[Moontoon]

Watching Children in Need last night, every footage it showed about children and families suffering just seems to more and more disprove the existence of god.
I'm not quite sure how ANYONE can believe there is an 'all-loving' and 'all-powerful' god, when watching the heartbreaking footage last night.

Makes me more and more glad i lost my faith at a young age. False hope and promises is all it seems to provide people

[Hylean]

(Original post by Moontoon)
Watching Children in Need last night, every footage it showed about children and families suffering just seems to more and more disprove the existence of god.
I'm not quite sure how ANYONE can believe there is an 'all-loving' and 'all-powerful' god, when watching the heartbreaking footage last night.

Makes me more and more glad i lost my faith at a young age. False hope and promises is all it seems to provide people

Really? Children In Need "disproves" the existence of the Abrahamic God? Yea, because negligent parents don't love their children precisely because they are negligent...

If the Abrahamic God exists as he is claimed to, ie. all loving and all powerful, etc. then he probably knows what's best for us and the universe, as a whole, and so suffering might actually be needed for a better future. Expecting everyone's lives to be perfect just because is a rather infantile argument against Him.

Let's ignore the tens of other religions which do not claim to have an all-loving or all-powerful deity.

[NICH0LAS]

(Original post by Calumcalum)
OK, know was sloppy terminology of mine. Put it this way: on what grounds do you say there is no evidence?

There is none, what more do you need?

It is not up to normal people to strip away your religious faith because that is all it is, faith..

If it had evidence we would all be religious, because it has none, religion is on the decline.

Religion is a bloody insult to intelligence it really is. You can see where they got the inspiration for lord of the rings.

[NICH0LAS]

(Original post by Hylean)
Really? Children In Need "disproves" the existence of the Abrahamic God? Yea, because negligent parents don't love their children precisely because they are negligent...

If the Abrahamic God exists as he is claimed to, ie. all loving and all powerful, etc. then he probably knows what's best for us and the universe, as a whole, and so suffering might actually be needed for a better future. Expecting everyone's lives to be perfect just because is a rather infantile argument against Him.

Let's ignore the tens of other religions which do not claim to have an all-loving or all-powerful deity.

Wow, you make it up as you go along don't you.

Your creator ( which ever one it is you think exists over the other hundreds) lets people suffer everyday with lack of food and physical abuse.

[Fg=GM1M2/r^2]

I do believe that God exists, but i dont think he plays a physical role in the creation or evolution of the universe. Because God says "be and it was" rather than saying "i physically created...". I believe it was only his will that allowed the universe to evolve in a way that humans could come about, or any other intelligent beings for that matter.

[frankieboy]

Do an infinite number of Gods exist?

[Fg=GM1M2/r^2]

No... i believe that only 1 god exists

[Hylean]

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
Wow, you make it up as you go along don't you.

Your creator ( which ever one it is you think exists over the other hundreds) lets people suffer everyday with lack of food and physical abuse.

I am making nothing up, and given you know nothing of my beliefs, I wouldn't try to reduce them to Abrahamic ones.

Epicurus is wrong because he doesn't know all the facts. Any good scientist will tell you you can't make a sound judgement without knowing all the facts. Let's assume that the Abrahamic God does exist; if He does then we know very little about why He does things or why things are the way they are. We extrapolate information from our surroundings and attempt to apply these to Him. It doesn't work like that. For example, the question "why do bad things happen"? Well, one has to ask whether God believes that one person's happiness is more important than the whole. Given anyone would argue the whole, then it's safe to say He values the whole over the single. Thus bad things may happen, but there is a greater meaning behind them that we cannot see because we are not eternal like He is. Furthermore, if I said to you I'm going to inject you with a potentially lethal disease, this would be considered a bad thing; yet that is exactly what we do every time we administer a vaccine.

My other point, a negligent parent can love their children despite being negligent. Negligence does not equate to not loving. To Epicurus' question, the only one that matters is "if he is both willing and and able then whence cometh evil". Unfortunately, given neither you nor I know the mind of God, if he exists, then we can't answer that question.

