A question for atheists/etc

[Madwand1]

Originally posted by: DarkKnight69

Originally posted by: HermDogg

5) Why does God need worship?

This is one question that I would love to be answered!

Why does a man that give us goodness and love require us to bend to our knees and ask forgiveness and offer thanks. This makes him sound like a tyrant to me. There are 2 issues with this:

1. If he were truly as the bible says, he would know that mankind was grateful to him and he would not require our worship.

2. He would not think any less of us for not believing in him because it was him who gave us the ability to not believe!

Is this a real question, or just rhetoric? I don't see anything hereabouts to indicate that there are real questions being asked, just rhetoric to push some point or the other.

If this question really matters to you, perhaps you could ask someone who might be able to answer nicely. Probably privately. Or you could just read something. Maybe many things.

So, do you really want an answer? Will you ask nicely? On your knees perhaps as if your life depended on it? I am using rhetoric here, and not really answering the question -- just trying to make a point. Whether or not you get it is up to you, as is everything.

Edit: But, I guess my "answer" will be completely mystifying nonsense to some. So I sincerly apologize for that.

 

[mattpegher]

I think that the original question can best be answered by looking at the dicotomy of the majority of players. On one side you have the atheist who are looking at religion more than at whether or not there is some existence after death. On the other you have religous believers who cannot logically discuss a pandenominational belief structure regarding the existence of an afterlife or diety without using terms and "rhetoric" that simple makes no sense to the other side. We seem to be taking two different languages. To say someone "is your lord and savior" means nothing to the athiest or even the agnostic (one who questions the existence of god, not denies it)

Although I agree the history of man's use of religious beliefs is fraught with misuse. The atheist need to seperate the argument to the concept not the application. And the believers need to speak in more concrete or at least deductive terms.

Is there some noncorporial intelligence? Are we connected to this, ie is there a soul, or some noncorporial force inside of us. Or are we just machines, fooled into thinking that we exist. Even most atheist don't like to go there, because that calls into question the definition of sentience, and without it we have no better right to life than a plant. Without it, is it any more wrong to kill another human for personal gain than it is to cut down a tree to make a chair. On the otherhand if trees have souls boy have we been bad.

 

[Noirish]

accept your 75 year life span and move on.

 

[Madwand1]

Originally posted by: mattpegher
On the other you have religous believers who cannot logically discuss a pandenominational belief structure regarding the existence of an afterlife or diety without using terms and "rhetoric" that simple makes no sense to the other side.

I see no "other side" as such in this. If you have a sincere interest in "the other side", then you must make an attempt to understand and absorb the other side's point of view. I think I already understand the "other side's" point of view, and see it as being "my side" at times, and I personally don't believe that it's correct to try to interfere in the holding of such views in general. This is a tricky point, but from what I see, freedom of belief and religion is given in principle; and so it's wrong to try to change that, and I have no intent to try to do so.

However, if someone is let's say on the far side of my side, and is facing some difficulty and sincerely wants some directional guidance, then I recognize a sense of responsibility for helping where I/we can. I doubt however that this can be done very effectively in general in a public forum, because of the nature of the subject and the forum, and so suggest general reading and other avenues for the most part.

 

[mattpegher]

For those of us that lay in the middle of these discussions there seems to be a disconnect. I believe in a supreme being and an afterlife, but I also believe that all of the worlds religions are in principle teaching the same thing. It is only the falability of human application of these principles that become a problem. Remember ever religious text was written and rewritten by humans, sometimes their biases are introduced innocently and sometimes with malice and forethought.

I agree that when someone is seeking guidance and reassurance, it is counterproductive to go into philosophical debate, but when two opposing viewpoints are to debate a subject a clear and mutually acceptable nomenclature needs to be established.

 

[TheSlamma]

Rationality makes me not

 

[JulesMaximus]

What makes you not believe in Jesus?

Logic? Reasoning? Intelligence?

 

[mattpegher]

Has anyone studied the three classic arguments for and against the existence of god as writen about by St. Thomas Aquinas? I dont remember all of them or who he was writing to/arguing with.

 

[ruffilb]

I can't believe this thread is still active.

