Bonjour798's Challenge Thread! Theists, Beware!

[Nakosis]

Well, what makes some things evil?

When you see something being done that violates your personal sense of morality.

That makes evil as subjective as morality IMO.

 

[CapinPorcupine]

But where do we get those morals?

 

[javajo]

My "belief". Is that I KNOW God exists. If that is too hard to accept, then too bad. God is real, and anyone who denies this, in my opinion/belief, has got their head in the sand. Jesus Christ, as the Bible says, is the ONLY one who died to pay the penalty of sin (death), and I believe he is the ONLY way to be saved, as scripture says:

Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. Acts 4:12

 

[CapinPorcupine]

My "belief". Is that I KNOW God exists. If that is too hard to accept, then too bad. God is real, and anyone who denies this, in my opinion/belief, has got their head in the sand. Jesus Christ, as the Bible says, is the ONLY one who died to pay the penalty of sin (death), and I believe he is the ONLY way to be saved, as scripture says:

Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved. Acts 4:12

By saying that how you did, people wont want to change their beliefs. You don't need to accept what others believe but you don't need to chew them out for it either.

 

[Riverwolf]

I'm not getting many theists' responses to my other thread - although one theist made a noble effort to address Reason 2, Reasons 1, 3, and 4 are untouched. I think I'm not getting replies because I titled it "Hello, Everyone," so I'm making a new thread with a more aggressive title where theists can address my arguments for atheism.

Richard Swinburne, a Christian philosopher, defines God as follows.

"I take the proposition 'God exists' (and the equivalent propositon 'There is a God') to be logically equivalent to 'there exists necessarily a person without a body who necessarily is eternal, perfectly free, omnipotent, omniscient, perfectly good, and the creator of all things.'" (The Existence of God, p. 7)

An atheist is a person who believes that God, so defined, does not exist.

...noooo, an atheist is someone who lacks any form of theistic belief. The above definition of God is not the only one.

I will present four quick reasons for being an atheist.

Reason 1: Free will does not exist.

If God exists, then God has free will, per Swinburne's definition. But it is extremely difficult to say what free will is supposed to be. Indeed, the notion of free will appears to be positively incoherent: An action must be either caused or uncaused, but it is not free if it is caused or if it is not caused. Therefore, neither free will nor God exists.

If I understand correctly: free will does not exist since it would imply a cause that is not an effect of something else. Fair enough.

Reason 2: Consciousness requires a brain.

If God exists, God is conscious without a body, per Swinburne's definition. But everything conscious that we know of has a brain. It is more reasonable to conclude that consciousness is a process that occurs in brains than to believe that it is a substance in itself which can have an existence independently of the brain. Therefore, God does not exist.

Correct. If God/Gods exist, and He/She/They/Etc. is/are incorporeal, then such does not possess consciousness in the same way that we do.

Reason 3: The problem of evil disproves God's existence.

If God exists, he is omnipotent, omniscient, and perfectly moral, per Swinburne's definition. If such a being existed, then evil would not exist. But evil does exist, in overwhelming quantity. Some apologists attempt to get out of this argument by deploying a free will defense, but as we have seen, free will does not exist. Therefore, God does not exist.

God as per a certain definition seems to not exist, but there are a few other possible explanations, such as other situations in God's dimension that we are unaware of, though that begs the question of why God does not make us aware of them.

However, I, as a theist, do not believe God is either good or bad. God is. Nothing more.

Reason 4: Occam's Razor "shaves off" the claim that God exists.

Given the lack of objective positive evidence for the existence of God, it is simpler to attribute belief in God to the intellectual vices and emotional needs of the believer than to an actually extant deity. In cases like this, we can safely appeal to Occam's Razor to "shave off" the claim that God exists, just like we do the claim that leprechauns exist. Therefore, in the same sense in which we say leprechauns do not exist, we can reasonably say God does not exist.

Funny, though, that, from what I understand, Occam's Razor was created as an argument for the existence of God, since it says that all things being equal, the simplest explanation tends to be the right one. The simplest (read: lazy) explanation for all the unknowns is "Goddidit."

The claim that God does not exist is a kind of a liberal statement, but based on your reasons, it is definitely reasonable to say that the above-defined God is unlikely to exist. It's one of the reasons why I'm not an Abrahamic monotheist. But I'm still a theist, a polytheist/panentheist to be exact.

 

[javajo]

The Bible further states in Romans 5:21:

But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

So, I believe, God loves us so much, that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. This means that even though we are vile, black-hearted, miserable, wicked sinners, God loves us anyway and paid the penalty of our sins (death-he died), so we would not have to if we trust him for that. I believe we all have a choice, pay for our sins ourselves by dying both physically and spiritually, i.e. going to Hell to pay our sin debt, or we may accept Christ's payment as a totally free gift (how cool is that of God), and be granted forgiveness of ALL our sins and given God's righteousness in place of our own 'filthy rags' righteousness, and granted eternal life the moment we trust Christ. This life is eternal, we are saved to the uttermost, completely and forevermore. This is my belief from the Holy Bible.

