-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
10 questions for intelligent christians...
- Thread starter mimidotcom
- Start date
mimidotcom
Seeking
mimidotcom
Seeking
YouTube - 10 questions that every intelligent Christian must answer
here's one that might work.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDHJ4ztnldQ&feature=related
here's one that might work.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDHJ4ztnldQ&feature=related
Last edited:
mimidotcom
Seeking
oprah has a discussion on jesus/god
YouTube - Oprah Denies Christ
this is kinda funny.. they talk about if you believe there is more than one way to god.. not only through jesus.. that you are buying into the LIE... hmmmmm.. atheists say that christians are buying in to the lie.. and christians say atheists are buying into the lie.. how entertaining...
YouTube - Oprah Denies Christ
this is kinda funny.. they talk about if you believe there is more than one way to god.. not only through jesus.. that you are buying into the LIE... hmmmmm.. atheists say that christians are buying in to the lie.. and christians say atheists are buying into the lie.. how entertaining...
mimidotcom
Seeking
definitely nothing new.. but im just getting around to asking these questions myself to christians.. having recently left christianity.. but thanks soo much for your consideration... and as far as carlin is concerned.. i just think he's great people!
McBell
Unbound
The really funny thing is that you, mimidotcom, HAVE bought into the lie.
Just not in the manner you present here.
Dunemeister
Well-Known Member
The bottom line is that you have to pick which mysteries to deal with. Christians do in fact have to live with the mystery of good and evil. But at least we have a worldview where good and evil are more than mere human feelings about things. There's a real right/wrong or good/evil distinction. It makes sense to say we ought to love X and hate Y. On the other hand, lots of other mysteries are neatly tied up. The origin of the world and life, for instance, are not puzzles for Christians. Nor is it any wonder how we could possibly know things.
The atheist, for her part, has no problem of evil because by atheist lights, there can be no such (objective) thing. There is just how we feel about it. We'll just have to live ironically with the fact that we seem to speak of good and evil as though it were objective (we argue about what is right and wrong as though there's an actual answer to the question apart from how we feel about the issue). But it's hard to account for such things as knowledge. If our cognitive faculties were not designed to obtain true beliefs, but only to get us in the right place at the right time to reproduce, there's a low objective probability that they do in fact give us true beliefs. Thus we have a defeater for all our beliefs, leaving us in a paralyzed skepticism. There's also a great and deep mystery about why there is something rather than nothing; and certainly there's a puzzle about why "something" should include life, let alone sentient life. But at least atheists don't have to live with the puzzle about how and why God might do things.
The atheist, for her part, has no problem of evil because by atheist lights, there can be no such (objective) thing. There is just how we feel about it. We'll just have to live ironically with the fact that we seem to speak of good and evil as though it were objective (we argue about what is right and wrong as though there's an actual answer to the question apart from how we feel about the issue). But it's hard to account for such things as knowledge. If our cognitive faculties were not designed to obtain true beliefs, but only to get us in the right place at the right time to reproduce, there's a low objective probability that they do in fact give us true beliefs. Thus we have a defeater for all our beliefs, leaving us in a paralyzed skepticism. There's also a great and deep mystery about why there is something rather than nothing; and certainly there's a puzzle about why "something" should include life, let alone sentient life. But at least atheists don't have to live with the puzzle about how and why God might do things.
mimidotcom
Seeking
which lie is that mestemia? the christian lie.. or the atheist lie.. as i am in between the two right now.
Masourga
Member
I actually had never even considered nor heard anyone ask the first question... which I believe is the most interesting - and I, at least, feel is worth taking seriously.
Why won't God heal amputees? If someone's miraculous recovery from cancer or some other illness is God at work, then why wouldn't he heal amputees with the same frequency? I admit, being an amputee doesn't necessarily mean you can't survive, obviously... but then, neither does having cancer.
And the answer seems simple. In my opinion it's for the same reason that sightings and visits by God seemed to stop at about the same time humanity began making more and more consistent historical accounts of the goings on in the world.
If being an amputee weren't such a visible and ever-lasting condition, then people would claim that God was healing anyone who was healed from that condition, just the same as they do for other conditions now. Which, by extension, could be used to infer that no condition is actually being healed by God.
It's sort of like the ruse of a placebo. You're just sitting there hoping with all your might that what you're drinking isn't just water.
To be honest, I'm not sure that "mestemia" even knows what he is talking about.
Last edited:
mimidotcom
Seeking
exactly.. take for instance the parents that reject medicine over prayer.. and no healing comes.. ???.. but of course.. according to christians.. it's god's will that that child die.. regardless of the amount of prayer.. would it not seem miraculous to heal the child without the use of needed medicine.. to prove your existence? i'd like to think so.
and mestemia.. that's twice.. he has done nothing but tell me his conclusions about me. for shame. i havent been here long enough to give that much of an impression about myself.. and furthermore.. i believe i've made it clear that yes.. i was once under the delusion of christianity.. and now.. im on a personal journey to figure out what if there is even anything worth believing in.. but thanks lol.. there are plenty more like him. and confused ones like me as well.
cardero
Citizen Mod
An interesting video but the experiment only challenges and tries to eliminate the God that is closely associated with primitive scriptures and prominent organized religions.
