10 questions every Xian should answer.

Dave_G
Dave_G's picture
Posts: 223
Joined: 2007-04-21
User is offlineOffline

wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
If it didn't happen to good

If it didn't happen to good people it wouldn't be bad.


Iruka Naminori
atheist
Iruka Naminori's picture
Posts: 1955
Joined: 2006-11-21
User is offlineOffline
wavefreak wrote: If it

wavefreak wrote:
If it didn't happen to good people it wouldn't be bad.

So, why does it happen?

The riddle of Epicurus: "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.  Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.  Is he both able and willing?  Then whence cometh evil?  Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"  -Epicurus  

Books on atheism, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Dave_G
Dave_G's picture
Posts: 223
Joined: 2007-04-21
User is offlineOffline
wavefreak wrote: If it

wavefreak wrote:
If it didn't happen to good people it wouldn't be bad.

 

Answers please


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Clearly sarcasm isn't

Clearly sarcasm isn't recognized here. 

It amazes me that this type of question is asked on this site. You're preaching to the choir. All of the regulars here already know that Christianity is rife with conflicting logic.  Besides, you don't really want an answer. Your mind is already convinced there is no consistent answer. Or at least one that you would like.

Here's an answer. There are no bad things. There are no good things. Things just happen.

Here's a different answer. God allows bad things to happen so that good people can be separated from bad. It is easy to behave with honor towards god when things are going well. It's when bad stuff happens that the real test begins.

Here's another answer. Most things that happen are a mixture of good and bad. What appears to be bad can sometimes turn out good (getting cancer and while being cured meet a a nurse, fall in love and get married). Sometimes good things turn bad (winning a lottery and ending up divorced because of arguments over the money). So only god knows the outcome  of  events that in our limited vision we label as good or bad.

So there's three different answers, I suspect none of which you will find satisfactory. Which is the real crux of the matter. You have already decided that no answer is satisfactory and have a loaded gun, ready to send out a barrage of counter claims and arguments. And you will gain no insight for yourself and convince no Christian of your position. 


Ophios
Ophios's picture
Posts: 909
Joined: 2006-09-19
User is offlineOffline
wavefreak wrote: If it

wavefreak wrote:
If it didn't happen to good people it wouldn't be bad.

 

True, and witty.

AImboden wrote:
I'm not going to PM my agreement just because one tucan has pms.


magilum
Posts: 2410
Joined: 2007-03-07
User is offlineOffline
Why do bad people

Why do bad people happen?
Did man have to make poos before the fall?


Iruka Naminori
atheist
Iruka Naminori's picture
Posts: 1955
Joined: 2006-11-21
User is offlineOffline
wavefreak wrote: Clearly

wavefreak wrote:

Clearly sarcasm isn't recognized here.

That's a pretty broad statement.  

wavefreak wrote:
It amazes me that this type of question is asked on this site. You're preaching to the choir. All of the regulars here already know that Christianity is rife with conflicting logic.

That's odd.  I was out of commission for the past couple of weeks.  I come back and there are a ton of new people, some of which probably don't know Christianity is rife with conflicting logic.

wavefreak wrote:
Besides, you don't really want an answer. Your mind is already convinced there is no consistent answer.

Of course there's no consistent answer unless you recognize the fact that god is imaginary.  I think you just don't like the answer. 

 

wavefreak wrote:
Or at least one that you would like.

Here's an answer. There are no bad things. There are no good things. Things just happen.

Here's a different answer. God allows bad things to happen so that good people can be separated from bad. It is easy to behave with honor towards god when things are going well. It's when bad stuff happens that the real test begins.

Here's another answer. Most things that happen are a mixture of good and bad. What appears to be bad can sometimes turn out good (getting cancer and while being cured meet a a nurse, fall in love and get married). Sometimes good things turn bad (winning a lottery and ending up divorced because of arguments over the money). So only god knows the outcome of events that in our limited vision we label as good or bad.

Are you trying to be funny--oh, excuse me...sarcastic--again? 

wavefreak wrote:
So there's three different answers, I suspect none of which you will find satisfactory. Which is the real crux of the matter. You have already decided that no answer is satisfactory and have a loaded gun, ready to send out a barrage of counter claims and arguments. And you will gain no insight for yourself and convince no Christian of your position.

Hmmmm, that's another odd statement considering the fact that many of us--most of us?--used to be Christians. 

Books on atheism, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Mjolnin
Theist
Posts: 143
Joined: 2007-04-20
User is offlineOffline
Two questions 1) Is this

Two questions

1) Is this for real?

2) Has these questions been on any earlier posts?

They are quite common and  I don't want to jump in without reading previous posts. I don't want to waste time on discusions by running over old stuff.


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Mjolnin wrote: Two

Mjolnin wrote:

Two questions

1) Is this for real?

2) Has these questions been on any earlier posts?

They are quite common and I don't want to jump in without reading previous posts. I don't want to waste time on discusions by running over old stuff.

At the top of this forum is a thread for questions theists need to answer. 


Mjolnin
Theist
Posts: 143
Joined: 2007-04-20
User is offlineOffline
I will not answer all 10 at

I will not answer all 10 at the same time. I believe it would be to many points to read, argue or defend at one time.

Question 1) why doesn’t God heal amputees?

From what I have read and believe these kinds of arguments are clearly illogical and even silly, although commonly used I believe intelligent atheists have dropped these kinds of arguments long ago. Saying that omnipotence requires the ability to do logically impossible things is stupid. God does not turn truth into a lie or will he lie and tell the truth at the same time. God will not create a rock He cannot lift.

Now I know how atheists feel when Pascal’s wager is introduced.

The truth is - We never know how much of any healing is truly miraculous, and how much is "ordinary". It is like most health studies… You can never answer the questions: How many would die or survive if they were not in the study? Statistical analysis can only give you odds on this, not truths.