However, as I don't believe in the Abrahamic God, or anything like him, you attacking me over it is a waste of your time. Just because I am able to step outside of my beliefs and argue from a Christian point of view does not make me a Christian. Something many users on this website would do well to realise.

[NICH0LAS]

(Original post by Hylean)
I am making nothing up, and given you know nothing of my beliefs, I wouldn't try to reduce them to Abrahamic ones.

I did say "which ever one you think exists"

Regardless, the same applies to you, as i explain below.

Epicurus is wrong because he doesn't know all the facts. Any good scientist will tell you you can't make a sound judgement without knowing all the facts. Let's assume that the Abrahamic God does exist; if He does then we know very little about why He does things or why things are the way they are. We extrapolate information from our surroundings and attempt to apply these to Him. It doesn't work like that. For example, the question "why do bad things happen"? Well, one has to ask whether God believes that one person's happiness is more important than the whole. Given anyone would argue the whole, then it's safe to say He values the whole over the single. Thus bad things may happen, but there is a greater meaning behind them that we cannot see because we are not eternal like He is. Furthermore, if I said to you I'm going to inject you with a potentially lethal disease, this would be considered a bad thing; yet that is exactly what we do every time we administer a vaccine.

You managed to glean all that from the holy books which are supposedly inspired by god and written by man

Using human logic, which is all we have, the holy books tell us suffering is wrong. The creator assigned to what ever religion does not want people to suffer.
Any other opinion you are forming is just made up gibberish that you "think".

"if he is both willing and and able then whence cometh evil". Unfortunately, given neither you nor I know the mind of God, if he exists, then we can't answer that question.

We can because again, using the human logic, and the written word of what ever go it is you favour, suffering is wrong. If you are suggesting this might not be the case you are undermining the holy books. If he is both willing and able, which he is according to the holy books, then when does this evil scum come back to earth???

However, as I don't believe in the Abrahamic God, or anything like him, you attacking me over it is a waste of your time. Just because I am able to step outside of my beliefs and argue from a Christian point of view does not make me a Christian. Something many users on this website would do well to realise.

Whatever god you follow, they all have the same main purpose.

[Hylean]

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
I did say "which ever one you think exists"

Regardless, the same applies to you, as i explain below.

You still attempted to reduce my beliefs to being similar in nature to those of the Abrahamic religions. For all you know, my beliefs could involve the FSM, but one that revels in the suffering of humans.

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
You managed to glean all that from the holy books which are supposedly inspired by god and written by man

Using human logic, which is all we have, the holy books tell us suffering is wrong. The creator assigned to what ever religion does not want people to suffer.
Any other opinion you are forming is just made up gibberish that you "think".

So, we can now apply human logic to a non-human being? Given we aren't really allowed to apply human logic to animals, I fail to see how this can be an acceptable approach to a deity.

As far as I'm aware, Christianity doesn't state, as an example, that "suffering" as a whole is "wrong". Please find the specific book, chapter and verse for this statement, please.

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
We can because again, using the human logic, and the written word of what ever go it is you favour, suffering is wrong. If you are suggesting this might not be the case you are undermining the holy books. If he is both willing and able, which he is according to the holy books, then when does this evil scum come back to earth???

Again, you're assuming my beliefs have a written word. You seem to know very little about religions on the whole if you think they all a book and set beliefs.

I've also answered the last question multiple times. The fact you don't like the answer isn't my problem. You've also ignored all the points I raised.

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
Whatever god you follow, they all have the same main purpose.

That would be rather interesting given the huge range of purposes the various gods have in the world. However, given your rampant antitheism bent, I'm going to assume you're one of those who sees religion only as a comfort for the weak and irrational.

The thing I find interesting about antitheists is that they ignore their own fears and irrationalities. Is believing there's no life after this and thus one has to enjoy their life to the full not just a comfort and irrationality on the level of religion? Would seem so to me. However, not the thread's topic, so if you reply to this section, I won't reply to it. Can't derail the thread now.

[NICH0LAS]

(Original post by Hylean)
So, we can now apply human logic to a non-human being? Given we aren't really allowed to apply human logic to animals, I fail to see how this can be an acceptable approach to a deity.

