Comments for Atheology

Comment on Billy Graham on Atheism by John Bates

John Bates — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 16:14:16 +0000

You would commit suicide if there was no God? Well, I would do the same IF (big if) God was the way many evangelicals say he is. If God created hell and Satan and decides to torture billions of people in hell for trillions of years then “God” would be complete and total evil – far worse than Hitler, worse than Pol Pot.
Yet many worship this (invented) idea of God and say he is “loving”. Wrong! This is not love, this is what it appears to be – it is sheer evil to torture people, period. If “God” makes the rules he is responsible for what happens.
Thankfully this idea of eternal torture is a lie. People hear religious leaders say this or that or think they read it in the bible and their brain shuts down. Face up to it: a torturing, infinitely vicious God is not worth the dirt on my shoe.
Some will try to defend their condemnation of others (in complete contradiction of Jesus’ words against pointing at others). But consider: is life worth living if 90% of the people you know are soon to be waterboarded with fire forever? Is this idea of God ethical?
You read it in the bible? Sorry, you didn’t. You read there was a hell, you read nothing about it lasting forever, nor did you read all non-christians are going there.
How many verses are there in the bible that say that Christ reconciles “all men” to God? Doesn’t the book say that all who love are “born of God”?

Comment on Billy Graham on Atheism by Believing Christian

Believing Christian — Sat, 14 Jan 2012 01:53:12 +0000

I haven’t invented God, He revealed Himself to me.
I am proud to have a supernaturalist worldview which, apart from my Faith, I find more consonant with reason and experience than pure naturalism/materialism.
The fact is Jesus was truthfully recorded as resurrected. We will be resurrected too. Crying about laws of physics won’t work when our Maker can choose to suspend them at any time. People need to accept Him for who He is- God and man in union- before they do anything else.
Furthermore, if I ever came to believe that this life was all, I would end it by suicide. There is NO point living a single life as an evolved animal in an indifferent universe that came into being for no reason. If no God and no afterlife, then no meaningfulness, no morality, no truth and no earthly life (for me.)

Comment on God and Other Minds by AGRO BUAH

AGRO BUAH — Sat, 24 Dec 2011 13:04:23 +0000

his posts are very nice and helpful …
added hopefully more successful.

Comment on Billy Graham on Atheism by AGRO BUAH

AGRO BUAH — Sat, 24 Dec 2011 12:58:09 +0000

The workmanship is good to be listened to.
can make at home look at some of your posts
thank you …

Comment on Antony Flew is Dead by Nightvid Cole

Nightvid Cole — Wed, 14 Dec 2011 05:22:51 +0000

I mostly agree with you, except for calling Plantinga’s evolutionary argument against naturalism “brilliant”. When I first came across it, my immediate reaction was, more or less, as follows:

The scenarios Plantinga envisages for adaptive combinations of false beliefs with specific desires simply could not plausibly work on a large scale. This is because a form of Occam’s razor (Given competing hypotheses consistent with the data so far, the true hypothesis is ceteris paribus more likely or more plausibly the simpler) can be slightly modified to

1. Of all competing belief-desire systems which have so far been consistent with the “correct” action, ones based primarily on truths are likely to be among the simpler ones

which can be combined with the premises

2. All else being equal, a more complex set of beliefs and desires is likely to need a bigger and more energy-expensive brain to execute with any given accuracy and speed than a simpler one, as well as a more complex and improbable genome to biologically develop

and

3. There is commonly natural selection against energetically inefficient organisms, and more improbable genomes are ceteris paribus less likely to be the ones that end up in an organism.

yields the conclusion

4. Evolution would likely select for organisms whose beliefs (insofar as the latter exist at all) have a tendency to track truth

I think it is a very straightforward and simple rebuttal that puts the argument where it belongs: In its grave.

Comment on CS Lewis’ Moral Argument by Matthew Weatherford

Matthew Weatherford — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 05:28:12 +0000

The universe includes rational agents! Saying that the universe isn’t a person is like saying that a school isn’t a person. Sure, no duh, it’s not, but that’s not what he meant.

Comment on Atheism and Common Sense by Matthew Weatherford

Matthew Weatherford — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 05:24:57 +0000

Hey, just so you know: technically, if God existed first then you are wrong to say that nothing ever existed. Nothing never has existed — it’s only a term to say that a being that we know of did not exist at that time. Oh and did I say that every scientist that I know is a theist. A theist can also be a naturalist by the way.

Comment on God and Other Minds by Matthew Weatherford

Matthew Weatherford — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 05:14:30 +0000

All deductive arguments start from inductive premises hahaha. I’m a theist and I know for a fact others have minds. Where did this come from? haha. If others are trying to figure out an argument for the existence of other peoples’ minds, then minds must exist obviously. UUUUUhhhh, science is natural philosophy. Those premises don’t come from just science.

Comment on Contingency and Necessity by Matthew Weatherford

Matthew Weatherford — Mon, 12 Dec 2011 05:08:13 +0000

I liked how you argued, but I think you missed something. Contingency is not dependence or relation; it only means that something could or could not exist. We say God is necessary, not because we are playing a stupid word game, but because if God were contingent then he wouldn’t be infinite. He doesn’t need to create himself in order to have created everything else. He doesn’t need to be contingent in order to relate to us, because his essence is to exist. Infinite series does not refer to chronology, but to rather to the importance of the cause. Just think about it. . .if everything were contingent then how could we end up where we are from an infinite series. Contingency broke the necessity chain, not vice versa hahaha. Read some Aquinas. You have your terms totally confused lol.

Comment on Why Are We Alive? by Compound

Compound — Thu, 01 Dec 2011 18:24:27 +0000

like Nathan “son of our creator” has wrote: “your all right and yet, your all wrong”… Im only going to mention one thing, and yes it has been wrote by men, please lets not debate about it… It the Bible, Please read this http://www.gotquestions.org/image-of-God.html this might help in answering the big question.