There is no acceptable proof of God for atheists

ironingbored

Linus67 wrote: »

The fact that we are here proves that God exists. And anyone who does not believe in God will not get into Heaven.

The fact that we are here does nothing of the sort.

What happens if one does not wish to participate in the fun and games in Heaven such as perpetual adulation, unbridled sycophancy and ego-massaging?

Linus67

ironingbored wrote: »

The fact that we are here does nothing of the sort.

What happens if one does not wish to participate in the fun and games in Heaven such as perpetual adulation, unbridled sycophancy and ego-massaging?

People who turn against God and mock him will either go to Purgatory or Heaven. If you are a misguided good person who is easily influenced by the Atheist Media and other misguided people there is hope. These people will spend time in Purgatory until the end of the world and then they will be let into Heaven alongside the rest of the people in the world who are not Catholic. And those who berate God and those who do not believe in God will spend eternity in Hell.

Blazer

Linus67 wrote: »

The fact that we are here proves that God exists. And anyone who does not believe in God will not get into Heaven.

The fact that I'm here proves that my parents are not sterile

For people that just quote a so-called bible and accept there is a God without any doubt whatsoever I rank them on the same IQ level as those poor bastards who blow themselves up for Islam..
Easily led gullible people.


I had a conversation with a priest once about God..
I asked how he could believe in a God who doesn't defend the poor/the innocent or save lives of all the people who are murdered in the world.
His answer was that even though we are all God's children sooner or later we have to walk on our own two feet so as to speak.
Do not parents eventually let their children loose to lead their own lives? He asked me.
My reply was "it's easy to see that you have no children...no man or woman will ever allow harm to come to their child..regardless of their age"
You might leave them go but you'll always try and protect them.

If God did exist he's the worst parent ever.

Turtwig

Berkut wrote: »

If God did does exist he's the worst parent engineer/designer ever.

FYP

ironingbored

Linus67 wrote: »

People who turn against God and mock him

How do you know God is a Him?

Linus67 wrote: »

...you will either go to Purgatory or Heaven.

What if I'm a good person but don't want to go to these places?

Linus67 wrote: »

If you are a misguided good person who is easily influenced by the Atheist Media and other misguided people there is hope. These people will spend time in Purgatory until the end of the world and then they will be let into Heaven alongside the rest of the people in the world who are not Catholic.

The only thing I am easily influenced by is hard facts. I don't accept things just because my parents told me or because that's what other people believe.

Linus67 wrote: »

And those who berate God and those who do not believe in God will spend eternity in Hell.

Isn't burning in hell a little OTT for just not believing? It seems extreme, vindictive and downright sadistic.

Turtwig

Linus 67 you've dug a big hole for yourself here, and I'd advise you start filling it quickly before other posters use this as opportunity to fill this thread with replies directly aimed at YOU!

ironingbored

House wrote: »

Not one scripture to back any of that up, I was a JW for 8 years and a born-again christian for 1 year, so I know you've got nothing but baseless assertion there.

Now that's a story I'd like to hear. And deserves its own thread.

Care to join us over @ A&A?

Linus67

I am a Traditionalist Catholic. I am not going to prostitute MY views just to appease some leftwing idiots.
I don't care what people's views are. And if people are so upset about my views it says a lot about them.
Why do some people feel so threatened by Christians and Catholics in particular? The responses on this topic seems to suggest that a lot of people on here are hardcore Communists.

I am only new here, bit isn't there an Atheist section on Boards.ie. Why post in the Christian section just to mock you Creator?

PDN

Linus67 wrote: »

I am a Traditionalist Catholic. I am not going to prostitute MY views just to appease some leftwing idiots.
I don't care what people's views are. And if people are so upset about my views it says a lot about them.
Why do some people feel so threatened by Christians and Catholics in particular? The responses on this topic seems to suggest that a lot of people on here are hardcore Communists.

I am only new here, bit isn't there an Atheist section on Boards.ie. Why post in the Christian section just to mock you Creator?

You are entitled, and encouraged, to state and discuss your views here. Kindly do so without insulting others. Calling other posters idiots earns infractions (as does mocking God or mocking Christianity).

themagicmunkey

CORRECTED - YOU ARE WRONG

Atheists by definition do not believe in God. Therefore, they don't consider him (why is he a dude, not a girl?) real. Fullstop

That is like saying Fish are not good cyclists, so they pretend they have no bikes

chozometroid wrote: »

What is comes down to is this: Atheists just don't like God, or the idea of the Christian God, so it doesn't matter to them if He is real or not. He is not worthy of worship to them.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

pts

Linus67 wrote: »

Why do some people feel so threatened by Christians and Catholics in particular?

I think you indirectly answered your own question in your post.