As far as I'm aware, Christianity doesn't state, as an example, that "suffering" as a whole is "wrong". Please find the specific book, chapter and verse for this statement, please.

If you are not going to use human logic which is all you can do to decipher the holy books which are meant to be the word of god, you might as well not read them...

What you are then suggesting is there are no rules and you can do what you like because "god might not" "god might do this" "god might not like that".

What is religion bult on if this is the case? Sand.

Again, you're assuming my beliefs have a written word. You seem to know very little about religions on the whole if you think they all a book and set beliefs.

You think what you like, if its religious aka to do with a god, i will brand you the same as other religions. You seem to think there is a differentiation here, there isn't, they all put faith in obscure fairy tales that have NO proof at all.

That would be rather interesting given the huge range of purposes the various gods have in the world. However, given your rampant antitheism bent, I'm going to assume you're one of those who sees religion only as a comfort for the weak and irrational.

I see religion as various things, some people are part of it for the "fun", some are because they genuinely think they might burn in "hell", some are because they think it is all fact, some are because they were born into it ( infact MOST are born into it) Some are because they think they will lose their family if they dont, some are because they use it for personal gain,

The list goes on and on.

The thing I find interesting about antitheists is that they ignore their own fears and irrationalities. Is believing there's no life after this and thus one has to enjoy their life to the full not just a comfort and irrationality on the level of religion? Would seem so to me. However, not the thread's topic, so if you reply to this section, I won't reply to it. Can't derail the thread now.

No not at all. You being here is a biological miracle. Why are you so greedy wanting more? But more importantly, why are you so greedy you're prepared to ignore all evidence?

Isn't the garden beautiful enough without having to imagine fairies at the end of it.

________

What i want to know is if god was so good as to inspire people to write the bible, why isn't he so good as to inspire everyone into the "right" religion.

This is another reason religion is EVIL to me

[Calumcalum]

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
There is none, what more do you need?

It is not up to normal people to strip away your religious faith because that is all it is, faith..

If it had evidence we would all be religious, because it has none, religion is on the decline.

Religion is a bloody insult to intelligence it really is. You can see where they got the inspiration for lord of the rings.

"On what grounds do you know that there is no evidence?"

"There is [no evidence]"

Surely you can see how circular this is?

[frankieboy]

You can't really use scientific knowledge to absolutely prove the existence or non existence of God. There is no absolute proof in science. Also, it's a man made framework.

[chickenonsteroids]

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
What i want to know is if god was so good as to inspire people to write the bible, why isn't he so good as to inspire everyone into the "right" religion.

This is another reason religion is EVIL to me

Religion isn't evil. Would you call a war game because it inspires some people to do bad things? I wouldn't think so.

People interpret things in different ways, that doesn't make religion evil does it? That would mean religion is always interpreted in negative ways. When it is not.

People who think religion is evil do not want to realise the good it brings to the world. Whether you think it's illogical or not.

[Hylean]

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
If you are not going to use human logic which is all you can do to decipher the holy books which are meant to be the word of god, you might as well not read them...

Given The Bible was written by man, it's fine to use human interpretation. One of the many arguments with the Qu'ran is that it is the direct word of Allah and thus humans may not always understand it.

I don't know enough about Hinduism to comment on their books.

Neo-pagan religions have no holy books.

Buddhism is the teachings of man, if highly evolved spiritually ones.

See where this is going? You need to actually do some research into religions before casting them all into the same pot. Dawkins makes this mistake and thinks that disproving the Abrahamic god somehow destroys all other gods as well. It's a daft notion and given he is a scientist, he should know better.

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
What you are then suggesting is there are no rules and you can do what you like because "god might not" "god might do this" "god might not like that".

What is religion bult on if this is the case? Sand.

I've never suggested there are no rules. Where did I even hint at that?

I asked you to find me the book, chapter and verse where The Bible states that "suffering is wrong". That has nothing to do with rules. As your argument against the existence of the Abrahamic God, but not other types, seems to hinge on the idea of suffering, I want you to put your money where your mouth is and prove The Bible states that suffering is morally wrong to that God.

