The cancer lady. [locked]
Was it just me or was that lady in the audience who kept pushing Kirk to answer her question a complete moron? He was trying to answer her, and she kept interrupting him and accusing him of avoiding the question which he wasn't doing. What a retard. Why did God allow cancer? The answer to that question is the same answer to why God allows any and all suffering to befall us. And Kirk was trying to answer that broader question, when he kept being very rudely interrupted. God didn't create suffering. He didn't create cancer. He created people with free will, and those people's decisions have caused all the evil in the world, including cancer.
The bible says that the world itself was condemned because of man's sin.
Granted that was a Christian-biblical answer to the question, but that is what was being asked. That question was being asked assuming God was real and Christianity was real. If that is true, then the bible must be the source of the answer to that question.
One angel originally created evil. Then one man recreated it. Evil is nothing more than disobedience to God. For disobedience to God to exist there must be some created thing with the ability to choose whether or not to obey God. That is why sin did not exist prior to the creation of angels. God did not make the angel sin, nor did he make the man sin. He only told them what to do and gave them the free will to obey or not. They chose to not obey. They have suffered the consequences.
That just irked me a little. And then I think I saw somewhere on this website bragging about the fact that Kirk couldn't even answer an audience member's question. Please.....Maybe if she would've shut up long enough for him to answer he could have.
"For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." 1Cor 1:18
Musicdude wrote:What now? Um, now, back to my original point. Creation is evidence of an extremely intelligent sentient creator.
You said this isn't evidence, it's logic. Since when did logic cease being a valid source of possible evidence?
No, this is an argument from ignorance. Because you cannot understand how all of this came to be your answer becomes 'god'. That does not make the answer correct.
I have no problem saying "I don't know" as an answer. Why is this difficult to the point that some people will make up an answer?
That's what scientists do all the time. They have a certain phenomenon (in this case, the existence the universe) they wish to explain. They make a logical hypothesis. My hypothesis is that some created this vast and complex universe, because it is all far to complicated and unlikely to be attributed to chance. Now I can gather evidence for years. Then, when I get enough evidence, I can bump the status up to theory. And it can remain that way long enough that eventually people will just accept it as true, just because no one has bothered to come up with an opposing theory.
So what is wrong with proposing God as a hypothesis?
"For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." 1Cor 1:18
Musicdude wrote:My boss can be unfair at times. I still have to obey him if I want to keep my job. Proving that he isn't always fair doesn't relieve me of my responsibilities to him.
I'm not saying God isn't fair.
Then why preface it with the example you did?
Musicdude wrote:You ask a paradoxical question, that no one has the answer to except God.Circular logic. "This doesn't make any sense, so we define it by a new set of rules we don't know." Well, how is it fair that we don't know the rules? "I don't know." Can I speak to your supervisor? "He's unavailable. Get on your knees and leave a message."
Musicdude wrote:<snip> But again, that does not relieve you of your responsibility. Pointing your finger elsewhere doesn't change anything. There may be people who haven't heard the gospel and God will deal with them fairly, because He is fair. But you have heard. What you do with that knowledge is up to you now. You either believe it or you don't. You are not responsible for the people who haven't heard. You are only responsible for you. Sapient isn't responsible for you either. You are responsible for you.But I've heard people from other religions try to tell me their way is good, too - people who have beliefs similar to yours with a few minor diversions, and people who have beliefs that can't be reconciled with yours. If you press them, they'll speak similar rhetoric as to why I should listen to them.
Are they agents of the Devil, just misinformed, or do they fall into some sort of other territory? Do they go to Hell? Does it concern you that if they are right, you might go to their Hell? Does it concern you that Christianity has splintered over (somtimes) minor points since its inception over varying interpretations of various concepts? What if your view of some minor point, like the day you attend Mass, will come into play on the day of judgement? Are you willing to just as easily go to a Methodist, Lutheran, Presbyterian, etc. message board and tell them they need to change the one thing the makes up the core of their belief (that makes if different from your own) and tell them to change it or else face judgement?
Then give them all equal consideration and choose one, or choose none. It's your choice. If you want a good source of info on what I believe I can hook you up. PM me. If not, it's your choice.
