I don't understand the Jesus died for our sins thing.

[Juddog]

Is this the same logic used when adult children kill and we call the parents terrible people? I will admit that your example is valid, but unless we're all declared criminally unfit to live our lives (and lose all free will), what else can be done?

If murderers must be brought to justice, so too thieves; if thieves, so too slanderers, if slanderers, so too liars. Then the entire world is brought to justice. God used to do that (check the Old Testament)

There is no such thing as adult children. Either you are an adult or you are a child.

My point is that there is zero proof for the parent watching over anything, and if he did watch over everything, he doesn't care about it. A being that takes a cosmic dump and leaves it to fester isn't worthy of worship, in my opinion.

Is god all-knowing? Then he's a psychopath under modern definition - created sin, created man knowing he would sin, and then punished him for doing something he knew he would do and forced him to do, since he created him being all knowing.

Is god all-powerful? Then he created sin / evil, allowed it to exist, and didn't do squat about it. If he's all powerful why does he need worshippers in the first place? He could just create a universe full of people that automagically worship him.

Is god all-loving? Then why put humans through so much bullshit in the first place? Why put an apple and a talking snake there, knowing full well how the rib-woman would react?

Every single logic point breaks down when you look at the abrahamic version of God as presented in the Bible. It becomes quite clear to anybody looking through the stories that various verses are written by different people, not scripted by some divine hand. Human people, writing stories, back in a time where humans thought that the sun was being pulled in a chariot across the sky, and didn't understand how diseases spread. That's all it boils down to.

The Bible should be taken with no more credibility than the stories of zeus up on Mt. Olympus throwing down lightning bolts, or Thor cleaving valleys with his hammer Mjolner.

 

[coldmeat]

 

[Jaskalas]

An omniscient being would know those in advance as well.

Not if he didn't want to know! lalalala, can't hear you! :awe:

 

[SlitheryDee]

Not if he didn't want to know! lalalala, can't hear you! :awe:

Hmmm. If a being doesn't know everything it isn't omniscient, but if it can't cause itself to not know something it isn't omnipotent. The only way god works logically is if he's neutered in one way or another.

 

[Gibsons]

Hmmm. If a being doesn't know everything it isn't omniscient, but if it can't cause itself to not know something it isn't omnipotent. The only way god works logically is if he's neutered in one way or another.

It's a conundrum.

 

[ringtail]

``

 

[TheSlamma]

Being an atheist is so much easier.

But dude you have to try so hard to deny an existence of a supreme being

And then there is the "where do you get your moral values from?"

 

[DDRGamer]

My point is that there is zero proof for the parent watching over anything, and if he did watch over everything, he doesn't care about it. A being that takes a cosmic dump and leaves it to fester isn't worthy of worship, in my opinion.

Welcome to the crisis of anyone considering God. That said, it's worth mentioning that I don't know of any parent that reprimands every single thing their children does.
If we as standard humans with our 'relative' goodness can't make sure our children are good, what does behavioural correction look like to an absolute justice capable Higher Power?

 

[Juddog]

Welcome to the crisis of anyone considering God. That said, it's worth mentioning that I don't know of any parent that reprimands every single thing their children does.
If we as standard humans with our 'relative' goodness can't make sure our children are good, what does behavioural correction look like to an absolute justice capable Higher Power?

What parents do you know that just dump their child off in the middle of the wilderness and never come back?

 

[John Connor]

Bill O, what a great role model.

Yeah, he's this guys role model.

 

[Gibsons]

Yeah, he's this guys role model.

Malmedy.

 

[John Connor]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malmedy :hmm:

 

[Gibsons]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malmedy :hmm:

Read it already. They left out the part about the transcript being whitewashed. But the did mention how he repeated it. He's a hypocrite and a liar. But hey, believe what you want..

Tarot cards work my aunt and sister read them. Trust me they work... My aunt told me about things in my life that was true and she said my parents would be buying a house and it happened. Most people can't do it right it takes meditation, etc to know how to do it right and she only did it for close friends and relatives.