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
You think what you like, if its religious aka to do with a god, i will brand you the same as other religions. You seem to think there is a differentiation here, there isn't, they all put faith in obscure fairy tales that have NO proof at all.

Really? So, you know, the Norse heathens who worship Loki or Þórr or Óðinn have similar beliefs to Christians? I'd love to see you show that, without reducing it to "they believe in deities".

Oh, and they're not "fairy-tales", they're "myths". And they are hardly obscure. I think the Abrahamic myths are some of the most well known stories in the world. Again, none of this shows there are no deities.

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
No not at all. You being here is a biological miracle. Why are you so greedy wanting more? But more importantly, why are you so greedy you're prepared to ignore all evidence?

Isn't the garden beautiful enough without having to imagine fairies at the end of it.

What evidence exactly? I see no evidence for your position. If you have some, please show us all. End this thread once and for all and prove there is no such thing as a deity. I'm sure everyone would love that.

Before you begin, notice I said "deity", so I expect evidence which is applicable to every concept of the word known to man and any you care to think up. Basically, you have to show evidence which completely rules out any such being existing, not one particular form, such as the Abrahamic god.

Oh, and again, as you have no idea what I believe, you can hardly comment on whether I "want more" or am "greedy". Nor do such arguments have any real basis on the existence of a deity.

As for the comment on being born into religion; we are born into most things, including atheism. Again, not an argument against the existence of a deity.

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
What i want to know is if god was so good as to inspire people to write the bible, why isn't he so good as to inspire everyone into the "right" religion.

This is another reason religion is EVIL to me

Why do you insist on reducing religion, and thus all their rules and beliefs, to those of the Abrahamic religions? Pagans, for instance, don't believe there is one right religion.

If the Abrahamic God exists, then by your judgement it would be He that is evil, not "religion". Religion is no different a political ideology and no ideology is evil in and of itself. Besides, whether He is evil or not does not somehow stop Him existing.

As for the inspiring people to the right religion, why do you think The Bible tells believers to preach? Or do you mean programme us to believe? Well, that gets in the way of Him giving us free-will, doesn't it? You're still ignoring the points I made in my first reply to you.

[frankieboy]

Olympian, Ancient Egyptian, Pagan, and Shintoism FTW! Muuuuuuch more fun......

[NICH0LAS]

(Original post by Hylean)
Given The Bible was written by man, it's fine to use human interpretation. One of the many arguments with the Qu'ran is that it is the direct word of Allah and thus humans may not always understand it.

So an all knowing clever master of everything would pass down a message that means nothing to the recipient.

I don't know enough about Hinduism to comment on their books.

Neo-pagan religions have no holy books.

Buddhism is the teachings of man, if highly evolved spiritually ones.

See where this is going? You need to actually do some research into religions before casting them all into the same pot. Dawkins makes this mistake and thinks that disproving the Abrahamic god somehow destroys all other gods as well. It's a daft notion and given he is a scientist, he should know better.

This is what i'm getting at - You don't need to know the specifics because they all fall into the same category. All religions will worship a form of creator, or supernatural being. This is how you can denounce them all at once into the same category, because each has as little evidence as the next one, none.

I've never suggested there are no rules. Where did I even hint at that?

I asked you to find me the book, chapter and verse where The Bible states that "suffering is wrong". That has nothing to do with rules. As your argument against the existence of the Abrahamic God, but not other types, seems to hinge on the idea of suffering, I want you to put your money where your mouth is and prove The Bible states that suffering is morally wrong to that God.

You're clinging on the nothing here, the holy books are all about peace and tranquillity. I will look tomo and find some scripture that relates to suffering.

Really? So, you know, the Norse heathens who worship Loki or Þórr or Óðinn have similar beliefs to Christians? I'd love to see you show that, without reducing it to "they believe in deities".

Oh, and they're not "fairy-tales", they're "myths". And they are hardly obscure. I think the Abrahamic myths are some of the most well known stories in the world. Again, none of this shows there are no deities.

Again, specifics are irrelevant. You say they are not fairy tales? Well i don't know many men that can feed 7000 with a little bit of bread or come back from the dead etc etc, they are nothing but stories to me. I've never seen anything supernatural that would make me consider them true.

