WHAT CONVINCED YOU?

Zillah

So, eh, Soul Winner. When you encounter an argument that completely destroys your position, and...er, completely ignore it in your response...do you actually know what's happening or do you have a blackout moment or something?

Specifically in relation to the following points I made (detailed versions in my first two posts):
- Pascal's Wager is nonesense because it is an argument for one option being safer not more likely. (I won't even go into the other points because this one really is cast iron, which is, I suspect, why you ignored it)
- The fact that an atheist cannot prove there is no God means nothing, re: infinite number of things that don't exist that you cannot prove do not exist.

Soul Winner wrote:

Now the question of who is worshiping the right God is a theological question not a scientific one. For instance if Hinduism is right then the universe is eternal. But we know its not eternal from the evidence so bang there goes one, nearly a billion people wrong just like that.

Ah yes, because history has shown us that when science proves a religious notion completely false that religion rolls over and dies rather than comes up with some convoluted rationalisation.

Remind me, was Genesis being metaphorical when it made ridiculous claims about the origin of the world, life and humanity? Was this always the stance of its followers?

Tar.Aldarion

Soul Winner wrote: »

Re God not being omnipotent because He cannot make a wall so high that He can't climb it and so forth, that is like saying that if God cannot make a four sided triangle then He is not all powerful. God can't make a four sided triangle. Four sided triangles are not triangles. So that doesn't prove anything. To bring in absurdities like this into the argument just weakens the argument.

My point was it is the same type of 'logic' as you are using with pascal's wager. Pretty to look at but just wrong.

Btw you analogy also did not make sense. If you make a wall so high you can't get over it then it is still a wall, unlike the triangle which changes to a quadrilateral. I did not ask could god make a wall so high that it was a lake.

stevejazzx

ah but you see what you're all missing about Pascals wagers is that when he postulated that little chestnut he only was 5 years old..and he wasn't a great five year old either..he was a bit slow,oh and martians stole his brain when he was three, leaving him quite numb..he actually just signed that particular wager to a Japaneese speech therapist who may have translated it incorrectly...

Zillah

That was odd.

stevejazzx

Zillah wrote: »

That was odd.

..got a better explanation?

Handsome Bob

Two pages of Pascals Wagers, for fcuk sake.

I was convinced not to believe in organised religion because after taking the leaps of faith for so long, I just couldn't do it anymore. It's as simple as that.

Re the question of how does one know what the one true religion is, I like Gary Habermas's work in Christian Apologetics, he makes a decent case for his religion.

condra

Flip the coin- if you ask Christians in this country what convinced them of Gods existence, many will answer, "I was brought up to believe in God".

Belief in God can only ever be learned or contrived. Atheism is the "natural" state.

As is often stated, the onus is on theists to prove the existence of god(s), not on atheists to prove they don't exist.

I was unfortunate enough to be indoctrinated by my parents, local church and school teachers as a child. It took years to rid myself of superstitious dogma.

whatdoicare

I just felt in my heart that he wasn't real. I never "realised" it or thought about it, nothing made me believe then stop believing, I just never believed.
Not when I made my communion, not when I made my confirmation and not now that I'm a grown adult.
I don't know why, I just don't and I know deep down I can try as hard as I like to believe but it'll be just pretend for me, because deep down in my heart of hearts I know it's all a lie.
Although I do enjoy studying the history behind jesus and the time of him aswell as all other major religions. I find the facts much easier to relate to.
But for me, I don't mind not being religious, I'm very content in my life and live it to the full. If there ends up being a god on the other side-I'm sure he'll understand.:)

Soul Winner

whatdoicare wrote: »

I just felt in my heart that he wasn't real. I never "realised" it or thought about it, nothing made me believe then stop believing, I just never believed.
Not when I made my communion, not when I made my confirmation and not now that I'm a grown adult.
I don't know why, I just don't and I know deep down I can try as hard as I like to believe but it'll be just pretend for me, because deep down in my heart of hearts I know it's all a lie.
Although I do enjoy studying the history behind jesus and the time of him aswell as all other major religions. I find the facts much easier to relate to.
But for me, I don't mind not being religious, I'm very content in my life and live it to the full. If there ends up being a god on the other side-I'm sure he'll understand.:)

Great answer. I was very like you before God found and claimed me, but before that I actually did believe in God or at least I thought I did. I won't say that I hope the same thing happens to you because I don't really care but if it does then good for you but if it doesn't then if you don't care then why should anyone else?