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Mjolnin wrote: I will not

Mjolnin wrote:

I will not answer all 10 at the same time. I believe it would be to many points to read, argue or defend at one time.

Question 1) why doesn’t God heal amputees?

From what I have read and believe these kinds of arguments are clearly illogical and even silly, although commonly used I believe intelligent atheists have dropped these kinds of arguments long ago. Saying that omnipotence requires the ability to do logically impossible things is stupid. God does not turn truth into a lie or will he lie and tell the truth at the same time. God will not create a rock He cannot lift.

Now I know how atheists feel when Pascal’s wager is introduced.

The truth is - We never know how much of any healing is truly miraculous, and how much is "ordinary". It is like most health studies… You can never answer the questions: How many would die or survive if they were not in the study? Statistical analysis can only give you odds on this, not truths.

You touch on the absurdity of the question, which I agree with. Part of the absurdity is that the question puts the onus on god to heal the amputee when the failure is rightly assigned to the believer. God doesn't fail to heal the amputee, the believer's faith is too weak to appropriate the power of god and bring healing to the amputee. 


Rigor_OMortis
Rigor_OMortis's picture
Posts: 557
Joined: 2006-06-18
User is offlineOffline
Quote: Question 1) why

Quote:

Question 1) why doesn’t God heal amputees?

From what I have read and believe these kinds of arguments are clearly illogical and even silly, although commonly used I believe intelligent atheists have dropped these kinds of arguments long ago. Saying that omnipotence requires the ability to do logically impossible things is stupid. God does not turn truth into a lie or will he lie and tell the truth at the same time. God will not create a rock He cannot lift.

So... why won't God heal amputees, again?

Because if you try to say that healing an amputee is illogical, then I've got no idea what's to say about ex nihilo creation....

Inquisition - "The flames are all long gone, but the pain lingers on..."
http://rigoromortis.blogspot.com/


Rigor_OMortis
Rigor_OMortis's picture
Posts: 557
Joined: 2006-06-18
User is offlineOffline
Quote: You touch on the

Quote:
You touch on the absurdity of the question, which I agree with. Part of the absurdity is that the question puts the onus on god to heal the amputee when the failure is rightly assigned to the believer. God doesn't fail to heal the amputee, the believer's faith is too weak to appropriate the power of god and bring healing to the amputee.

Let me try to imitate the movie: "If you're an educated, intelligent person, you will see that the strange rationalizations (like the one above) that you make up to explain your belief in the light of inconsistencies simply make no sense at all."

Inquisition - "The flames are all long gone, but the pain lingers on..."
http://rigoromortis.blogspot.com/


Mjolnin
Theist
Posts: 143
Joined: 2007-04-20
User is offlineOffline
Rigor_OMortis

Rigor_OMortis wrote:

So... why won't God heal amputees, again?

Because if you try to say that healing an amputee is illogical, then I've got no idea what's to say about ex nihilo creation....

Can a God create something out of nothing is not the point of the answer or the question. It is why doesn’t God do it. The request is something absurd and a contradiction against our nature and to expect it is illogical. If a God did heal an amputee than it would be studied and written off as a naturally occurring event and your view would not change.  


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Rigor_OMortis

Rigor_OMortis wrote:

Quote:
You touch on the absurdity of the question, which I agree with. Part of the absurdity is that the question puts the onus on god to heal the amputee when the failure is rightly assigned to the believer. God doesn't fail to heal the amputee, the believer's faith is too weak to appropriate the power of god and bring healing to the amputee.

Let me try to imitate the movie: "If you're an educated, intelligent person, you will see that the strange rationalizations (like the one above) that you make up to explain your belief in the light of inconsistencies simply make no sense at all."

 

Is it possible to offer a Christian point of view without being a Christian? Should I preface my remarks with "a Christian would answer".

I want another tag. How about non-fundie theist. I'm tired of having to point out that I don't embrace fundamentalism. 

 Also, if there was real intent at enlightment, you would bring up specific issues, not resort to thinly veiled ad hominem.

 


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Mjolnin

Mjolnin wrote:
Rigor_OMortis wrote:

So... why won't God heal amputees, again?

Because if you try to say that healing an amputee is illogical, then I've got no idea what's to say about ex nihilo creation....

Can a God create something out of nothing is not the point of the answer or the question. It is why doesn’t God do it. The request is something absurd and a contradiction against our nature and to expect it is illogical. If a God did heal an amputee than it would be studied and written off as a naturally occurring event and your view would not change.

 

Do me a favor and stop assuming you know mine or anyone else's views.

Me, I'd take it as proof if God would heal my right eye - it's been written off as useless for 43 years and I have films of the dead retina floating in the vitreous and the huge cataract that is my lens.

If God wanted to do something that only he could do, don't you think he could eliminate natural explanations from the equation? 

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
wave, I agree that you need

wave, I agree that you need a new tag.  You and maybe three others need something to separate you from the fundies, because I see this happen to you all the time.  What that tag is, I dunno.  You can't have an atheist badge, of course... and you're not quite a pantheist, either...

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote: wave, I

Hambydammit wrote:

wave, I agree that you need a new tag. You and maybe three others need something to separate you from the fundies, because I see this happen to you all the time. What that tag is, I dunno. You can't have an atheist badge, of course... and you're not quite a pantheist, either...

 

 

How about aatheist? 


Mjolnin
Theist
Posts: 143
Joined: 2007-04-20
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote: Do me a

jcgadfly wrote:

Do me a favor and stop assuming you know mine or anyone else's views.

Me, I'd take it as proof if God would heal my right eye - it's been written off as useless for 43 years and I have films of the dead retina floating in the vitreous and the huge cataract that is my lens.

