A few questions from an atheist.

[smhjoc]

A little background information: I started off as an evangelical/baptist christian, as this is what both my parents happened to be. I was young, and still had the preconception that my parents were always right, and that I should blindly follow everything they believed. Now, once I began to form opinions on my own (around my adolescence/teenage years, like most people), I slowly moved towards progressive christianity. This transition was mainly due to disturbance of a literal, eternal hell or torment, my increased compassion towards homosexuals and other persecuted groups, as well as my realization that the Bible didn't have to be inerrant to have value. As time progressed, I became more and more aware of the problems with christianity. Before, my main reasons for believing in christianity were personal experience/happiness with the gospel, martyrdom of the apostles, disbelief of evolution, several apologetics, origin of morality, etc. (the common arguments). However, I slowly realized that a major reason that I believed in christianity was due to confirmation bias. I wanted so badly to believe in a god and an afterlife, that I began to give evidence supporting my position more light then opposing evidence.

Now, I came her to pose a few questions as I'm curious on what christians (and theists and general) feel about them. I also wanted to make a few points. Keep in mind, I'm no theologian/philosopher, so some of these questions may be quite trivial and amateurish.

1. I see a lot of posts here describing atheists as arrogant, hateful people who despise god and want nothing more than to be right. I reject this generalization. I have yet to meet an atheist who is happy with the idea that there is no god to give us compassion, and that after death we will never see friends or family again as we will not exist. As for arrogance and hatefulness, many people can act this way, even theists.

2. Is there really any solid evidence for the existence of a god? If so, please list them. However, arguments from ignorance will not suffice. Saying "god exists because I don't know how this works" is not a decent argument.

3. If there is evidence for god, why christianity? There are thousands of religions out there, lots with similar beliefs. One does not even have to accept a religion if they accept a god figure, which would be deism. Now, if there is substantial evidence for christianity, please list them.

4. There are many beautiful, heart-warming verses in the Bible. There are also many extremely immoral and disgraceful verses. Sure, we belong to god, and we are his property. I know this question has probably been brought up multiple times, but I still don't understand it. The God of the Bible has commited genocides, thrown people in hell for eternity, and other disastrous acts. If these acts can be justified, please explain how.

5. What about wishful-thinking/confirmation bias? I understand atheism is hard to accept (it still is for me), but I simply cannot see any reason to accept christianity except because I want to believe it. It has some evidence, sure. But does it really have sufficient evidence?

[Danieltwotwenty]

Hi

1. I see a lot of posts here describing atheists as arrogant, hateful people who despise god and want nothing more than to be right. I reject this generalization. I have yet to meet an atheist who is happy with the idea that there is no god to give us compassion, and that after death we will never see friends or family again as we will not exist. As for arrogance and hatefulness, many people can act this way, even theists.

These would be opinions from personal experience, i agree that most but not all would fit this description from my experience and I have met far less thiests that act this way.

2. Is there really any solid evidence for the existence of a god? If so, please list them. However, arguments from ignorance will not suffice. Saying "god exists because I don't know how this works" is not a decent argument.

3. If there is evidence for god, why christianity? There are thousands of religions out there, lots with similar beliefs. One does not even have to accept a religion if they accept a god figure, which would be deism. Now, if there is substantial evidence for christianity, please list them.

4. There are many beautiful, heart-warming verses in the Bible. There are also many extremely immoral and disgraceful verses. Sure, we belong to god, and we are his property. I know this question has probably been brought up multiple times, but I still don't understand it. The God of the Bible has commited genocides, thrown people in hell for eternity, and other disastrous acts. If these acts can be justified, please explain how.

5. What about wishful-thinking/confirmation bias? I understand atheism is hard to accept (it still is for me), but I simply cannot see any reason to accept christianity except because I want to believe it. It has some evidence, sure. But does it really have sufficient evidence?

Have you read the main site as all these questions have been answered in detail there.

Kind Regards
Daniel

[kitemikami]

I just looked around the website and I couldn't find anything. Can you link us to some articles?

[Katabole]

Hello Smhjoc.

1. I see a lot of posts here describing atheists as arrogant, hateful people who despise god and want nothing more than to be right. I reject this generalization.

Some atheists are arrogant, hateful people who despise god and want nothing more than to be right. Others are quiet, passive people who generally don't become involved with debate or discussion. From my own perspective, I usually only have a bone to pick with those who unabashedly attack my faith with little or no knowledge of it or I comment on famous atheists like Richard Dawkins or Daniel Dennet who have made an industry out of making Christianity and Christians out to be stupid people.

