This has got to stop!

[Interested Atheist]

I was just trying to write a post along the lines of "Can Christians Justify Morality At All?" because I think Zoltan's recent thread has missed the point a bit and overlooked the gaping holes in his own theology. Unfortunately I ran into some difficulties setting up my argument, and it may take longer or not happen at all. But what did occur to me in making one point is a Christian defence - God is all good, and therefore the morals he gives us cannot be faulted. I'd like to discuss logical flaws with that particular argument later, but at the moment my problem is this:

A Christian defence is based on the huge assumption that...well, that God is real. If that came up in an argument I'd ask the Christian to prove that God is real. But that would take a long time, results so far in history have proved unsatisfactory - and besides which, it's not a very fair task to set to some poor Christian on his own, is it?

So, that make me think. Considering that there are a number of major religions in the world (let's forget about the minor ones for the moment) and considering that they all say that they are the one true faith and promise dire consequences for those who do not adhere to their particular creed, wouldn't it be reasonable to say that the question "Does God exist? and if so, which one?" is of paramount importance?

Too important, I would say, to be decided by the normal reasons - conversion, a moment of enlightenment (both highly suspect) or even the arguments of apologists! Not to mention the reason that most people become or stay Christians - family, friends, society!

My proposal is this:
Before we allow these religions to carry on spreading their lies (at least most of them have to be lying, even if one of them is true!) we should find out which one is true. Then we can dedicate ourselves to it.

How?

We should have a meeting between the heads of the various religions and force them to come to an agreement about what criteria are suitable for deciding the correct religious faith. Then we can apply that criteria and come to a decision.

An illustration: two men had a disagreement over a herd of cows; they both claimed that it belonged to them. They went to a judge to ask him for a resolution. The judge decided that they should each share the herd equally. But how? Neither of them would trust the other to do it, and the judge knew that one would blame him if he divided them.
So, the judge told the first thief to divide the herd, but allowed the second thief to choose his half first!
And the moral of the story is: It takes two thieves to strike an honest bargain!

Because the question of our eternal welfare is too important to leave things in the state they are now. So find one true faith, if there is one; prove that it is true; and then we shall all follow happily.

AND IF YOU CAN'T PROVE THAT YOUR RELIGION IS TRUE WHY ARE YOU ASKING ME TO GAMBLE MY IMMORTAL SOUL ON IT!!!?
What do you think?

[calpurnpiso]

I was just trying to write a post along the lines of "Can Christians Justify Morality At All?" because I think Zoltan's recent thread has missed the point a bit and overlooked the gaping holes in his own theology. Unfortunately I ran into some difficulties setting up my argument, and it may take longer or not happen at all. But what did occur to me in making one point is a Christian defence - God is all good, and therefore the morals he gives us cannot be faulted. I'd like to discuss logical flaws with that particular argument later, but at the moment my problem is this:

A Christian defence is based on the huge assumption that...well, that God is real. If that came up in an argument I'd ask the Christian to prove that God is real. But that would take a long time, results so far in history have proved unsatisfactory - and besides which, it's not a very fair task to set to some poor Christian on his own, is it?

So, that make me think. Considering that there are a number of major religions in the world (let's forget about the minor ones for the moment) and considering that they all say that they are the one true faith and promise dire consequences for those who do not adhere to their particular creed, wouldn't it be reasonable to say that the question "Does God exist? and if so, which one?" is of paramount importance?

Too important, I would say, to be decided by the normal reasons - conversion, a moment of enlightenment (both highly suspect) or even the arguments of apologists! Not to mention the reason that most people become or stay Christians - family, friends, society!

My proposal is this:
Before we allow these religions to carry on spreading their lies (at least most of them have to be lying, even if one of them is true!) we should find out which one is true. Then we can dedicate ourselves to it.

How?

We should have a meeting between the heads of the various religions and force them to come to an agreement about what criteria are suitable for deciding the correct religious faith. Then we can apply that criteria and come to a decision.