As far as assuming anyone else's views... I do apologize. That is a broad and labeling statement.  So what is your view? That if your eye was healed you would believe in a God? What is your view if God doesn't?

jcgadfly wrote:

If God wanted to do something that only he could do, don't you think he could eliminate natural explanations from the equation? 

This is the God of gaps I get accused of following. If you can not explain it "God did it".

I do feel for your loss of vision. I have had surgery on my right eye to remove metal fragments… My son at the age of 4 under went surgery to reattach his retina after being hit with a target arrow shot from a neighbors yard.

However, our beliefs do not hinge on our loss of physical abilities, whether fair or not. Expectations of what I want or what I think is fair has no bearing on my beliefs.


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Mjolnin wrote: jcgadfly

Mjolnin wrote:
jcgadfly wrote:

Do me a favor and stop assuming you know mine or anyone else's views.

Me, I'd take it as proof if God would heal my right eye - it's been written off as useless for 43 years and I have films of the dead retina floating in the vitreous and the huge cataract that is my lens.

As far as assuming anyone else's views... I do apologize. That is a broad and labeling statement. So what is your view? That if your eye was healed you would believe in a God? What is your view if God doesn't?

jcgadfly wrote:

If God wanted to do something that only he could do, don't you think he could eliminate natural explanations from the equation?

This is the God of gaps I get accused of following. If you can not explain it "God did it".

I do feel for your loss of vision. I have had surgery on my right eye to remove metal fragments… My son at the age of 4 under went surgery to reattach his retina after being hit with a target arrow shot from a neighbors yard.

However, our beliefs do not hinge on our loss of physical abilities, whether fair or not. Expectations of what I want or what I think is fair has no bearing on my beliefs.

If my eye was healed with no medical intervention and no other way of explaining it naturally - that would go a long way to restoring my belief.

Thanks for your concern and sharing your war (surgery) story. Fortunately, the left eye is 20/25 after cataract surgeries so I'm doing well overall.

The only reason I brought up my eye is because you brought up atheists blowing off a healed amputee as having a natural explanation. 

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Wave, I thought sure I

Wave, I thought sure I remembered you saying you believe in some kind of cosmic super-something.  It's just really hard to peg you because you seem to argue both for and against a lot of things.

Not trying to give you a hard time... I'm on your side at least part way.  I know it's gotta be aggravating for people to assume you're talking about Christian stuff when you're not.  It's just that you don't seem to be taking the atheist position often, either.

Care to clarify your beliefs?

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote: Wave, I

Hambydammit wrote:

Wave, I thought sure I remembered you saying you believe in some kind of cosmic super-something. It's just really hard to peg you because you seem to argue both for and against a lot of things.

Not trying to give you a hard time... I'm on your side at least part way. I know it's gotta be aggravating for people to assume you're talking about Christian stuff when you're not. It's just that you don't seem to be taking the atheist position often, either.

Care to clarify your beliefs?

 

 

Fair enough. A couple of problems that I think people may be having with me is that I am interested enough in the consistency of arguments that I will switch sides and play devils advocate at the drop of a hat. I also have enough exposure to fundamentalism that I know pretty well alot of their arguments so I can fill in the blanks even if I don't adhere to the ideas myself.

A bigger problem is that much of what I believe is very fluid. But alot of what happens on this site revolves around a pretty rigorous use of language and a pretty strong common understanding of terminology. I am still working on "translating" what is banging around in my head so that it can be effectively debated. A good example of this is the phrase "intelligent design". Logically, If god is intelligent and god designed the universe then it follows that we are the product of intelligent design. But the phrase "intelligent design" has specific meaning in this culture and on this site that invokes Christian fundmentalism. So in all practicality, "intelligent design" is reduced to an oxymoron.

Another problem is that if I don't claim anything I don't have to prove itWink. While I'm being a little tongue in cheek, I'm not inclined to state something if I don't feel I have some way to back it up. So for now I don't say most of what I'm thinking. An example of this would be for me to offer something up that is essentially a restating of the god of gaps. That idea is regularly refuted here and it would be pointless to go there. So unless I can offer a new wrinkle on the god of gaps then I just let it lie.

So my advice to anyone that wants to know what I think is to ask good questions. A good question in the sense that it pushes me to think about an answer and formulate a clear response. I consider the question that started this thread a really poor one. It can only take the conversation in about a thousand directions with little chance at a net increase in understanding. 


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
That's it? No

That's it? No questions?

 

Bummer. 


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
LoL wave... It wouldn't be

LoL wave...

It wouldn't be logical to ask questions of someone who admits he doesn't have answers, now, would it?

Seriously, I think I understand, and I wish the word "agnostic" didn't cause such a furor here, because its common connotation seems to fit you pretty well.

I've said before that I think you sometimes get so caught up in semantics that you forget what you're discussing, and I still think that's true, and I suspect sometimes that your own uncertainty gives your arguments a rather schizophrenic sound from time to time, which may reflect on you in an unnecessarily negative way.

In any case, personally, I think metaphorically you have missed the forest for the trees... and are they really trees, or are they woody protuberences... and if they are protuberences, from whence did they protube...

Protube? I thought it was youtube...

Anyway, for now, I think you might be stuck with the theist badge, but if I think of anything suitably moderate and non-confrontational, I'll run it up the flagpole and see if anyone salutes.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Hambydammit wrote: ...

Hambydammit wrote:

...

that your own uncertainty gives your arguments a rather schizophrenic sound from time to time, which may reflect on you in an unnecessarily negative way.

...

 

Ahhh ... so those ARE voices in my head. I thought it was god.


Hambydammit
High Level DonorModeratorRRS Core Member
Hambydammit's picture
Posts: 8657
Joined: 2006-10-22
User is offlineOffline
Quote: Ahhh ... so those

Quote:
Ahhh ... so those ARE voices in my head. I thought it was god.

lol...