Zillah wrote: »

So, eh, Soul Winner. When you encounter an argument that completely destroys your position, and...er, completely ignore it in your response...do you actually know what's happening or do you have a blackout moment or something?

Must be a blackout as I fail to see what you are talking about. I used Pascal's wager to illustrate a point that I wanted to make, I do not hang my faith on it jeeze...

Zillah wrote: »

Specifically in relation to the following points I made (detailed versions in my first two posts):
- Pascal's Wager is nonsense because it is an argument for one option being safer not more likely.
(I won't even go into the other points because this one really is cast iron, which is, I suspect, why you ignored it)
- The fact that an atheist cannot prove there is no God means nothing, re: infinite number of things that don't exist that you cannot prove do not exist.

I don't think it is. We know that the universe had a beginning right? And we don't know how it came to be, but most scientists accept that at some point in the finite past it did not exist. Now not only did the universe not exist but the potential for a universe did not exist. So from nothing at all everything came. How? Either it was created by a powerful being which transcends space and time i.e. is eternal i.e. not having a beginning. Or the universe just popped into existence from nothing and by nothing. These are the 2 options that we are faced with hence Pascal's wager idea.

Zilah wrote:

Ah yes, because history has shown us that when science proves a religious notion completely false that religion rolls over and dies rather than comes up with some convoluted rationalization.

Remind me, was Genesis being metaphorical when it made ridiculous claims about the origin of the world, life and humanity? Was this always the stance of its followers?

I don't believe so. I believe it is being literal. What mornings and evenings are though in God's mind is probably not what we know them to be from our point of view and we must assume the story is being told from His point of view as it is describing things He is doing. “A day with the Lord is as a thousand years” as it says in another place so when God is describing time frames what is it that He wants to teach us? What is a day to an eternal being? 24 hours as we would measure it? Even the early church fathers didn't believe that they were literal 24 hour periods and they lived in the first and second centuries AD.

Gambler

I don't think it is. We know that the universe had a beginning right? And we don't know how it came to be, but most scientists accept that at some point in the finite past it did not exist.

I'm nowhere near to being up on the current "big bang" sceince, personally I don't know why there is always an assumption that time at some stage had to "begin" and now that I think about it I must do some more readin on this but it's a big jump from accepting there was a begining to the universe to:

Now not only did the universe not exist but the potential for a universe did not exist. So from nothing at all everything came.

I don't know any scientists that claim that before the big bang there was "nothing" and it all came from nowhere, if anything I would think that they would just say "we don't know\have any ideas yet"

whatdoicare

May I ask a question-not really relating to the thread but it's something I've always gotten stuck on?
In the bible-the part relating to our existence-Adam and Eve and such? And they had Cain and Able, I think? One murdered the other?What came next?
I always wanted to know!
I remember once watching a documentary on how Adam had other wives-referred to in the old testament- but I'm afraid I was distracted that day and never finished watching it.
I always assumed that Adam and Eve referred to an egg and sperm and the snake was used as phallic imagery- I don't have a clue why I think this, I must have watched or read something about it at some point.
I assumed that this was a hidden story in those days about sex and modesty-I have the feeling that much of the bible is meant this way-as a way of teaching about life-like you would tell a child while trying not to overwhelm them or frighten them.
I'm interested to know what you believe happened next? How did they populate the Earth? Same with the Ark and the two of every animal?