Psychics are kinda hit and miss some don't know anything and some are damn good I dealt with two who were damn good! If you don't believe me then look at the "evidence" where psychics helped law enforcement to solve crimes. Ever watch John Edward or the Long Island Medium?

Let me just tell you that I knew one that was able to access my password protected laptop just by me thinking of the password.

 

[John Connor]

What??? I posted a link to a town! ROFL

 

[Gibsons]

This is the link you were looking for
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malmedy_massacre

 

[Braznor]

Let me ask a question to all the people who think humans have complete free will.

Which one of the neurons in your brain is really you?

 

[PlanetJosh]

Being an atheist is so much easier.

Being an agnostic is even easier than that. Imo people would be more approving of an agnostic considering the agnostic believes there's a decent chance god exists.

 

[BurnItDwn]

Being an agnostic is even easier than that. Imo people would be more approving of an agnostic considering the agnostic believes there's a decent chance god exists.

Being an atheist and being an agnostic are not mutually exclusive.


Most athests that I know are agnostic atheists. They think that since the probability of a god is so low, there probably is not one.

I would argue that the probability of the existence of 1 or more gods approaches 0 as knowledge acquisition increases.

We will never know/prove for certain that there can not be a god. However, we will get so damn close that the "god can not exist" argument will be sort of like .9999999 = 1.

We have very little knowledge at this time, so I would say while it's improbable, it is possible that there could be some sort of superbeing going around creating galaxies and making weird species who have tailbones but no tails.

I would also equate the probability of the Supreme Spaghetti being "real" with any and all mythological fantasy beings.

 

[Gibsons]

sort of like .9999999 = 1.

uh oh

 

[Juddog]

uh oh

.9999999... (repeating) does equal 1. The more 9's you add, the closer to 1 the figure becomes, so .9999 repeating forever ends up being one.

Think of it this way:

Divide 1 by 3. You get .3333333333 repeating.

Now take that result, and multiply times 3. You get .999999999 repeating.

 

[Gibsons]

.9999999... (repeating) does equal 1. The more 9's you add, the closer to 1 the figure becomes, so .9999 repeating forever ends up being one.

Think of it this way:

Divide 1 by 3. You get .3333333333 repeating.

Now take that result, and multiply times 3. You get .999999999 repeating.

A little exposition:
http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=967573

 

[Kadarin]

Being an agnostic is even easier than that. Imo people would be more approving of an agnostic considering the agnostic believes there's a decent chance god exists.

No. I am agnostic. I do not discount the existence of "god" (or gods, or "higher powers", or whatever) out of hand, but until such time as there is any evidence whatsoever that they exist, I am not going to go out of my way to believe in them.

 

[sao123]

I have this question pop up in my head from time to time but I always forget to ask it.

So, "Jesus died for our sins."

I don't see what the sacrifice is though. Let's just assume:

Jesus is the son of God.
There IS Heaven (paradise).
Jesus, when he passes from the mortal earth, goes to Heaven to be with his father.
Heaven, by all accounts, is better than the mortal earth.

Um, so except for the excruciating way in which he died, I'm not seeing a big sacrifice?

I hear people say that God sacrificed his only son. Well, no, he doesn't appear to have sacrificed anything, right? His son still exists. In fact, his son is now closer to him and in a much better place.

What am I missing here? I have to be missing a lot.

The key you seem to be missing is that, in both many religions and mythical legend, blood sacrifice is a key component of appealing to a deity.
In Judiasm this was done through animal sacrifice.
In Christianity, the result was the climax of Christ's blood sacrifice because his blood was pure and sinless.

 

[akahoovy]

But dude you have to try so hard to deny an existence of a supreme being

And then there is the "where do you get your moral values from?"

Which eventually becomes the question, "How will we know if laws are moral or not if there is no religion?"

 

[KeithTalent]

Being an agnostic is even easier than that. Imo people would be more approving of an agnostic considering the agnostic believes there's a decent chance god exists.

I'm pretty sure that's not true. :hmm:

KT