• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

The origins of atheism

Status
Not open for further replies.

Hikarifuru

Shine Bravely
Nov 11, 2013
3,379
269
✟28,053.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Criliman,

Ah, so your world view is based on your beliefs and not based on evidence? There is no evidence that proves we do not have free will.

Actually there is, free will is a philosophical concept, not a scientific concept. But nueroscience can and does show that you are not in conscious control of your desires or decisions. No you do not have free will. You are making decisions but free is the wrong word to use.... but its a philosophical issue, not a scientific one.

I never said his infinite nature is immune to logic itself.

You didn't need to say it, you clearly provide that it is.

Logically, if this eternal infinite being exists, then it would be the source of all logic.


That doesn't follow, logic doesn't come from a source... true and false don't come from something. They describe, they aren't things. You are acting like thing provided logic as if it determines it... that undermines logic as well.

Which would show why you can't use logic to show that this being is impossible.

That undermines logic, that makes it immune to logic, superior to logic.

Therefore, it's irrational to believe this being is impossible, if you value logic.

Wrong.

Asking the question "what are the answers" implies one must first assume answers can be known.

No, rather that there is an answer, not that it can be discovered.

The fact that some currently conclude that we don't have the answers, does not mean the answers can't be known.

You are the one providing a being outside of our ability to know or perceive, I didn't say anything could not be known.

Should we expect answers to come from finite beings who can't possibly see everything as it truly is?

No.

It's a good thing you're not dead yet. Ultimately, the fact is that your world view is based on your beliefs and not on evidence, as I pointed out in the beginning of this post.

Actually it's evidenced by people dying without answers at a rate of thousands and thousands per day.
 
Upvote 0

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟46,103.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
Of coarse not, but proofs aren't even enough. Jesus would perform some amazing act of healing and the "deniers" would propose that his power came from Satan not God. So even miracles were ineffective against the pigheaded.
Stories of miracles are not evidence of miracles.
 
Upvote 0

Davian

fallible
May 30, 2011
14,100
1,181
West Coast of Canada
✟46,103.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Ignostic
Marital Status
Married
No, you are just impressed with your own BS and believe that to be proof of something.
full
 
Upvote 0

Chriliman

Everything I need to be joyful is right here
May 22, 2015
5,895
569
✟173,201.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Criliman,

Ah, so your world view is based on your beliefs and not based on evidence? There is no evidence that proves we do not have free will.

Actually there is, free will is a philosophical concept, not a scientific concept. But nueroscience can and does show that you are not in conscious control of your desires or decisions. No you do not have free will. You are making decisions but free is the wrong word to use.... but its a philosophical issue, not a scientific one.

So when someone decides to kill themselves, they didn't actually make that choice?

I understand our free will is not unlimited. We don't have free will to fly. Our free will is limited to right and wrong decisions which lead to consequences, like someone deciding to kill themselves leads to the consequence of them being dead. Someone deciding to help someone else leads to the consequence of them feeling better about themselves. The question is, why do we have free will to make right and wrong choices and who decides what is absolutely right and absolutely wrong?


Logically, if this eternal infinite being exists, then it would be the source of all logic.

That doesn't follow, logic doesn't come from a source... true and false don't come from something. They describe, they aren't things. You are acting like thing provided logic as if it determines it... that undermines logic as well.

What if you're thinking about good things like logic, reason and evidence and so forth in the wrong way? What if all good things in life do come from one infinite eternal source? What if everything we perceive as bad is a result of not knowing that infinite eternal source of all goodness? None of what I'm saying is illogical, it just requires an open mind to really think about the implications.
Which would show why you can't use logic to show that this being is impossible.

That undermines logic, that makes it immune to logic, superior to logic.

Again, not if this eternal infinite being is perfect logic in of itself.

We humans do not have perfect logic, but does that fact mean perfect logic does not exist?

Therefore, it's irrational to believe this being is impossible, if you value logic.

Wrong.

You claim it's wrong, but you can't use logic to show that the existence of this being would be impossible. Why is that?

Asking the question "what are the answers" implies one must first assume answers can be known.

No, rather that there is an answer, not that it can be discovered.

Here, you're implying the answer cannot be discovered.

The fact that some currently conclude that we don't have the answers, does not mean the answers can't be known.
You are the one providing a being outside of our ability to know or perceive, I didn't say anything could not be known.

Now your saying you're not implying anything could not be known. So which is it? Can everything that has meaning be known or not? This is the problem I run into with atheists, they just can't decide what they want to believe when it comes to answers about life. Inconsistent behavior can't be trusted.

Plus, I never said this being can't be known. I do in fact know this being to be God of all creation.

Should we expect answers to come from finite beings who can't possibly see everything as it truly is?

No.

Good! So stop relying on your finite self or any other finite being to provide the answer that are logically impossible for finite beings to answer. This is why wise humans seek a higher authority than themselves in order to find answers and clearly they do receive answers that allow them to be certain that this higher authority does in fact exist. This shows that where you go to seek answers can greatly affect what you believe to be true.