I have yet to meet an atheist who is happy with the idea that there is no god to give us compassion, and that after death we will never see friends or family again as we will not exist.

From that statement, you evidently know a lot of unhappy people who are saddened by a naturalistic worldview. I have met atheists that couldn't care less about anyone but themselves and if they think about the afterlife at all, it is usually only when someone close to them dies.

2. Is there really any solid evidence for the existence of a god?

Evidence? What about the existence of the observable universe? I am not of the school of Stephen Hawking who claimed in his book, 'The Grand Design' that the universe will and can create itself from nothing. However, I don't usually go in the debate of what evidence is there that the invisible Creator exists. Instead, I look at the historical records of the existence of Jesus of Nazareth. One of Jesus' claims was that he was God, the same as the invisble Creator.

3. If there is evidence for god, why christianity?

Well, you can only go on what is written and in the case of multiple religions, then it is up to the reader to do a truth test. If you compare Christianity to other faiths and what is written in their holy books, for example:

Buddha said, "I am a teacher in search of the truth". Jesus said, "I am the truth".
Confucius said, "I never claimed to be holy". Jesus said, "Who convicts me of sin"?
Mohammed said, "If Allah does not put his cloak of mercy over me, I have no hope". Jesus said, "If you do not believe in me, you will die in your sins".

Another reason as to "why Christianity and not other religions" would be, and I'll ask you, If Christianity is not true, how can you explain it's meteoric rise and explosion from Judaism in the first century under intense persecution, when its adherants were preaching a story of a dead, crucified man returning to life and were dying in scores defending that belief?

Sure, we belong to god, and we are his property.

That sounds like a statement from a theist, not an atheist. Misnomer on your part?

The God of the Bible has commited genocides

Yes, the God of the Bible did commit genocides. He used the Israelites to annihilate races of Canaanites. That is a deep study, but to give you a little bit of background, the Canaanite peoples, including children and animals had been corrupted by an influx of fallen angels. According to Deut 12:31 (KJV) the Canaanites were burning their children alive on altars to the god Molech. The God of the Bible claims to be a God of judgment and he used the Israelites as his sword of judgment on these peoples. It would be hard to reconcile the genocide(s) if there were no influx of angels, which is what most people do when they read the stories about the Canaanite conquests but God in his infinite wisdom is righteous in his judgment.

thrown people in hell for eternity

Not everyone on this forum believes in Hell. I don't and I don't believe anyone is burning in "Hell" presently. I ultimately believe that God will bring evil, wicked people to justice but their destruction in the end will be just, best described for me in the last part of Oba 16, "...and they shall be as though they had not been". It's probably worth your while doing a study on the synonymous words for Hell, used in the Hebrew and Greek.

5. What about wishful-thinking/confirmation bias?

Ahh, Sigmund Freuds contention. That God is a wish fulfillment, a fictional Father figure, projected on the skies of our imaginations and heaven is an imaginary projection of our fear of extinction of death. Fredrick Nietzsche would probably ask you how you can rationally justify your absolute, sounding commitment to timeless values, without implictly invoking God because Nietzsche would tell you, you can't.

But does it really have sufficient evidence?

Compare Christianity to what you already wrote: I have yet to meet an atheist who is happy with the idea that there is no god to give us compassion, and that after death we will never see friends or family again as we will not exist.

When Jesus Christ is accepted by people, they receive a forgiveness. I have seen it. Others on the forum have experienced it. That may not be enough evidence for you but is abundant evidence for us.

A little background information: I started off as an evangelical/baptist christian, as this is what both my parents happened to be.

So, if you believe your parents loved you, do you now believe that they lied to you by poisoning your innocent mind with a doctrine that is nothing more than a myth?

[kitemikami]

Don't you think you're lumping all atheists together? Not all atheists are bad people, just like not all Christians are good people

[smhjoc]

Some atheists are arrogant, hateful people who despise god and want nothing more than to be right. Others are quiet, passive people who generally don't become involved with debate or discussion. From my own perspective, I usually only have a bone to pick with those who unabashedly attack my faith with little or no knowledge of it or I comment on famous atheists like Richard Dawkins or Daniel Dennet who have made an industry out of making Christianity and Christians out to be stupid people.

Certainly. I've encountered many of them, mostly on the Internet. They are extremely rude, and ironically, tend to have nothing valuable to say. However, as I said, one must not forget that there are these kinds of people everywhere, no matter what their beliefs are.

