• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

what atheism teaches us

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
God is not responsible to prevent Evil just because God is All-Powerful and can prevent Evil.

False. Do we prosecute people who are complicit in murder? Yes-- yes we do.

They are responsible for a failure to prevent the murder.


Being All-Powerful also implies that God can choose not to do anything God does not want to do, so that means God can choose not to prevent Evil or be Obvious.

That means? Such a being is evil. For a failure to act in a Moral Fashion.

If this being could prevent Evil, but chooses not to? IT IS DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL EVIL IT ALLOWS TO HAPPEN.

That is how it works.
Why is God Evil just because God is not Obvious? Why should God be Obvious? :confused:

Fair. Even a 2 year old comprehends what is Fair, and what is Not Fair.

Part of Fair, is Equal Treatment.

If this god of yours exists? It is demonstratively UN-fair-- for failure to be Equally Convincing.

Since, according to the Label, it is All Knowing, it Knows what would be Needed to be Universally Convincing.

But the fact that an ever-growing number of folk, are no longer convinced? Many of whom grew up under a culture that tacitly programmed it's children into the belief structure of 'god'?

I would say that is a Failure To Convince of Epic Proportions-- and since we know the god in question knows this is happening? It has to be a deliberate move on the part of this god.

Which is patently, and willfully Not Equal--- unfair.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Trailblazer said:
That is a non sequitur. Just because God is the Creator of Everything does not mean that God is responsible for everything.
Bob the Unbeliever said: Absolutely false.

Unless you accept that this god of yours is most definitely not omni-powerful and also not omni-knowing?
And is also NOT capable of doing anything to interfere?
God is not responsible because God delegated the responsibility to humans by giving them free will to make choices and thereby take responsibility.

This is not about capability. God is fully capable of interfering but God does not want to interfere all of the time. God might interfere some of the time but we cannot ever know if or when or what.
Why call such a powerless being "god"?

Just because God is All-Powerful and All-Knowing does not imply that God should use His power and knowledge to do everything for humans.

Being All-Powerful implies that God can choose to do whatever God wants to do and choose not to do whatever God does not want to do.

Being All-Knowing implies that God knows when to step in and when to leave humans alone to make their own decisions. If God did everything for humans then humans would not acquire any knowledge of their own and learn the lessons they are put on earth to learn.
 

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
God is not responsible because God delegated the responsibility to humans by giving them free will to make choices and thereby take responsibility.

Sorry? That's not how Responsibility works.

If a human father cannot delegate his responsibility to an offspring? Then neither can god.

It remains: If god has the capacity to stop rape and other evils? But absolutely refuses to do so?

God is responsible for all the rapes in the world-- they are laid directly at it's feet.

That's kinda how All Powerful works. You cannot become a Deadbeat God, here.

This is not about capability. God is fully capable of interfering but God does not want to interfere all of the time. God might interfere some of the time but we cannot ever know if or when or what.

Deadbeat God. Gotcha. Deliberately, and with Malice, obfuscating any possible evidence it exists.

Conclusion: Such a deity is pure evil. For neglect, if nothing else.

Just because God is All-Powerful and All-Knowing does not imply that God should use His power and knowledge to do everything for humans.

Being All-Powerful implies that God can choose to do whatever God wants to do and choose not to do whatever God does not want to do.

Being All-Knowing implies that God knows when to step in and when to leave humans alone to make their own decisions. If God did everything for humans then humans would not acquire any knowledge of their own and learn the lessons they are put on earth to learn.

See above. You cannot excuse letting babies die from worm infections in their hearts, simply to "teach us a lesson".

You cannot excuse toddlers dying of god-preventable cancer, to "teach them a lesson".

No lesson is worth that price. None.

We are back to a capricious, and evil god. Humans are far more moral-- for the majority of humans would never allow a child to die-- if there was a way to prevent that death.

Especially not from disease or natural disaster.

I stand by my conclusion: If your god exists? It is absolutely immoral and evil.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
False. Do we prosecute people who are complicit in murder? Yes-- yes we do.

They are responsible for a failure to prevent the murder.
God is not complicit in the murder because God had no part in the murder.

God is not responsible for a failure to prevent murder. Humans are responsible to prevent murder because they have the free will to choose not to commit murder.
That means? Such a being is evil. For a failure to act in a Moral Fashion.

