U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-25-2013, 06:57 PM
 
614 posts, read 468,906 times
Reputation: 1254

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Rossi View Post
If there was a loving creator who made man as the apex of his universe, and who loved man, he would not have made creatures, from bacteria, to spiders. to fire ants, to snakes etc., capable of killing us (unless is a sadistic, not loving, creator).

Nor would he have deliberately made us capable of falling from "grace" especialling knowing in advace the exactl details of just that happening.

Conclusion?

No such creator does or could exist.

I see arguments like this one too often and i think it is a very poor argument against a gods existence.

I see words like "loving" god wouldnt allow this or that tragedy or condition to befall his "loved" creation. Well, what exactly does "love" mean? It could be argued, by an intelligent progressive theist that the word is merely the closest approximation we humnas can identify with the creators thought. Surely a being that is not biologically based and did not develop as a result of natural selection will not have psychlogical or emotional makeup that is similar to or can be easily understood by referencing our apelike neurological insticts and tendencies which are the result of our peculiar evolutionary path.

The motive or purpose that would drive such a being to direct us to behave in a particular manner may in fact not be what we undrstand as "love" or "caring".
Surely WE would never be able to tolerate a loved one suffering or falling from "grace", but a god almost certainly does not have emotions, as emotions are instincts that developed within the nervous systems of chemical based animals. So the capacity of a god to witness suffering among its creation would not cause the instinctive emotional discomfort we know.
Perhaps a colder philosophical approach to existence and purpose would better to understand a god than the emotionalist approach almost all theists promote to their weak minded flock.


The fact is the only rational reason not to believe in god is that there is no empirical justification for the existence of nor even the possibility of such an entity.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-25-2013, 08:01 PM
 
354 posts, read 246,578 times
Reputation: 105
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheArchitect
The fact is the only rational reason not to believe in god is that there is no empirical justification for the existence of nor even the possibility of such an entity.
This is a very good reason indeed, but I wouldn't say it's the only reason. Certain god claims/concepts are logically inconsistent. This is also a good reason to reject those concepts. The problem of suffering (thanks mordant) was constructed to logically address the inconsistency of any supposed all-loving god claims; an attribute many Christians apply to their god.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2013, 03:40 AM
 
39,339 posts, read 10,954,803 times
Reputation: 5108
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheArchitect View Post
..
The fact is the only rational reason not to believe in god is that there is no empirical justification for the existence of ...
Correct.

Quote:
nor even the possibility of such an entity.
No. The possibility of such an entity is not rational ((or logical) reason to believe that it does exist. The only reason to believe that is if there is a persuasive amount of evidence to make it plausible. The mere possibility is in no way enough to justify belief, let alone stating the existence of god (1) as a fact. Even some evidence, if open to argument and debate would not be enough. some decent evidence, now I come to think of it, would be enough to justify belief and some of the Cosmic origins arguments come close.

ID at one time looked like it might be good evidence too, but that hasn't stood up to scrutiny. At the moment the 'Goldilocks' argument has too many counters - such as the one about why we are so vulnerable, and why extinctions were needed to give us a chance. We were lucky. Conditions produced us. Different conditions, different Us - or maybe no us.

With the 'who made everything then?' argument, at the moment we have too little evidence and understanding (Big bang, as pointed out before, evidently happened, but is not the start as it had to come from something before) to be able to say God or not. That is not empirical justification for belief that it had to be a god. The possibility that it might be is not rational or logical reason for belief that it was.

Sorry for the length, but this is so often a last ditch argument to try to get God -as-a-given onto the table.

(1) your lower case. Which is why I haven't mentioned Biblegod. We are talking about a possible intelligent will behind the origin of the universe. We are not talking about the very particular personal God of the Bible. It is of course a Leap of Faith that a possible creator of everything is the same being as the tribal god of the Hebrews, repackaged by the Greeks to turn it into the god of the Roman world.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-26-2013, 12:14 PM
 
Location: Northeastern US
14,198 posts, read 9,113,267 times
Reputation: 6081
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheArchitect View Post
Surely a being that is not biologically based and did not develop as a result of natural selection will not have psychological or emotional makeup that is similar to or can be easily understood by referencing our apelike neurological instincts and tendencies which are the result of our peculiar evolutionary path.
That's a good observation but it runs contrary to the Biblical teaching that we are "created in god's image" which I was always taught means that god imprinted us with HIS basic moral sensibilities, wrote HIS law on our hearts. In other words we are NOT according to that teaching a product of natural selection but a mirror of God's own independent development. So if you want to know what god thinks / feels / values, look within, observe the consensus human experience of your fellow man, etc.

I understand of course that you're not pushing BibleGod here but suddenly I better understand one of the reasons for conservative Christianity's antipathy to evolution ... effectively they teach that they are above all that and it's debasing to their egocentric views of their manifest destiny, that they are not stamped off a celestial punch press but just rose up from the muck like all other living things.

This isn't new information to me but I just haven't thought about it in this light before.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheArchitect View Post
The fact is the only rational reason not to believe in god is that there is no empirical justification for the existence of nor even the possibility of such an entity.
Agreed . However, so many people here can only talk in terms of their own personally projected god; the meta-concepts are too abstract to wrestle with until you've dispensed with the concrete instance that you're hung up on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality > Atheism and Agnosticism
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top