I'm paraphrasing and reading between the lines, but the way I (and probably many other people) read your post is.

Linus67 wrote: »

I am a Traditionalist Catholic. I am not going to prostitute MY views just to appease some leftwing idiots. I don't care what people's views are. And if people are so upset about my views it says a lot about them.

I get my "instructions for life" from a 2000 year old book. I believe very strongly in what this book says and I'm not prepared to change my views regardless of what discoveries or advances are made if they contradict my 2000 year old book. I know I'm right and anyone who thinks otherwise is obviously wrong.

I wouldn't necessary agree that people are afraid of Christians but if the above interpretation of your post are the views you hold I think you do come across as a very scary person.

Turtwig

pts wrote: »

I think you indirectly answered your own question in your post.

I'm paraphrasing and reading between the lines, but the way I (and probably many other people) read your post is.


I get my "instructions for life" from a 2000 year old book. I believe very strongly in what this book says and I'm not prepared to change my views regardless of what discoveries or advances are made if they contradict my 2000 year old book. I know I'm right and anyone who thinks otherwise is obviously wrong.

I wouldn't necessary agree that people are afraid of Christians but if the above interpretation of your post are the views you hold I think you do come across as a very scary person.

Actually, the way I read his/her post was:

"I'm a traditionalist Catholic and I'm not going to appease my views for people who don't believe in God (Who I clearly do).

He/She is just being emotional, we're seen as an attack on something dear to him/her that is unquestionably real...almost like a personal insult.
(Hopefully, through dialogue you will lose that conception)

It simple, Linus, you're being emotional for no reason.In my opinion, the way you should look at is it is like this : If you engage in rational debate with us (as many others here do, and I am grateful for that:)) you'll gain a better understanding of your beliefs.
Which means either you'll join us, or your faith and understanding in God will be much better understood and appreciated.
The issue of God is the singlest most important question in our lives which is why we discuss these things..:)

rccaulfield

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

And how do you propose that you do a double blind trial on a specific prayer?

As said above- he/she prayed for a specific sum of money and it arrived. So it would go something like- A prayer is made thats something will happen in a specific area, an independent tester(that doesn't know the prayer) observes the area for said period of time and records what happens. HOWEVER the lord works in mysterious ways etc etc and all the cop out outs would soon come i feel if the trial proves the prayer didn't work? Maybe not?
All double blind trials done that iv studied on superstition/supernatural claims have never beaten the odds of chance.

Linus67

PDN wrote: »

You are entitled, and encouraged, to state and discuss your views here. Kindly do so without insulting others. Calling other posters idiots earns infractions (as does mocking God or mocking Christianity).

Why single me out and not the person who questioned my IQ and compared me to Mohammedan terrorists? Surely saying such things is an insult to me?

I have no problem arguing with anti Catholic posters, but I will end up posting on the same topic indefinitely. So what's the point?

Zombrex

Linus67 wrote: »

The fact that we are here proves that God exists. And anyone who does not believe in God will not get into Heaven.

With cool hard logic like that it is a wonder anyone is an atheist.

I suppose that a bunny rabbit created the universe. The fact that there is a universe proves that this assertion is correct. QED

PDN

Linus67 wrote: »

Why single me out and not the person who questioned my IQ and compared me to Mohammedan terrorists? Surely saying such things is an insult to me?

I have no problem arguing with anti Catholic posters, but I will end up posting on the same topic indefinitely. So what's the point?

You were not singled out. The person who attacked you was infracted whereas you merely received an inthread warning.

If you have any further questions about moderation then address them to a moderator via PM or take it to Helpdesk. Please do not try to discuss them in a thread on this forum.

The purpose of this forum is for discussion about the Christian faith. It would be helpful if we all leaned towards discussion rather than seeking argument.

Fanny Cradock

rccaulfield wrote: »

As said above- he/she prayed for a specific sum of money and it arrived. So it would go something like- A prayer is made thats something will happen in a specific area, an independent tester(that doesn't know the prayer) observes the area for said period of time and records what happens. HOWEVER the lord works in mysterious ways etc etc and all the cop out outs would soon come i feel if the trial proves the prayer didn't work? Maybe not?
All double blind trials done that iv studied on superstition/supernatural claims have never beaten the odds of chance.

Well then you should probably look a little harder at some of the meta-analysis out there. Still, whatever the findings, the idea that you can study the effectiveness of prayer is preposterous. The simple fact is that it is impossible to control the conditions required to set up a control group or any comparative groups.

robindch

Fanny Cradock wrote: »

Still, whatever the findings, the idea that you can study the effectiveness of prayer is preposterous.