Going into the specifics of these well known myths, stories, fairytales is also difficult, some say that "Jesus" guy wasn't even wrote about until 400 years after his death, and even then it was with political motive = money. The discrepancies are horrendus, no one stands a chance of working out the truth.

What evidence exactly? I see no evidence for your position. If you have some, please show us all. End this thread once and for all and prove there is no such thing as a deity. I'm sure everyone would love that.

Before you begin, notice I said "deity", so I expect evidence which is applicable to every concept of the word known to man and any you care to think up. Basically, you have to show evidence which completely rules out any such being existing, not one particular form, such as the Abrahamic god.

Oh, and again, as you have no idea what I believe, you can hardly comment on whether I "want more" or am "greedy". Nor do such arguments have any real basis on the existence of a deity.

So you are prepared to read and consider books of religion over what a scientist can tell you in moments?

Look at what they pull out of the ground at the various layers, it's like a physical timeline, you can see it with your own eyes. This alone destroys unfounded thoughts of creation, it rips the idea of creation apart.

If everything was created then why do they not find diverse life on every layer of the earth instead of specific species through their stages of time and development on earth? Why are there no species of today sitting in with the dinosaur bones.

Are you aware they have a good idea that 99% of all species that have lived are now extinct? Some creation that is...

What about that insect they found that stuns its victim and lays its eggs inside it.... The eggs hatch and literally eat their way out... the insect who is being eaten is still alive at the start of this process. You think god is loving???

We can only look at what they have found for a reasonable answer to how we ended up here, not religion.

As for the comment on being born into religion; we are born into most things, including atheism. Again, not an argument against the existence of a deity.

Religion is far different to being born into a non religious family. The non religious family don't brainwash you from birth.

Why do you insist on reducing religion, and thus all their rules and beliefs, to those of the Abrahamic religions? Pagans, for instance, don't believe there is one right religion.

Well good on the pagans, i on the other hand would like them to prove that whatever god they believe in is real.

If the Abrahamic God exists, then by your judgement it would be He that is evil, not "religion". Religion is no different a political ideology and no ideology is evil in and of itself. Besides, whether He is evil or not does not somehow stop Him existing.

Religion is full of corruption and idiocy, it is evil.

As for the inspiring people to the right religion, why do you think The Bible tells believers to preach? Or do you mean programme us to believe? Well, that gets in the way of Him giving us free-will, doesn't it? You're still ignoring the points I made in my first reply to you.

You're using circular reason, so what if the bible says it, where did the bloody bible come from, that's what i want to know.

The goal of science isn't to prove your god doesn't exist, it is to go out and find evidence for why we are really here, most scientists (probably over 90%) don't give a toss about religion.

What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.

[Skill]

does god exist. no

[Hylean]

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
So an all knowing clever master of everything would pass down a message that means nothing to the recipient.

Where did I say "means nothing"? Your debating style is very odd.

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
This is what i'm getting at - You don't need to know the specifics because they all fall into the same category. All religions will worship a form of creator, or supernatural being. This is how you can denounce them all at once into the same category, because each has as little evidence as the next one, none.

You can denounce them, but you cannot say they all believe the same thing. There's a big difference. By that argument, I could be facetious and denounce strong atheism, as there's little evidence for it. Booyah. Given the amount of time atheists spend on here trying to combat the idea that "atheism" means the rejection of the existence of a higher being, reducing beliefs to a common denominator is just silly and shows you to be ignorant of the subject matter.

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
You're clinging on the nothing here, the holy books are all about peace and tranquillity. I will look tomo and find some scripture that relates to suffering.

If I'm clinging to nothing, you'll have no problem finding me the right verse.

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
Again, specifics are irrelevant. You say they are not fairy tales? Well i don't know many men that can feed 7000 with a little bit of bread or come back from the dead etc etc, they are nothing but stories to me. I've never seen anything supernatural that would make me consider them true.

Specifics are irrelevant? That's hardly a very logical, rational or empirical thought to hold.

