Is debate pointless?
Offline I've posted this question in other place online but never really got a response.
Over the past few years I've noticed that facts and reality are increasingly meaning less to people. (Well, some people). I felt like no matter how many times I show them the facts it doesn't matter. They hold onto their beliefs political/religious/ whatever, no matter what the evidence may say. Well the other day I had my suspicions confirmed when I heard NPR's Talk of the Nation. They did a story on research being done at the University of Michigan on something called the "Backfire effect". Brendan Nyhan and Jason Reifler have found that when someone holds a belief and is then presented with facts that contradict that belief, they are likely to hold onto that belief all the more strongly. In effect, presenting a misinformed person with the correct information only strengthens their belief in the misinformation. The Washington Post did a story on this a while back too.
So my question is this: Is there just no point in having a discussion with these people? If reality only makes them hold onto their false beliefs all the more strongly, what's the point? It's a conversation ender. "Hi, do you know that evolution is a lie?" "It's not." "Yes it is!" "Wait a second, before I take the time to talk to you about this, would you, if presented with facts that contradict your views, change your mind?" "Nope, not in the slightest. It would just confirm my faith." "Uh...have a nice day." (And keep in mind, this is not just fundies, the research was done on average people on political issues) If we can't even have a discussion about things where the facts and reality matter, how can we build a stable society? Doesn't everything just come down to either who can get the most people to the polls or who has the most guns?
- Login to post comments
Just when eyes was dang near 'bout to take y"all serious lee, y'all jump heeyup and dun name off my most favorite church of all dang time;
http://www.landoverbaptist.org/2010/july/breakout.html
You do realize Landover is a total spoof/satire "since 1620" give or take a few days. It's a favorite source for all the atheists on site here. Your red neck ways were just too good to be true.
"Very funny Scotty; now beam down our clothes."
VEGETARIAN: Ancient Hindu word for "lousy hunter"
If man was formed from dirt, why is there still dirt?
I was referring speciffically to "loss of brain mass" dementia, which is an affliction of age...
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
The Truest Christian these atheists will ever meet. I worship the only Lord at the Church with the Truest Christians: Landover Baptist.
For a fact it has been years since I took the time to read the bible but I seem to recall a damnation pronunced upon any who would add to the words of the bible. Yet here you yammer on about pitchforks and all kinds of crap not found in the bible. Don't give me that Ghenna crap either. You know all the crap your now damned soul is adding.
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.
www.ussliberty.org
www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html
www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.
www.ussliberty.org
www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html
www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml
Sorry to break in but you are feeding a troll here! This corner is just for atheists, I suppose... I'm still convinced he is mocking you. I've never met someone living in the dark ages still like him...
I will not post here anymore... since I maybe be considered a theist and want to respect your rules...
mocker or no mocker you will go nowhere with him...
BTW - Europe is not a country!!
Matthew 5:10 (King James Version)
10Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.
The Truest Christian these atheists will ever meet. I worship the only Lord at the Church with the Truest Christians: Landover Baptist.
The Truest Christian these atheists will ever meet. I worship the only Lord at the Church with the Truest Christians: Landover Baptist.
Man! God knows I REALLY do love you! I just HATE your ignorance...
I thought you weren't going to post here any more, androgenous hippy.
The Truest Christian these atheists will ever meet. I worship the only Lord at the Church with the Truest Christians: Landover Baptist.
Wow! Another organization. How is it that Jesus rejected the religious organizations of his day and took the "dregs" of society (tax-collectors, prostitutes, etc) as his followers? You think he would be different today? I would bet he would condemn them all, especially one that judges men by the color of their skin. In your world God never stops holding a grudge. Everyone is pre-judged. What was the point of creating a whole race of men to only condemn just because their great-great-great-etc-granddad saw his dad nude? Sick & twisted, this god of yours.
It really is quite the stretch saying Ham is the father of black people. Another crack in the strict interpretation of KJV1611.
Religion Kills !!!
Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.
http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/
The Truest Christian these atheists will ever meet. I worship the only Lord at the Church with the Truest Christians: Landover Baptist.
