On Atheism vs. Christianity

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Atreus21
The purpose of this topic is to point out the fallacy I think is inherent in challenging Christians on the basis that pain implies something meaner than a loving God.

It seems to me that pain and pleasure must play by the same rules. That is, if pleasure is part of evolution, then pain must be too. Yet many atheists only question the significance of pain, and typically ignore pleasure.

In other words, if pain is proof that God, even if he exists, is not a nice guy, then what is pleasure proof of?

The main problem with your theory is that your christian god is supposed to be benevolent. Thus, pleasure would be synonamous with his will, while watching families be forced to rape and cannibalize each other would be something a benevolent god might try to you know, prevent. If he's around, and he's all powerful, and he's benevolent, then it makes sense for pleasure to exist. It doesn't make sense for the level of horror people experience to exist.

IOW, pleasure and pain make perfect sense in a world without a benevolent god, but in a world where a benevolent god exists, such levels of horrific existence are contradictory to his very existence. If you claim the torture and murder is a lesson to others that the benevolent father wishes to instruct, that kinda sucks for the torturee, no?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Fuck it, I'm gonna go kill myself now because some whackjob says I have no purpose Buawhahahaha.

I never said you have no purpose; your reading comprehension needs a little work.

You said 'nothing they do matters'. I don't know how that could mean anything other than their life having no purpose.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
You know nothing of my overdraft incident other than that it happened (once), not sure why you are bringing it up, or how its relevent or pertains to my intelligence or ability to respond to your post.

It happened multiple times as recently as last month. You said this in another thread. $300 or so in the last couple of months not including the initial multiple overdrafts last December. I brought it up to illuminate your hypocrisy. You submit that I am an idiot, but since you are clearly one as well (name notwithstanding) your assertion is dubious. Perhaps I am an idiot, but a statement from an idiot holds no meaning, so only from others who are not so clearly idiots does yours statement hold any.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Fuck it, I'm gonna go kill myself now because some whackjob says I have no purpose Buawhahahaha.

I never said you have no purpose; your reading comprehension needs a little work.

You said 'nothing they do matters'. I don't know how that could mean anything other than their life having no purpose.

I meant that consistent with their belief system, not mine. Thus, what a person does to me does matter. I never said anybody should kill themselves, I questioned why they wouldn't if they truly believe what they claim to.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
You know nothing of my overdraft incident other than that it happened (once), not sure why you are bringing it up, or how its relevent or pertains to my intelligence or ability to respond to your post.

It happened multiple times as recently as last month. You said this in another thread. $300 or so in the last couple of months not including the initial multiple overdrafts last December. I brought it up to illuminate your hypocrisy. You submit that I am an idiot, but since you are clearly one as well (name notwithstanding) your assertion is dubious. Perhaps I am an idiot, but a statement from an idiot holds no meaning, so only from others who are not so clearly idiots does yours statement hold any.

Argumentum ad hominem. Do you have any arguments that are not fatally fallacious?

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Ah, I see, sentience creates the illusion of meaning and everything is relative. Then I suppose you won't mind those who create the illusion of God and create thereby for themselves, absolute truth. Their illusion should surely be just as good as yours, no?

No, because they are making positive claims with no scientific evidence. This is separate from the problem of meaning. If music has no meaning to me, but it has meaning to someone else, there is no foul because neither of us are making claims regarding how the universe works. Similarly, if the game Monopoly is the only thing that means anything to me, and I play it non-stop, that is separate from say a claim that Uncle Pennybags actually exists. I might be considered crazy if all I do is play Monopoly, but I would be considered even more crazy if I told people Uncle Pennybags was a real person. Meaning is outside of descriptive beliefs/understanding.

You place meaning in being logically consistent within the logic you claim exists. Thus you create your own fair and foul. You are crazy and if you want to be crazier why would that matter to me. It's meaningless to me. Your logic, my logic, all totally meaningless. There is no meaning relative or absolute. There is no meaning.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: Cerpin Taxt

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
You know nothing of my overdraft incident other than that it happened (once), not sure why you are bringing it up, or how its relevent or pertains to my intelligence or ability to respond to your post.

It happened multiple times as recently as last month. You said this in another thread. $300 or so in the last couple of months not including the initial multiple overdrafts last December. I brought it up to illuminate your hypocrisy. You submit that I am an idiot, but since you are clearly one as well (name notwithstanding) your assertion is dubious. Perhaps I am an idiot, but a statement from an idiot holds no meaning, so only from others who are not so clearly idiots does yours statement hold any.

Argumentum ad hominem. Do you have any arguments that are not fatally fallacious?

Did you get a dictionary of esoteric and annoying terms for your birthday or something? non sequitur, pascal's wager, latin? Come on. I'm off to lunch Fatally fallacious I intend to hang onto that one, though.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

hopefully this thread shows the rest of the forum just how stupid you are.

Pretty pathetic that you need an imaginary god to justify your own existence.

From the guy who runs up $100-200/month in overdraft fees, I'll take this with a grain of salt.

It's no surprise why so many people avoid these threads. At least so far the professed atheists have been the least tolerant...