Evidence? What about the existence of the observable universe? I am not of the school of Stephen Hawking who claimed in his book, 'The Grand Design' that the universe will and can create itself from nothing.

Well, there are several theories on how the universe could have come into existence from nothing. Quantum theory, for example, can explain how energy can be created from nothing (Heisenberg's uncertainty principle). Through billions and billion of years, subatomic particles combined into hadrons to form different types of particles that combined into atoms, which combined into more and more complex molecules which allowed abiogenesis to occur, followed by evolution. We many not know everything, but we have a good idea. In terms of "nothing", we're not really sure what the "nothing" really was, as in whether it was vacuum or actually nothingness. It certainly does seem mind-boggling as how something like the universe could appear out of nowhere, but not knowing the origin of the universe perfectly shouldn't then mean god has to exist. Scientists are working on an explanation.

Buddha said, "I am a teacher in search of the truth". Jesus said, "I am the truth".
Confucius said, "I never claimed to be holy". Jesus said, "Who convicts me of sin"?
Mohammed said, "If Allah does not put his cloak of mercy over me, I have no hope". Jesus said, "If you do not believe in me, you will die in your sins".

Sure, but merely declaring oneself as some sort of supreme deity doesn't mean much. I can state I am god, but such claim requires evidence, and good evidence at that.

If Christianity is not true, how can you explain it's meteoric rise and explosion from Judaism in the first century under intense persecution, when its adherants were preaching a story of a dead, crucified man returning to life and were dying in scores defending that belief?

That only shows that many of the believers had strong enough faith to die for what they believed in. Throughout history, people have died for what they thought was right: muslims, christians, jews, atheists, you name it. It doesn't really have anything to do with the reliability of one's belief, just that they have strong faith.

That sounds like a statement from a theist, not an atheist. Misnomer on your part?

Oh, by that I was referring to a universal belief in christianity. Not that I was giving my belief on it.

Yes, the God of the Bible did commit genocides. He used the Israelites to annihilate races of Canaanites.

Even if they had been corrupted, why didn't God show compassion and help them, instead of striking down on them? Even if this scenario was justified, that doesn't explain the other atrocities God made. Destroying Job's life? Asking Abraham to sacrifice his son, which apparently was a way to test Abraham's faith (or possibly morality)? Killing a group of kids/adolescents with bears due to them mocking Elisha? Slaughtering a bunch of new-born children in Egypt? How are any of these justified?

Not everyone on this forum believes in Hell. I don't and I don't believe anyone is burning in "Hell" presently.

When I was a christian, neither did I. However, non-existence isn't great either, compared to the everlasting bliss and glory those in heaven would receive, merely due to how much faith someone had. Why would God even make that sort of division? I understand the whole "man is separated from God and those who accept Christ can receive salvation", but how does that make sense? In fact, why do we even exist in the first place? If it was so God could have a relationship with something he created, why did he make the selection process based on how skeptical someone is? That would mean that someone who was an atheist but would love to have a relationship with a god if he happened to exist would still go to hell.

When Jesus Christ is accepted by people, they receive a forgiveness. I have seen it. Others on the forum have experienced it. That may not be enough evidence for you but is abundant evidence for us.

I've seen it as well. But I can't see that as anything other than a placebo effect, unless further evidence is given. Plus, that doesn't really help when it comes to evidence for christianity. To experience forgiveness, one must first believe that Christ is the son of god. However, other atheists and I fail to actually believe he is the son of god, and therefore have no way of testing this evidence from experience.

So, if you believe your parents loved you, do you now believe that they lied to you by poisoning your innocent mind with a doctrine that is nothing more than a myth?

Of course I believe my parents love me. I do not, however, believe that my parents are correct on every aspect of every decision they will ever make. We have had differences in politics, life, and of course, religion. I do not look down on my parents for believing in christianity. Sure, I don't believe what I was taught, but I don't look at it that they deliberately lied to me and wanted the worst for me. They believed in christianity, and wanted me to share the same happiness and love for god that they did, and of course, receive salvation.

[Danieltwotwenty]

Hi
Here is a link to the main site http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/answers.html

Don't you think you're lumping all atheists together? Not all atheists are bad people, just like not all Christians are good people

I said most not all, there are always exceptions from both sides. Christains are far from perfect but i have found them to be the most caring and understanding people, although there will always be wolf's among sheep.