Leaving aside the question of whether or not you can study prayer per se, what researchers have done is study whether what religious people say about the effectiveness of praying is true. And it turns out in the largest (over 1800 people), most well-carried-out (double-blind, randomized etc), multi-year, multi-million-dollar study, that what religious people claim on behalf of prayer is simply not true.

Different thing.

Linus67

Linus67 wrote: »

The fact that we are here proves that God exists. And anyone who does not believe in God will not get into Heaven.

:eek: ?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

Zombrex

robindch wrote: »

Leaving aside the question of whether or not you can study prayer per se, what researchers have done is study whether what religious people say about the effectiveness of praying is true.

It is a subtle but important difference, something you encounter a lot as a atheist, when asked so you don't believe in God, the answer is No, I don't believe you when you say there is a God.

At the end of the day all religion is is human claims about the supernatural. You can test the validity of these like you can test the validity of any human claim, even if the answer is that the claim cannot be supported.

PDN

robindch wrote: »

Leaving aside the question of whether or not you can study prayer per se, what researchers have done is study whether what religious people say about the effectiveness of praying is true. And it turns out in the largest (over 1800 people), most well-carried-out (double-blind, randomized etc), multi-year, multi-million-dollar study, that what religious people claim on behalf of prayer is simply not true.

Different thing.

Religious people do not have a generic belief about prayer, nor do they all say that the same things are true.

The study you mention shows that having a variety of people of different religious beliefs, praying to different concepts of God, is not effective enough to be statistically significant.

I agree.

I also believe the same would be true of medicine. Try doing a double-blind randomised study (and, if you're daft enough spend millions of dollars in the process) where people take all kinds of medicine unrelated to their medical history - then see if their health improves or not. I strongly suspect that the results would show that just taking medicine in general (rather than taking the correct medicine for your condition) would not result in a statistically significant improvement in the subjects health - indeed, the opposite would probably be true. This would not prove that medicine doesn't work. Nor, indeed, would it demonstrate that what medical people say about medicine isn't true - because that would be to make false claims and absurd generalisations about medical people.

Turtwig

PDN wrote: »

I also believe the same would be true of medicine. Try doing a double-blind randomised study (and, if you're daft enough spend millions of dollars in the process) where people take all kinds of medicine unrelated to their medical history - then see if their health improves or not. I strongly suspect that the results would show that just taking medicine in general (rather than taking the correct medicine for your condition) would not result in a statistically significant improvement in the subjects health - indeed, the opposite would probably be true. This would not prove that medicine doesn't work. Nor, indeed, would it demonstrate that what medical people say about medicine isn't true - because that would be to make false claims and absurd generalisations about medical people.

This is actually one of the weirdest things about modern medecine, what you proposed has actually been carried out in a number of different ways, and the two rather bizarre phenomena (can I call them that?) that occur are the placebo effect namely subjects improve when given the wrong treatment, or a fake treatment. And placebo's evil twin - the nocebo effect namely a doctor mistakenly tells a healthy person that they're terminally ill and. well, you guessed it, the person usually ends up dying within the time had the doctor had given them!

While I get the point you were making above, I just thought I'd point out that common sense isn't always right.

The effect of prayer does need to be studied because, from a naturalist viewpoint, we evolved the prayer mechanism for some reason (possibly a benefit?) and as prayers haven't really been tested yet no one really know what the results will spout out. Interestingly though from, a brain point of view, prayer is just a less intense form of meditation. Science has pretty much confirmed that meditation is good for you : so prayer is good too!
(Although Meditation is much much better:P)

Soul Winner

Malty_T wrote: »

Science has pretty much confirmed that meditation is good for you : so prayer is good too!
(Although Meditation is much much better )

I can understand how a species like ours could have evolved to meditate but I can't imagine how we could have evolved "praying". Meditation can be used to either stimulate or relax the mind but it has nothing to do with what one truly believes in. Whereas praying to a God that we actually believe is there couldn't have been evolved. How do we evolve beliefs? Practices yes but beliefs no. How do Gods evolve from primitive types of Gods worshipped by the heathen to God's like the God of the Bible? How can one race of people have evolved to pray to that kind of inconvenient God if He doesn't actually exist? A God who puts constraints on you, who rattles your cage, who bugs you to worship Him. That baffles me. All other Gods I can understand but to evolve a belief in a God like the God of the Bible is really strange and counter productive if He doesn't exist. If all I'm doing is evolving a belief then give me a wooden poll with a carved head to pray to any day. I don't need that guy in the Bible who says things that make me feel inadequate and uncomfortable about myself. My point is that there is no way that our species evolved all these millions of years to end up worshipping a character like this when all the while He never even existed.

lugha

Malty_T wrote: »

This is actually one of the weirdest things about modern medecine, what you proposed has actually been carried out in a number of different ways, and the two rather bizarre phenomena (can I call them that?) that occur are the placebo effect namely subjects improve when given the wrong treatment, or a fake treatment. And placebo's evil twin - the nocebo effect namely a doctor mistakenly tells a healthy person that they're terminally ill and. well, you guessed it, the person usually ends up dying within the time had the doctor had given them!