 

[javajo]

By saying that how you did, people wont want to change their beliefs. You don't need to accept what others believe but you don't need to chew them out for it either.

I am just saying what I know ('believe') to be the truth. I believe the hour is late and it is time to dispense with the BS and tell others the TRUTH, which is that even though we are sinners, God loves us and being a just God he could not let sin go unpunished, so he sent his only begotten Son to pay the penalty of our sins (death-he died) so we may be reconciled to Him. This is my belief and I am simply stating what I believe and know to be the truth. Personally, I really hope and pray that people stop resisting the Holy Spirit's conviction in their lives and turn to trust Christ. That is just my personal belief that I know is very, very true. I'm just sayin'...for those who have ears to hear, and hearts not made of stone, let them hear and trust the Lord. That is what I believe from my experience in life and from what (I fully believe) God's Word states.

 

[CapinPorcupine]

I am just saying what I know ('believe') to be the truth. I believe the hour is late and it is time to dispense with the BS and tell others the TRUTH, which is that even though we are sinners, God loves us and being a just God he could not let sin go unpunished, so he sent his only begotten Son to pay the penalty of our sins (death-he died) so we may be reconciled to Him. This is my belief and I am simply stating what I believe and know to be the truth. Personally, I really hope and pray that people stop resisting the Holy Spirit's conviction in their lives and turn to trust Christ. That is just my personal belief that I know is very, very true. I'm just sayin'...for those who have ears to hear, and hearts not made of stone, let them hear and trust the Lord. That is what I believe from my experience in life and from what (I fully believe) God's Word states.

And that's great, I'm not denying that, I'm just saying (from experience) that you need to be open to change before it happens.

 

[Thistle]

The Bible further states in Romans 5:21:

But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

So, I believe, God loves us so much, that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. This means that even though we are vile, black-hearted, miserable, wicked sinners, God loves us anyway and paid the penalty of our sins (death-he died), so we would not have to if we trust him for that. I believe we all have a choice, pay for our sins ourselves by dying both physically and spiritually, i.e. going to Hell to pay our sin debt, or we may accept Christ's payment as a totally free gift (how cool is that of God), and be granted forgiveness of ALL our sins and given God's righteousness in place of our own 'filthy rags' righteousness, and granted eternal life the moment we trust Christ. This life is eternal, we are saved to the uttermost, completely and forevermore. This is my belief from the Holy Bible.

Who is this "we" you keep referring to? Is it a large group of people? What did they do to be branded "sinners" (whatever the hell that is)?

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Ok, a theist is someone who believes that God exists and takes an active roll in the lives of humanity and the governance of the universe. A deist is someone who believes in that God created the universe but does not actively take part in his creation, he watches from afar. So, what some folks are saying are non-theists, they mean deists. I'm more of a deist than a theist myself and I'm not sure the OP really addresses deism.

 

[Storm]

Ok, a theist is someone who believes that God exists and takes an active roll in the lives of humanity and the governance of the universe. A deist is someone who believes in that God created the universe but does not actively take part in his creation, he watches from afar. So, what some folks are saying are non-theists, they mean deists. I'm more of a deist than a theist myself and I'm not sure the OP really addresses deism.

Properly speaking, yes. In addition to deism, there's pantheism & panentheism. The op addresses none.

However, the word theist is most often used to describe anyone who believes in a God, and that's how I took it.

 

[Nakosis]

But where do we get those morals?

From our parents, teachers, our culture. Books like the Bible. Movies you watch. Every experience of our life influence what we end up seeing as right and wrong. Some we maybe aware of. Some not so much.

So there seems a built in sense of right and wrong but the truth is I think it was developed by our experiences in life. Some very early in our childhood.

A lot of experiences are common to man. Like developing a feeling of empathy. That's why we find we had a lot of moral values in common. Because of the commonality of our experiences.

However there is no certainty of that commonality between humans. Now days it's a small world. We hear about happens from the other side of the world. Everything you hear has a chance to influence the sense of morality you have. Sometimes you'll reject some concepts of morals because of the morality you've already developed.

In many cases this is not a conscious process. That is why it may be difficult to pinpoint the origin of your sense of morality. Other times it maybe a conscious choice like adherence to something like the golden rule.

Just because your are not aware of all the things that have influenced your sense of morality doesn't mean they are not there.

 

[CapinPorcupine]

From our parents, teachers, our culture. Books like the Bible. Movies you watch. Every experience of our life influence what we end up seeing as right and wrong. Some we maybe aware of. Some not so much.

So there seems a built in sense of right and wrong but the truth is I think it was developed by our experiences in life. Some very early in our childhood.

A lot of experiences are common to man. Like developing a feeling of empathy. That's why we find we had a lot of moral values in common. Because of the commonality of our experiences.

However there is no certainty of that commonality between humans. Now days it's a small world. We hear about happens from the other side of the world. Everything you hear has a chance to influence the sense of morality you have. Sometimes you'll reject some concepts of morals because of the morality you've already developed.