An illustration: two men had a disagreement over a herd of cows; they both claimed that it belonged to them. They went to a judge to ask him for a resolution. The judge decided that they should each share the herd equally. But how? Neither of them would trust the other to do it, and the judge knew that one would blame him if he divided them.
So, the judge told the first thief to divide the herd, but allowed the second thief to choose his half first!
And the moral of the story is: It takes two thieves to strike an honest bargain!

Because the question of our eternal welfare is too important to leave things in the state they are now. So find one true faith, if there is one; prove that it is true; and then we shall all follow happily.

AND IF YOU CAN'T PROVE THAT YOUR RELIGION IS TRUE WHY ARE YOU ASKING ME TO GAMBLE MY IMMORTAL SOUL ON IT!!!?
What do you think?
Well said...but all amounts in accepting which tooth fairy is the most believable. Then this tooth fairy must be separated from the brain that created it by using MRIs and other devices so the image can be seen. Then one must concentrate on the image and see if it responds to our neruological signals, if it does and communicates with immense intelligence separating itself from the screen of the machine absorbing endoplasm, then with certainty we can say we have found the true god..........till then.....crazy is as crazy thinks.....:lol:

[Sigma]

Its a good idea but good luck getting the religions to agree on a test. Any group who is proven wrong will just claim the test was biased or some bull shit like that.

[calpurnpiso]

Its a good idea but good luck getting the religions to agree on a test. Any group who is proven wrong will just claim the test was biased or some bull shit like that.
Sure...they will not even take my JET ( Jesus Existnce Test) which is so easy to do, and readily could prove their schizophrenia caused invisible friend delusion is REAL!.......they only have to jump from a 20 story building while reading the Babble...it is not if I asked from them to jump from the Empire State or Mount Rushmore!...geezz....and they ONLY thing they can come up with is the cope out phrase " Thou shall not tempt the lord thy god"....as if I was testing him alone, I already know he is not real. Alas, I'm testing the Christ-psychotic CLAIMS that he exists, acts upon matter, answer prayers and saves schizophrenics in distress!!...:)

[inkadu]

Well said...but all amounts in accepting which tooth fairy is the most believable.
El Raton Perez. Claro!

[Baphomet]

Interested Atheist Wrote:

We should have a meeting between the heads of the various religions and force them to come to an agreement about what criteria are suitable for deciding the correct religious faith. Then we can apply that criteria and come to a decision.
Actually, religions do come to meetings to decide which religion is correct. These meetings are known as "crusades", "Jihads", and "holy wars", and usually end up becoming very violent.

[AlonzoFyfe]

Actually, modify the original argument, and you have yet another example of one of the major problems with religion, and proof that religion is . . . well . . . a problematic belief system.

There is no way for two people to come together, examine the evidence, and determine which is right. Yet, each individual involved in the discussion insists that they have the capacity to determine which view is correct, and that is the view they happen to hold.

This is a fundamental contradiction, and a good reason to abandon religious belief entirely.

Alonzo Fyfe (http://www.alonzofyfe.com)
Atheist Ethicist Blog (http://atheistethicist.blogspot.com/)

[calpurnpiso]

Well said...but all amounts in accepting which tooth fairy is the most believable.
El Raton Perez. Claro!
Hmm.....naturalmente...pero como es pequenito uno diria " el ratoncito Perez"! ( Certainly, but since it is small one would refer to it as the little mouse Perez.)

In Spain a very old tradition has been that a little invisible mouse is the one that exchanges children teeth for money. The origin of the name Perez is uncertain. This is little more believable than a floating Nike ( winged floating lady of Greek mithology representative of victory, where the concept of Angels derived from). The English of course rely on gnomes, fairies et al due to their Celtic Northern roots, to create children tales...but when children become adults those tales are more complicated mutating into what we know today as religious convoluted tales. Accepting those tales as fact regardless of their transformation, remains a form of mental retardation with touches of schizophrenia, iow, a form of mental illness whose cause is unknown...:)

[ManInTheWild]

An interesting idea but, of course, it would end in tears. Along those same lines, how about the leaders of the world get together to discuss the dangers of all religious belief systems and try to promote a new kind of ethics based on reason?