After reading the posts and lack of response to you question, do you have your answer?
It's not debate, logic, evidence or proof. It's just trying to rationalize one's feelings.
Taxation is the price we pay for failing to build a civilized society. The higher the tax level, the greater the failure. A centrally planned totalitarian state represents a complete defeat for the civilized world, while a totally voluntary society represents its ultimate success. --Mark Skousen
It would help if I knew what a POE is...
Huh, as Robo-atheist would say.
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
In which he gets to spend an eternity next to me...
Nony, you never cease to impress.
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
the liberal lies!
Almost as bad as the theistard lies... but not nearly as much!
Kapkao -atheist, right-wing, AND PROUD OF IT!
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
my mouse is stupid.
Hi all,
I came across this website as I was trying to gather opinion about how people view on this theist/atheist topic. First off, I'd like to declare that I'm new to this forum, and personally I do believe in intelligent design, but I just wanted to have some friendly conversation to gather some opinions because I myself wanted to figure a few things out.
I think the original poster of this thread asked a very good question so I signed up and wanted to join the conversation. I do feel that it is quite legitimate to ask the question whether debate has any point. I do ask myself that question some times too, not only on religion, but on almost everything in life. I really don't know the answer, and I wanted to explore it more here.
So, I wanted to ask the people here (I don't really wanted to divide or label people atheists and theists because we're all human) about some of the things I heard, and wanted to see how you think.
I heard about this: this universe contain so many things we don't know yet; the knowledge this universe contain is so vast; we human on the other hand knows so little, can we really be sure that there is no God? I mean, if I believe there is no God, is there a probability that God exist, but is outside of my knowledge?
What would you think about this??
We're not. It is more or less unlikely depending on what God we're discussing. The only issues we can probably claim certainly on is the statement cogito ergo sum and definitively true things like tautologies and mathematics.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
Welcome
It is a great website with some brilliant people and some interesting characters. We don't know everything. The flaws in perfect books like the Bible, Koran and Book of Mormon teach me those gods do not exist. Perhaps there is a god but it is bound to be more like Einstein and Spinoza's god. It is not deeply involved in human life's whispering things to primitive desert people or whacked out Christian fundamentalist or Islamic suicide bombers. Why would god create so much variety and expect everyone to be the same? Those who experience god and those who experience UFOs are similar. The few, the odd with esoteric knowledge only granted to them. The history of religion is quite instructive of how non-divine it is. Watching fundies each telling the other only they are right is instructive. The scientific method blows holes the size of trucks through religion.
As I said in a prior post I believe in debate. I was a former minister and those who debated me gave me pause, the more patient the better. I learned Christianity wasn't logically sound. You have to believe it without evidence or logic. You wind up believing just about anything despite any evidence to the contrary. Human are not entirely rational.
Religion Kills !!!
Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.
http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/
Thanks for the responses.
I appreciate your answers, but I have to say that I don't quite understand fully what that all mean, because the answers are quite loaded with lots of information.
The question I'm trying to explore is, whether God exist or not.
Could you explain: "the statement cogito ergo sum" and "tautologies"? I tried to google the terms, but I still don't quite understand...
Also, Ex-minister, I would also understand more on what you mean as I couldn't unpack what you're trying to say.
1. How does the Bible, Koran and Book of Mormon teach you that those gods do not exist?
2. You said perhaps there is a god who is "bound to be more like Einstein and Spinoza's god". I did a bit of research on that, it seems that they believe there's impersonal God. So you mean perhaps there's impersonal Gods??
3. Does that mean, in conclusion, you mean there is no God, but there can be impersonal God??
It should be noted that the KJV of the Bible is not the earliest known Biblical text, depending upon the book, it would have been in either: a. Hebrew, b. Aramaic, or c. Greek. I point this out because as we can see when translating text some of the meaning can be lost even among languages which have a common root such as French and Spanish, much less so when translating from a language which has no common root to English such as the three listed above. One instance of this would be that the term "to wash one's feet" in English is often a euphemism for "having sex with" in Hebrew. Even in the Bible itself, KJV included, there is enormous amount of room for debate.
