Atheist Join Me Please, I need some questions answered.

a reply to: windword

This is very true, Nature is about survival and reproduction, plants vying to reach sunshine and get nutrition and reproduce, humans and animals are the same.
Humans have maintained our tribal existences right through to city living in NYC, Our defeat will be our slavery to emotions.

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

Q1 - If god created everything then what created god.

A1 - god has always existed.

Now my thought right here is, well if god has always existed why couldn't the universe have always existed as well, leading to almost an infinite combinations of the materials existent inside it.

a reply to: Vector99

Or, how many gods have also always existed?

originally posted by: ServantOfTheLamb
a reply to: NightFlight

Nothing in this universe but man worships a supreme being. Man created god to worship. God does not, nor has God ever existed.

Ok so man is unique in that they worship a supreme being. Ok so you think man created God. Why should I believe that? If God didn't create man what did? Is the universe eternal so many questions!!! I'll just keep it to those for now.

The answer to all of those questions is "i don't know, let's go become scientists and find out". But many people, like yourself, start imagining up romantic ideas that sound pleasant and comforting, instead of observing the world around you, becoming adept in at least one branch of science, and not letting speculation become concrete in your mind.

Really, the ONLY reason to not believe people's claims about their favorite deity is that, no one has ever produced any valid physical evidence for their existence. Which is the same reason i don't believe in other mythological and impossible creatures. I put god right there next to dragons, fairies, and mermaids. When someone shows up with some valid physical evidence like a fossil of posieden's magic trident, then i will be the first to want to look at it. I consider people who believe in things they have no good reason to believe, to be unreasonable.

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: Vector99

Or, how many gods have also always existed?

Hehe that's question 2. One at a time

a reply to: Skid Mark

If you had read the OP you would have realized this is an off topic post...

a reply to: Woodcarver

Ok but your lack of belief in a God is not all of your beliefs that is simply the rejection of my belief. I want to know about your beliefs and why you think the way you do.

a reply to: zazzafrazz

Why would you giving a flying crap about what anyone else's beliefs are? Why do you let it impact you this much? Get on with your faith, live your life and leave everyone else alone.

Because I care about what is true. I fail to see how having conversation is letting something impact in some major way its simply a something im interested in...

a reply to: JoshuaCox

1) yes, at least as far as we know or can imagaine.

Okay so you believe that matter and energy are all that exists or at the very least that is the most probable position in your opinion.

My first question would be do you believe information exists? If so is information matter and energy?

2) would have to be neutral at best, good really isn't on the table, not the biblical God anyway...genocide, incest, slavery exc...

I am entirely sure what your trying to say here but that argument is strictly to define what God is. Now you can reject the idea that the Biblical God fits that description but it would still defeat atheism if you accepted the argument. Now I didn't present that to convince someone. I presented that so people could understand exactly what it is I mean when I say God.

But judging by the universe being both good and evil and a creation is usually a reflection of its its creator. I would say that "he is both" is a fair guess.

This is a non sequitur, at least imo. Your position rest on the same underlying assumptions as a previous poster. The first being that an omnipotent God can create any type of world he wants. Which I find to be untrue seeing that if an omnipotent God creates creatures that are truly free he couldn't make them choose anything and as such could not stop them from causing the world to go the way he would "want". Rather what he can do is create situations in which the creatures have a choice and "stand back" and let them choose. Your second assumption is the claim that the existence of an omnibeneveloent God is logically incompatible with a world in which there is evil. Why do you believe that to be the case? It seems if I can present a situation that is possible and God and evil can coexists in that scenario it would show that an all good God and evil are not logically incompatible. God could not have created a world that had as much good as the actual world but had less evil, both in terms of quantity and quality. Also God has morally sufficient reasons for permitting the evil that does in fact exists. If this situation is even possible it shows God and evil are not logically incompatible so these assumptions seems to be wrong.

Yes..those are things that are best for society and cause the least conflict. If you rape or murder, family members will retaliate.. Exc. I think morality can be explained as a social evolution.

Your confusing moral epistemology with moral ontology. The moral argument is on the topic of ontology so was the question you proposed to answer. Social evolution could be involved in the way recognize moral values and duties, but the question is there such a thing as an objectively good action and is there such a thing an objectively evil action. It seems your answer would be yes.

4) No. Some things are just he best way to do something. I think that is highlighted by the anti gay and anti other religion's movements.

Ok I see your answer is No, but you didn't actually give any reasons. On Atheism what external referent outside of yourself are you referring to when you say something is Good? If it is not outside of yourself your answer to the previous question should be no.

The bible clearly backs up things we know to be immoral, slavery, women as property, sex (marriage to) with children.

Oh if only that were true...the bible does no such thing but you may have read some stuff out of context and with a lack of historical knowledge on jewish tradition and came to that conclusion. In fact I've already quoted a verse that condemns the type of slavery your referring to in the OT, "And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death." And regardless if you reject the Biblical God that argument would still stand the same as it has nothing to do with the Bible.

You cannot disprove the concept of God, but Christianity is quite easily debunked..

I didn't ask for someone to disprove God. I asked people to provide reasons for their own beliefs. For example if you deny the existence of a God you most likely a naturalist maybe even a reductionist. I want reasons to believe naturalism is true that have nothing to do with rejecting the reasons I gave in the OP. There was no need for you to answer my questions you could have simply stated what you believed and given me reasons to believe that way as well.

a reply to: CagliostroTheGreat

Okay why should I be a discordian? Why hsould I believe that to be the way the world actually is?

a reply to: ServantOfTheLamb

How can God be all knowing and all good???