[a different tim]

If any religion consistently won all its crusades, jihads and holy wars, that might be evidence of a sort.

Alas, it is not so. God seems to be fickle when it comes to helping his followers (whoever they are this week) to spread the one true religion (whatever it is this week) over the globe.

[inkadu]

Hmm.....naturalmente...pero como es pequenito uno diria " el ratoncito Perez"!
My mind still can not get around the fact that "mice" don't exist in spanish -- just "little rats." The difference in the size of the balls of a rat and mouse make it a whole different creature in my schemata.

David Sedaris writes about the Christmas tradition in Amsterdam (or some northern european country) where Santa Claus has black slaves pulling his sled... People will never stop finding things to fight about.

[Eva]

actually, ratón is mouse. rata is rat.

plural: ratones y ratas.

[Interested Atheist]

If any religion consistently won all its crusades, jihads and holy wars, that might be evidence of a sort.

Alas, it is not so. God seems to be fickle when it comes to helping his followers (whoever they are this week) to spread the one true religion (whatever it is this week) over the globe.
Absolutely! Atheists generally claim that they don't believe in God because the evidence presented is unconvincing. But there's also the fact that the evidence we HAVE rules against a God in the first place! For example, there should be evidence of Noah's Flood if the Bible is true, but there isn't.

Some other examples along the lines A Different Tim mentions are in this essay:

http://www.ebonmusings.org/atheism/theistguide.html

So basically, the argument is that there can't be a God because if there was, we would expect to see certian evidences which we don't. Christians looking for converts need to explain these objections first. Some of my favourite are:

Verified, specific prophecies which couldn' have been contrived (remember Schrack the Baptist barking on about the "concrete evidence of the bible? :lol::lol::lol:)

Miraculous occurrences (no, cancer remissions do NOT impress me. Let's seem some healed limbs! I love the story (forget where I read it) about the skeptic who visited Lourdes Holy Water site and, upon seeing all of the discarded crutches by people who had had their lameness healed, said "What, no wooden legs?"

And, as A Different Tim said, a religion that had a record of WINNING wars embarked upon in God's name would be a definite plus!

I mean, honestly!

[inkadu]

actually, ratón is mouse. rata is rat.
Y cuanto mas pequeno es un ratoncito que un raton? Because that's pretty damn small. Perez can't possibly carry many teeth away.

[inkadu]

So basically, the argument is that there can't be a God because if there was, we would expect to see certian evidences which we don't.
Or to be more precise a God may exist. Your God certainly doesn't.

It drives me up the wall that we must concede the possibility of a God existing before the big bang. To a theist, the possibility of a God before the big bang means that it makes drinking the blood of christ philosophically reasonable. To us, it just means we don't know jack about what was here before the universe was. To them, it means God sent Jesus down to die for our sins. Argh.

[Eva]

actually, ratón is mouse. rata is rat.
Y cuanto mas pequeno es un ratoncito que un raton? Because that's pretty damn small. Perez can't possibly carry many teeth away.
un ratoncito es un ratón pequeño....ya sea porque es joven o porque es de una especie de poco tamaño....una ratita, igual, diría yo...

[Choobus]

actually, ratón is mouse. rata is rat.
Y cuanto mas pequeno es un ratoncito que un raton? Because that's pretty damn small. Perez can't possibly carry many teeth away.
un ratoncito es un ratón pequeño....ya sea porque es joven o porque es de una especie de poco tamaño....una ratita, igual, diría yo...
whatchoo talkin' bout willis?

[Tenspace]

a ratoncito is a small mouse....ya is because he is young or because it is of....una little ratita a so large species of, equal, would say I

[calpurnpiso]

Y cuanto mas pequeno es un ratoncito que un raton? Because that's pretty damn small. Perez can't possibly carry many teeth away.
un ratoncito es un ratón pequeño....ya sea porque es joven o porque es de una especie de poco tamaño....una ratita, igual, diría yo...
whatchoo talkin' bout willis?
Well, miniscule nano-mouse in Spanish is: un ratoncito requete pequenito que su pequenez lo ha hecho hundirse entre las moleculas de un requete pequeno pedazo de queso...:) ( a mouse soooo small that his diminutive size has made him sink into the molecules of a very small piece of cheese )...:)

This reminds me, a poet once said: German is the language to talk to men, French is the language to talk to women and Spanish is the language to talk to god....hmmm....he did not mentioned what was English the language to talk to?....I have to study this man's upbringing....:lol:....