 

[PrinceofWands]

Originally posted by: mattpegher
Has anyone studied the three classic arguments for and against the existence of god as writen about by St. Thomas Aquinas? I dont remember all of them or who he was writing to/arguing with.

I think you're referring to the 'Five Ways' from Summa Theologica
Everything in the world changes.
The notion of cause and effect.
Things exist in the world but they need not.
We can see in the world degrees of perfection and goodness.
Nature points to the notion of order in that things.

Much like the ontological argument, it's a restricted theoretical argument with very little practicality. At the time it was groundbreaking, now it's victim to more developed modes of logic and reason.

 

[Rip the Jacker]

Show me God.

That's what I thought.

It's the same thing as when your parents tell you there's Santa Claus, and people like you still believe in it..

Ha ha.

 

[mattpegher]

I may be remembering it wrong but after the Summa Theologica, I beleive there were some letters between St Thomas and some british atheist, Sir Bacon or something like that. A debate which touched on the Free Will defence of the existence of evil in a universe created by an omniscient omnipotent and benevolent creator. His earlier writing were indeed primitive and nondeductive but these latter letters were more logical. I have to go back 20 years to remember the course in undergraduate philosophy of religion.

 

[engineereeyore]

Originally posted by: Rip the Jacker
Show me God.

That's what I thought.

It's the same thing as when your parents tell you there's Santa Claus, and people like you still believe in it..

Ha ha.

How can you show someone something when they won't open their eyes? People who want to see God most often are going to see him and people who don't want to see him most often won't.

You have every right to not believe in God and everyone has their reasons why they do or don't. I can understand why some people have a hard time with it. It's not always convenient and it's not always easy. But everything in this world is based upon something we can not prove or understand.

For example, I work a great deal with a concept known the Law of the Conservation of Engergy. States pretty much that energy can not be created or destroy, but only converted from one form to the other. Question is, where did the original energy come from? We don't know. Logic states that it couldn't have just appeared, yet scientific evidence show that it can't be created. So how does that work? Who's right, logic or science?

The question is the similar for religious individuals as well, just replace energy with God. Where did he come from? If he's always existed, how is that possible?

Point is, nothing you can believe in has all the answers. Whether you accept all of sciences answers, religion answers, or somewhere in between, the beliefs are based upone something that is not understood and defies logic. So why mock someone for believing in something that is just as absurd as what you believe in?

 

[Kyanzes]

Personally I don't believe in heavenly creatures, God(s) or anything paranormal. Lack of knowledge (scientific explanations) is what leads people to believe in such things. People need something to believe in, like superior powers in action that will punish the wicked (instead of you doing it personally), reward the worthy (instead of you taking what you need) and grant eternal life beside the heavenly father (instead of you realizing how short life is and do whatever you can while there's still a chance). There's no life after you die. Most of the people thinking the opposit often say: you can't prove it. Yeah, I can't prove either that I'm James T. Kirk's son in a different life, but I swear to anything you want that I'am. Please. You can hope on but it will never grant you anything remotely close to what we call afterlife. The simpliest way to describe it would be: it feels just like when you felt before you had been conceived. Nothing. You simply cease to exist. It's tough, but that's all you can hope for.

Unfortunately smart people have constantly been taking advantage of this phenomenon we know as religion. A select few dominates billions of people with supreme power over the crowd.

Ofc there are different religions, with different promises. But all of them muster a god or two. Even Buddhism - pending on house - propagates the existence of perfect beings that just as far fetched as gods originating from western cultures. Maybe, just maybe, the closest to reality are beliefs found in the chinese culture - unification/co-existence with the surrounding nature and stuff - but even there you would find fascinating tales of wonders that are clearly not based on objective observations.

Also, scientific achievements comfirmed none of these aformentioned beliefs, on the contrary: the very basic foundations of Christianity have been shaken by basic scientific methods like carbon dating. Clearly the world (Earth) hasn't been created in the last few thousand years. Not even remotely.

