ScumLord wrote: » I just think there's a huge conflict in saying god is caring but if he decides this or that he won't care about your opinion on the matter. I don't like the thought of something thinking their better than me (even if they are) it's arrogant.
ScumLord wrote: » I'm open to the idea of a creator but not the one in the bible and not an ongoing active administrator. The universe is so well balanced that any outside interference could make a mess of everything.
prinz wrote: » I fear for your sense of humour if that makes you lol tbh. This is where it gets really interesting, people with no belief in an omnipotent being racking their brains trying to come up with arguments against it.
Ickle Magoo wrote: » I'm hardly racking my brains to find arguments against something for which you can show me no evidence and the world is suspiciously akin to how it would be if no god existed now, am I? I came up with most of my opinions on theism as a pre-schooler.
Jakkass wrote: » Dare I say, they may well be up for an audit
YHVH wrote: I mean those trees are awesome but they just go on growing and don't know i made them
YHVH wrote: Hi Elephant you like me but you don't know just how cool I am
YHVH wrote: Hi puppy you like me but you like everything. I am the creator of heaven and earth
YHVH wrote: I know. I will make someone to worship me. I will make my own friends
YHVH wrote: Now Adam and er Eve is it. You can have anything in the garden but of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil ye may not eat.
Adam wrote: Grand
Eve wrote: OK
YHVH wrote: I TOLD YOU NOT TO EAT OF THE FRUIT OF THE TREE OF THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOOD AND EVIL
Eve wrote: Yeah well we hadn't eaten of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil and so we didn't know that it was wrong to lie.
YHVH wrote: I am not listening get out of my sight for a few thousand years!
Adam wrote: Can we ever come back God?
YHVH wrote: Yeah look I was a bit hasty there so I am going to come back in a bit, knock up a fourteen year old, get her to give birth to become a joiner and get myself crucified to make up for you eating that fruit.
Eve wrote: Why don't you just make a really nice endtable
YHVH wrote: Oh I will.
MUSSOLINI wrote: » Sorry to interrupt, but what are the historical pieces of evidence for Jesus Christ's existence besides the gospels? .
supermonkey wrote: » There's loads of archaeological evidence. Between 8AD and 28 AD there is loads of amazing Israeli furniture so amazing that I can't even emulate it today. All the joints line up. Nothing glued in place. It is amazing stuff.
Jakkass wrote: » I just think, that even if I could give you the loftiest and most intellectual of all arguments (if I could being the emphasis, I don't think I argue all that well at the best of times) it wouldn't budge a thing.
Do you not wonder why the universe is so well balanced to begin with? It's a huge problem I have with atheism, is that the assumption is that this happens for no reason whatsoever, and that the universe is devoid of purpose.
ScumLord wrote: » No, it's a pretty big impasse with me, I just can't get around the fact that the Christian god if he was a person sounds like someone I just wouldn't like to be around.
supermonkey wrote: » Look at his creation. I think lions are beautiful but it is a bit tough on the Gazelles. Perhaps the reason that Adam and Eve were not to eat the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and of evil was because they would have realised that God was evil.
Bambi wrote: » Could god not have just made a gotchee to guard the tree?
Jakkass wrote: » Do you not wonder why the universe is so well balanced to begin with? .
bluewolf wrote: » How is it well balanced
Ickle Magoo wrote: » I never get that argument either. I'd say heading for almost certain solar annihilation while dodging comets, meteors and solar flares is anything but a universe acting with purpose for the sake of a few billion primates on one tiny sphere.
ScumLord wrote: » It's science that will go on and on about how if one tiny detail like the force of gravity was slightly different the universe just wouldn't work. It's where the multi universe theory comes in to explain why this universe would be so perfect. It's just one of many universes that are all slightly different and most of the other ones wouldn't work at all.
Ickle Magoo wrote: » No, if one detail was slightly different the universe would be different, I don't know what "just wouldn't work" means?
ScumLord wrote: » If gravity was different it would cause all kind of problems that could prevent planets and stars from forming which would mean the universe would just be a clump of elements. You could say that's just different but the end result would mean no planets, and no life. From our point of view that's a broken universe.
Jakkass wrote: » Actually, that isn't a problem. Just because human behaviour and human thought changes over time, does not discredit the view that there is a universal standard of morality by which we will all be judged by. .
MUSSOLINI wrote: » Sorry to interrupt, but what are the historical pieces of evidence for Jesus Christ's existence besides the gospels? I assume there are many pieces from the Romans etc, considering even older material(like Cicero's letters) is still extant? Not making an argument against His existence mind, just curious.
Nodin wrote: » So just because your supposed "universal standard" doesn't exist, theres a universal standard which exists. I like it.
Jakkass wrote: » I didn't argue this. Humans can choose to not conform, indeed try to suppress or ignore this universal standard of morality if they so choose, but on a pragmatic level, when we all argue with each other as to who was in the wrong against whom, or who did the wrong thing, we are all dwelling on a common source of morality irrespective of how much or how little people want that to be the case.
Ickle Magoo wrote: » We have no idea what would happen if the laws that govern our universe from the singularity to now did not happen the way they did. We can postulate about hypothetical metaverses all we like but there is no way of making any kind of claims beyond "different". People may not have inhabited such a universe, there may be floating gelatinous blobs of intelligence, forces that we don't understand creating or making things we don't know about instead.
bluewolf wrote: » Eh, we're dwelling on our own sources. That's why there's arguments
Jakkass wrote: » I would argue it is down to fallible human behaviour that there are arguments over behaviour, and doing the right thing. We can become self-interested, and that can detract from genuine moral behaviour. It happens to the best and the worst of us, that is why from my take on it that these arguments take place. If morality were relative, there wouldn't be any point in having the argument. There would be no way to relate on the same terms if people had an entirely different definition of good and evil than you had.
When people are wronged, they don't argue that they were wronged subjectively, but that they were wronged objectively.
Jakkass wrote: » .................., we are all dwelling on a common source of morality irrespective of how much or how little people want that to be the case.