If this being could prevent Evil, but chooses not to? IT IS DIRECTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY AND ALL EVIL IT ALLOWS TO HAPPEN.
Morality does not apply to God because God is not a human. If God prevented all evil in the world God would have to override free will every time someone chose to do evil. In that case humans would just be God’s robots, puppets on a string. God might as well just take over the world like a dictator.

If God took over, people would never learn from their mistakes, which is the purpose of this earthly existence. That is not how this world is set up.
Trailblazer said: Why is God Evil just because God is not Obvious? Why should God be Obvious?
Bob the Unbeliever said: Fair. Even a 2 year old comprehends what is Fair, and what is Not Fair.
Part of Fair, is Equal Treatment.

If this god of yours exists? It is demonstratively UN-fair-- for failure to be Equally Convincing.
Since, according to the Label, it is All Knowing, it Knows what would be Needed to be Universally Convincing.
It is fair, because everyone has an equal shot at finding God.

God is not trying to be convincing because God does not want to convince anyone that He exists. If God wanted to be universally convincing God would do it because God can do it, since God is All-Powerful. There is a good reason why God has not done so:

“He Who is the Day Spring of Truth is, no doubt, fully capable of rescuing from such remoteness wayward souls and of causing them to draw nigh unto His court and attain His Presence. “If God had pleased He had surely made all men one people.” His purpose, however, is to enable the pure in spirit and the detached in heart to ascend, by virtue of their own innate powers, unto the shores of the Most Great Ocean, that thereby they who seek the Beauty of the All-Glorious may be distinguished and separated from the wayward and perverse. Thus hath it been ordained by the all-glorious and resplendent Pen… ” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 71

In that passage, “If God had pleased He had surely made all men one people” means that God could prove to everyone that He exists. Then everyone would know God exists. God chose not to prove Himself that way because God wants everyone to search for Him and find Him by using their own free will, “by virtue of their own innate powers.” God also wants us to have faith, and that is why God does not offer unequivocal proof of His existence. Those who have faith are rewarded.

I might add that for those of us who have real faith, it is no longer faith because we know God exists even though there is no objective proof. I cannot speak for God but I think this is what God is trying to achieve. It comes easy for some and it is more difficult for others. I mean some people have to do a lot more homework. Some people never complete the homework assignment but I do not think that is what is important to God. What is important is that you make a sincere effort. Some fruit does not ripen until it falls from the tree. If you did not know God exists in this world you can come to find out after you die.
But the fact that an ever-growing number of folk, are no longer convinced? Many of whom grew up under a culture that tacitly programmed it's children into the belief structure of 'god'?

I would say that is a Failure To Convince of Epic Proportions-- and since we know the god in question knows this is happening? It has to be a deliberate move on the part of this god.

Which is patently, and willfully Not Equal--- unfair.
God gave all human beings the ability to reason, so you might want to ask why people are increasingly unconvinced that God exists. I already know one reason why. It is because the religions of the past, particularly Christianity, are rife with superstitious doctrines and dogmas that rational people can no longer believe in. As such, many people threw out the baby (God) with the bath water (religion). That bath water is really old, so I can see why people threw it out. The actual teachings of Jesus are still pristine but what developed out of them, the religion of Christianity with all its man-made doctrines and dogmas, does not represent what was originally revealed by God.

So, most of the decrease in belief is because people are falling away from Christianity, more and more in this modern age. God knows this is happening because God knows everything, and God wants it to happen, because until people give up their old religions they will never embrace God’s new religion, the Baha’i Faith. If it means that some people do not believe in God at all in many ways that is better than believing in a religion full of false doctrines.

God is not going to intervene and make people believe in His new religion because it has to be a choice and it has to be sought after. Anything worth having is worth the effort so God wants people to find it on their own and freely choose it.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Trailblazer said: God is not responsible because God delegated the responsibility to humans by giving them free will to make choices and thereby take responsibility.

Bob the Unbeliever said:
Sorry? That's not how Responsibility works.
If a human father cannot delegate his responsibility to an offspring? Then neither can god.
It remains: If god has the capacity to stop rape and other evils? But absolutely refuses to do so?