 

[engineereeyore]

Originally posted by: Kyanzes
Personally I don't believe in heavenly creatures, God(s) or anything paranormal. Lack of knowledge (scientific explanations) is what leads people to believe in such things. People need something to believe in, like superior powers in action that will punish the wicked (instead of you doing it personally), reward the worthy (instead of you taking what you need) and grant eternal life beside the heavenly father (instead of you realizing how short life is and do whatever you can while there's still a chance). There's no life after you die. Most of the people thinking the opposit often say: you can't prove it. Yeah, I can't prove either that I'm James T. Kirk's son in a different life, but I swear to anything you want that I'am. Please. You can hope on but it will never grant you anything remotely close to what we call afterlife. The simpliest way to describe it would be: it feels just like when you felt before you had been conceived. Nothing. You simply cease to exist. It's tough, but that's all you can hope for.

Unfortunately smart people have constantly been taking advantage of this phenomenon we know as religion. A select few dominates billions of people with supreme power over the crowd.

Ofc there are different religions, with different promises. But all of them muster a god or two. Even Buddhism - pending on house - propagates the existence of perfect beings that just as far fetched as gods originating from western cultures. Maybe, just maybe, the closest to reality are beliefs found in the chinese culture - unification/co-existence with the surrounding nature and stuff - but even there you would find fascinating tales of wonders that are clearly not based on objective observations.

Also, scientific achievements comfirmed none of these aformentioned beliefs, on the contrary: the very basic foundations of Christianity have been shaken by basic scientific methods like carbon dating. Clearly the world (Earth) hasn't been created in the last few thousand years. Not even remotely.

I don't know that I would go so far as to say that scientific methods and understanding have "shaken" basic concepts because honestly, they haven't. You would honestly expect people to completely abandon an idea simply because "according to man's current understanding", something did happen the way someone says it does. Is it accepted by all of Christianity that the world is only ~6,000 years old? No. Is it by some. Yes. Now you would attempt to disprove it with evidence bases upon our current understanding of the carbon element. Are you honestly arrogant enough as to believe that you know enough about the universe and how it work as to be able to say with 100% certainty that carbon dating is 100% accurate and will never be shown erroneous?

Now I like carbon dating, I really do. And I do find it to be very good at estimating time. But I would never go so far as to say that our human understanding of the universe is sufficient enough to say it is 100% accurate and will never be shown to be otherwise. Do you know what the effects of the creation of this world hasdon the elements contained within it? Do you think science is capable of stating these things with 100% certainty?

You may be right, and there is no reason to believe otherwise. But you may be wrong too, and there is just as good of a chance of that. So why do you feel the need to consider others ignorant for not believing in your ideals that are no more intelligent or worthy that theirs? If that type of arrogance is necessary, that's reason enough to me to never agree with what you claim.

 

[atybimf]

I believe Christianity was made up. The stories in the bible were made up. I believe the intentions of the people who made up Christianity were good, but everyone who believes in Christianity, or any religion for that matter, are being lied to.

 

[mattpegher]

Recent statements by the Vatican have come out in favor of evolution as the means by which human life has come about. The official position is that science and religion are not opposed or mutually exclusive. The scientific data does not disprove the existence of god and never will. This can only be argued logically and philosophically. No matter what evidence is determined science cannot disprove the existence of something, it can only show evidence for the possible existence of something.

 

[HermDogg]

Originally posted by: Madwand1

Originally posted by: DarkKnight69

Originally posted by: HermDogg

5) Why does God need worship?

This is one question that I would love to be answered!

Why does a man that give us goodness and love require us to bend to our knees and ask forgiveness and offer thanks. This makes him sound like a tyrant to me. There are 2 issues with this:

1. If he were truly as the bible says, he would know that mankind was grateful to him and he would not require our worship.

2. He would not think any less of us for not believing in him because it was him who gave us the ability to not believe!

Is this a real question, or just rhetoric? I don't see anything hereabouts to indicate that there are real questions being asked, just rhetoric to push some point or the other.

If this question really matters to you, perhaps you could ask someone who might be able to answer nicely. Probably privately. Or you could just read something. Maybe many things.

So, do you really want an answer? Will you ask nicely? On your knees perhaps as if your life depended on it? I am using rhetoric here, and not really answering the question -- just trying to make a point. Whether or not you get it is up to you, as is everything.