[narnia4]

1. I see a lot of posts here describing atheists as arrogant, hateful people who despise god and want nothing more than to be right. I reject this generalization. I have yet to meet an atheist who is happy with the idea that there is no god to give us compassion, and that after death we will never see friends or family again as we will not exist. As for arrogance and hatefulness, many people can act this way, even theists.

Well, we speak of what we know. Yes its stereotypical, but unfortunately there are often reasons for stereotypes. Don't you find it odd that so many people have the same basic experience with many atheists. There are obviously people out there who are atheists and treat other people decently... but just look online. At least the loud atheists, I don't see any way around describing them as hateful and arrogant.

2. Is there really any solid evidence for the existence of a god? If so, please list them. However, arguments from ignorance will not suffice. Saying "god exists because I don't know how this works" is not a decent argument.

Its stuff like this that makes me doubt someone's sincerity. No mainstream apologist will ever say "god exists because I don't know how this works". The vast majority of arguments don't even have that as an underlying assumption. Take a look at this site for starters. Try http://www.reasonablefaith.org for another resource.

3. If there is evidence for god, why christianity? There are thousands of religions out there, lots with similar beliefs. One does not even have to accept a religion if they accept a god figure, which would be deism. Now, if there is substantial evidence for christianity, please list them.

You know the main site and multiple other Christian sites answer these questions. You talked about confirmation bias... if you came to your conclusion based off unbiased reason... then why aren't you aware of the answers? A standard answer to that question would be that you have examined Christianity and find no substantial evidence for Christianity. Unfortunately this can't be the case because Christianity happens to have a good deal of evidence in support of it. Most importantly, the evidence for Christ and his resurrection. If you threw out all pre-conceived biases, all assumptions about whether or not there is a God, then the resurrection of Christ could be considered one of the most well-attested historical facts in history. Indeed, if there were a trivial historical incident/person without anything to do with religion that had as good of evidence in support of it as the existence of Christ and his resurrection, the existence of that incident/person would be universally accepted.

As far as Christianity... is this an objection against theism? Because it seems to be a fairly common theme among atheists, if they have a problem with Christianity then they seem to take it as a proof for atheism. But to answer the question, there are many, many things that make Christianity unique among every other religion in the world. I recommend Jesus Among Other Gods by Ravi Zacharias. And again, if we COULDN'T answer "Why Christianity?", atheism is not the next logical step.

4. There are many beautiful, heart-warming verses in the Bible. There are also many extremely immoral and disgraceful verses. Sure, we belong to god, and we are his property. I know this question has probably been brought up multiple times, but I still don't understand it. The God of the Bible has commited genocides, thrown people in hell for eternity, and other disastrous acts. If these acts can be justified, please explain how.

This is a big question to expect people to answer all at once. There are many threads on this subject and many links we could send you to and articles on the main site. Here's a few pointers-

Hell for eternity isn't a belief that's required to believe in the God of the Bible, and while I believe in hell there are some interesting points about it.

Things should always be taken in context. What's the context of what's happening in the Old Testament? What reasons could there be for this? Did God say that he wanted certain people wiped out or is it just recorded in the Bible? And many other things.

If God committed acts you consider to be immoral, then you are conceding that objective morality exists. Objective morality is unexplainable under atheism, therefore God exists. So instead of dismissing the existence of God because of what you perceive to be immoral acts, work through it case by case. You mentioned earlier that you considered the argument from morality... that's some good evidence right there. Few things seem as obvious as objective morality, and yet there is absolutely no such thing if atheism is true.

5. What about wishful-thinking/confirmation bias? I understand atheism is hard to accept (it still is for me), but I simply cannot see any reason to accept christianity except because I want to believe it. It has some evidence, sure. But does it really have sufficient evidence?

What is sufficient evidence for you? How about another question... why atheism? Don't you think that any worldview that you hold needs to not only have positive evidence in support of it, but be internally coherent? Even many atheists, probably most, will admit that there is NO positive evidence for atheism, and atheism is ALSO internally incoherent. So if you're having problems with Christianity or literal interpretations to the Bible, why this big leap to atheism?

As far as confirmation bias, it can and does work both ways. This is really a pretty silly argument, frankly. So apparently "I want something to be true, therefore it is false". Whether or not you want something to be true doesn't have that much to do with whether it is true.

This is all pretty standard stuff, its disheartening that someone with Christian parents who grew up a Christian could dismiss Christianity for these reasons. Not trying to be rude, just candid. And thank YOU for not being rude to the people here, its a nice change of pace.