No.  Voices in your head do not exist because they are not material.  (Materialism v. Dualism XXI, live on pay per view)  Since they do not exist, you are not hearing them.  If god does ever talk to you, you can be sure he doesn't exist.

 

Atheism isn't a lot like religion at all. Unless by "religion" you mean "not religion". --Ciarin

http://hambydammit.wordpress.com/
Books about atheism


Wyzaard
Posts: 58
Joined: 2007-06-08
User is offlineOffline
wavefreak wrote: You touch

wavefreak wrote:

You touch on the absurdity of the question, which I agree with. Part of the absurdity is that the question puts the onus on god to heal the amputee when the failure is rightly assigned to the believer. God doesn't fail to heal the amputee, the believer's faith is too weak to appropriate the power of god and bring healing to the amputee.

 Rubbish.  This god, by way of it's omni-attributes, is the ONLY one with the complete knowledge, capacity and moral obligation to act for the good in this case... which needs to be a human good, as any other is practically meaningless.   


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
Wyzaard wrote: wavefreak

Wyzaard wrote:
wavefreak wrote:

You touch on the absurdity of the question, which I agree with. Part of the absurdity is that the question puts the onus on god to heal the amputee when the failure is rightly assigned to the believer. God doesn't fail to heal the amputee, the believer's faith is too weak to appropriate the power of god and bring healing to the amputee.

Rubbish. This god, by way of it's omni-attributes, is the ONLY one with the complete knowledge, capacity and moral obligation to act for the good in this case... which needs to be a human good, as any other is practically meaningless.

 

I don't assume that what we consider a moral obligation is also what god should. I suppose some define god that way, but I certainly don't.


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
wavefreak wrote: Wyzaard

wavefreak wrote:
Wyzaard wrote:
wavefreak wrote:

You touch on the absurdity of the question, which I agree with. Part of the absurdity is that the question puts the onus on god to heal the amputee when the failure is rightly assigned to the believer. God doesn't fail to heal the amputee, the believer's faith is too weak to appropriate the power of god and bring healing to the amputee.

Rubbish. This god, by way of it's omni-attributes, is the ONLY one with the complete knowledge, capacity and moral obligation to act for the good in this case... which needs to be a human good, as any other is practically meaningless.

 

I don't assume that what we consider a moral obligation is also what god should. I suppose some define god that way, but I certainly don't.

Doen't that leave the problem of God not being bound by rules he made?

Are you saying that God isn't bound by the moral statutes he laid down for us and will condemn us to perdition for not following?

Did I miss a signing statement somewhere? 

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


SamSexton
Posts: 61
Joined: 2007-05-18
User is offlineOffline
From what i gather, Mjolnin

From what i gather, Mjolnin suggested that God wouldn't heal an amputee because such a thing is impossible, in other words God is bound by nature. The thing is that God can't be bound by nature or miracles and people hearing Gods voice wouldn't exist.

 

You've got to see knowledge as a giant puzzle with all the pieces missing, we've found a lot of them and every day we find more, but that little God section of the puzzle, well noone will ever find that piece so it would be stupid to commit to what shape you think it is by carving your own piece and putting it down, yet theists seem to always be carving their own pieces to fit the holes rather than searching for pieces.

 If you've already commited to God or no God then you have already lost the debate for truth.


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote: wavefreak

jcgadfly wrote:
wavefreak wrote:
Wyzaard wrote:
wavefreak wrote:

You touch on the absurdity of the question, which I agree with. Part of the absurdity is that the question puts the onus on god to heal the amputee when the failure is rightly assigned to the believer. God doesn't fail to heal the amputee, the believer's faith is too weak to appropriate the power of god and bring healing to the amputee.

Rubbish. This god, by way of it's omni-attributes, is the ONLY one with the complete knowledge, capacity and moral obligation to act for the good in this case... which needs to be a human good, as any other is practically meaningless.

 

I don't assume that what we consider a moral obligation is also what god should. I suppose some define god that way, but I certainly don't.

Doen't that leave the problem of God not being bound by rules he made?

Are you saying that God isn't bound by the moral statutes he laid down for us and will condemn us to perdition for not following?

Did I miss a signing statement somewhere?

I don't assume we are on the same level as god when it comes to moral obligation. I own a cat. The cat is well taken care of, but I don't give it the same value as my son. It is entirely possible that we are more like cats to god than sons and daughters. I have long had problems with the "equality" assumed by the "created in god's image" theism. I am more comfortable assuming that god's moral obligations are to do what is best for all that lives, not just what is best for humanity. This removes us from what I see as an arrogant position as the most important life form in existence. Of course this position is not consistent with Christian theology so if you are examining my answers in that light we will likely go around in circles.

 

 


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
wavefreak wrote: jcgadfly

wavefreak wrote:
jcgadfly wrote:
wavefreak wrote:
Wyzaard wrote:
wavefreak wrote:

You touch on the absurdity of the question, which I agree with. Part of the absurdity is that the question puts the onus on god to heal the amputee when the failure is rightly assigned to the believer. God doesn't fail to heal the amputee, the believer's faith is too weak to appropriate the power of god and bring healing to the amputee.

Rubbish. This god, by way of it's omni-attributes, is the ONLY one with the complete knowledge, capacity and moral obligation to act for the good in this case... which needs to be a human good, as any other is practically meaningless.

 

I don't assume that what we consider a moral obligation is also what god should. I suppose some define god that way, but I certainly don't.

Doen't that leave the problem of God not being bound by rules he made?

Are you saying that God isn't bound by the moral statutes he laid down for us and will condemn us to perdition for not following?

Did I miss a signing statement somewhere?