Soul Winner

Tar.Aldarion wrote: »

My point was it is the same type of 'logic' as you are using with pascal's wager. Pretty to look at but just wrong.

Btw you analogy also did not make sense. If you make a wall so high you can't get over it then it is still a wall, unlike the triangle which changes to a quadrilateral. I did not ask could god make a wall so high that it was a lake.

I'd say that He cannot build a wall that high, but it is only due to His never being NOT able to climb it. Or maybe He can build one but He's just not that stupid.

Zillah

Soul Winner wrote: »

I don't think it is. We know that the universe had a beginning right? And we don't know how it came to be, but most scientists accept that at some point in the finite past it did not exist. Now not only did the universe not exist but the potential for a universe did not exist. So from nothing at all everything came. How?

We don't know.

Either it was created by a powerful being which transcends space and time i.e. is eternal i.e. not having a beginning.

Or, y'know, you could not invent an answer without evidence and admit that we don't know. Even if I were to concede this absurd need for a causal factor outside space and time, there is no reason to assume such is an intelligent super entity.

I also find it hysterical and staggering that you can on one hand assert that nothing at all existed and then clumsily segue into proposing that an omnipotent super intelligence was existant as if that wasn't a completely insane thing to say.

"Yes, the sky is blue. Nothing but blue in the sky. Now, we have to conclude that the sky is made of blood because both the sky and blood are red."

Or the universe just popped into existence from nothing and by nothing. These are the 2 options that we are faced with hence Pascal's wager idea.

None of this has anything at all to do with Pascal's Wager. Apprently not only do you not understand the rebuttals you've been given, you actually don't even understand the argument you yourself have employed. Bravo.

The only thing Pascal's Wager says is that if we look at life and the afterlife as a gamble, then the bet that is likely to lead to less post-life suffering is belief in God. That's it. It's like you're pointing at a table and telling me it supports your position on who will be the next Taoiseach. They have nothing to do with each other.

I don't believe so. I believe it is being literal. What mornings and evenings are though in God's mind is probably not what we know them to be from our point of view and we must assume the story is being told from His point of view as it is describing things He is doing. “A day with the Lord is as a thousand years” as it says in another place so when God is describing time frames what is it that He wants to teach us? What is a day to an eternal being? 24 hours as we would measure it? Even the early church fathers didn't believe that they were literal 24 hour periods and they lived in the first and second centuries AD.

Uh huh. And what about the talking snake? Magic tree? Eve being made from Adam's rib? The appearance en masse of all the species that populate the world? The claim that human kind began as two parentless humans who spawned the rest of our race? All of that is literal truth as well? Or was it something that science disproved and the believers had to adapt to with ridiculous rationalisations?

condra

Zillah wrote: »

And what about the talking snake? Magic tree? Eve being made from Adam's rib? The appearance en masse of all the species that populate the world? The claim that human kind began as two parentless humans who spawned the rest of our race? All of that is literal truth as well? Or was it something that science disproved and the believers had to adapt to with ridiculous rationalisations?

= win

rockbeer

Zillah wrote: »

Or, y'know, you could not invent an answer without evidence and admit that we don't know. Even if I were to concede this absurd need for a causal factor outside space and time, there is no reason to assume such is an intelligent super entity.

I actually fell out with a friend over this nonsense. Sat in the pub one night he tried to tell me that nothing could come of nothing therefore god.

I proposed that our universe might just as plausibly be code running on a computer somewhere outside our universe. The effect would be identical from our perspective and there's equal evidence for both. Possibly more for the computer - at least we know computers can exist, unlike pan-dimensional super-beings with powers. His reply: "Now you're being silly".

I kid you not.