I have one final encouragement. We all live by faith and we all make assumptions. Under your atheistic worldview, morality isn't justifiable, there is no purpose to your life, you may not have free will or even be THINKING. You're no more special then a rock and you have a shorter lifespan, and when you're done thats it. These are important issues. Don't write off Christianity... that does NOT mean and has NEVER meant BLIND faith... I've never seen anything about blind faith in the Bible. But examine your heart and the evidence and the implications and validity of different world views, you have no reason NOT to, right? Seek God... those who honestly seek will find.

[Ant]

I see a lot of posts here describing atheists as arrogant, hateful people who despise god and want nothing more than to be right.

People like to think they are right and everyone else is wrong. Many Christians are arrogant, hateful people. Many atheists are closer obeying the laws of God than many Christians, and God is more likely to save those atheists than those arrogant, hateful Christians. Believe it or not, I believe God is inspiring the trend towards Atheism, as part of a process of redoing religion for the better.

2. Is there really any solid evidence for the existence of a god? If so, please list them. However, arguments from ignorance will not suffice. Saying "god exists because I don't know how this works" is not a decent argument.

Yes, but nobody ever listens. The evidence exists from statements from early in the Bible predicting stuff that'll happen in the future, usually later books in the Bible. Also, God gave a very accurate description of nuclear war. Stars are hydrogen fusion fireballs, exactly the same as nuclear bombs, so when Jesus mentioned stars falling from heaven, people hiding under ground, the sky darkened, that is an very accurate description of nuclear war with the very primitive language of the time. Most people seem only interested in the New Testament, which won't provide hardly any real proof of the existence of God, so few people know such proof exists. Also, wishful-thinking/confirmation bias very often block the acceptance of such evidence. For example, nobody really wants to believe that God predicted nuclear war, 'cause that means it'll probably happen.

3. If there is evidence for god, why christianity? There are thousands of religions out there, lots with similar beliefs. One does not even have to accept a religion if they accept a god figure, which would be deism. Now, if there is substantial evidence for christianity, please list them.

God communicates to us through all religions, not just religions, also in our dreams, stories, fantasy and fiction movies, etc. No religion is better than any other. However, it is dramatically better to study the Bible (or what ever you choose), for yourself, and form your own opinions.

4. There are many beautiful, heart-warming verses in the Bible. There are also many extremely immoral and disgraceful verses. Sure, we belong to god, and we are his property. I know this question has probably been brought up multiple times, but I still don't understand it. The God of the Bible has commited genocides, thrown people in hell for eternity, and other disastrous acts. If these acts can be justified, please explain how.

Hell is symbolic, it doesn't exist as people visualize it. It only represents a state of mind. As for genocide, that is a human term, used only to make some entity look bad. God's purpose is to save humanity, which would destroy itself if God didn't save us. Whatever method God uses to achieve that goal is justified and necessary.

5. What about wishful-thinking/confirmation bias? I understand atheism is hard to accept (it still is for me), but I simply cannot see any reason to accept christianity except because I want to believe it. It has some evidence, sure. But does it really have sufficient evidence?

Wishful-thinking/confirmation bias are very bad. They prevent people from seeing the truth. Respecting your parents is good, but at some point you need to think for yourself. You need to accept that you are young, so you should try to play it safe, following your parents rules as much as you can, 'cause they might know something you don't, but that doesn't mean you don't think for yourself.

The problem with wishful-thinking/confirmation bias, is they pretty much eliminate thinking. We have a situation, where if A is true, than B, C, D, E, F, G, H, etc. must also be true. So A absolutely must be true. The problem is, A is false, so whole religions are a load of BS, all because of wishful-thinking/confirmation bias. This is not only true in religion, I've seen the same thing in science.

God wants to save as many people as possible from the eminent destruction of nuclear war. I think God has determined that he can't save everyone, so God puts some things in the Bible to deliberately lead people who would cause problems with God's plan astray. Or it might be that those people will only be temporarily lead astray, and later on will come to God.

Like starting a company, you don't take in people who won't benefit the company. Maybe later on, those people will benefit the company, but not at first. Or maybe those people can be brought in later on without significant harm.

In the end, people believe what they want to believe. If they want to care about other people, they'll come to God's plan, and form a new world full of caring people. If they selfish and greedy, they may never come to God's plan.

Offer people a reward, like life after death in heaven, and what sort of people do you attract? People who care about themselves. For a time, that may have helped make people behave, but now God is redoing religion, without the heaven and hell reward system.