I don't assume we are on the same level as god when it comes to moral obligation. I own a cat. The cat is well taken care of, but I don't give it the same value as my son. It is entirely possible that we are more like cats to god than sons and daughters. I have long had problems with the "equality" assumed by the "created in god's image" theism. I am more comfortable assuming that god's moral obligations are to do what is best for all that lives, not just what is best for humanity. This removes us from what I see as an arrogant position as the most important life form in existence. Of course this position is not consistent with Christian theology so if you are examining my answers in that light we will likely go around in circles.

 

 

 True enough.

On the other hand, I'm not a big fan of trying to follow and worship a God that regards us only as animals and playthings for his amusement.

Is that the God you're describing? 

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote: True

jcgadfly wrote:

True enough.

On the other hand, I'm not a big fan of trying to follow and worship a God that regards us only as animals and playthings for his amusement.

Is that the God you're describing?

 

To remain consistent, I have to accept the possibility that an entity with "cosmic powers" could deterimne that the best thing for all that lives is the termination of humanity. But I would like to think that such a being would not reach that decision capriciously. My conceptualization of a deity assumes a more universal form of benevolence. What is best for humanity is measured as part of what is best for everything else. So this does not necessarily eliminate bad things from happening. An antelope probably isn't too happy to be eaten by a lion, but it keeps things in balance. To me humans are just one variable in a giant equation of existence. We are just a variable, not the answer itself.


theotherguy
theotherguy's picture
Posts: 294
Joined: 2007-01-07
User is offlineOffline
Mjolnin wrote: I will not

Mjolnin wrote:

I will not answer all 10 at the same time. I believe it would be to many points to read, argue or defend at one time.

Question 1) why doesn’t God heal amputees?

From what I have read and believe these kinds of arguments are clearly illogical and even silly, although commonly used I believe intelligent atheists have dropped these kinds of arguments long ago. Saying that omnipotence requires the ability to do logically impossible things is stupid. God does not turn truth into a lie or will he lie and tell the truth at the same time. God will not create a rock He cannot lift.

Now I know how atheists feel when Pascal’s wager is introduced.

The truth is - We never know how much of any healing is truly miraculous, and how much is "ordinary". It is like most health studies… You can never answer the questions: How many would die or survive if they were not in the study? Statistical analysis can only give you odds on this, not truths.

 

So in other words, God only heals where its possible that the person could have been healed anyway?

 Sounds to me like God is applied to healings after the fact. Amputees can't regrow their own limbs (though they certainly could if only a few genes were re-activated, but that's nothing for a omnipotent God, right?) But cancer patients can go into remission, people can become immune to viruses, can fight off bacteria, regrow skin and hair, and overcome a coma. So why are these people given "miracle" status? Why are there no healed amputees?

 

I can garuntee you that no matter how faithful amputees are, they will never have their limbs regrow. Not even if they were Jesus freaking Christ. And why? Because there are no miracles, no miraculous healings, no God. You might as well pray to an invisible pink unicorn, a flying spaghetti monster or a jug of milk to heal you and you will get the exact same results.


Eloise
Theist
Eloise's picture
Posts: 1804
Joined: 2007-05-26
User is offlineOffline
wavefreak wrote: jcgadfly

wavefreak wrote:
jcgadfly wrote:

True enough.

On the other hand, I'm not a big fan of trying to follow and worship a God that regards us only as animals and playthings for his amusement.

Is that the God you're describing?

 

To remain consistent, I have to accept the possibility that an entity with "cosmic powers" could deterimne that the best thing for all that lives is the termination of humanity. But I would like to think that such a being would not reach that decision capriciously. My conceptualization of a deity assumes a more universal form of benevolence. What is best for humanity is measured as part of what is best for everything else. So this does not necessarily eliminate bad things from happening. An antelope probably isn't too happy to be eaten by a lion, but it keeps things in balance. To me humans are just one variable in a giant equation of existence. We are just a variable, not the answer itself.

I'm thoroughly impressed by your rationality Wave, not to mention your own benevolence, but I'm a Theist too so that hardly counts. Pantheism would suit your thematic here, but maybe not your impression so much which is more deistic to me. 

 

 I had something to say on the current question too, I recall there is a christian bible passage something along the lines of God doesn't give you a burden bigger than you are capable of bearing. I realise that has a kind of callous sounding undertone, but I think it is still relevant to the question. I have a pragmatic leaning in me in that of all my life I have gained most from the trials, and that gainful experience is not among the things I would change if I could. Speaking for amputees on this matter wouldn't be right, though, so I am only saying some relevance might exist, not asserting that it does in any way.  

Theist badge qualifier : Gnostic/Philosophical Panentheist

www.mathematicianspictures.com


rexlunae
rexlunae's picture
Posts: 378
Joined: 2007-01-07
User is offlineOffline
Eloise wrote: I had

Eloise wrote:
I had something to say on the current question too, I recall there is a christian bible passage something along the lines of God doesn't give you a burden bigger than you are capable of bearing. I realise that has a kind of callous sounding undertone, but I think it is still relevant to the question. I have a pragmatic leaning in me in that of all my life I have gained most from the trials, and that gainful experience is not among the things I would change if I could. Speaking for amputees on this matter wouldn't be right, though, so I am only saying some relevance might exist, not asserting that it does in any way.

Good point, however, from a Christian perspective, in which god is imagined to be all-powerful, there should be no limits upon its capabilities, i.e. god can achieve any end by any means. There should be no requirement that if god wants to 'make you stronger', he would have to use suffering. Ultimately, we are still left with the conclusion that god wants us to suffer.