He never rings me any more... some people take this stuff really seriously.

seanybiker

One thing that turned me off religion, not that I was into it anyways was when I was making me conformation, there was an english lad in my class and he was made go into the priest and say blaa blaa it has been whenever since I went to confession. This poor chap was raised in england as an atheist but he was made go into confession and say he was never at confession.
hats ok for us irish who get force fed this bullology about jebus and his father, who are the same people, personally I think it was a PAYE scam.
I hate the way Religon in Ireland is forced upon you at such a young age. If catholic priests or whoever are so devoted to jebus and no he lived, why dont they give people a chance of finding out for themselves.
Im baptised, made me communion and cornfirmation ( I dont care about spelling god forgives) but as a 12 year old at the time, that was the done thing.
I said this many times before, If you believe in god, fair enough and if you dont then fair enough.
WHO CARES. (well apart from the holy moly crowd):mad:

Handsome Bob

rockbeer wrote: »

I actually fell out with a friend over this nonsense. Sat in the pub one night he tried to tell me that nothing could come of nothing therefore god.

I proposed that our universe might just as plausibly be code running on a computer somewhere outside our universe. The effect would be identical from our perspective and there's equal evidence for both. Possibly more for the computer - at least we know computers can exist, unlike pan-dimensional super-beings with powers. His reply: "Now you're being silly".

I kid you not.

He never rings me any more... some people take this stuff really seriously.

Never a good conversation to have with friends when alcohol is involved.

Zombrex

Soul Winner wrote: »

I don't think it is. We know that the universe had a beginning right?

Basically yes, but then that depends on how one defines "universe" and "beginning"

We know the current state of the universe had a beginning, beyond that we can't say much more. It is possible, though difficult to demonstrate, that this universe is simple one of an infinite number. Then you get into the question of what do you call this collection of universes.

Soul Winner wrote: »

And we don't know how it came to be, but most scientists accept that at some point in the finite past it did not exist.

As has already been explained to you many times, time itself started at the Big Bang. There was no point in the past when the universe did not exist.

Soul Winner wrote: »

Now not only did the universe not exist but the potential for a universe did not exist. So from nothing at all everything came. How?

That is a very good question.

I hope though that you appreciate that "God did it" isn't actually an answer.

Soul Winner wrote: »

Either it was created by a powerful being which transcends space and time i.e. is eternal i.e. not having a beginning. Or the universe just popped into existence from nothing and by nothing.

... Or a whole load of other ideas that are just as likely but that you refuse to consider because it doesn't fit your particular theological argument...:rolleyes:

CerebralCortex

Soul Winner wrote: »

...How? Either it was created by a powerful being which transcends space and time i.e. is eternal i.e. not having a beginning. Or the universe just popped into existence from nothing and by nothing. These are the 2 options that we are faced with hence Pascal's wager idea.

Again as I said the same old absolutes of absolute crap. Say for instance a god which transcends my ass blah blah blah exist. Why do you impress human emotions onto that idea? Does that not say anything to you? It is what is so frustrating about your threads Soul Winner you consistently fail to see how tainted your thought process is by your own desires.

Soul Winner wrote: »

I don't believe so. I believe it is being literal. What mornings and evenings are though in God's mind is probably not what we know them to be from our point of view and we must assume the story is being told from His point of view as it is describing things He is doing. “A day with the Lord is as a thousand years” as it says in another place so when God is describing time frames what is it that He wants to teach us? What is a day to an eternal being? 24 hours as we would measure it? Even the early church fathers didn't believe that they were literal 24 hour periods and they lived in the first and second centuries AD.

Again more anthropomorphising.

Zombrex

Soul Winner wrote: »

Just curious as to what individual facts convinced you atheists that there is no God.

There was no one thing, but I guess the main thing was looking at humanity more closely, looking at the different religions and the way people can believe things that clearly aren't true.

The excuse often given by religious people is that just because all the other religions are not true, just because everyone in those religious believes they are having some kind of spiritual communication that isn't real, with a deity that doesn't exist, doesn't mean I'm (believer of religion X) am

Which really isn't that convincing an argument. You might not be, but you probably are.