Tony

[Silvertusk]

I see a lot of posts here describing atheists as arrogant, hateful people who despise god and want nothing more than to be right.

People like to think they are right and everyone else is wrong. Many Christians are arrogant, hateful people. Many atheists are closer obeying the laws of God than many Christians, and God is more likely to save those atheists than those arrogant, hateful Christians. Believe it or not, I believe God is inspiring the trend towards Atheism, as part of a process of redoing religion for the better.

2. Is there really any solid evidence for the existence of a god? If so, please list them. However, arguments from ignorance will not suffice. Saying "god exists because I don't know how this works" is not a decent argument.

Yes, but nobody ever listens. The evidence exists from statements from early in the Bible predicting stuff that'll happen in the future, usually later books in the Bible. Also, God gave a very accurate description of nuclear war. Stars are hydrogen fusion fireballs, exactly the same as nuclear bombs, so when Jesus mentioned stars falling from heaven, people hiding under ground, the sky darkened, that is an very accurate description of nuclear war with the very primitive language of the time. Most people seem only interested in the New Testament, which won't provide hardly any real proof of the existence of God, so few people know such proof exists. Also, wishful-thinking/confirmation bias very often block the acceptance of such evidence. For example, nobody really wants to believe that God predicted nuclear war, 'cause that means it'll probably happen.

3. If there is evidence for god, why christianity? There are thousands of religions out there, lots with similar beliefs. One does not even have to accept a religion if they accept a god figure, which would be deism. Now, if there is substantial evidence for christianity, please list them.

God communicates to us through all religions, not just religions, also in our dreams, stories, fantasy and fiction movies, etc. No religion is better than any other. However, it is dramatically better to study the Bible (or what ever you choose), for yourself, and form your own opinions.

4. There are many beautiful, heart-warming verses in the Bible. There are also many extremely immoral and disgraceful verses. Sure, we belong to god, and we are his property. I know this question has probably been brought up multiple times, but I still don't understand it. The God of the Bible has commited genocides, thrown people in hell for eternity, and other disastrous acts. If these acts can be justified, please explain how.

Hell is symbolic, it doesn't exist as people visualize it. It only represents a state of mind. As for genocide, that is a human term, used only to make some entity look bad. God's purpose is to save humanity, which would destroy itself if God didn't save us. Whatever method God uses to achieve that goal is justified and necessary.

5. What about wishful-thinking/confirmation bias? I understand atheism is hard to accept (it still is for me), but I simply cannot see any reason to accept christianity except because I want to believe it. It has some evidence, sure. But does it really have sufficient evidence?

Wishful-thinking/confirmation bias are very bad. They prevent people from seeing the truth. Respecting your parents is good, but at some point you need to think for yourself. You need to accept that you are young, so you should try to play it safe, following your parents rules as much as you can, 'cause they might know something you don't, but that doesn't mean you don't think for yourself.

The problem with wishful-thinking/confirmation bias, is they pretty much eliminate thinking. We have a situation, where if A is true, than B, C, D, E, F, G, H, etc. must also be true. So A absolutely must be true. The problem is, A is false, so whole religions are a load of BS, all because of wishful-thinking/confirmation bias. This is not only true in religion, I've seen the same thing in science.

God wants to save as many people as possible from the eminent destruction of nuclear war. I think God has determined that he can't save everyone, so God puts some things in the Bible to deliberately lead people who would cause problems with God's plan astray. Or it might be that those people will only be temporarily lead astray, and later on will come to God.

Like starting a company, you don't take in people who won't benefit the company. Maybe later on, those people will benefit the company, but not at first. Or maybe those people can be brought in later on without significant harm.

In the end, people believe what they want to believe. If they want to care about other people, they'll come to God's plan, and form a new world full of caring people. If they selfish and greedy, they may never come to God's plan.

Offer people a reward, like life after death in heaven, and what sort of people do you attract? People who care about themselves. For a time, that may have helped make people behave, but now God is redoing religion, without the heaven and hell reward system.

Tony

Tony - you have not shown any links or sources showing evidence to any of the quite frankly wild claims you have made - please do so.

I may I remind you also of what the boards purpose and guidelines are.

http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... hp?f=1&t=4
http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... f=1&t=2517

Silvertusk

[jlay]

Through billions and billion of years, subatomic particles combined into hadrons to form different types of particles that combined into atoms, which combined into more and more complex molecules which allowed abiogenesis to occur, followed by evolution. We many not know everything, but we have a good idea.