Anyway back to on topic as to if it is pointless to debate when the facts support the other person's belief. I would say yes it is worth it, even if the other person finds the facts to support his or her belief because of the point of debate. It is not to prove who is right or wrong but rather to engage each other in thought. While I am not an atheist, an agnostic, nor a theist, I find the problems with the idea that these three groups could not possibly learn from each other. It has been my experience that true theists have had some experience with something which lacks a definition, that atheists have a firm understanding of the problems of the human conditions, while agnostics are able to understand that doubt is one of the most important things. It is important that each of these groups have important lessons to learn from each other which can only be done through open dialogue and debate.
"Lycurgus, Numa, Moses, Jesus Christ, Mohammed, all these great rogues, all these great thought-tyrants, knew how to associate the divinities they fabricated with their own boundless ambition."
-Marquis de Sade
Welcome to the forum, roadie. If you like, you may start a new thread for this topic, and we'll meet you there.
http://www.rationalresponders.com/node/add
Oooohhh, that's exciting.
Sure.
I stated that there are some issues that I think I can be certain about. The first example I used was the statement, cogito ergo sum. This is roughly translated as "I think, therefore I am." It is a statement made by the philosopher Rene Descartes; it just means, I know I'm thinking, therefore, I must exist. I think we can be certain about that statement because if you didn't exist, then you couldn't think, and there is no doubt that I am thinking.
I also mentioned tautologies. I think of them as statements that cannot be false because they are definitively true. More formally, you could say that they are logical statements in which the conclusion is true regardless of what values you assign to the components or premises. For example, 'either I am wearing socks or I am not wearing socks.' That statement is a tautology and is true, for I must be wearing socks or not wearing socks. Another example, 'bachelors are not married.' Bachelors, by definition, are not married. Therefore, that statement cannot be false.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
I can give you my view - which is lifted from Epicurious - an ancient Greek philosopher. This not a direct quote, but you can look it up on Wikipedia if you want.
There is no evidence that god/s/dess interact with our world or the people in the world. Therefore, we might as well act as if s/he/it/they do not exist.
There are no thunderstorms predicted for my area today, tomorrow, all next week. Therefore, I can go stand outside today, declare "THERE ARE NO GOD/S/DESS" and be reasonably certain I will not be hit by lightning. I wouldn't be stupid enough to try this if thunderstorms were predicted. I'm willing to bet god/s/dess doesn't exist or if there is a remote possibility that s/he/it/they do exist, they don't give a rip about me. There is therefore no reason to waste time in rituals to said non-existing/uncaring entities.
-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken
"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.
Thanks for the responses.
Higgins, I totally agree with you that "It is not to prove who is right or wrong but rather to engage each other in thought." In instances like that, it is worthwhile to have a discussion or even a debate. So, I think, it's not about what topic the debate is, but how you engage it. Debate is a tool, you can use it to crush other people, or you can use it to learn something about the other person, or to learn something about the topic. So I hope, the debate in this forum, or at least in this thread, is genuine and helpful.
I'd like to also thank Butterbattle for his explanation. It seems that we agree on the fact that there're a few things we can be sure, some can't. I agree that we can be sure we exist, at least I exist (I don't know if I'm talking to a super computer with AI and can answer my questions.. joking), and we can be sure some logical statements are true.
So, to use your example "Either I am wearing socks or I am not wearing socks." Can we say that "Either there is God, or there is no God" is a true statement? If so, we have to choose logically: is there God, or is there no God?
Some of you have stated that we can't be sure there is no God, and you can't be sure there is God either. So, both sides are possible. In other words, it is possible that there is God, and it is possible that there is no God.
Now, it seems that, because we can’t be sure, choosing either side requires some sort of "betting" (as cj noted). In other words, choose either side would require some sort of "believe" or "faith". Would you agree to that?
Are you willing to say "I have faith the sun will rise in the east tomorrow"? Is that fact or faith? Re or Apollo? God/s/dess not responding to our prayers and entreaties and sacrifices is a fact. Not faith, not belief. Nothing happens, has ever happened, will ever happen when you pray. Not unless you get off your ass and make it happen - by yourself. No supernatural/spiritual assistance required.