"For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." 1Cor 1:18
I always enjoy being challenged. It causes me to dig deeper, and in the end I am either more certain of my beliefs, or I have to reconsider them. But I (unlike many Christians) want the truth, regardless of what that might be. I think I have found it. But I'm not above being wrong. But it's going to take some serious proof to convince me I'm wrong. Proof I have not seen here, nor expect to.
"For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." 1Cor 1:18
What would you accept as scientific proof that god doesn't exist?
You may want to get on your knees for this god of yours -- I certainly won't.
If you had accepted allah or any god first on faith, that god would have proven itself to you.
Interesting experiement: Accept the non-existence of god on faith, then see if the non-existence proves itself to you.
Then why bother talking about it?
"What the bible says" is a deplorable reason in itself, regardless of what other "reasons" you have.
Sounds a lot like Joseph Smith to me.
"Accomplish the supernatural"? Is that supposed to make sense?
Well if none of us get to see god's little magic show besides you, then none of us have to believe, do we?
There are no theists on operating tables.
Understandable. If you wish, we could discuss this in a more one-on-one fashion. feel free to contact me via email if you would rather keep it from being too over-whelming.
I used to discuss in Christian forums, and know what it is like to be in the minority in these situations. It was only through such onslaughts that I was able to hone whatever discussion skills I have. My goal here is not primarily to convince you to be an atheist, but to have you understand why I think atheism is the rational position. If you understand then disagree, fine. So far, I'm not convinced you underastand, thus your disagreement is thus far irrelevant.
[email protected]
Shaun
I'll fight for a person's right to speak so long as that person will, in return, fight to allow me to challenge their opinions and ridicule them as the content of their ideas merit.
You see, that is my concern and the concern of a lot of people here. It's one of the conclusions at which, if given enough time to sit and think about one's faith, any logical person should arrive. If I am subscribing to a faith that not only rejects the wicked, but the naive for no good reason, and my job is to sit there and say, "Such is the will of God. He is just and fair, though he is so just and fair I just can't wrap my head around his fairness and justness if pressed hard enough." is not a position in which I want to find myself.
Totally excluding the other lines of argument this thread has gone through, you would have to conclude...
And I'd be 100% correct. However...
If my reason for disbelieving in God can be traced to a desire for all of mankind to be treated with equality and fairness in the eyes of an supposedly all-just creator who has slanted reality to favor an arbitrary selection of them, that's misguided? And I came to that conclusion using a pretty lax view on the power of God, actually. Given the Christian view, it wouldn't be arbitrary, God would KNOW who was screwed. So, with this knowledge, that their is no equality, fairness, or justice as defined by us, who translated the Bible into those terms, I think taking a stand based on the presumption that if such a huge flaw exists, other do, too, and I'll remain unbeliving until a more coherent argument is made. Then, changing my mind won't be too hard a step to take, you know, in the name of following a true just and fair God whose followers took the time and effort to translate ancient texts into a format that makes logical sense.
And if a five-year old kid wanders onto the court during a pick-up basketball game, can I trample him if his feet aren't planted? I don't want to be called for charging, after all.
David Cross: So I was watching this one show where - there's a guy on stage and he pretends he has contact with the dead and people are watching.
Audience Member: Crossing Over.
David Cross: No, not Crossing Over. It was uh, church.
Saying that a building has a builder is merely using deductive logic.
Saying that the universe had a builder is also logically sound. However, where we come into the problem is the definition of this "builder".
Let me give you an example:
The tree exists therefore it must have a "builder". The builder happens to be a seed, water, and sunlite.
The universe exists therefor it must have a builder. What are the variables that make up this builder? That is something that science has put a great deal of effort into finding out. Thus far they have some pretty amazing theories based on the information that they have access too (Big Bang and Evolutionin buffs please correct me if I'm wrong).
To say that the existance of the universe proves that there must be a superwizard with a big hat and a long suple beard has no logical backing whatsoever. That is merely plugging in the word "god" where there is only "lack of information".
The point I was trying to make with all the "anecdotal evidence" as you put it, was why I strongly believe what I once took merely on faith. I didn't suggest that it would be proof to anyone other than me, in fact, I literally stated the opposite.
I don't shrug off my shortcomings. I constantly work on improving them with God's help. My voluntary scapegoat secures my eternal future, but the present is a day by day work in progress. I have sucesses and failures daily. The penalty for my sins has been taken away, but the temporal implications of them are still a reality, until I die or Christ comes back, whichever happens first.