God is responsible for all the rapes in the world-- they are laid directly at it's feet.
That's kinda how All Powerful works. You cannot become a Deadbeat God, here.

God is not a human being so you cannot compare God with a human father. God can delegate anything He wants to delegate because God is All-Powerful.

I already addressed why God is not responsible so I see no reason to repeat myself and get caught in an endless loop.
Deadbeat God. Gotcha. Deliberately, and with Malice, obfuscating any possible evidence it exists.

Conclusion: Such a deity is pure evil. For neglect, if nothing else.
I explained this already. You are free to believe god is evil because you have free will. Only humans can be neglectful because they are responsible. God is only responsible for what He created, not what humans have done with the creation.

There is evidence that God exists, the Messengers God sends. The fact that many people do not like the evidence is not God’s fault.
See above. You cannot excuse letting babies die from worm infections in their hearts, simply to "teach us a lesson".
You cannot excuse toddlers dying of god-preventable cancer, to "teach them a lesson".
No lesson is worth that price. None.
We are back to a capricious, and evil god. Humans are far more moral-- for the majority of humans would never allow a child to die-- if there was a way to prevent that death.
Especially not from disease or natural disaster.
I stand by my conclusion: If your god exists? It is absolutely immoral and evil.
The reason suffering exists is about more than teaching people a lesson. Suffering is the result of the material world, a natural outcome of living in it; so if you want to blame God for something, blame God for creating a world like this. Moreover, the distribution of suffering is unequal, so you can add that to your list. I am none too happy about any of this, but because I understand why I am able to accommodate it at least most of the time.

This world is only a small part of our total existence and it is preparation for the world to come, so if we do not learn what we need to learn here we will be handicapped in the next world. If we do learn it then there will be no more suffering after we die.
 

ThePainefulTruth

Romantic-Cynic
I am not a theist.

I never said you were, but you only argue against them....the easy target.

Go back and re-read my post-- I am arguing against the idea that gods created the universe.

Against a theist God creating the universe, which, again, is my point that you keep ignoring.

And Hawking never did advocate for a god-- "kicking and screaming"?
He was dragged kicking and screaming from his position that he'd proven that there was no God, by which he indirectly admitted that God couldn't be ruled out for having created it. But because he's a hostile witness, he'd never actually say those words which others atheist scientists have had the good grace to actually admit. He should have retired 10 years ago.
 

ThePainefulTruth

Romantic-Cynic
So why even claim that such a god exists?

How many times and how many ways do I have to say it before it sinks in:

I don't claim that God exists, only that It might, and regarding the existence of a laissez-faire God, there's no evidence either way. I am not a theist, I'm an agnostic and a deist.

Would you please print that, tape it to your computer and refer to it whenever you feel the need to respond to one of my posts here.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
How many times and how many ways do I have to say it before it sinks in:

I don't claim that God exists, only that It might, and regarding the existence of a laissez-faire God, there's no evidence either way. I am not a theist, I'm an agnostic and a deist.

Would you please print that, tape it to your computer and refer to it whenever you feel the need to respond to one of my posts here.

But as a deist you lean towards a god, and it appears from your posts that you are a bit more than a deist. If you don't like people responding to what you post then why bother posting?
 

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
I never said you were, but you only argue against them....the easy target.



Against a theist God creating the universe, which, again, is my point that you keep ignoring.


He was dragged kicking and screaming from his position that he'd proven that there was no God, by which he indirectly admitted that God couldn't be ruled out for having created it. But because he's a hostile witness, he'd never actually say those words which others atheist scientists have had the good grace to actually admit. He should have retired 10 years ago.

Did you have an actual point to make in the above? Or were you just rehashing your failed claims from your earlier rant?

I don't see that you said anything new, or valid for that matter...

PS. There are only theist gods. By the definition of the word "atheist", in fact. You cannot believe in a creator-god and remain an atheist.

Belief in the unproved idea of a creator-god makes you a theist.

You're welcome.
 

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
How many times and how many ways do I have to say it before it sinks in:

I don't claim that God exists, only that It might, and regarding the existence of a laissez-faire God, there's no evidence either way. I am not a theist, I'm an agnostic and a deist.

Would you please print that, tape it to your computer and refer to it whenever you feel the need to respond to one of my posts here.