Edit: But, I guess my "answer" will be completely mystifying nonsense to some. So I sincerly apologize for that.

I honestly want answers to all the questions I posed (with the exception of the one labelled as sarcastic, that was just mean-spirited). I have yet to find people who are able to give me those answers in a way that meshes with what God is supposed to be. And sorry, your answer really didn't make much sense (to me at least).

 

[HermDogg]

Originally posted by: Netopia

Originally posted by: DarkKnight69

Originally posted by: HermDogg

5) Why does God need worship?

This is one question that I would love to be answered!

Why does a man that give us goodness and love require us to bend to our knees and ask forgiveness and offer thanks. This makes him sound like a tyrant to me. There are 2 issues with this:

1. If he were truly as the bible says, he would know that mankind was grateful to him and he would not require our worship.

2. He would not think any less of us for not believing in him because it was him who gave us the ability to not believe!

I think you think too highly of humans. What is it most humans seek in one form or another? Esteem. Whether it be a car, muscles, money, position, relationships, a hot gaming box.... whatever.... all humans desire at some level to be elevated and have others look up to them. An all knowing God would understand this, and having given a certain amount of self-determination to his creatures, would set up some sort of system (religion?) by which they could be reminded that they AREN'T the be all end all and that they should instead humble themselves.

So really... what is it about Biblical Christianity that bothers you so much?

That Jesus said for people to be humble and forgive?
That Jesus taught people to think of others first?
That Jesus taught that some things were wrong?
That Jesus said that being meek (powerful but controlled) was the way to go?
That Jesus taught that living wasn't all about this life, and we should put others first?
That Jesus taught that a true neighbor was someone who loved others?
That YOU AND I have done bad things, but HE'S willing to overlook them because he loves us?
That He loves us so much that he'd die for us, even if we HATE Him?
That He wants us to tell others that there's hope for them too?
That Hell is a person's choice and we ourselves are to condemn no one, even in word?

C'mon.... tell me what it is about BIBLICAL CHRISTIANITY that you find so offensive? Forget all the hype of what is portrayed as "Christian" in the media. The media only shows the extremes so that they can get ratings. Tell me what THE BIBLE teaches people to do as Christians that's so horrible? Please, point to a New Testament teaching that you think is evil.

Perhaps the problem is that HUMANS are always involved in Religion. And therefore Religion will most alwasy be flawed. But that's not God, that's just messed up people tying to do their best.... and sadly, in some cases, messed up people using religion to try to elevate themselves by putting others down, but that's NOT what is taught in the Bible.

Joe

My problem with BIBLICAL CHRISTIANITY is the inherent belief that underlies BIBLICAL CHRISTIANITY. Oh, and

That Jesus taught that living wasn't all about this life, and we should put others first?

That YOU AND I have done bad things, but HE'S willing to overlook them because he loves us?

That Hell is a person's choice and we ourselves are to condemn no one, even in word?

Because, ya know, there's no evidence of another life beyond this one. There's no evidence that God exists, and the God that everyone talks about seems unfailingly irrational in most of his actions. I guess that's my problem with BIBLICAL CHRISTIANITY.

(Honestly, I have no idea how this was a response to the question posed by DarkKnight and myself. God needs worship because humans are too uppity? And then some weird tangent on BIBILICAL CHRISTIANITY?)

 

[Kyanzes]

Originally posted by: engineereeyore

Originally posted by: Kyanzes
Personally I don't believe ....

I don't know that I would go so far as to say that scientific methods and understanding have "shaken" basic concepts because honestly, they haven't. You would honestly expect people to completely abandon an idea simply because "according to man's current understanding", something did happen the way someone says it does. Is it accepted by all of Christianity that the world is only ~6,000 years old? No. Is it by some. Yes. Now you would attempt to disprove it with evidence bases upon our current understanding of the carbon element. Are you honestly arrogant enough as to believe that you know enough about the universe and how it work as to be able to say with 100% certainty that carbon dating is 100% accurate and will never be shown erroneous?

Now I like carbon dating, I really do. And I do find it to be very good at estimating time. But I would never go so far as to say that our human understanding of the universe is sufficient enough to say it is 100% accurate and will never be shown to be otherwise. Do you know what the effects of the creation of this world hasdon the elements contained within it? Do you think science is capable of stating these things with 100% certainty?