Gee, I have no idea why people react badly when you come out and say 'people with your beliefs should go commit suicide'. I'm sorry man, but your argument in this thread is ridiculous.

Actually, it seems that I'm the only one actually saying that. Sadly Skoorb seems to be arguing a fact is which he doesn't believe. So I guess it's only me who is recommending you kill yourself as soon as possible.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Did you get a dictionary of esoteric and annoying terms for your birthday or something? non sequitur, pascal's wager, latin? Come on. I'm off to lunch Fatally fallacious I intend to hang onto that one, though.

Don't dive into the deep waters if you don't know how to swim.

 

[daishi5]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Fuck it, I'm gonna go kill myself now because some whackjob says I have no purpose Buawhahahaha.

I never said you have no purpose; your reading comprehension needs a little work.

You said 'nothing they do matters'. I don't know how that could mean anything other than their life having no purpose.

Well, the entire universe is going to end in some way (heat death/big rip/collapse into a big hole/ something else cause I really don't know that much about it) and no matter what you do, it will be erased, and therefore in the really long run what you do does not matter. Belief systems that include an afterlife that is outside of this physical world get around this by saying their deeds will be remembered for eternity. So, in comparison to the magical fantasy land of heaven, yes what we do does not matter.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Cerpin Taxt

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Did you get a dictionary of esoteric and annoying terms for your birthday or something? non sequitur, pascal's wager, latin? Come on. I'm off to lunch Fatally fallacious I intend to hang onto that one, though.

Don't dive into the deep waters if you don't know how to swim.

Funny, that's exactly how I was taught to swim.

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Fuck it, I'm gonna go kill myself now because some whackjob says I have no purpose Buawhahahaha.

I never said you have no purpose; your reading comprehension needs a little work.

You said 'nothing they do matters'. I don't know how that could mean anything other than their life having no purpose.

I meant that consistent with their belief system, not mine. Thus, what a person does to me does matter. I never said anybody should kill themselves, I questioned why they wouldn't if they truly believe what they claim to.

Saying 'from what I've decided about your belief system you should believe your life is pointless', is somehow different? (hint: if it's their belief system, obviously they believe this way) Actually in many ways it's worse, because you're telling someone you know better than they do what their belief system means, and then telling them that this superior understanding states they should go kill themselves.

It seems to me like you hadn't given this topic that much thought before you came into this thread, and you said something that's pretty unsupportable.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Cerpin Taxt

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Did you get a dictionary of esoteric and annoying terms for your birthday or something? non sequitur, pascal's wager, latin? Come on. I'm off to lunch Fatally fallacious I intend to hang onto that one, though.

Don't dive into the deep waters if you don't know how to swim.

Funny, that's exactly how I was taught to swim.

That explains a lot.

 

[n yusef]

Skoorb et al,

Do you have a college degree? If so, how did you make it through at least fifteen years of schooling without learning about nonreligious morality?

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: daishi5

Well, the entire universe is going to end in some way (heat death/big rip/collapse into a big hole/ something else cause I really don't know that much about it) and no matter what you do, it will be erased, and therefore in the really long run what you do does not matter. Belief systems that include an afterlife that is outside of this physical world get around this by saying their deeds will be remembered for eternity. So, in comparison to the magical fantasy land of heaven, yes what we do does not matter.

That would only be true if 'things that matter' were solely 'things that are permanent'. That seems pretty arbitrary.

EDIT: Not only that, but if we are to continue to exist on some sky-beardo plane of existence, I for one wonder how everyone's not going to get really tired of swapping those "hey, remember what we did in college 600 billion years ago?" stories.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Originally posted by: daishi5
Well, the entire universe is going to end in some way (heat death/big rip/collapse into a big hole/ something else cause I really don't know that much about it) and no matter what you do, it will be erased,

Unsubstantiated.

and therefore in the really long run what you do does not matter.

So?

Belief systems that include an afterlife that is outside of this physical world get around this by saying their deeds will be remembered for eternity. So, in comparison to the magical fantasy land of heaven, yes what we do does not matter.

You can only speak for yourself.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

It is obviously completely incomprehensible that someone would want to make the world a better place for any reason but appeasing an omnipotent deity who could already do it himself if he wanted to. It's not like we atheists have to live on this planet or anything... why would we care?

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy
It is obviously completely incomprehensible that someone would want to make the world a better place for any reason but appeasing an omnipotent deity who could already do it himself if he wanted to. It's not like we atheists have to live on this planet or anything... why would we care?

(or give a crap about our children/grandchildren/legacy/etc)

 

[daishi5]

Originally posted by: jonks

Originally posted by: Atreus21
The purpose of this topic is to point out the fallacy I think is inherent in challenging Christians on the basis that pain implies something meaner than a loving God.

It seems to me that pain and pleasure must play by the same rules. That is, if pleasure is part of evolution, then pain must be too. Yet many atheists only question the significance of pain, and typically ignore pleasure.

In other words, if pain is proof that God, even if he exists, is not a nice guy, then what is pleasure proof of?