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
Going into the specifics of these well known myths, stories, fairytales is also difficult, some say that "Jesus" guy wasn't even wrote about until 400 years after his death, and even then it was with political motive = money. The discrepancies are horrendus, no one stands a chance of working out the truth.

Since when did something have to be written down for it to exist? Something can exist in oral tradition for centuries with very little change, just so you're aware. It can also change rapidly, but as we have no evidence for either case here, it's a moot point.

Again, what does the existence of Jesus have to do with the existence of a higher being?

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
So you are prepared to read and consider books of religion over what a scientist can tell you in moments?

Given Christianity has taught for centuries that the creation myth is a metaphor, I don't see where you're coming from. Besides, where did I state ever that I disregard scientific evidence?

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
Look at what they pull out of the ground at the various layers, it's like a physical timeline, you can see it with your own eyes. This alone destroys unfounded thoughts of creation, it rips the idea of creation apart.

Aye, I know. Happily accept that. Doesn't disprove a deity.

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
If everything was created then why do they not find diverse life on every layer of the earth instead of specific species through their stages of time and development on earth? Why are there no species of today sitting in with the dinosaur bones.

How does this disprove a deity, exactly? Admittedly, it disproves a literal interpretation of Genesis, but given Christians have answered that, and evolution, with Intelligent Design, I don't see the issue. As for others, well, there's also the deist theory of the great clockmaker who doesn't give a ****. This is why specifics matter. You're trying to use science to disprove something which has already adapted science, if we ignore 7-day creationists, without issue.

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
Are you aware they have a good idea that 99% of all species that have lived are now extinct? Some creation that is...

So? What does that have to do with a deity existing?

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
What about that insect they found that stuns its victim and lays its eggs inside it.... The eggs hatch and literally eat their way out... the insect who is being eaten is still alive at the start of this process. You think god is loving???

To the insect, definitely. Perhaps all the people that die from such things would've gone on to be child rapists or genocidal murderers. Who can say? Hardly evidence against a deity.

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
We can only look at what they have found for a reasonable answer to how we ended up here, not religion.

For many people, a higher being is perfectly reasonable, logical and rational. You talk like science is an anthema to religion, which it really isn't.

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
Religion is far different to being born into a non religious family. The non religious family don't brainwash you from birth.

Course they do. This argument is old and worn out. It shows very little understanding of child and identity development. You think an atheist family doesn't affect their children's beliefs? Get real. Again, still nothing to do with a deity existing.

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
Well good on the pagans, i on the other hand would like them to prove that whatever god they believe in is real.

Why? Does it really matter? Seeing as you are convinced, by the sounds of it, that all religions are "false" and "evil", surely you should be proving your position just as much.

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
Religion is full of corruption and idiocy, it is evil.

So are banks, governments, democracies, theocracies, meritocracies, communism, nazism, fascism, etc. Well, gosh, everything is evil.

Still not an argument against a deity.

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
You're using circular reason, so what if the bible says it, where did the bloody bible come from, that's what i want to know.

Comes from man, has always come from man and has always admitted to have come from man.

It's hardly circular logic. You asked why God hasn't inspired us to believe? Well, he has tried, by getting Christians to preach, or Muslims, or even Jews.

The whole free-will debate is something else entirely. Still nothing in this post which proves or disproves a deity existing.

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
The goal of science isn't to prove your god doesn't exist, it is to go out and find evidence for why we are really here, most scientists (probably over 90%) don't give a toss about religion.

You're going to have to provide some hard statistics for that wild guess of yours.

Anyone with a brain knows that science's goal isn't to disprove the existence of a deity, so why are you so hell bent on using it to try to?

(Original post by NICH0LAS)
What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof.

Well, proof of a higher being: the fact there has been throught the centuries a strong belief across the world in a higher being. Now, this is quite possibly a very weak proof, but it is a proof which you need to counter and have failed to.

[Good bloke]

(Original post by Hylean)
, I could be facetious and denounce strong atheism, as there's little evidence for it.

If by strong atheism you mean stating that gods definitely don't exist (as I expect you do), there is no evidence for that position at all, to my knowledge. Thinking, scientifically-minded atheists aren't strong atheists in general.