Asside from you putting blind faith in somebody telling you that,, please share with us what 'evidence' you have personally examined and tested regarding this claim.

Sure, but merely declaring oneself as some sort of supreme deity doesn't mean much. I can state I am god, but such claim requires evidence, and good evidence at that.

You could start by raising a man four days dead back to life. Raising yourself back to life after being dead three days. Supernaturlly controlling nature. And, fulfilling scripture written 400 to 1000 years prior, about your birth, life and death.

Even if they had been corrupted, why didn't God show compassion and help them, instead of striking down on them? Even if this scenario was justified, that doesn't explain the other atrocities God made. Destroying Job's life? Asking Abraham to sacrifice his son, which apparently was a way to test Abraham's faith (or possibly morality)? Killing a group of kids/adolescents with bears due to them mocking Elisha? Slaughtering a bunch of new-born children in Egypt? How are any of these justified?

[/quote]
All good questions, which have been asked and answered over and over. Would you a agree that any ancient literary document must be interpreted in its proper context? Are you saying that just because these are difficulties that you reject any possible explanation that could justify these actions.
If God is real, then He is God. Not a man. And thus God's actions would be with eternity in mind, not merely a moment. If you are genuinely interested in the in depth explanations I would recommend Paul Copan's book, "Is God a Moral Monster." it devotes four chapters alone to the Canaanite slaughter.

Let us not also forget that to judge God, one must also stand on the Judeo Christian worldview to do such. Someone appealed earlier to the faulty appeal to consequence. The same could be said here. Example. "I don't like president Obama's policies. His policies have cost soldier's lives. therefore he doesn't exist."

[Ant]

Tony - you have not shown any links or sources showing evidence to any of the quite frankly wild claims you have made - please do so.

I may I remind you also of what the boards purpose and guidelines are.

So what, having an opinion is forbidden? Are you another one of those people into thought control? The purpose of this and all forums is to allow people to talk and learn from each other. That process can not happen when people practice thought control.

And thus God's actions would be with eternity in mind, not merely a moment.

Exactly. I hear people complaining about millions of people dieing in religious wars, but what is millions of lives compared with billions and the survival of our species? Nothing. Thinking in terms of eternity changes priorities drastically.

People rarely think in terms of eternity, or even the near future. People usually think only about the present, and so often that causes us severe problems.

Tony

[Katabole]

Smhjoc, I would give a longer rebuttal to the answers you gave but narnia4 and Jlay basically covered anything I would have added. Thank you both.

There are a couple of things though:

I can state I am god, but such claim requires evidence, and good evidence at that.

In order to make a claim as to a diety, in this case God Himself, Jesus would have had to expressed the attributes of God, namely omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence. After intense scrutiny of the Gospels over the years, I believe Jesus did that plainly. Saying you are God is one thing. Proving it; quite another.

Omnipotence. Jesus is claimed to have calmed a storm meaning he had power over nature. He healed optic nerves of the blind, repaired derelict eardrums, healed those that were paralyzed simply by either touching them or speaking. And he came back to life from death meaning He had power over death.

Omniscience. Jesus claimed to have lived in the ancient past, claimed he could read minds and knew what people were thinking and made audacious claims about the future, even predicting his death and the type of death he would suffer.

Omnipresence. Jesus claimed to be the same as the invisible creator God and equal to the Spirit of God meaning he could be in different places at different times.

That only shows that many of the believers had strong enough faith to die for what they believed in. Throughout history, people have died for what they thought was right: muslims, christians, jews, atheists, you name it. It doesn't really have anything to do with the reliability of one's belief, just that they have strong faith.

Smhjoc, Christianity could have been proven false in an hour. All that had to be done was to display the crucified body of Jesus to the high priest. That wasn't done because there was no body to display, even though the Jewish priesthood was so convinced that Jesus would rise from the dead that they placed guards outside his tomb, which the Gospels claim they bribed so they would keep their mouths shut. 500 people the book of Acts claims, saw Jesus alive after he died. Going public to preach the resurrection of a dead man is one thing and would be absolutely ridiculous. Going public to preach the resurrection of a very famous and well known dead man that was witnessed by many to be alive after an execution and a burial is quite another. Early Christians died for their faith because the event that happened was true. That is the only reason why Christianity succeded as a belief system.

[DannyM]

Tony - you have not shown any links or sources showing evidence to any of the quite frankly wild claims you have made - please do so.

I may I remind you also of what the boards purpose and guidelines are.