[Eva]

huh?

[CSense]

For an Earth as a better place to leave, I submit that all religious people should go to their personal heaven...

Too rough? Read here (sorry if "old news"): http://www.nobeliefs.com/beliefs.htm

[calpurnpiso]

For an Earth as a better place to leave, I submit that all religious people should go to their personal heaven...

Too rough? Read here (sorry if "old news"): http://www.nobeliefs.com/beliefs.htm
Well said. Remember, mental illness was not discovered till merely over 100 years ago, so, there have been tons of schizophrenics, autistic, TLE sufferers, and psychoactive drug abusers whose SYMPTOMS have been regarded as a divine gift of prophesy and intellectual sanctitude since then!!

ergo..religious psychosis have been infecting the brains of king-priests for over millennia. Religious texts are a clear proof of these ancient folks neurological disorder. This is no more evident when comparing those ancient schizophrenia suffering brains
( Augustinus, origen, Eusebius, Cyril of Alexandria, Aquinas, to the ancient but mentally healthy minority ( i,e Archimedes, erathostenes, pythagoras, Aristarchos, etc)..

There is an obvious problem in this 21st Century when not accepting the perverted, irrational, extremely delirious, psychotic beliefs of religious-faith as a form of neurological anomaly ( mild form of schizophrenia ?)

From the site you posted:

"People have slaughtered each other in wars, inquisitions, and political actions for centuries and still kill each other over beliefs in religions, political ideologies, and philosophies. These belief-systems, when stated as propositions, may appear mystical, and genuine to the naive, but when confronted with a testable bases from reason and experiment, they fail miserably. I maintain that beliefs create more social problems than they solve and that beliefs, and especially those elevated to faith, produce the most destructive potential to the future of humankind. "

....and so does schizophrenia, TLE and other brain disorders, the true material that religious beliefs are made out of....:)

[schemanista]

If any religion consistently won all its crusades, jihads and holy wars, that might be evidence of a sort.
How about if (American)football teams, or baseball teams were able to win in ways that could only be attributed to divine intervention? To listen to athletes speak, you'd think Jesus caught every pass and made every tackle. I saw one receiver make a touchdown during the Pittsburgh/Cincinatti game yesterday[1] and he pointed his finger skyward during his end zone dance as if to say "thanks Big Guy". So if God was responsible for that touchdown, why does that idiot not refuse his salary?


[1] Don't ask me who or which play. I know jack shit about (American)football. It happened to be on the tube at the bar where we were celebrating a win in the only sport which matters.

[Choobus]

what is the only sport that matters? Cock fighting? Christian taunting? (the latter is not too widespread but it is becoming more popular around the world. It's not at all popular in Kansas for some reason)

[philoseeker]

Interested Atheist wrote:

"Miraculous occurrences (no, cancer remissions do NOT impress me. Let's seem some healed limbs! I love the story (forget where I read it) about the skeptic who visited Lourdes Holy Water site and, upon seeing all of the discarded crutches by people who had had their lameness healed, said "What, no wooden legs?"

Marshall Brain points out in his e-book "Why Does God Hate Amputees" that even things like cancer remission occur among non-believers in the same ratio as among "prayer-filled" believers. He calls it "God's ratio" and it pretty much coincides with general odds. To any thinking person, this should indicate that there is no God to intervene in the lives of believers. Admittedly, belief in God (similar to meditation) can have a positive effect.

[Erik]

Interested Atheist,

Your points about religious thought are highly valid, although I think your analysis can be taken to a more basic level. Before we can discuss whether any god exists, the theist has to provide a coherent definition or theory of what god is. Almost every argument about the existence or not of a god skips over this fundamental issue, which is gladly ignored by the believer, because it is so difficult to pin down.