It's only the fairy tales they believe.


wavefreak
Theist
wavefreak's picture
Posts: 1825
Joined: 2007-05-10
User is offlineOffline
rexlunae wrote: Eloise

rexlunae wrote:
Eloise wrote:
I had something to say on the current question too, I recall there is a christian bible passage something along the lines of God doesn't give you a burden bigger than you are capable of bearing. I realise that has a kind of callous sounding undertone, but I think it is still relevant to the question. I have a pragmatic leaning in me in that of all my life I have gained most from the trials, and that gainful experience is not among the things I would change if I could. Speaking for amputees on this matter wouldn't be right, though, so I am only saying some relevance might exist, not asserting that it does in any way.
Good point, however, from a Christian perspective, in which god is imagined to be all-powerful, there should be no limits upon its capabilities, i.e. god can achieve any end by any means. There should be no requirement that if god wants to 'make you stronger', he would have to use suffering. Ultimately, we are still left with the conclusion that god wants us to suffer.

It is the all powerful all knowing thing that is the problem. As soon as omni anything is invoked it collapses under a mountain of contradictions. I suppose it is possible that there is a god with omni characteristics but our language is insufficient to describe such things. But is is just as likely that "omni-ness" is impossible. For me it doesn't matter. Humans exist and have some place in the order of things. What is important to me is to learn more about how we fit in with the rest of existence.


Mjolnin
Theist
Posts: 143
Joined: 2007-04-20
User is offlineOffline
SamSexton wrote: From what

SamSexton wrote:

From what i gather, Mjolnin suggested that God wouldn't heal an amputee because such a thing is impossible, in other words God is bound by nature. The thing is that God can't be bound by nature or miracles and people hearing Gods voice wouldn't exist.

Repeted from earlier "Can a God create something out of nothing is not the point of the answer or the question. It is why doesn’t God do it. "

God is bound by his nature not ours. To say God must act against our nature to prove himself is silly. This sounds like you expect the God of gaps to prove himself. But a God can't because it is illogical for  science to identify something that can not be explained and call it a work of God.

SamSexton wrote:

You've got to see knowledge as a giant puzzle with all the pieces missing, we've found a lot of them and every day we find more, but that little God section of the puzzle, well noone will ever find that piece so it would be stupid to commit to what shape you think it is by carving your own piece and putting it down,

yet theists seem to always be carving their own pieces to fit the holes rather than searching for pieces.

 

I find this statement to be exactly what I was stating earlier. We actually agree on this, with the exception of the last statement.

"theists seem to always be carving their own pieces to fit the holes"

In this discusion the hole has been shaped by the atheist question, not the theist answer. In order for there to be any God... God must fill this  puzzle hole.

Can you not see how your logic follows the illogic of the theist?? Or is it your illogic and theist logic??


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Mjolnin wrote:

Mjolnin wrote:
SamSexton wrote:

From what i gather, Mjolnin suggested that God wouldn't heal an amputee because such a thing is impossible, in other words God is bound by nature. The thing is that God can't be bound by nature or miracles and people hearing Gods voice wouldn't exist.

Repeted from earlier "Can a God create something out of nothing is not the point of the answer or the question. It is why doesn’t God do it. "

God is bound by his nature not ours. To say God must act against our nature to prove himself is silly. This sounds like you expect the God of gaps to prove himself. But a God can't because it is illogical for science to identify something that can not be explained and call it a work of God.

SamSexton wrote:

You've got to see knowledge as a giant puzzle with all the pieces missing, we've found a lot of them and every day we find more, but that little God section of the puzzle, well noone will ever find that piece so it would be stupid to commit to what shape you think it is by carving your own piece and putting it down,

yet theists seem to always be carving their own pieces to fit the holes rather than searching for pieces.

I find this statement to be exactly what I was stating earlier. We actually agree on this, with the exception of the last statement.

"theists seem to always be carving their own pieces to fit the holes"

In this discusion the hole has been shaped by the atheist question, not the theist answer. In order for there to be any God... God must fill this puzzle hole.

Can you not see how your logic follows the illogic of the theist?? Or is it your illogic and theist logic??

"God is bound by his nature..."

Most forms of Christianity I've experienced state that humans should aspire to be as much like God as we can. To do that, they believe God gave rules on how to conduct our lives. If mankind is to be like God, doesn't it make sense that he would follow the rules he wants us to? Or should we have the nature of the God you describe - "He doesn't follow the rules. Why should I?"

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Mjolnin
Theist
Posts: 143
Joined: 2007-04-20
User is offlineOffline
 jcgadfly wrote:1.

jcgadfly wrote:

1. "God is bound by his nature..."

Yes. It is not a nature to do the ridicules.

jcgadfly wrote:

Most forms of Christianity I've experienced state that humans should aspire to be as much like God as we can. To do that, they believe God gave rules on how to conduct our lives. If mankind is to be like God, doesn't it make sense that he would follow the rules he wants us to? Or should we have the nature of the God you describe 

 

You are rightwe should all aspire to be as much like god as we can be. We should create our own universe and decide what the rules are and sit back and listen to our creations rationalize our existance.

I am not the smartest but I believe we are to aspire to follow Christ's life. That in and of itself has the ability to spin in any direction.

jcgadfly wrote:
 

 "He doesn't follow the rules. Why should I?"

Because we do not have the ability to create the rules. I am not 100% dominant anywhere, home, work, playing sports or sitting by myself and watching TV. There will always be rules that we are stuck with.

Why not ask - Why doesn't my boss follow the same rules I do... Or why doesn't things go my way...


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Mjolnin wrote: jcgadfly

Mjolnin wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

1. "God is bound by his nature..."

Yes. It is not a nature to do the ridicules.

jcgadfly wrote:

Most forms of Christianity I've experienced state that humans should aspire to be as much like God as we can. To do that, they believe God gave rules on how to conduct our lives. If mankind is to be like God, doesn't it make sense that he would follow the rules he wants us to? Or should we have the nature of the God you describe

You are rightwe should all aspire to be as much like god as we can be. We should create our own universe and decide what the rules are and sit back and listen to our creations rationalize our existance.