In many cases this is not a conscious process. That is why it may be difficult to pinpoint the origin of your sense of morality. Other times it maybe a conscious choice like adherence to something like the golden rule.

Just because your are not aware of all the things that have influenced your sense of morality doesn't mean they are not there.

Okay, and where did our teachers, parents, and culture (which media stems from) get this view of evil?

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Properly speaking, yes. In addition to deism, there's pantheism & panentheism. The op addresses none.

It doesn't really seem to address theism that well either, more of a Abrahamic God Specific thing.

However, the word theist is most often used to describe anyone who believes in a God, and that's how I took it.

To be honest, I was wondering of Bonjour798 knew the difference in the two so I thought it would be good to post the definitions, since we were using the terms and all.

 

[Thistle]

Okay, and where did our teachers, parents, and culture (which media stems from) get this view of evil?

They got them from their teachers, parents, and culture. However, morals are most often not outright copied from generation to generation. Morals evolve over time, and the driving force behind it is most likely our drive for self-preservation. For instance, there was a time when hanging, torture, or flogging were deemed to be just a part of society's justice system. I'm not a historian, but it likely took the empowerment of people (embodied by events such as the French Revolution) to put an end to those enforcement techniques. After all, suddenly bodily harm was no longer a one-way street, and nobility risked getting repaid in kind. So suddenly, torture became "barbaric" and eroded from our view on what was morally right.

But you don't even have to go back in history to see this mechanism occurring. Even now, we face the tyranny political correctness, trying (with a certain degree of success) to get us to artificially adopt certain "values" which, actually, are only there to serve a political agenda (self-preservation).

 

[CapinPorcupine]

They got them from their teachers, parents, and culture. However, morals are most often not outright copied from generation to generation. Morals evolve over time, and the driving force behind it is most likely our drive for self-preservation. For instance, there was a time when hanging, torture, or flogging were deemed to be just a part of society's justice system. I'm not a historian, but it likely took the empowerment of people (embodied by events such as the French Revolution) to put an end to those enforcement techniques. After all, suddenly bodily harm was no longer a one-way street, and nobility risked getting repaid in kind. So suddenly, torture became "barbaric" and eroded from our view on what was morally right.

But you don't even have to go back in history to see this mechanism occurring. Even now, we face the tyranny political correctness, trying (with a certain degree of success) to get us to artificially adopt certain "values" which, actually, are only there to serve a political agenda (self-preservation).

But even during (and before) that you wouldn't just murder someone because they, oh I don't know, looked at your chickens funny (I'm no historian either); I'm just saying that we have always had this view of right or wrong, like how would we know torture was wrong? There was a time where we should have killed each other because it would be the smarter thing to do as a species (more food, less competition, easier living) but we didn't kill our elders because they were weak. We had a sense of morality that just miraculously formed?

 

[tumbleweed41]

Okay, and where did our teachers, parents, and culture (which media stems from) get this view of evil?

Societal evolution based on societal survivability.

 

[Storm]

Societal evolution based on societal survivability.

"God's law is written on the hearts of all mankind."

Tomayto, tomahto from where I sit.

 

[Draka]

But even during (and before) that you wouldn't just murder someone because they, oh I don't know, looked at your chickens funny (I'm no historian either); I'm just saying that we have always had this view of right or wrong, like how would we know torture was wrong? There was a time where we should have killed each other because it would be the smarter thing to do as a species (more food, less competition, easier living) but we didn't kill our elders because they were weak. We had a sense of morality that just miraculously formed?

What was good for the culture and ourselves became our morals really. We didn't kill our own because we counted on our own tribe for survival. Elders were respected and protected for their wisdom. We cover our own butts basically. When we, as people, know something may be done to us we don't like, we tend to not want to put ourselves into situations where that may occur. When societies form we want to naturally step into a way of doing things so that we don't get hurt. We also base what we view as wrong on if we would feel it was wrong if done to us or our loved ones. I find being raped to be horrible and a violation of me in so many ways, so therefore, I find rape itself to be wrong. It's really not that hard to figure out.

 

[Thistle]

But even during (and before) that you wouldn't just murder someone because they, oh I don't know, looked at your chickens funny (I'm no historian either); I'm just saying that we have always had this view of right or wrong,

Yes, but it evolved over time, and it evolved differently from culture to culture.

like how would we know torture was wrong?

Because anyone could be at the receiving end of it.

There was a time where we should have killed each other because it would be the smarter thing to do as a species (more food, less competition, easier living)

There have been plenty of times when we did. We still do. You think Iraq is about democracy and freedom?

but we didn't kill our elders because they were weak.

There are quite a few survival-based advantages to not just killing each other. Working together typically increases your chance of success (and therefore your chance of survival) in an endeavor, and any cruelty may be repaid to you in kind at a later stage.

We had a sense of morality that just miraculously formed?

No, it did not come from god.