All knowing would include knowing evil as well.

a reply to: SaturnFX

belief (strong) requires a sort of rejection of any new perspectives, and that is the death of learning.

I have a strong belief that 2+2=4 that doesn't mean I wouldn't listen if someone was trying to tell me 2+2=185. See I feel atheist have the misconception that because theist believe in a God that means that they have some type of static belief. That is not the case. The public has this misconception that Science and Religion are at odds and this has been added to by the media. Science and religion are not mutually exclusive in fact I think they compliment each other as you can tell if you look at my answer to question 1.

Given all things are energy, which constitutes matter, then sure. every "thing" is energy..no energy, it is no "thing"...(thing being key) if it exists, it has energy

Does information have energy? Is information physical? I would say it is definitely a thing, but I don't think you could defend the idea that information has energy nor do I think you could defend the idea the information doesn't exists as it would be hard to explain how we are having conversation at the moment. Nor do I think you could show that information is physical. If you have reasons for believing those things I would love to hear them.

whatever you define it no doubt. biblically speaking, the one source creator for all things, all dimensions, everything. older religions would define it as basically a super being (one of many) that took part in creation.

Well I gave you the name of the argument and the conclusions I believe can be drawn from it and I think that describes a small portion of the nature of God that we can actually deduce.

Sure. both subjective based on society norms of course. thats like asking of humor and pledges exist.

I feel like you said sure but your answer seems to be no. I'll need some clarification.

No, see, you view that as todays standard of morality. it used to be considered (and still is in some parts of the world) to be a moral imperative to burn witches and stone sinners. it could be considered morally correct to kill a woman who got raped due to her being unpure vegetarians find it morally repulsive to kill an animal, vegans the same but also killing plantlife morality is a sliding scale of society with only a few core elements that are naturally put in place for simple biological continuation of the species (aka, dont murder another, dont steal people stuff else that will force them to murder you, etc)

You said no but immediately stepped into the realm of epistemology meaning you are on the topic of how we recognize moral values and duties and are pointing out that our moral intuition can be flawed. I agree with that. My point is on the topic of ontology. Meaning if the situation is one person think it is good to rape and the other person thinks it is bad to rape then one person is mistaking. These are claims about the way the world actually is. They are truth claims. If your going to say no I am going to need you to give me some reason to believe that my moral experiences in reality are delusions.

a reply to: Vector99

Q1 - If god created everything then what created god. A1 - god has always existed.

Close my answer would by God is by nature timeless as per the conclusions of the cosmological argument. You seem to be operating under the assumption that something that is eternal by nature would have a beginning and that seems to be a logically contradictory idea. If something is eternal then it by definition has no beginning and no end. The Borde-Guth-Viliken theorems state that any universe that is on average expanding is a finite universe. Cosmologist know that at 1 * 10 ^-35 seconds also known as the first planck time space and time in the classical sense came into existence. So the universe could not have existed in any type of state resembling matter before then as there would be no space for the matter to exists in. Energy is the capacity to do work. You cannot have the capacity to do work without space as there is no thing to preform work on. If the universe were eternal then there would be an infinite number of past events. If there is an infinite number of past events how do you get to the event in which I am typing these words. You couldn't. Now the problems with an infinite regress has been written on extensively so I'll let you do your own research on that but the scenario above is one issue. Another issue I can quickly pop out is that in an infinite regress you would have something like A because B because C because D and so on. The problem with this is every conclusion in this chain is 100% dependent upon the conclusion before it and you never arrive at a conclusion that is self evident as it to would have something it depended on and so on. You never get to a self evident truth. Lots of issues with it though just look into it.

a reply to: mOjOm

How can God be all knowing and all good??? All knowing would include knowing evil as well.

I have the knowledge of murder that doesn't make me a murderer? There is a difference between having knowledge of something evil and being something evil....

ServantOfTheLamb

I don't care if you are a Discordian. That's your choice. I bet you'd have a lot more fun!

a reply to: CagliostroTheGreat

But the topic of the thread was to give me reasons to believe the way you believe not just state your belief...

ServantOfTheLamb

Oh. Why? Are you looking to renounce your faith?

a reply to: Woodcarver

I consider people who believe in things they have no good reason to believe, to be unreasonable.

As do I yet you have believe that lets say naturalism is true, or you have no reason to believe it is more probable that naturalism is true or at least your reluctant to give me any. I have given multiple reasons in the OP, you may not find them convincing but I have reasons. Now you want to pretend to be more reasonable so lets hear your positive reasons for your belief not a rejection of mine.

ServantOfTheLamb

Also, the reason you should be a Discordian is because you would have more fun. You sound like a bit of a Greyface...

a reply to: CagliostroTheGreat

No but your making a truth claim about the world that contradicts my truth claim about the world. I want you to try and convince me because I care about what is true. A rough sketch of why I believe what I believe is at the top of the OP either those arguments would convince someone or they wouldn't the point is there are reasons given I have yet to be given any reasons by others for their beliefs a select few have answered with respect and willingness to engage and I feel I have given them my times worth in response because I appreciate their sincerity.