Original Sin?

Here's a simple question for FrGamble.

Does he believe there are any atheists after our individual deaths?

If he doesn't, then he knows there is a proof god can produce that is undeniable. So, he knows there is proof that is not being given by his god on this Earth.

Quote: rxwine

Actually with an all powerful god capable of overwhelming us with evidence, you have the most notable failure of any proof ever. You have the most capable being of proof just by its own description so the lack of convincing evidence is the worst failure in the history of eternity.

FrG weaseled out of the question, that if God luvvvvvs us so much and wants us all to be saved, why doesn't he make his existence blindingly obvious to us--the thousand-foot-high flaming letters thing? I think FrG said something like God's existence IS obvious--but clearly, it isn't, not to moron evil atheists like me.

And since he luvvvvs me as much as anyone else, why hasn't he come up with some way to convince me? Clearly, whatever he's done in that regard hasn't worked. Is God an incompetent screwup, that he can't convince me and all those other atheists of the TROOT?

The existence of the sun is obvious. The existence of Ling Ling the panda is obvious. The existence of this grilled cheese sandwich is obvious (at least until I eat it, anyway). Why doesn't the omnipotent God who luvvvvs us so much have the ability to make himself just as obvious to us? Why would he want to hide his divine light under a bushel basket?

Believers can't answer that pretty basic question.

Making the statement that the universe didn't begin to exist doesn't make it so.

Quote: FrGamble

Yes, a personal revelation or better yet a relationship is always more convincing.

Not even close.

I reiterate: we're not primitives. We know about such things as night terrors, misfiring neurons, third-man syndrome, etc.

Quote:

Not having the original writings but only a vast, vast, amount of the corroporating writings from all over the world and in agreement is not the same thing as only having the current books.

The Bible doesn't even agree with itself. And there's so little contemporary evidence of Jesus, that it's possible he may not have been what the NT makes him out to be. Latter imitations of latter books are not corroboration.

Quote:

Secondly, you still fail to deal with the lasting impact of this small group of followers. Is there any other adequate explination for the success of the Gospel than its divine origins?

You seem to have little regard for its content.

Some Romans dismissed it as a religion for "women and slaves." In some ways this was true. And given there were far more downtrodden and oppressed people than people of means, it spread.

Quote:

One simple question, is the universe neccessary?

necessary for what, or for whom?

Quote:

Good point. The problem is where are the believers of Hathor now?

Ah, well, Hathor contained within herself Sechmed the destroyer. Maybe the endless, savage wars in Christendom were her doing. You know she once nearly wiped out humanity, disobeying even Ra to do so.

Quote:

I do agree though that coffee is a sign of God's providential care for us.

As I said, it's not nearly enough. But that's the first sensible thing I've ever heard from a religious person regarding theology.

Funny, though, there is no mention of coffee in the Bible.

Quote: stinkingliberal

Atheism is a LACK of belief--a lack of faith--a lack of credulity.

I am working with the definition of atheism that says definitively there is no God. A lack of belief or withholding belief because you don't know or aren't convinced seems like agnosticism. Can you explain the difference between an agnostic and an atheist?

Quote:

That's idiotic!! Why does there have to be "evidence" for a philosophical stance?

Take another read of this question and I think it will sink in who is being idiotic.

Quote:

And yes, I am comparing Jesus to Attila. They were both important historical figures. At times, they were considered to be divine beings by some of their followers. And they're both dead.

Jesus is very much alive and has lots of followers still.

Quote:

And no matter how much you choose to lie about it, Father--a shameful thing for someone such as you--atheism is NOT a claim that there is no God. It is a refusal to believe in any god. Atheists, unlike religious believers, don't state that they know with any degree of certainty what is the nature of the universe. They simply find the God hypothesis unconvincing.

I am confused perhaps, but I am not lying. I thought atheism is making a claim that there is no God. You seem to have done so multiple times in this very post. If you don't know if God exists than be more clear with your language and call yourself an agnostic. Oh yeah, also continue to be open about the possibility of God's existence if you just aren't convinced yet.

Quote:

I challenge you for the fifteenth and last time to provide evidence of God's existence. And since we seem to disagree on what constitutes "evidence," let's default to a third party. Present evidence that would be acceptable in a US court of law.

Now here's where you start to weasel:

1. You can't prove evidence of atheism!!!!!!! (????)

If atheism is the mistaken belief that there is no God than yes you can't prove it, nor can you even provide a shred of evidence. If you want to be a weasel and say that atheism is being open to the belief in God but you are not convinced than I think that is called agnosticism and we can have a conversation about that, instead of atheism. Please tell me what you hold and stop changing your position when it is convenient for you or you find out you are wrong.

Quote:

2. A whole buncha people believe in God. That's evidence!

The defense would like to call its first billion witnesses. Now all of these people who have a real experience and relationship with God you can call crazy, deluded, brainwashed but the court will recognize some of them as expert testimony. "You strenuously object and ask the court to reconsider." "Oh in that case... You will even have the judge calling some of them experts and their opinion will be heard." (paraphrase from A Few Good Men) Imagine for a moment if in a court of law you had 1 million people testifying to the fact that they know this person personally and swear under oath He is real. Is that not considered evidence?