The main problem with your theory is that your christian god is supposed to be benevolent. Thus, pleasure would be synonamous with his will, while watching families be forced to rape and cannibalize each other would be something a benevolent god might try to you know, prevent. If he's around, and he's all powerful, and he's benevolent, then it makes sense for pleasure to exist. It doesn't make sense for the level of horror people experience to exist.

IOW, pleasure and pain make perfect sense in a world without a benevolent god, but in a world where a benevolent god exists, such levels of horrific existence are contradictory to his very existence. If you claim the torture and murder is a lesson to others that the benevolent father wishes to instruct, that kinda sucks for the torturee, no?

I have always had a problem with this argument, and it seems to be covered in that wikipedia article. How do you know that god views the raping and cannibalizing of their own family as evil? I know you and I think it is evil, but that does not imply that it is actually evil.

My argument stems from the idea that if there is a supreme being, creator of all, our identification of good and evil is meaningless, and their true definitions are the subject of his whim. The statement "god is good," at least in my eyes, does not mean god does what we think is good, but whatever he does is good. If god told me to kill all left handed people, and chop of the left leg of every man named bob, (assuming there is an actual supreme god, and he really did tell me this) then if I go around doing it, I am doing "good."

I did do some studying of this, a few books, but it has been a few years. I think that this means we can rule that there cannot be a judeo-christian god, and a bible that is infallible. I just came to the conclusion that if there is a judeo-christian god, the bible must be wrong in at least a few places so I would just be safe follow the commandment of love they neighbor and moved on with my life. Don't tell my parents, they spent a lot of time sending me to christian schools for most of my childhood life.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: Atomic Playboy
It is obviously completely incomprehensible that someone would want to make the world a better place for any reason but appeasing an omnipotent deity who could already do it himself if he wanted to.

God can do it, but he needs your money!

 

[daishi5]

Originally posted by: n yusef
Skoorb et al,

Do you have a college degree? If so, how did you make it through at least fifteen years of schooling without learning about nonreligious morality?

Hmmm, I am getting very close to graduating, and I have never had any course cover that, nor do I have any courses in the future that will cover that. I also doubt that I will cover that in any further education, so I think it might be normal not to cover that. However, that looks like some interesting reading.

Edit: lunch time over, will be a few hours before I can continue.

 

[n yusef]

Originally posted by: daishi5

Originally posted by: n yusef
Skoorb et al,

Do you have a college degree? If so, how did you make it through at least fifteen years of schooling without learning about nonreligious morality?

Hmmm, I am getting very close to graduating, and I have never had any course cover that, nor do I have any courses in the future that will cover that. I also doubt that I will cover that in any further education, so I think it might be normal not to cover that. However, that looks like some interesting reading.

The principle is very simple: Murder is wrong, not because a god says so, but because someone was killed. Theft is wrong, not because a god says so, but because someone was stolen from. A liberal arts education crystallized my beliefs, but the foundation is inherent to any secular society, and (I had assumed) to the psyche of its members.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
You know nothing of my overdraft incident other than that it happened (once), not sure why you are bringing it up, or how its relevent or pertains to my intelligence or ability to respond to your post.

It happened multiple times as recently as last month. You said this in another thread. $300 or so in the last couple of months not including the initial multiple overdrafts last December. I brought it up to illuminate your hypocrisy. You submit that I am an idiot, but since you are clearly one as well (name notwithstanding) your assertion is dubious. Perhaps I am an idiot, but a statement from an idiot holds no meaning, so only from others who are not so clearly idiots does yours statement hold any.

And you know nothing about any of the circumstances either. sine you brought it up in this thread, its going in this thread. The initial occurance last december was while i was out of the country. Previously, my bank would decline any transaction that i did not have the balance to pay. this changed 2 years ago and I was never informed since all mail goes to my permanent address (my parents house lulz) and I was listed as secondary signatory to my dad since this account is 15 years old and :effort: to have him removed. massive overdraft occurred.

second overdraft occurs in may, I had deposited money than went out and spent more money than had been in the account the prior to the deposit that day, and got hit with another set of overdraft charges because the deposit didn't post until the next day. This one the bank credited back half.

The ones last month involved a large bartab that i was unaware of afterwords, followed by me just living normally for a week.

anyways thats hardly 100-200 every month

 

[Ldir]

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Originally posted by: Skoorb
I'd say the best atheists in this thread are the barbarians mentioned earlier in the Sudan. Now those people who propagate that truly have an atheistic view of the world, one in which a human life holds no meaning at all.

Alright folks, I think that is my queue to exit this discussion. You have to believe in something that has 0 scientific evidence, otherwise you are a barbaric mass murderer..... I think my brain just exploded.

You're fine. That was his argument imploding.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: Cerpin Taxt

Originally posted by: Moonbeam

Originally posted by: Cerpin Taxt

Originally posted by: Skoorb
Did you get a dictionary of esoteric and annoying terms for your birthday or something? non sequitur, pascal's wager, latin? Come on. I'm off to lunch Fatally fallacious I intend to hang onto that one, though.

Don't dive into the deep waters if you don't know how to swim.

Funny, that's exactly how I was taught to swim.

That explains a lot.

I think what it explains is that you have limited notions on how to teach swimming. I think what you wanted to say was that you are deep which in my opinion is pretty shallow.