So what, having an opinion is forbidden? Are you another one of those people into thought control? The purpose of this and all forums is to allow people to talk and learn from each other. That process can not happen when people practice thought control.

Please watch your tone, Ant. If your thoughts are your own then just say so. Nobody here has any desire to control your thoughts.

[smhjoc]

Well, we speak of what we know. Yes its stereotypical, but unfortunately there are often reasons for stereotypes. Don't you find it odd that so many people have the same basic experience with many atheists. There are obviously people out there who are atheists and treat other people decently... but just look online. At least the loud atheists, I don't see any way around describing them as hateful and arrogant.

I agree.

Its stuff like this that makes me doubt someone's sincerity. No mainstream apologist will ever say "god exists because I don't know how this works". The vast majority of arguments don't even have that as an underlying assumption. Take a look at this site for starters. Try http://www.reasonablefaith.org for another resource.

Well, by that I was referring to the common argument from ignorance as evidence for god, specifically the cosmological argument. I admit it may have some merit if it is proven (or has strong support) scientifically that the universe could not have come into existence by itself through chance, and needed some sort of supernatural guide. Problem is, at the moment, we don't know for sure how the universe came into existence. There are countless theories, and scientists are working on it. I think to then leap to the idea that since we don't know for sure how the universe came into existence by chance, that god exists.

I've read a lot of Craig's works, as well as viewed several debates online (Hitchens, Stenger, Flew, and a few others. I will admit, he's an astonishingly good debater, and even most atheists will admit this. His debating techniques are probably some of the best I've ever seen. Thing is, he puts big emphasis on the cosmological argument, as well as the concept of morality, which I don't feel have too much strength when it comes to proving the existence of god. If you have any good articles that you feel give strong support for the existence of god/authority of Jesus, please let me know, and I'll gladly take a look at them.

A standard answer to that question would be that you have examined Christianity and find no substantial evidence for Christianity. Unfortunately this can't be the case because Christianity happens to have a good deal of evidence in support of it. Most importantly, the evidence for Christ and his resurrection.

But what would this evidence be? Jesus may have existed, but what good evidence do we have to support that Jesus was who he said he was? Sure, many people followed him, but how can we be sure that the gospel wasn't edited over time?

And again, if we COULDN'T answer "Why Christianity?", atheism is not the next logical step.

Not instantly, no. However, I didn't seem to feel that there was strong enough evidence for christianity. This then led to me feeling the same way about the existence of god in general. Atheism in its entirety doesn't state that there is definitely no god. Sure, god could in theory exist, but I simply see no reason to believe in one. Atheism doesn't need to prove anything, as the burden of proof doesn't lie on me. As an example, say I said that I believed unicorns existed. One can make any claim they want, and if someone told me they believed unicorns were real, I would ask them why. Making a claim requires evidence. I don't have to disprove that unicorns exist, because it's practically impossible to do so. If they can't give me any evidence (or poor evidence), then just because a unicorn could exist doesn't give me any reason to actually believe it does.

If God committed acts you consider to be immoral, then you are conceding that objective morality exists. Objective morality is unexplainable under atheism, therefore God exists. So instead of dismissing the existence of God because of what you perceive to be immoral acts, work through it case by case. You mentioned earlier that you considered the argument from morality... that's some good evidence right there. Few things seem as obvious as objective morality, and yet there is absolutely no such thing if atheism is true.

But morality can be explained under atheism. It may not be absolute from person to person, but it can be very similar, depending on where one was raised, brain arrangement, etc. One example is why do atheists not feel killing one another is okay, and other immoral acts? Some of these can be explained from evolutionary psychology, which not surprisingly can be found in other species as well. Compassion, empathy, and love for one another can be explained by Oxytocin, a type of hormone.

As far as confirmation bias, it can and does work both ways. This is really a pretty silly argument, frankly. So apparently "I want something to be true, therefore it is false". Whether or not you want something to be true doesn't have that much to do with whether it is true.

Not at all. My point wasn't that it shows it's false, but that it could be a major reason as to why many people believe in a god. Due to confirmation bias, they are more likely to give supporting evidence more light than opposing evidence. I'm not stating it for sure, but I do think it does contribute to faith.

Under your atheistic worldview, morality isn't justifiable, there is no purpose to your life, you may not have free will or even be THINKING. You're no more special then a rock and you have a shorter lifespan, and when you're done thats it.

As depressing as it is, that doesn't relate to whether it's true or not.