Ah, one caveat. If someone has a heart attack and they know people are praying for them, it takes them longer to recover. If they don't know they are being prayed for, they recover in the same amount of time as the unprayed for group. That is a fact we do know.
-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken
"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.
Yes, I agree, provided that God is precisely defined.
Actually, maybe a slight correction to what I said earlier. In most cases, we can't be certain either way, but there are some definitions that can provide certainty. For example, if I define God as a married bachelor, then we can be certain that God does not exist.
Yes.
Our revels now are ended. These our actors, | As I foretold you, were all spirits, and | Are melted into air, into thin air; | And, like the baseless fabric of this vision, | The cloud-capped towers, the gorgeous palaces, | The solemn temples, the great globe itself, - Yea, all which it inherit, shall dissolve, | And, like this insubstantial pageant faded, | Leave not a rack behind. We are such stuff | As dreams are made on, and our little life | Is rounded with a sleep. - Shakespeare
it is a long answer, but the books are quite flawed and you can see their source is from pagan polytheistic religions. Horus the Egyptian God is an example. The Genesis myths come from Sumerian myths. Samson's myth and Hercules.
Believers says these are perfect books. Reading them you see that is not true. There are contradictions and bizarre things that simply don't fit the world we know. Reading the books you can ask yourself, have I ever seen anything like that?
A great website that reveals these perfect book's flaws is http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/
It has the text with comments.
Religion is man made. Science keeps converting the supernatural into natural explanations. It never happens the other way around. If humans don't destroy themselves we will keep pushing back the supernatural. I cannot say for sure that some form of god will not be found, but it sure seems unlikely.
Religion Kills !!!
Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.
http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/
Thank you for all your replies, and I think I'm learning something new every time somebody replies. (My apologies, I'm going out of town for the weekend, so my responses may be brief or not very well worded, but I hope you understand what I mean.)
First, I think Butterbattle brought up a very good point, in fact, I think he hit the head of the nail. I didn't he made a mistake, so he didn't have to make correction. The example of "either I am wearing socks or I am not wearing socks." are valid, and true. His next statement "if I define God as a married bachelor, then we can be certain that God does not exist." This is valid too, and I think it's true too. I'm no expert in logic, but I think there are some basic logic principle are understood by most people. His first statement can be boiled down to "Either A or not A". I think this is definitely a true statement, and no matter what you substitute in A, it'd still be a true statement. "Either I'm a human or I'm not a human" "Either I exist or I don't exist". "Either this is an orange or this is not an orange". So, I don't think you need to precisely defined "God" to make that statement true. So I think
"Either there is God, or there is no God"
is a valid and true statement.
Now, for the second part, "if I define God as a married bachelor, then we can be certain that God does not exist." I think this is a very interesting statement because this is a major breakthrough in my understanding toward whether God exist. I don't know how to break down this statement, but let's use an example.
"If I define Barack Obama as a teenage girl, then we can be certain that Barack Obama does not exist."
I think the logic is correct, but just the definition is incorrect. (I don't think one can make somebody disappear simply by defining that person to be something he is not.) So, in this case, what happened is that the “Barack Obama” as I defined doesn’t exist. Yes, a teenage girl who’s called Barack Obama certainly doesn’t exist; But a Barack Obama who’s the president of America exist!! How we define that Obama doesn’t make a difference whether that person exist. Whether Obama exist is a truth that we need to find out.
I suspect that when we claim that God doesn’t exist, we sometimes used the same logic. Let’s try again:
“If I define God as a being that ‘answers our every call as we like, doesn’t allow any evil to exist, nor can hunger exist’, then we can be certain that God does not exist”.
You can change the words in the quote to anything else for your own definition.
Several of the replies stated that God is “uncaring” “unresponsive”, so we define that God doesn’t exist. Let’s think about that for a moment, is that your reason too?
CJ, you said “There is no evidence that god/s/dess interact with our world or the people in the world. Therefore, we might as well act as if s/he/it/they do not exist.” “Nothing happens, has ever happened, will ever happen when you pray.” I think it’s a legitimate statement, but is that your own experience? Or have you surveyed the entire population in the world?