It's a good thing you're not dead yet. Ultimately, the fact is that your world view is based on your beliefs and not on evidence, as I pointed out in the beginning of this post.

Actually it's evidenced by people dying without answers at a rate of thousands and thousands per day.

Are you certain that when someone dies they don't receive the ultimate answer? This can't be proven either way so how could you be certain?
 
Upvote 0

TheQuietRiot

indomitable
Aug 17, 2011
1,583
330
West Yorkshire
✟27,002.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
You claim it's wrong, but you can't use logic to show that the existence of this being would be impossible. Why is that?

Can you use logic to show that the existence of leprechauns is impossible?

And if you cannot, does that lend any credence or provide any evidence that leprechauns exist?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DogmaHunter
Upvote 0

Chriliman

Everything I need to be joyful is right here
May 22, 2015
5,895
569
✟173,201.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Can you use logic to show that the existence of leprechauns is impossible?

And if you cannot, does that lend any credence or provide any evidence that leprechauns exist?

I never claimed leprechauns were eternal and infinite. I am claiming God is eternal and infinite. Can you see why bringing leprechauns into a conversation about eternal infinite existence is irrational?
 
Upvote 0

TheQuietRiot

indomitable
Aug 17, 2011
1,583
330
West Yorkshire
✟27,002.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
I never claimed leprechauns were eternal and infinite. I am claiming God is eternal and infinite. Can you see why bringing leprechauns into a conversation about eternal infinite existence is irrational?

So substitute leprechauns for another eternal and infinite being that is not God.

Say the eternal and infinite super leprechaun.

Can you disprove its existence with logic?
 
  • Like
Reactions: DogmaHunter
Upvote 0

Colter

Member
Nov 9, 2004
8,711
1,407
61
✟100,301.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Can you name the parts right now? and will it change at a later time?

Seems subject to your needs.

Will hit some highlights.

Genesis is the attempted collation of fragmented stories from ancient times, that's why it reads like it does.

* Adam and Eve arrived/materialized from another world on an old, previously populated, evolved, fallen earth. They spent their first 6 days surveying the garden prepared for them, this became the 6 day creation story tens of thousands of years later.

* The crafty beast was already fallen, already here. While Eve did default, then Adam, their sin didn't bring sin, sin would be possible without their disastrous failure. Sin is to know Gods will yet choose to do otherwise.

* Noah's flood, a small local flood legend in the region of the Mesopotamian rivers, was a device used by the Hebrew redactors when they attempted to trace their self important blood lines back to a much older Adam. Finding it impossible to do so they decided to drown the whole world in its own wickedness to fill the gap.

* Melchizedek incarnate, made covenant with Abraham.......but the later redactors had god come down.

From there certain miraculous events were all exaggerated. Phaeohs plagues, frogs, bugs, red rivers, sticks to snakes, Passover etc.

* There was a Moses, he was a reformer, he did lead the slaves out of Egypt but no dividing oceans, burning bushes etc.

* Leviticus laws strictly man made.

* Hebrew history distorted, they intermixed with the Canaanites, never destroyed them all.

* David was your basic mobster king.

* No talking donkeys, no fire from the sky etc.

* Jesus did come, he was very different then the erroneous expectations of the Jews

* Jesus is the Son, his original gospel was salvation by faith and the responsibility that comes with it. If the Jews had received him they would be teaching that gospel today from Jerusalem and Jesus still would have left and gone back to his rightful place. But killing Jesus became the gospel as the Pagan world already believed in human/divine sacrifice.

* Paul is basically the founder of Christianity, a religion about Jesus not of Jesus.

* Gospels have inaccuracies.

* The book of revelation is a complete mess!

other then that......
 
Upvote 0

HitchSlap

PROUDLY PRIMATE
Aug 6, 2012
14,723
5,468
✟288,596.00
Country
United States
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
I never claimed leprechauns were eternal and infinite. I am claiming God is eternal and infinite. Can you see why bringing leprechauns into a conversation about eternal infinite existence is irrational?
Can you see why claiming anything is eternally infinite in it's existence, without evidence, is irrational, gods/s not withstanding.
 
Upvote 0

Chriliman

Everything I need to be joyful is right here
May 22, 2015
5,895
569
✟173,201.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
So substitute leprechauns for another eternal and infinite being that is not God.

Say the eternal and infinite super leprechaun.

Can you disprove its existence with logic?

Depends if we can remain rational in our conversation. How many people do you see claiming that an eternal and infinite super leprechaun exists, other than yourself? Should I be inclined to believe this super leprechaun exists just because you've made it up?

Or should I be more inclined to believe an eternal and infinite God exists because millions of people claim to have personal evidence of this God?

Which is more rational to believe based on the presented evidence?

If you don't view millions of testimonies as evidence then you're clearly being irrational. Sure millions of testimonies doesn't mean its true, but it at least means it's worth looking into as objectively as possible. If you have preconceived notions about God, then you can't be objective when discussing God.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.