Challenge for all atheists

[Silvercrest]

But it all circles back around to the fact, that if perfect and all knowing, God should've seen that this wasn't going to get his message out in a manner that would be clear to those who he wanted to communicate with.

I'm not sure if you're posing a question here. If not, okay.

If you are, I can reply, but — as I don't claim to have all the answers, all you're going to get are my beliefs. Which are
1) incomplete, 2) based on my personal understanding, and 3) unlikely to carry enough authority to convince you regardless of 1) and 2). Which means we'll just go round and round.

And you know this... how? Nothing remotely related is mentioned in the Bible. And you certainly didn't get it from science.

Beat ya to it!

 

[Silvercrest]

Silvercrest said:
With all due respect, I wish people would start thinking about these things even if you don't accept it.

Annnnnnnnnnnd here's where you're wrong. We ARE thinking; people are coming up with logically sound, reasonable arguments because they are THINKING about it. Spot621 wrote an incredibly clear, rational and well-informed response. Obviously, a great deal of thought went into the reply.

Who are you talking to?

 

[auntiehill]

Ooops. Let me edit that.

 

[Silvercrest]

My ironic quote got turned on its head. Ah, the irony.

 

[Silvercrest]

Hmm... auntie, I'm afraid you still need to edit. What you posted actually is something I wrote ("start thinking"), but it was an intentional takeoff on the OP's statement of "stop arguing". Possibly a bit too subtle!

 

[auntiehill]

I got so riled up, I got carried away.

Time for me to take a break.

 

[stardream]

Take into consideration that the OP probably never attended a 'real' science class in his life. My husband never did. What he knows now he learned 'on the fly' from me and the kids or from watching documentaries. Even though I was raised in a fundamentalist group I at least went to public school. A lot of these kids are either home schooled or sent to a private Christian school where the science is 'Christianized' and by that I mean slanted toward a particular bent of Christianity. I guess they are afraid that exposure to the facts might make them lose faith or something. Oddly enough some of my cradle Catholic friends were taught evolution and the big bang theory etc in their Catholic schools and they are still faithful Catholics so that excuse is kind of lame. I stopped going to church for a while but it had nothing to do with science.

 

[TrickyDickie]

Here, I believe, is the real crux of the matter and where the whole God thing collapses:

An all-powerful deity would have the ability to create people with the CAPACITY to fully understand right from wrong. Then take a look at their free will choices from that standpoint.

But, it's obvious that from the very beginning, humans do not come with anything like that built-in. You can't allow genetic defects and other such factors into any kind of a system at the start and then blame the outcome. Your creations did not create themselves, YOU did! Blame yourself, dude. Don't take it out on them!

There is nothing logical and rational with this God business. It all falls apart like a house of cards when you approach it with a little common sense instead of blind faith.

 

[JWPlatt]

I guess they are afraid that exposure to the facts might make them lose faith or something.

Countries afraid of female empowerment - "the only cure for poverty we know" - use the same tactics to keep women uneducated, ignorant, and oppressed. This is not entirely unrelated to this discussion.

 

[Spot261]

Take into consideration that the OP probably never attended a 'real' science class in his life

Which of course presents the danger that attempts at discourse become something approaching bullying. However if no one challenges his beliefs he will never get the chance to balance out that bias. Your point is well taken but the take home message is unclear, should I soften the blow out of tact (bearing in mind the kid gloves are already on) or reinforce the point to give him as much outside perspective as possible?

I'm not attacking him personally, rather hoping that by debunking the worst of his arguments he will gain the chance to re evaluate his approach and hopefully find himself less open to ridicule in future.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

With all due respect, you should really try to live up to your username and try to be spot on.

With all due respect (prepares to say something disrespectful), Spot261 and others have rebutted your nonsense quite well throughout the thread. And by nonsense, I mean your Biblically literal until it doesn't suit you, scientifically illiterate, vengeful and hateful God used as an excuse to justify your own personal views and bigotry, and hypocritical when it comes to Christ's actual teachings brand of fundamentalism, not Christians in general.

 

[BillJ]

I just never got how one could be a Hardcore Christian and a Star Trek fan at the same time...

 

[JWPlatt]

...hoping that by debunking the worst of his arguments he will gain the chance to re evaluate his approach and hopefully find himself less open to ridicule in future.

What an excellent and constructive point of view.

 

[stardream]

Which of course presents the danger that attempts at discourse become something approaching bullying. However if no one challenges his beliefs he will never get the chance to balance out that bias. Your point is well taken but the take home message is unclear, should I soften the blow out of tact (bearing in mind the kid gloves are already on) or reinforce the point to give him as much outside perspective as possible?

I'm not attacking him personally, rather hoping that by debunking the worst of his arguments he will gain the chance to re evaluate his approach and hopefully find himself less open to ridicule in future.

More than likely nothing you or anything anyone else says here will change his mind. Be as nice as you want or as tough as you want but in the end it will probably make little difference.

I just never got how one could be a Hardcore Christian and a Star Trek fan at the same time...

Funny that.

 

[Silvercrest]

I'm not attacking him personally, rather hoping that by debunking the worst of his arguments he will gain the chance to re evaluate his approach and hopefully find himself less open to ridicule in future.

What an excellent and constructive point of view.

It really is. I wish I could say I practiced that in my experience with the other poster over in S&T. Unfortunately I recognized the futility of rational argument early on, gave up, and took the opportunity to sit back and take potshots at him. Not very Christian of me.

 

[Amaris]

I just never got how one could be a Hardcore Christian and a Star Trek fan at the same time...

Hi, former hardcore Christian here, and I'd like to offer you my perspective on that: I believed Jesus was coming soon, but that if he tarried into the 24th century, we could still see all that the Star Trek universe had to offer. To be honest, much of the Star Trek message works for Christianity: compassion, kindness, reason, and empathy rule the day, where a weapon used is a last resort rather than a first attack. Love your neighbor, blessed are the peacemakers, all of this is present in the Star Trek universe (especially TNG). There's really nothing that runs against that message.

 

[JWPlatt]

Science.

 

[Silvercrest]

Good heavens, Miss Sakamoto!

 

[Doom Shepherd]

I just never got how one could be a Hardcore Christian and a Star Trek fan at the same time...

Balseraphic resonance. Allows one to believe two contradictory truths at the same time, without causing dissonance (at least, not until one of the beliefs slips.)
http://www.sjgames.com/in-nomine/draft/Balseraphs.html

 

[Tosk]

To paraphrase Gervais, I'm so glad that god made me an atheist.