It really isn't that complicated to be an atheist. Anyone who has ever had a friend who is convinced his girlfriend isn't cheating on him even though she cheated on every other boyfriend she has ever had, knows what it is like to be an atheist.

Anyone who has ever known someone who plays subscribes to these pyramid schemes or these get rich quick schemes, knows what it is like to be an atheist.

My atheism came about simply when realised two things,

A) The universe is indifferent to the hopes and desires of individual humans.
You have no greater chance of winning the lottery just because you are poor and need th money. The girl on the subway who you think is really pretty isn't going to want to go out with you just because you have not had sex in a year. Your girlfriend isn't going to not cheat on you just because you really don't want her too. Your dog isn't going to live to 25 years old just because you would really miss him if he died.

Humans, in general, can't deal with that
Humans invent a whole host of delusions to get around, mentally, the issues presented in A). This goes far beyond religion, though religion is perhaps the most obvious example. Basically humans (all humans, including atheists) often find themselves not being able to deal with the harshness of the indifferent universe, and grab on to versions of reality that are more pleasing but that which don't have anything to do with what is actually happening.

Again the Christian argument is yes we know all that, we see it every day, but just because humans are doing this all the time doesn't mean we are doing it when it comes to the belief in our comforting loving deity.

Which is true, but it strongly suggests that you are, just like everyone else. Pile on top of that the complete lack of any proper evidence (evidence that is independent of the "feelings" or claims of the individual believers) and it is pretty hard not to conclude that Christianity is just like every other human delusion, religious or otherwise.

Soul Winner wrote: »

There is not an atheist on the planet that KNOWS that there is no God, only atheists with varying degrees in belief that there is no God but none that actually knows.

Depends on how you define "knows" ... I mean can anyone really know anything for certain. How do I know the tooth fairy doesn't exist? I "know" this because I have been told by other people, such as my parents, that they pretended to be the tooth fairy. I "know" that such a concept as a tooth fairy is rather implausible from a scientific point of view (how would such a being operate, how would it have evolved, where would it have come from).

Based on all the evidence presented to me I conclude that it is far far more likely that the "tooth fairy" is in fact an invention of adults for the amusement of children, some modern remnant of older superstitions and myths.

Do I "know" this? Depends on what you mean. I cannot prove beyond all doubt that the tooth fairy doesn't actually exist. She could exist, my parents could be lying for some reason. Society in general could be lying. But I don't think that is very plausible. But then I could be wrong.

So do I know your god doesn't exist (or anyone else's for that matter?). Not for 100% certain, any more than I know for 100% certain that the tooth fairy or Santa doesn't exist. Out of all the made up gods your god could actually be real. Out of all the billions of humans throughout history who have gone through life believing in a religious delusion, Christians could actually be not a delusion.

It is certainly possible. But I don't think it is particularly likely. In fact I would say, based on what I've seen, that it is very unlikely. If I had to pick the most likely religion to be real I certainly wouldn't pick Christianity, or the Christian concept of god.

sukikettle

HE EXISTS REGARDLESS. HE IS VERY POWERFUL AND DESCRIBED IN THE BIBLE AS A CONSUMING FIRE. THERE IS A JUDGEMENT COMING ON THE WORLD AND IT WILL HAPPEN REGARDLESS.IT'S A TERRIBLE DAY FOR THOSE WHO WILL NOT CHOOSE HIM.DON'T FORGET IT IS HE WHO HARDENS YOUR HEARTS WHEN YOU GO TOO FAR.ETERNAL LIFE IS A FREE GIFT AND YOU ONLY NEED ASK. A PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP THROUGH HIS SON AND NOT RELIGION IS THE KEY. READ FOR YOURSELF. THE BIBLE IS VERY CURRENT AND VERY RELEVANT AND WHAT IS THE POINT OF YOUR LIFE OTHERWISE AND WHAT HOLDS YOU IN CHECK MY FRIENDS? A FEAR OF THE LAW? WHY ISN'T THERE COMPLETE ANARCHY?WHY DO YOU LOVE AND GIVE AND CRY AND LAUGH? WITHOUT HIM WHAT IS IT ALL FOR?

