural explanation for all that exists that is natural and material is more probable than a supernatural explanation.



Good luck!

 

[Cearbhall]

In order for this argument to be sound, you would have to demonstrate that there is no supernatural or transcendant realm as well as demonstrate how a natural explanation for all that exists that is natural and material is more probable than a supernatural explanation.



Good luck!

Atheists just happen to think that it's more likely that we don't have the technology to find the answers yet than it is that a higher power will send us into a fiery pit after death if we touch, and we're confident enough in that logic to state that deities don't exist, in the same way that most people state definitively that unicorns don't exist.

This is why I'm an agnostic atheist, though. I recognize that we can't disprove the existence of a higher being and that we don't yet have the ability to give a flawless scientific explanation. And I want there to be unicorns.

 

[Davian]

...
There is no contradiction if there are two different realms. Your reasoning assumes there is only one realm (natural). This is fallacious however.

Just not in any way that you can demonstrate.

In order for this argument to be sound, you would have to demonstrate that there is no supernatural or transcendant realm as well as demonstrate how a natural explanation for all that exists that is natural and material is more probable than a supernatural explanation.



Good luck!

Asking someone to prove a negative? lol. Will you be using this one in your "debate"?

 

[quatona]

I agree.



There is no contradiction if there are two different realms. Your reasoning assumes there is only one realm (natural). This is fallacious however.

In order for this argument to be sound, you would have to demonstrate that there is no supernatural or transcendant realm as well as demonstrate how a natural explanation for all that exists that is natural and material is more probable than a supernatural explanation.

No, it would be up to the proponent of "a supernatural realm" to demonstrate that there is such.
Besides, I have yet to see how anything is explained by the assumption of a "supernatural". "The supernatural realm" is usually claimed to be beyond our understanding, and as such doesn´t and can´t explain anything. E.g. owhere is it explained how God could manage to create anything. Breathing stuff into existence is not an explanation, it´s an appeal to the unexplainable.