Quote:

3. When we pray, we get a warm, gooey feeling inside. That's evidence!

That's not evidence nor is it even true all the time. Many times living by the Gospel is a challenge and requires of us to rise above our warm, gooey feelings and do what is right no matter how it makes us feel. What you might offer as evidence instead is the fact that Judeo-Christian take on morality is the foundation upon which Western civilization is built. You might also point out that teachings and guidance of Jesus Christ are still used today to help people become the best versions of themselves. But this is all a little speculative and can be controversial. Let's just stick to the historical facts about the impact this man Jesus has made and continues to make upon human history. There is nothing like it with any person that has ever or will ever live. He is truly the most unique person ever and I offer as the most likely possibility for His impossible effect - that He was who He said He was, namely God. (I'm bracing for your insults and attack on the one I love more than anything else in the world. Please know before you attack how much it does hurt me when you belittle or insult my Lord)

Quote:

I don't think you're worth talking to any more. Your insults and your lying make it an unpleasant experience.

Never have I ever begun this nasty and aggressive rhetoric that you spew throughout this forum. I started this conversation with you a while ago when you were much more civil and I long for you to return to that tone. I do however simply mirror the tone and vitriol that you throw at me, maybe I shouldn't (turn the other cheek and all) but I'm afraid that because you use such aggressive language it may be the only way you can hear what I am saying.

Quote: stinkingliberal

And since he luvvvvs me as much as anyone else, why hasn't he come up with some way to convince me? Clearly, whatever he's done in that regard hasn't worked. Is God an incompetent screwup, that he can't convince me and all those other atheists of the TROOT?

Is the teacher whose students don't practice and desire to learn the math an incompetent screwup?

Quote:

Why doesn't the omnipotent God who luvvvvs us so much have the ability to make himself just as obvious to us? Why would he want to hide his divine light under a bushel basket?

Believers can't answer that pretty basic question.

Why doesn't He just force you to believe? Is that what you are asking? Why doesn't He swoop down like Superman and command you to bend the knee before His presence? God does love you so much that He will not force Himself upon you. When you loved someone in your life and pursued them how did you do it? I reckon it is pretty much the same way that God is pursuing you.

Also God hides so that we seek. I would say that is a pretty basic answer to a pretty basic question.

Quote: Nareed

Not even close.

I continue to hold that a relationship is the most powerful connection in the universe.

Quote:

The Bible doesn't even agree with itself. And there's so little contemporary evidence of Jesus, that it's possible he may not have been what the NT makes him out to be. Latter imitations of latter books are not corroboration.

Bible is actually translated as a library, or a collection of books. In a library you wouldn't expect all the books to agree.

The fact that important books were painstakingly copied in the ancient world is a sign of their importance. When this is done thousands of times throughout various cultures and with such care that the manuscripts all agree in 99% of what they say is a very clear indication of the significance of that work.

Quote:

Some Romans dismissed it as a religion for "women and slaves." In some ways this was true. And given there were far more downtrodden and oppressed people than people of means, it spread.

This is not nearly enough. But that's the first sensible thing I've heard from a non-religious person regarding Christianity in a long time.

Quote:

necessary for what, or for whom?

Simple, does the universe HAVE to exist?

Quote:

Funny, though, there is no mention of coffee in the Bible.

Well, those careful scribes copying the Bible might have missed a verse or two somewhere.

Actually, it's interesting that monks copying the Bible invented cappuccino.

Quote: FrGamble

I continue to hold that a relationship is the most powerful connection in the universe.

With people or things that exist.

Quote:

Bible is actually translated as a library, or a collection of books. In a library you wouldn't expect all the books to agree.

I'd expect history books to agree on most of their contents, given equal or similar subjects, within the limits of what is definitely known and what is speculation. If one book says Julius Caesar conquered Gaul and another says he conquered Hispania, one of them is wrong.

Quote:

The fact that important books were painstakingly copied in the ancient world is a sign of their importance.

Their importance to the people who paid for the copies.

Quote:

Simple, does the universe HAVE to exist?

For what? For whom?

Quote:

Actually, it's interesting that monks copying the Bible invented cappuccino.

Why would even monk make manual copies of the Bible, or anything else, centuries after the invention of the printing press?

Quote: Nareed

With people or things that exist.

Naturally.

Quote:

For what? For whom?

Does the universe have to exist in itself? Does it have the reason for its being without any reference to a what or a whom? Is it possible that the universe could not exist?

Quote: FrGamble

God does love you so much that He will not force Himself upon you.

That's more Christian illogic. Presumably, if I don't glom onto his message, then I will not be saved and I will spend eternity undergoing unimaginable torture (by beings created by God for that expressed purpose). So if he luvvvvs me, shouldn't he make ABSOLUTELY CERTAIN that I get the message rather than run the risk that I won't be saved?

A loving mother will FORCE her kid to stay out of the street so he doesn't get run over. She will also FORCE him to eat and dress properly, etc. etc. If we are God's children, and he luvvvvs us, shouldn't he do everything in his power to keep us from going to hell and burning for all eternity? Clearly, we lack the ability to make sure that happens on our own--just look at me, a stinking atheist. Shouldn't God get proactive rather than run the risk that I'll be run over by a cement truck tomorrow and be consigned to the depths of hell?

Sorry, your faith and mythology just don't make sense.