Now, when we come to the nitty gritty stuff of proofing or disproving the Bible, I think it can be a lengthy discussion because there’s both side of the stories. A simple google search gave me these results:
http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/b_proof.shtml
http://agards-bible-timeline.com/q9_historical_proof_bible.html
http://www.christcenteredmall.com/discoveries/index.htm
http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Scientific-Proof-of-Bible.php
on and on… but I don’t care, because I don’t think it matter anyway. Can a book disprove the existence of God? My question is, I don’t quite understand how you arrived the conclusion that God doesn’t exist when you think you can find flaws in some books? Can you elaborate a little bit on that?
How does pointing out your sins and lies constitute persecution.
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.
www.ussliberty.org
www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html
www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml
And you with me as you are damned by your own words.
How does this constitute the persecution you so devoutly desire?
Jews stole the land. The owners want it back. That is all anyone needs to know about Israel. That is all there is to know about Israel.
www.ussliberty.org
www.giwersworld.org/made-in-alexandria/index.html
www.giwersworld.org/00_files/zion-hit-points.phtml
Essentially a law that states religion is so silly even a contrived silly religion would be no sillier.
You know. Every male scientologist gets their own planet out there in the universe that they can personally populate by having endless sex with hot women!
Sound like any Islam you know?
"Experiments are the only means of knowledge at our disposal. The rest is poetry, imagination." Max Planck
Jesus says if you ask for ANYTHING in his name you will receive it. He also says if you have the faith of a tiny mustard seed you can say to this mountain throw yourself into the ocean and it will happen.
So give it a shot for yourself and see. You could start a log of prayers and if they are answered. There are lots of conditions for prayers and if you are interested I can go over that. It is heavily geared toward giving God lots of loopholes, so it is a wash and proves nothing.
George Carlin does a hilarious stand up act talking about God & prayer. He said he now prays to Joe Pesci because he seems like a guy who can get things down. In conclusion he says his prayers are answered about 50/50 with Joe. Same with God and a rabbits foot.
Here is his video on youtube. It was the inspiration for the name of my blog and actually helped break the spell of woo-woo.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeSSwKffj9o
Some people pray for a parking spot and wow there it is. Seems kinda lame. Others pay for world peace. Good luck with that. However, some of these believers are like gamblers they only tell you about the wins and never the loses.
The other subject. How can a flawed book disprove God exists? Believers will tell you their books are perfect. They are supposedly divinely written and/or inspired. So, they say their God is perfect and therefore he would write a perfect book. He is all-powerful after all. So, when you see clear flaws in these books it shows that their perfect God does not exist just like the logic you wrote about. Their books show they are only human, creative, talented at times, but only human. The God of the Bible shows the full range human emotions and limitations. He cannot create a perfect world. He gets angry at his creation and destroys it, saving a few and then plans to destroy it yet again. He is jealous, petty, angry and yet repentant and loving. He is on the heavy side of being dysfunctional but really within the norm of human possibilities. He is imparted with superpowers. Who among us doesn't want to have that? We write comics and movies with people having those things. We want them. So very human. I say pass on the books I have read and bring on the next group of people who KNOW they have a perfect, all-knowing, all seeing God.
Here is an entertaining video on the Bibles contradictions
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RB3g6mXLEKk
Religion Kills !!!
Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.
http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/
Hi,
Thanks for your reply. Again, appreciated your sharing, Mr. ex-minister. I was actually hoping you could lay out the structure of your logic, such as transition from your premises to your conclusion, with the logical connections, etc. However, you’ve just rephrased your original points with some extra examples. It’s hard to respond to a blob of ideas lumped together as an argument, but I’ll try to understand what you’re try to say and respond.
It seem to me that what you’re trying to say essentially is this: “God doesn’t answer my prayer, therefore God doesn’t exist.” Right? I suppose you don’t mean to say “God doesn’t answer any prayer at all, therefore God doesn’t exist”, because I suppose you didn’t survey the entire population of the world. “God doesn’t answer my prayer, therefore God doesn’t exist.” This logic is thin, and you even used a stand up comedian as your support; and the stand-up was just about cursing and mocking. That’s a little low, my friend. Anyway, I thought we’ve dealt with this logic already. God doesn’t answer your prayer doesn’t mean God doesn’t exist.