The Mad Hatter

sukikettle wrote: »

HE EXISTS REGARDLESS. HE IS VERY POWERFUL AND DESCRIBED IN THE BIBLE AS A CONSUMING FIRE. THERE IS A JUDGEMENT COMING ON THE WORLD AND IT WILL HAPPEN REGARDLESS.IT'S A TERRIBLE DAY FOR THOSE WHO WILL NOT CHOOSE HIM.DON'T FORGET IT IS HE WHO HARDENS YOUR HEARTS WHEN YOU GO TOO FAR.ETERNAL LIFE IS A FREE GIFT AND YOU ONLY NEED ASK. A PERSONAL RELATIONSHIP THROUGH HIS SON AND NOT RELIGION IS THE KEY. READ FOR YOURSELF. THE BIBLE IS VERY CURRENT AND VERY RELEVANT AND WHAT IS THE POINT OF YOUR LIFE OTHEWISE AND WHAT HOLDS YOU IN CHECK MY FRIENDS? A FEAR OF THE LAW? WHY ISN'T THERE COMPLETE ANARCHY?WHY DO YOU LOVE AND GIVE AND CRY AND LAUGH? WITHOUT HIM WHAT IS IT ALL FOR?

I think your caps lock key is stuck. Please buy a new keyboard.

In answer to the question - I'm not convinced that there is no god, but I haven't seen any compelling evidence that there is one. For as long as I've been able to reason things out, I've been unable to accept the concept of an all-powerful being generally, and I've seen no reason to accept the word of an ancient book and an ancient tradition, simply because that's the way it's been.

Hrm...maybe I didn't explain that very clearly...

sukikettle

He doesn't need to prove Himself. You either want Him or you don't. It's called faith just as you're fairly certain there's a tomorrow but not entirely sure you'll wake up. Don't you hope you do and what if you didn't where are you going?

Pride Fighter

Jesus appeared to me in a dream and said it was all bulls1t:D

The Mad Hatter

sukikettle wrote: »

He doesn't need to prove Himself. You either want Him or you don't. It's called faith just as you're fairly certain there's a tomorrow but not entirely sure you'll wake up. Don't you hope you do and what if you didn't where are you going?

I'm not asking for him to prove himself. Any proof, from anyone, would be nice. The idea of believing something simply because you've been told it's true is absurd.

Though (having read your block of text) I'm fairly sure that if he does exist, he is indeed regardless.

sukikettle

I'm really sorry faith is not an option for you Pride. I mean that.

The Mad Hatter

sukikettle wrote: »

I'm really sorry faith is not an option for you Pride. I mean that.

...

what?

sukikettle

Are you an aimless creation in a very ordered universe Hatter.

Mena

sukikettle wrote: »

He doesn't need to prove Himself. You either want Him or you don't. It's called faith just as you're fairly certain there's a tomorrow but not entirely sure you'll wake up. Don't you hope you do and what if you didn't where are you going?

Why would you be going anywhere? If there's no god, and you died in the morning, you'd be dead. End.

It's only the human condition that makes us want to believe there is something after death, it's like a warm blanket of hope, but it's a false hope based on no verifiable evidence.

Edit: Felt like responding to this one:

sukikettle wrote: »

Are you an aimless creation in a very ordered universe Hatter.

I have hopes, dreams and aspirations. I don't need a fictional character to validate them. Humanity's ego needs to take a step down, as yes, we are rather inconsequential in the cosmological sense.

sukikettle

Look it's not anyone's job to convince or prove.You accept Him or you don't I bet you've never asked Him to reveal Himself in your lives.