There is another phenomena which often shows up along with the placebo effect (but doesn't get mentioned as much) and that is the regression fallacy. In the context of the question of whether intercessionary prayer is effective, if believers were only to offer such prayers in fairly extreme circumstances (e.g. for the recovery of a sick relative) then they would observe a tendency for what the prayed for to come to pass. But it need not have anything to do with prayer.

Turtwig

Soul Winner wrote: »

I can understand how a species like ours could have evolved to meditate but I can't imagine how we could have evolved "praying". Meditation can be used to either stimulate or relax the mind but it has nothing to do with what one truly believes in. Whereas praying to a God that we actually believe is there couldn't have been evolved. How do we evolve beliefs? Practices yes but beliefs no. How do Gods evolve from primitive types of Gods worshipped by the heathen to God's like the God of the Bible? How can one race of people have evolved to pray to that kind of inconvenient God if He doesn't actually exist? A God who puts constraints on you, who rattles your cage, who bugs you to worship Him. That baffles me. All other Gods I can understand but to evolve a belief in a God like the God of the Bible is really strange and counter productive if He doesn't exist. If all I'm doing is evolving a belief then give me a wooden poll with a carved head to pray to any day. I don't need that guy in the Bible who says things that make me feel inadequate and uncomfortable about myself. My point is that there is no way that our species evolved all these millions of years to end up worshipping a character like this when all the while He never even existed.

Your entire argument rests on the false assumption that evolution has to be beneficial.

Soul Winner

Malty_T wrote: »

Your entire argument rests on the false assumption that evolution has to be beneficial.

Well I'm not saying that it has to be or not, but be that as it may, isn't it true that Natural Selection favours traits which benefit survival?

Morbert

Malty_T wrote: »

Your entire argument rests on the false assumption that evolution has to be beneficial.

Evolution moves from less successful survival strategies to more successful survival strategies. It is "beneficial" in that regard.

I'm not aware of any evidence which suggests that prayer directly evolved. Though I can see how it might emerge culturally from other evolutionary dispositions.

CerebralCortex

Soul Winner wrote: »

Well I'm not saying that it has to be or not, but be that as it may, isn't it true that Natural Selection favours traits which benefit survival?

Plus, unwittingly, with complete contempt for the property of self awareness in favour of replication/survival.

Turtwig

Soul Winner wrote: »

Well I'm not saying that it has to be or not, but be that as it may, isn't it true that Natural Selection favours traits which benefit survival?

Natural Selection isn't the only way..

Morbert wrote: »

Evolution moves from less successful survival strategies to more successful survival strategies. It is "beneficial" in that regard.

Argeed, beneficial to survival and reproduction, but not necessarily beneficial to the lives of the survivors. Their lifespan may be shortened but as long as their reproduction is increased natural selection will continue to work on them.

Zombrex

Soul Winner wrote: »

Whereas praying to a God that we actually believe is there couldn't have been evolved.

We not only know that praying could have evolved, we have a pretty good idea why it evolved in humans.

Praying is the end result the evolved ability of humans to communicate and to see human like agents in nature. We have a natural instinct to communicate with humans and non-humans (we talk to animals, despite rationally knowing they don't understand us)

We also have a very strong instinct to see a mind behind events in nature. It makes perfect sense then that humans would attempt to communicate with this mind in nature, particularly by asking it for stuff (praying) since we are much more likely to fall back on this instinct to see agency in nature when we are under stress (ie we need something to help us)

Soul Winner wrote: »

All other Gods I can understand but to evolve a belief in a God like the God of the Bible is really strange and counter productive if He doesn't exist.

How is believing in the Christian god counter productive from an evolutionary point of view?

Soul Winner wrote: »

If all I'm doing is evolving a belief then give me a wooden poll with a carved head to pray to any day. I don't need that guy in the Bible who says things that make me feel inadequate and uncomfortable about myself.

Of course you do. Since when has feeling adequate and comfortable kept anyone alive?

Humans have a natural instinct to believe thing worst about themselves, and to believe others when they say the worst about them. A person may paint a picture and have 10 people say it is lovely but start bawling crying because 1 person hates it.

We have a natural tendency to over emphasis the negative things said about us and under emphasis the positive. From an evolutionary point of view we do this to keep ourselves on our toes.

L. Ron Hubbard put this to great use. The first thing you want to do if you want to start a successful religion is start telling people there is something wrong with them, because they will believe it.