Your second point is that you think there’s flaw in the “book”. From your description, it seems you’re referring to the Bible, not the book of mormon, and Koran. So, let’s think about it. You said there were “clear flaws”, but like what? Is it like your first two sentences: “Jesus says if you ask for ANYTHING in his name you will receive it. He also says if you have the faith of a tiny mustard seed you can say to this mountain throw yourself into the ocean and it will happen.”? I found this scripture in a bible website: “12I tell you the truth, anyone who has faith in me will do what I have been doing. He will do even greater things than these, because I am going to the Father. 13And I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Son may bring glory to the Father. 14You may ask me for anything in my name, and I will do it.” It seems that you’ve quoted a line out of context and twisted some words, and therefore it didn’t make sense. From reading the scripture, I didn’t get an impression that Jesus promised to give you anything you ask. Your logic is, unfortunately, flawed. Not the Bible.
Let’s examine your logic again from a different angle, if I pray “God, I’m going to rob a bank tomorrow, please don’t let me get caught.” Then it would be impossible to have a solution. Because by your definition, if God doesn’t answer my prayer, He doesn’t exist; if God answer my prayer, He is evil. This is a self-contradicting statement by itself, very much like the logic that concluded Obama didn’t exist. You can’t use a self-contradicting statement to disprove something. It’s like a wife saying this to her husband “If you love me, you would let me have an affair!” It doesn’t make sense because if I love my wife, I wouldn’t let her have an affair!! It is self-contradicting. So, by definition and by logic, “prayer” must follow some guidelines in order for God to say yes to you; it’s not loophole, it’s simple logic.
On your subsequent statements, “Believers will tell you their books are perfect …. people who KNOW they have a perfect, all-knowing, all seeing God.” They’re all personal opinions without any logical support. So I am unable to respond to those; you then provided another mocking video, which, again, I trust that you didn’t mean to use that to prove anything, right?
Looking at a few threads in this forum, I saw a lot of hostility here toward Christianity. To me, atheism is a life style, a philosophy of life, but overwhelmingly it seems that atheism is about attacking Christianity. People here call names, label Christians, mock Christianity, and even hate, almost to a degree of racism. I don’t understand why. Also, there seem to be a view here that atheism is pure reason and facts, and Christianity is pure irrationality and faith. No it is not. It requires faith to believe there is no God, and Christianity is rational. There isn’t sufficient “facts”, “reasons”, and “logics” to support atheism. To me, the facts, reasons, and logics, from Christianity is much more compelling.
In Christian communities I see a lot of things that contrast to the hate I see here. People have great and genuine friendships, unconditional love, teaching about how to be a better citizen, etc. Often I see when one person is in need, a group of people offer help and support. I don’t see how that is so undesirable?! About prayer, God answered my prayer. I remember a number of years back, I was single for a while, and one morning I said a prayer to God, and asked God to lead me to my life-long partner. In a few hours as I went out to a restaurant I ran into a long-lost friend, and she is now my wife. I started my career as a tele-marketer, I asked God to lead me into a career I liked. I now works as a mechanical engineer in one of the top consulting firms in my area. A few months ago we wanted to move to a new house and prayed God to lead our way; we bought a house and needed to sell our current house quick. We put our house on the market and was sold within 2 days with a good price. There are similar houses in the same complex that have been on the market for months, and kept reducing price, but still not sold. Did I hear voiced in my head? No. Do I think God answered my prayer? Yes. Can I prove to you that it was God? No. Why do I still believe? Because reasons, facts, logics, personal experience, all points to the fact that God exists; because there are so many times that God answered my prayer.
After our discussion/debate, maybe some of you are driven more into atheism, maybe some of you are more cleared about what you believe. To make this debate not pointless, I hope those who are open-minded here would go explore Christianity and compare for yourself. It is easy to be cynical, but I hope when it comes to question about life, you would be serious and honest to yourself. A great place to explore is Alpha course, and that’s where I learnt a lot about Christianity. Their motto is “you can ask anything”. Learn about Christianity, meet some real Christians, and make an informed decision.