The video tries too easily to sweep God under a carpet and conclude that this entity is imaginary without offering the possibility that GOD may exist, just not as advertised by many popular religions.
The video tries too easily to sweep God under a carpet and conclude that this entity is imaginary without offering the possibility that GOD may exist, just not as advertised by many popular religions.
McBell
Unbound
Really?
You have no idea?
So you are merely a puppet for the spreading of the lies?
A most interesting confession.
mimidotcom
Seeking
lies? so i take it you feel u have possession of the "truth".. yes.. most interesting indeed..
how can any one faith or denomination feel entitled to the "truth"? when there are obviously sooooo many truths to be had.
your answers are the right answers i presume.. and anyone not clinging to what you believe is spreading lies?
:clap
mimidotcom
Seeking
mestemia.. either ask me a question.. or dont address me. your presumptions wont get you anywhere. im here for information.
The best thing about that video is the pretense that it is aimed at an intelligent audience...
Was there a particular question(I can guess that it would be the first one, but just in case) you wanted to discuss?
Was there a particular question(I can guess that it would be the first one, but just in case) you wanted to discuss?
cardero
Citizen Mod
If you are referring to the "amputee" question, RF has devoted a whole thread to it.
Apex
Somewhere Around Nothing
The amputee thing kind of reminds me of this.
You might be a fundy-atheist if:
You believe that extra drippy ice-cream is a logical proof against the existence of God, because an omniscient God would know how to stop the ice-cream from being extra drippy, an omnipotent God would have the ability to stop the ice-cream from being extra drippy, and by golly, an omnibenevolent God wouldn't want your ice-cream to be extra drippy.
You might be a fundy-atheist if:
You believe that extra drippy ice-cream is a logical proof against the existence of God, because an omniscient God would know how to stop the ice-cream from being extra drippy, an omnipotent God would have the ability to stop the ice-cream from being extra drippy, and by golly, an omnibenevolent God wouldn't want your ice-cream to be extra drippy.
Copernicus
Industrial Strength Linguist
The film actually took the opposite position and made quite a good case for it. You ask the questions precisely because religion itself makes them questions--or "mysteries". If you are not religious, then it is no mystery that limbs do not spontaneously regenerate in the face of prayers. The faithful have a problem, because it is not apparent why God would spontaneously cure cancers, but never amputated limbs.
Nonsense. It is perfectly clear what evil is to atheists--that which causes unnecessary, unbearable suffering in human beings. Why would human beings find such a thing abhorrent and call it evil? Well, duh! What is silly is the idea that God is necessary to define evil. Humans from all different religious backgrounds--even those that lack belief in gods--are quite consistent in what kind of behavior comes off as evil.
If we were turkeys, then we would consider Thanksgiving to be pure evil.
It ought to be very clear to any objective thinker that evil is a relative concept, not an objective one. By your lights, Thanksgiving would be evil if God declared it evil. Because human beings and not Turkeys define God, he does not declare Thanksgiving evil. It is no mystery to atheists why God only seems to define evil relative to subjective human experiences.Atheists do have to live with one big mystery, and that is how anyone could think that God solved the mystery of why there is something rather than nothing. What do they think God is--nothing? Religious faith not only plagues the mind with unnecessary mysteries about why reality is as it is, but it also provides people with pat answers that are patently absurd.
Dunemeister
Well-Known Member
The faithful have a mystery, not a problem. Nothing about God's selectivity with healing implies the non-existence of God or calls into question is love for those who suffer.
I didn't say that atheists are immoral or don't have moral intuitions. What I'm saying is that, if naturalism is true, there's no basis for objective ethics. It's just a matter of feelings. But if THAT's true, then it's kind of mysterious why we should argue about whether particular actions are evil. There's just the way you feel about it and how I feel about it. In other words, most of our moral activity -- arguing, debating, searching, and analyzing putative moral truth -- is apparently nonsense.
If we were turkeys, then we would consider Thanksgiving to be pure evil.
I think you've descended into incoherence here. At least I can't figure out what you're saying. It's also obvious that you've missed at least one of my major points, so perhaps I'll elucidate.
On naturalist lights, we cannot have knowledge of anything. To have knowledge, we must have cognitive faculties that are aimed at getting us true beliefs. But if naturalism is true, our cognitive faculties are designed to get our body parts in the right place to do the four Fs: fighting, fleeing, feeding, and reproducing. Truth, whatever that is, takes the hindmost. Indeed, all our beliefs could be false, every last one of them for all we know. At least on Christian lights, we have reason to think that our cognitive systems are designed to get true beliefs.
Other mysteries for the naturalist are the emergence of the universe and the emergence of life. My point in all this is simply that you pick your mysteries and take your chances. The Christian struggles with mystery, but the mystery is not cognitively crippling (unlike naturalism, which entails that we can have confidence in exactly none of our beliefs, not even what we believe about our own names).