I am not the smartest but I believe we are to aspire to follow Christ's life. That in and of itself has the ability to spin in any direction.

jcgadfly wrote:

"He doesn't follow the rules. Why should I?"

Because we do not have the ability to create the rules. I am not 100% dominant anywhere, home, work, playing sports or sitting by myself and watching TV. There will always be rules that we are stuck with.

Why not ask - Why doesn't my boss follow the same rules I do... Or why doesn't things go my way...

You do realize that makes God a petulant, capricious bastard, don't you?

God can do what he wants because if there's something he wants to do that is against his nature, he simply changes the rules.

If we don't know the rules (because your God keeps changing them), why play the game? 

 

 

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Chretien
Theist
Chretien's picture
Posts: 6
Joined: 2007-06-25
User is offlineOffline
 I don't have a college

 I don't have a college degree, nor do I need one to answer the ten questions.

 

1. AMPUTEES

 

Your question is based on the assumption that no amputees have ever been healed. I would like to know where you derived this assumption? Have you personally spoken to every amputee that has ever lived? I see your statement as a huge generalization. Second, I would also assert that God heals/rewards people according to their faith. We find this in the New Testament where Jesus chose not to do miracles in places where their faith was week, such as Capernaum. Most people today do not have the kind of faith and commitment to God that is required for that kind of miracle.

 

2. WHY STARVING PEOPLE

 

Because we live in a fallen/cursed world. God will and does see to it that justice prevails, but not necessarily in this world.

 

3. DEATH OF INNOCENT PEOPLE IN THE OLD TESTAMENT

 

First, your question is based on the assumption that they were innocent. My question to you is: how do you know they were innocent? Perhaps God knew something about them that you don't? Ever think of that? God is actually merciful by not damning us all to hell right now. He is Holy and cannot tolerate sin.

 

4. BIBLE-SCIENTIFIC NONSENSE

 

You assumed without any evidence or basis that the events in the Bible never occured. That was your premise, and it is not warranted. In reference to the 6 days of creation, there are two schools of thought among Christian theists. 1. God created the world in 6 literal days. Now, do you have proof God could not do this, or are you only assuming He can't? 2. Others hold to the view that the days are symbolic of eras. It would seem that the first four days are longer periods of time, and the last three days were 24 hour periods.

 

5. SLAVERY

 

You have to understand that if God does not exist, there can be no objective moral values. Therefore, since you are an atheist, your appealing to the principle of objective morals (absolute right and wrong) is a violation of your own worldview.

 

6. BAD THINGS HAPPEN TO GOOD PEOPLE

 

Again, you are assuming to know who is or is not good. God does not see as men see. He has absolute intelligence and wisdom and just might happen to know more about people than you do. Second see my comment on 6. SLAVERY. Third, this world is fallen. God deals with each and every person according to their own spiritual condition. A condition YOU know nothing of. He does what is best for everyone. Suffering is actually a good thing for the soul. That' why bad things happen to good people. For bad people who never suffer, it simply means God has withdrawn His grace from them. They have no chance of salvation so He's given them up.

 

7. JESUS MIRACLES LEFT NO EVIDENCE

 

Why should he? What would you consider evidence? I would submit that the existance of all the saints he left refutes that. The life changing power of Jesus' teachings has produced countless thousands of saints.  Also, the Tomb of the Holy Sepulcher where Jesus was burried produces the miracle of the Holy Fire every Easter without fail.

 

8. JESUS NEVER APPEARS TO ME

 

Again, have you spoken to every person within the last 2,000 years? Or are you just assuming he hasn't?  Christ appeared to many saints. He even appeared to me when I was 16. I heard his voice clearly speaking to me telepathically as I awoke from sleep. He was there and I could not move. He told me some things about my future. His voice was more real and wonderful then anything you could imagine. One thing he told me was that Christianity is true and that he is alive. And I Don't have a history of hallucinations.

 

9. EATING HIS BODY AND BLOOD

 

Well, the history of the saints has shown that the eucharist sanctifies souls. Your arguments are not logical or rational. They are simply personal emotional arguments.

 

10. CHRISTIAN DIVORCE

 

This is true in modern times, and the Bible predicted it. I would submit that the majority of today's American Christian's are largely phonies.

 

 

 

“It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and Bible.” -- George Washington


Mjolnin
Theist
Posts: 143
Joined: 2007-04-20
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote: You do

jcgadfly wrote:

You do realize that makes God a petulant, capricious bastard, don't you?

God can do what he wants because if there's something he wants to do that is against his nature, he simply changes the rules.

If we don't know the rules (because your God keeps changing them), why play the game? 

I don't see it quite the same way. (bet that came as a surprise)

I realize that I can not predict the actions of a God. I leave that up to others but don't listen to them when they tell me the future.

I realize when I don't get what I want I don't blame a God. I often want what is not good or healthy. If I recieved everthing I wanted I would be a safe person to be around, I don't use common sense during playtime.

as far as playing the game... we are all in it whether God exists or not.

And to expect the redicules from a God is still redicules.


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Mjolnin wrote: jcgadfly

Mjolnin wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

You do realize that makes God a petulant, capricious bastard, don't you?

God can do what he wants because if there's something he wants to do that is against his nature, he simply changes the rules.

If we don't know the rules (because your God keeps changing them), why play the game?

I don't see it quite the same way. (bet that came as a surprise)

I realize that I can not predict the actions of a God. I leave that up to others but don't listen to them when they tell me the future.

I realize when I don't get what I want I don't blame a God. I often want what is not good or healthy. If I recieved everthing I wanted I would be a safe person to be around, I don't use common sense during playtime.

as far as playing the game... we are all in it whether God exists or not.

And to expect the redicules from a God is still redicules.