And let's not forget, there are everyday effects of the logical outcome of beliefs. It is not only your hypothetical immortal soul that is at stake, but your access to federal funding for stem cell research, your tax dollars being used to fund faith-based charities and to support ethnic cleansing in the Middle East for fundamentally religious purposes, and, soon enough, the shutting off of women's reproductive rights. Now, each of these things might have a logical basis (and I'm not arguing for or against any of them here), but one way that these issues should not be resolved is through irrational beliefs.

[Interested Atheist]

Good point. Pascal's Wager says that you lose nothing by becoming a Christian if there is nog God, but you do - you lose the freedom to make your own choices about life. Good examples, Erik!

[Clara Listensprechen]

. Considering that there are a number of major religions in the world (let's forget about the minor ones for the moment)...
As in ALL Abrahamic? If so, I disagree with that assessment as to where you'd draw the line.
...My proposal is this:
Before we allow these religions to carry on spreading their lies (at least most of them have to be lying, even if one of them is true!) we should find out which one is true. Then we can dedicate ourselves to it.
That's already been done in Madrid a couple years ago, and they all agreed that secularism is the enemy, not each other. Prior to that, there was a tri-faith Abrahamic panel established to resolve Judaism with Christianity with Islam. They also agree that non believers are a serious threat.

[peepnklown]

I’m a serious threat only when I have explosive diarrhea.

[MissLucifer]

AND IF YOU CAN'T PROVE THAT YOUR RELIGION IS TRUE WHY ARE YOU ASKING ME TO GAMBLE MY IMMORTAL SOUL ON IT!!!?
I always found it very amusing that Xians talk of truth with no proof. I recently debated an idiot, I mean xian [she was once quoted as saying "god gave AFrica aids because they worship trees and rocks" so you can see what I am up against] who kept speakign of truth. How can you argue with that? She did not understand that what she believes in is a belief, not the truth. I told her it was time she started studying the DIctionary for the real truths.

[Choobus]

AND IF YOU CAN'T PROVE THAT YOUR RELIGION IS TRUE WHY ARE YOU ASKING ME TO GAMBLE MY IMMORTAL SOUL ON IT!!!?
I always found it very amusing that Xians talk of truth with no proof. I recently debated an idiot, I mean xian [she was once quoted as saying "god gave AFrica aids because they worship trees and rocks" so you can see what I am up against] who kept speakign of truth. How can you argue with that? She did not understand that what she believes in is a belief, not the truth. I told her it was time she started studying the DIctionary for the real truths.
well then, if you're so smart, why don't you tell us why god did give Africa aids?

[Kamikaze189]

God hates black people, of course.

[peepnklown]

God hates black people, of course.
So does the Bush Jr., odd.

[brad89]

Perhaps god is really Uncle Ruckus (the boondocks).

[Sternwallow]

This reminds me, a poet once said: German is the language to talk to men, French is the language to talk to women and Spanish is the language to talk to god....hmmm....he did not mentioned what was English the language to talk to?....I have to study this man's upbringing....:lol:....
English is the language to speak to air traffic controllers in worldwide.

[Sternwallow]

Interested Atheist wrote:

"Miraculous occurrences (no, cancer remissions do NOT impress me. Let's seem some healed limbs! I love the story (forget where I read it) about the skeptic who visited Lourdes Holy Water site and, upon seeing all of the discarded crutches by people who had had their lameness healed, said "What, no wooden legs?"

Marshall Brain points out in his e-book "Why Does God Hate Amputees" that even things like cancer remission occur among non-believers in the same ratio as among "prayer-filled" believers. He calls it "God's ratio" and it pretty much coincides with general odds. To any thinking person, this should indicate that there is no God to intervene in the lives of believers. Admittedly, belief in God (similar to meditation) can have a positive effect.
This is not quite correct in the case of Lourdes. The number of cancer cures recorded (claimed) by the Church at Lourdes, about 64, is much lower than the number of remissions expected for the same number of candidate cases in the general population, a little over 100. Going to Lourdes is hazardous to your health!

[brad89]

Hell, I would classify people who go to Lourdes as if they need a lobotomy.