The desperation of christian 'logic'

[Dawkinsrocks]

My, you do use a lot of words to say very little don't you?

The causation argument is widely used and it is nonesense.

The argument that you cannot disprove god is also used although by the even-more-desperate. There is a thread running on this board where the OP is 'prove that god does not exist'.

Your claim to have experienced god is worthless as evidence.

As the great Richard Dawkins says, 'If one person claims to hear voices in their head we say they are mad. If thousands do we say they are religious'.

 

[Hobo1]

I wonder what your motivation is to disprove the existence of God.

I look back back on human history as far as it can be traced by archeologists. The belief in a greater power, as witnessed by the preparation of the dead for a life beyond, has been around for 40 millennium. I suppose one can conclude this is a chicken or egg argument. Which came first, God or the belief in God? That question, of course, cannot be answered using scientific or mathematical analysis - at least not now.

However, one must be impressed that an abstract concept such as God has remained a part of virtually all human cultures. There have been very few cultures were God has not been recognized in some form (ie, the former Soviet Union). However, over time all people of all cultures eventually re-cultivate a faith in a higher power in some form.

You can't say that about any other abstract concepts that have remain a part of human culture for so long - except perhaps the desire to make war.

I will agree with you that for someone to hold a "true" belief in God, one must experience some form of personal revelation. Simply to hold a faith in God because a particular belief system is passed down by from family or friends cannot be as strong as someone who has had a personal experience.

Admittedly, a lot of sociological mysteries surround the practice of religion and why people react the way the do - something deserving of further study. Even so, I don't see where trying to disprove someone's belief system through logic will have any positive purpose.

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

Your opening question about my motivation to disprove the existence of god suggests that you have not read my OP.

I am ridiculing the christian argument that as you cannot disprove god's existence he must therefore exist.

The survival of superstition throughout the ages is easily explained by the intelligence of humans.

Our species is intelligent enough to foresee death, to worry about death and to come up with something that takes the sting out of death i.e. an afterlife.

Clever people have used this to control and dominate people through the invention of religion.

And that is why religion is successful. It preys on man's worst fear and enables those who seek power to exploit it.

Really intelligent people like me can deal with the fact that death is the end. In fact we rejoice in that as an eternity doing anything would be hell.

Especially being surrounded by christians for all eternity.

5 minutes is too much.

 

[Dr.Who]

Your opening question about my motivation to disprove the existence of god suggests that you have not read my OP.

I am ridiculing the christian argument that as you cannot disprove god's existence he must therefore exist.

The survival of superstition throughout the ages is easily explained by the intelligence of humans.

Our species is intelligent enough to foresee death, to worry about death and to come up with something that takes the sting out of death i.e. an afterlife.

Clever people have used this to control and dominate people through the invention of religion.

And that is why religion is successful. It preys on man's worst fear and enables those who seek power to exploit it.

Really intelligent people like me can deal with the fact that death is the end. In fact we rejoice in that as an eternity doing anything would be hell.

Especially being surrounded by christians for all eternity.

5 minutes is too much.

the vast majority of people on political forums have learned to recognize straw man arguments and have stopped using them. the rest of us just get tired of pointing out the same objections over and over again.

A few people say that since God cannot be disproved He must exist. Yet you not only think that is something worthy of countering but then you go on to draw all sorts of conclusions based on that.

If there were a poll:

Who is more desperate Dawkinsrocks or Christians? More people would vote for you. You do more harm to your cause than help.

Of course you have improved a lot in your debating style since joining here so there is hope for you that you will stop saying this ridiculous stuff.

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

I cited more than that as examples of the desperation of christian 'logic'.

You are hoist by your own petard.

 

[Dr.Who]

I cited more than that as examples of the desperation of christian 'logic'.

You are hoist by your own petard.

Keep talking. Works for me.

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

Ok try this

Free will is logically impossible.

God, if he existed would be responsible for everything that happened including the evil.

That is my logic.

Try unpicking that.

 

[Dr.Who]

Ok try this

Free will is logically impossible.

God, if he existed would be responsible for everything that happened including the evil.

That is my logic.

Try unpicking that.

"Free will is logically impossible."

Good glad to know that you are just a automaton. Meanwhile I choose what I plan to do or not. I have free will. And it is possible. How about you all out there? Do you make your own choices or are you just a biological machine? If you are just a machine then I guess you have no reason to complain if you are excluded from Heaven. Is that what the Apostle Paul meant when he said that some, like clay pots, could be destined for the shard heap (paraphrased). Maybe Dawkins is on to something. Maybe he somehow realizes that he is not a person but more like a clay pot. That might be fine for him but I know I am a person. He can speak for himself but not for me.

"God, if he existed would be responsible for everything that happened including the evil."

And as a person I make my own decisions about the right things I do and the wrong things I do. No one is responsible when I do something wrong except me. When I do something wrong I do not blame Dawkins because it was not him that made the choice. When I do something wrong I do not blame my parents because it was not them that made the choice. Even though when they decided to have a baby they knew that someday that baby would grow to be a person who would do something wrong I still do not blame them. I am an adult.

 

[Dawkinsrocks]

You mean that when faced with insurmountable logic you just plough on as though I hadn't said anything and then make up an easy point and respond to that.

Free will is logically impossible in the context of the christian god.

I know you have to check reason in at the church door so I am not surprised by your response.

Carry on wasting your life devoting it to a fairy tale.

 

[Dr.Who]

You mean that when faced with insurmountable logic you just plough on as though I hadn't said anything and then make up an easy point and respond to that.

Free will is logically impossible in the context of the christian god.

I know you have to check reason in at the church door so I am not surprised by your response.

Carry on wasting your life devoting it to a fairy tale.

Um, no. Every single biased and ridiculous statement that you have typed here has been easily countered. I have done so handily many many times. So have a number of others. But at times it gets tiresome so I just skip a few. The difficult thing about debating with you is not in winning the debates but in keeping a Christian attitude at the same time. I admit it is hard and I have failed. For the record, when I say you are wrong I am not trying to destroy your ego just your statements. You might be a fine person worthy of respect it is just that your comments here are not.

There are those who have argued that free will is logically impossible in the context of an omnipotent and omniscient God. They might even be right. But the last time you said free will was impossible you did not put it in that context you just said it was impossible. Which I demonstrated was wrong. Just now you put it in the context of a Christian God. But since few Christian scholars argue that the Christian God is absolutely omnipotent or absolutely omniscient I can still confidently say that you are wrong. There is no logical difficulty in a virtually omnipotent or virtually omniscient God endowing His creatures with free will.