Basically, you just said that to expect anything from your God is ridiculous. Not sure that's a selling point for your god.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say you don't believe in the god of christianity. Christians claim that their God has promised certain things to them in the Bible (forgiveness of sins, a glorious afterlife, etc.) so they have an expectation of those things.  

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Mjolnin
Theist
Posts: 143
Joined: 2007-04-20
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly

jcgadfly wrote:
 

Basically, you just said that to expect anything from your God is ridiculous. Not sure that's a selling point for your god.

Not really expecting anything, just ecpecting something rediculous to happen because you asked for it. I have seen people requesting prayers over a lottery ticket...ect. Shit like that is rediculous. (thanks for not mentioning my spelling)

jcgadfly wrote:

I'm going to go out on a limb and say you don't believe in the god of christianity. Christians claim that their God has promised certain things to them in the Bible (forgiveness of sins, a glorious afterlife, etc.) so they have an expectation of those things.  

Actually I am Christian just not what you would call mainstream. I do believe in those promises of forgiveness and afterlife I just don't expect my life to be perfect and completely peaceful. I don't expect to become rich if I tithe to a church or recieve special gifts from God because I prayed for them. I do believe that my life is not mine to own but mine to give and my wants are secondary to the needs of everybody else. Well...that is what I believe but unfortunately I don't follow perfectly, the forgiveness part comes in real handy there.

I do know some of the best things in my life came out of what I thought were bad things.


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Mjolnin wrote: jcgadfly

Mjolnin wrote:
jcgadfly wrote:

Basically, you just said that to expect anything from your God is ridiculous. Not sure that's a selling point for your god.

Not really expecting anything, just ecpecting something rediculous to happen because you asked for it. I have seen people requesting prayers over a lottery ticket...ect. Shit like that is rediculous. (thanks for not mentioning my spelling)

jcgadfly wrote:

I'm going to go out on a limb and say you don't believe in the god of christianity. Christians claim that their God has promised certain things to them in the Bible (forgiveness of sins, a glorious afterlife, etc.) so they have an expectation of those things.

Actually I am Christian just not what you would call mainstream. I do believe in those promises of forgiveness and afterlife I just don't expect my life to be perfect and completely peaceful. I don't expect to become rich if I tithe to a church or recieve special gifts from God because I prayed for them. I do believe that my life is not mine to own but mine to give and my wants are secondary to the needs of everybody else. Well...that is what I believe but unfortunately I don't follow perfectly, the forgiveness part comes in real handy there.

I do know some of the best things in my life came out of what I thought were bad things.

Did those best things come:

1) When you prayed to your god

or

2) When you prayed to your god and then did something about it yourself? 

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Mjolnin
Theist
Posts: 143
Joined: 2007-04-20
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote: Did those

jcgadfly wrote:

Did those best things come:

1) When you prayed to your god

or

2) When you prayed to your god and then did something about it yourself? 

There was a preacher in the news a few years back who let his oldest child starve to death while waiting on God to provide. The preacher had lost his job and was sitting at home praying and doing nothing. That is one case of rediculous .

Prayer and action is a daily occurence. If you pray and sit on your ass I doubt anything will happen. "Those who don't work, don't eat". I accept help and do not expect charity. I look for the ordinary during extrodinary times, not thunder bolts and lightning. Could it be just me...nah, I'm not that good, niether probability or statistics were on my side.  To go any farther would be an appeal to emotion and I am not that sweet of a guy. 

 Things go better with prayer.


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Mjolnin wrote: jcgadfly

Mjolnin wrote:
jcgadfly wrote:

Did those best things come:

1) When you prayed to your god

or

2) When you prayed to your god and then did something about it yourself?

There was a preacher in the news a few years back who let his oldest child starve to death while waiting on God to provide. The preacher had lost his job and was sitting at home praying and doing nothing. That is one case of rediculous .

Prayer and action is a daily occurence. If you pray and sit on your ass I doubt anything will happen. "Those who don't work, don't eat". I accept help and do not expect charity. I look for the ordinary during extrodinary times, not thunder bolts and lightning. Could it be just me...nah, I'm not that good, niether probability or statistics were on my side. To go any farther would be an appeal to emotion and I am not that sweet of a guy.

Things go better with prayer.

Can you attribute it to God if you did it yourself or sought help on your own?

It sounds like so many testimonies I've heard. "I had a cancerous tumor. I prayed to God and went to the doctor and had surgery to remove it. God healed me." 

That's giving God credit he doesn't necessarily deserve. 

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin


Mjolnin
Theist
Posts: 143
Joined: 2007-04-20
User is offlineOffline
jcgadfly wrote: Can you

jcgadfly wrote:

Can you attribute it to God if you did it yourself or sought help on your own?

It sounds like so many testimonies I've heard. "I had a cancerous tumor. I prayed to God and went to the doctor and had surgery to remove it. God healed me." 

That's giving God credit he doesn't necessarily deserve. 

This is pushing to the rediculous. So, If there were a God I should be able to sit on my ass and have everything handed to me.

I don't do testimonies.


jcgadfly
SuperfanBronze Member
Posts: 6789
Joined: 2006-07-18
User is offlineOffline
Mjolnin wrote: jcgadfly

Mjolnin wrote:

jcgadfly wrote:

Can you attribute it to God if you did it yourself or sought help on your own?

It sounds like so many testimonies I've heard. "I had a cancerous tumor. I prayed to God and went to the doctor and had surgery to remove it. God healed me."

That's giving God credit he doesn't necessarily deserve.

This is pushing to the rediculous. So, If there were a God I should be able to sit on my ass and have everything handed to me.

I don't do testimonies.

No, I'm just saying if you went through the job interview and got the job, you shouldn't give God credit for what you did on your own merits. 

Why give God credit for what you got by busting your ass? 

"I do this real moron thing, and it's called thinking. And apparently I'm not a very good American because I like to form my own opinions."
— George Carlin