It’s a pleasure discussing with you guys. Hope you have a great future.
I changed my mind. Honest debate is pointless over the internet. On the other hand, dishonest debate where some if not all participants utilize straw man armies, pigeon holes, cheap shots, anecdotal crap, stat opinions as fact, cherry-pick data to support their arguments, and practice a few double-standards of their own, is quite frequent and is sometimes the inevitable outcome of what may start out as an insightful commentary on a topic of interest.
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
EEEEEECCCCKKKKKk...... bug spray, bug spray
-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken
"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
I don't know what came over me.
-- I feel so much better since I stopped trying to believe.
"We are entitled to our own opinions. We're not entitled to our own facts"- Al Franken
"If death isn't sweet oblivion, I will be severely disappointed" - Ruth M.
Well, between work and vacation I have been away from this site for awhile. Looks like you might be gone as well. I hadn't realized you wanted to go into great detail about proof of God. I plainly don't have the time to do that, but others here are far better at that discussion than me. If you want to start a separate thread that might get it going.
You think I know nothing of Christianity. I dedicated my heart, soul and body to it for several decades. I fought the good fight. But there were so many things that were unbelievable to me. You talk like you only see happy Christians at church. Perhaps they are your acquaintances. I went deeper than that and lived with them. Once under the surface you see lots of issues and problems. People not taking care of themselves and are tormented. I even see today with my Christian friends have major issues. One guy because of his honesty has caused a rift between him and his fellow members. The pastor has stood against him even though the pastor is the vile man (married, slept with underage girls, and misuse of church donations). The pastor and elders persuaded this guys wife to leave him. It is a mess. The bible teaches members to keep all this hush-hush (1 Corinthians 6:1-7). So the sick side isn't seen. Now are all Christians messed up. No. I have respect for a number of Christian friends. However, if you don't see that there are some messed up Christians then you are not really looking. There is great pressure to put on a happy face at church. I have seen much racial prejudice within the walls of the church. I have seen lots of harsh judgement and gossiping. When I studied church history in seminary I just wanted to puke. Very vile and reprehensible. This is only one pebble in the mix of my conversion to unbelief.
I have never been able to summarize, which I don't think you want anyway, why I don't believe. There are countless reasons. I now do have an open-mind because as a believer and minister anything that was contrary to making God look good I accounted for my evil nature. I was at fault and I would close my mind to any contrary thoughts.
Roadie writes:"It requires faith to believe there is no God, and Christianity is rational. There isn’t sufficient “facts”, “reasons”, and “logics” to support atheism"
1) God is perfect. He created a flawed world. Not rational.
2) God is love. He creates humans who born in sin, blind, ignorant of him and living a short life and if they don't obey him even though he refuses to meet with them directly he will burn them in a lake of fire forever. Cruel and unusual punishment.
3) Science has found no evidence of God. We haven't found hell below by drilling nor heaven above using telescopes and space probes.
4) While King Tut who lived 1350 before Christ we have ample evidence that Tut actually existed, for Christ we don't not have a single piece of evidence, a nail or a piece of the cross. Christians would have held tight on to those things because they would have healing powers for sure.
5) All babies are born atheist. They have to be taught about Moses, Paul and Jesus. Then they have to believe to be saved. How illogical for someone eternal salvation and a God who is supposed to be loving.
6) God only reveals himself to primitive desert religions and uneducated people. Same for UFOs. Why would I believe one over the other?
Religion Kills !!!
Numbers 31:17-18 - Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.
http://jesus-needs-money.blogspot.com/
To answer your question, i don't think its pointless with everyone. I frequently debated with atheists when i was christian. Being shown repeatedly the facts as well as having an unfortunate event happen in my life, convinced me i was wrong.
Worse things have happened and it had only strengthened my faith, so I definitely give credit to debate for me being an atheist.
I do understand the frustration though, and arguing with some (most) people is pointless.