My God never changes, nor does my view of Him. My view of God is based on the bible, not religion. Religion may change, but the bible doesn't.
"For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." 1Cor 1:18
By that rationale I could build an automatic machine that runs on solar power and does nothing more than turn a fan. So did the machine create the wind off of the fan, or did the guy who designed and built it?
Where did the first tree come from? A seed? Where did that come from? How did a little seed with all the information it takes to build a tree (which had never previously existed before) come into being?
You claim coincidence and chance are the builders of the universe. But all these little microcosms were set into motion and can do nothing more than they were designed to do. A tree cannot just decide to produce a seed for a rose. It can't decide anything.
"For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." 1Cor 1:18
So, who created the wind from the fan? The fan I would guess.
Dunno.
Another tree?
Couldn't say.
I do?
Ok.
So where does that leave us? Thus far we have established that there are questions we don't know the answers too. What now?
My boss can be unfair at times. I still have to obey him if I want to keep my job. Proving that he isn't always fair doesn't relieve me of my responsibilities to him.
I'm not saying God isn't fair. You ask a paradoxical question, that no one has the answer to except God. I'm not convinced that people who have not heard the gospel at least one time are condemned to hell. That is a big question that even the most well-educated theologeons argue about, and can't agree upon. But that is why we send missionaries to those countries. That is why I'm talking to you now. I can't talk to the entire world and tell them about Jesus, but I can talk to the people I come into contact with. The world is not my concern. My only concern is myself, my family, and the people who I associate with. I'll let God worry about how to evangelize the lost people of Zimbabwie. Maybe I'll go there one day. I don't know.
But again, that does not relieve you of your responsibility. Pointing your finger elsewhere doesn't change anything. There may be people who haven't heard the gospel and God will deal with them fairly, because He is fair. But you have heard. What you do with that knowledge is up to you now. You either believe it or you don't. You are not responsible for the people who haven't heard. You are only responsible for you. Sapient isn't responsible for you either. You are responsible for you.
"For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." 1Cor 1:18
I didn't know the RRS bunch claimed ignorance on these matters.
What now? Um, now, back to my original point. Creation is evidence of an extremely intelligent sentient creator.
You said this isn't evidence, it's logic. Since when did logic cease being a valid source of possible evidence?
"For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God." 1Cor 1:18
I wouldn't know. I"m sure some of these clever folks have answers for all kinds of things that I don't generally concern myself with.
See, we missed a step there. It's the step where we name the absense of knowledge "an extremely intelligent sentient creator". How did we decide that this must be true?
Uh huh. I said that the statement was logical deduction, but that it did not lead to the point you and the Ray / Kirk crew wish that it did.
No, this is an argument from ignorance. Because you cannot understand how all of this came to be your answer becomes 'god'. That does not make the answer correct.
I have no problem saying "I don't know" as an answer. Why is this difficult to the point that some people will make up an answer?
Then why preface it with the example you did?
Circular logic. "This doesn't make any sense, so we define it by a new set of rules we don't know." Well, how is it fair that we don't know the rules? "I don't know." Can I speak to your supervisor? "He's unavailable. Get on your knees and leave a message."
But I've heard people from other religions try to tell me their way is good, too - people who have beliefs similar to yours with a few minor diversions, and people who have beliefs that can't be reconciled with yours. If you press them, they'll speak similar rhetoric as to why I should listen to them.
Are they agents of the Devil, just misinformed, or do they fall into some sort of other territory? Do they go to Hell? Does it concern you that if they are right, you might go to their Hell? Does it concern you that Christianity has splintered over (somtimes) minor points since its inception over varying interpretations of various concepts? What if your view of some minor point, like the day you attend Mass, will come into play on the day of judgement? Are you willing to just as easily go to a Methodist, Lutheran, Presbyterian, etc. message board and tell them they need to change the one thing the makes up the core of their belief (that makes if different from your own) and tell them to change it or else face judgement?
David Cross: So I was watching this one show where - there's a guy on stage and he pretends he has contact with the dead and people are watching.
Audience Member: Crossing Over.
David Cross: No, not Crossing Over. It was uh, church.