You may be right, and there is no reason to believe otherwise. But you may be wrong too, and there is just as good of a chance of that. So why do you feel the need to consider others ignorant for not believing in your ideals that are no more intelligent or worthy that theirs? If that type of arrogance is necessary, that's reason enough to me to never agree with what you claim.

I see you can't (won't) see past the carbon dating part. Thing is, that to believe in something won't make the object of your belief real. If someone believes Tom & Jerry do exist in the real world, it still won't make them real. If I follow your logic, the Jedi Order and the T-1000 are just as real as God. Unfortunately imagination can be exploited. I saw Alien (in a theater actually, hehe) when I was seven. Scared the hell out of me, and couldn't sleep well for years. My strong belief that alien creatures crawling in the dark of my room waiting for me to fall asleep was so strong, that I couldn't be convinced by any means that they weren't real. In a same manner, God, or other celestial beings can be real for people who let themselves affected by other's influence. People are vulnerable.

It's not arrogant to question a belief.

 

[Madwand1]

Originally posted by: HermDogg
I honestly want answers to all the questions I posed (with the exception of the one labelled as sarcastic, that was just mean-spirited). I have yet to find people who are able to give me those answers in a way that meshes with what God is supposed to be. And sorry, your answer really didn't make much sense (to me at least).

I found a list of your questions, and it's specific to Christianity or some specific flavors of it -- I wouldn't know. I don't think that I'm the right person to answer them in that context.

As to my "answer", it's pretty much a point about attitude. If you go into an inquiry with a negative or hostile attitude, then I think that it's likely to fail. Moreover, I think you have to go into it with the opposite attitude. "Knowing God" is nothing less than knowing the universe, and if you think you can get that cheaply, or via internet arguments, you're kidding yourself more than a little. Some say that you can know something of God, but that any of it takes more than a heck of a lot of effort, yet on the other hand, it's worth any sacrifice.

As to worship, obviously, an omnipotent being would actually need nothing. Most, if not everything that is asked or suggested, etc., is something that's actually good for us in a more profound manner.

(Besides, with an omnipotent being, I can't think of any attitude besides worship that would make sense. In this point, perhaps worship is the most natural thing to do if you take the quest seriously.)

With this, I'd like to bid you farewell. Decide for yourself whether or not you think there is a quest, and if it might be worthwhile. If not, don't feel confronted by me at least -- surely a life lived well (or honorably, or truthfully, or nobly, etc., pick your highest value framework), is not worthy of eternal damnation or any such thing, and more likely, a life lived well is worth much more than a life not lived well with regular church attendance.

 

[Wag]

Originally posted by: rdubbz420

Originally posted by: Wag
I'm Jewish.

You?re going to hell.

Jews don't believe in Hell.

And even if I did I'd be having more fun than you on the way there.

 

[Powermoloch]

all of the religions in the world far out number christians in numbers :evil:

 

[CheesePoofs]

Originally posted by: Wag

Originally posted by: rdubbz420

Originally posted by: Wag
I'm Jewish.

You?re going to hell.

Jews don't believe in Hell.

And even if I did I'd be having more fun than you on the way there.

I'm with you: being Jewish FTW!

But aside from that, I believe that Jesus existed, there are documents to prove that. But there is no evidence to prove that he was anything more than a preacher, albeit one who gained quite a following. I am not the type of person who will believe that someone died and then came back a few days later, or performed any number of other miracles.

And besides, believing that there is more to life continues after we physically dies doesn't mean you have to believe in Jesus ... many people believe the one without the other.

 

[bobdelt]

Really I laugh at the whole religion thing. It really is the chicken and the egg. I could say the big bang created everything, but then who created the crap in the big bang? Someone could say god created everything, and I could say who created god? ( I mean a guy just didn't wake up one day and say "hey... I think I'll be god to a couple billion people today and create a universe in my off time"...)

You think God would be just some Guy? Or a supernatural force\sprit? I find religioin hard to believe to if I thought God was just some guy and not the spirit behind the laws of physics.