I am so sorry to kick over your sand-castle like this? But. Deism **is** theism.

You don't get to make up your own definitions, and remain both civil and be able to communicate.
 

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
God is not complicit in the murder because God had no part in the murder.

False. If god could prevent the murder? God is complacent in said murder.

That is literally the legal definition.

If mere mortal laws can prove your god is immoral? Then your god fails to measure up to mere human standards, and is not much of a god.

This pretty much trumps the rest of your arguments, so I won't belabor the point further.

Hey! If a simple Comic Book gets this? How hard can it be?

With Great Power, comes Great Responsibility.

You cannot get higher than **all** powerful...
 

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
It is fair, because everyone has an equal shot at finding God.

100% false.

Proof? The 1000's of different sets of beliefs all over the world-- wherein each child is bombarded by the god-culture he or she was randomly born into.

That is literally the opposite of what you just said....

Reality seems to trump your claims, here.
 

Bob the Unbeliever

Well-Known Member
There is evidence that God exists, the Messengers God sends. The fact that many people do not like the evidence is not God’s fault.

False, and false and false once more.

It is patently UNFAIR to use Special Messengers.

Why cannot god speak directly to each and every person, and avoid the use of such Specially Chosen Teacher's Pets?


Again, that is the exact opposite of Fair.

And absolutely it is your god's fault! According to you? Your god deliberately designed it this way! That's a level of Evil that Darth Vader would envy.... !
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Trailblazer said:
God is not complicit in the murder because God had no part in the murder.

False. If god could prevent the murder? God is complacent in said murder.

That is literally the legal definition.
The legal definition does not apply to God because God is not a man who goes to court. Moreover, God is not accountable to anyone but God. :rolleyes:
If mere mortal laws can prove your god is immoral? Then your god fails to measure up to mere human standards, and is not much of a god.
God is infallible and exalted above anything that can ever be recounted or perceived, let alone measuring up to any fallible human standards. :rolleyes:

This pretty much trumps the rest of your arguments, so I won't belabor the point further. :D
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Trailblazer said: It is fair, because everyone has an equal shot at finding God.

Bob the Unbeliever said: 100% false.

Proof? The 1000's of different sets of beliefs all over the world-- wherein each child is bombarded by the god-culture he or she was randomly born into.
That is literally the opposite of what you just said....

Reality seems to trump your claims, here.
The fact that there are many religions to pick from does not mean that you cannot find one that is right for you. That would be like saying that because there are many different makes and models of cars you cannot find one that is right for you. Having many to choose from makes it more difficult to find the right one, but it is not impossible.

More than one religion will give you a shot at finding God, so you have plenty to pick from, although only one religion is the one that reveals God's will for this age, which makes it the best one to find if you want to know God's will for this age.

Everyone has an equal shot of finding the religion that reveals God's will for this age, since this is the information age.
 

Trailblazer

Veteran Member
Trailblazer said: There is evidence that God exists, the Messengers God sends. The fact that many people do not like the evidence is not God’s fault.

Bob the Unbeliever: False, and false and false once more.

It is patently UNFAIR to use Special Messengers.
Why is it unfair? Everyone has an equal shot at finding that Messenger and His message.
Why cannot god speak directly to each and every person, and avoid the use of such Specially Chosen Teacher's Pets?
In brief, the reasons God does not speak directly to everyone are as follows:
  • God wants you to look for His Messenger and find Him using your own innate intelligence
  • God wants to separate those who are willing to search from those who do not care that much
  • God does not need to communicate directly to everyone when He can send the message to one Messenger from whom everyone else can get the message
 

ThePainefulTruth

Romantic-Cynic
No--- belief that there is a Magical Sky Fairy what "created" the universe, has no basis in reality.

Sorry about that.

You argument from sarcasm is refuted by about a half-dozen logical fallacies. So, what do we have:

Exhibit A: The Universe.
Question: How did the universe come to be?
Proposition 1: It was designed and initiated by a super-sentient intelligence.
Proposition 2: It wasn't designed, just came to be spontaneously.
Facts, evidence or reasoned theories supporting either proposition: None.
Distractions: Massive quantities of unsubstantiated religious and nihilistic hearsay and feelings.
Conclusion: Agnostic doubt is the only rational position
 
Top