Original Sin?
February 1st, 2018 at 12:01:03 PM permalink | |
Dalex64 Member since: Mar 8, 2014 Threads: 3 Posts: 3687 |
It absolutely is an assumption. We have gone over multiple times that a logically consistent argument is not proof that it is correct. You also dismiss out of hand any other logically consistent arguments on the basis that it does not agree with your beliefs. Science has a number of answers, starting with "we don't know" but positing a number of logically consistent possibilities (maybe A, or maybe B, etc), additionally things like "Maybe C if we had a better understanding of D" but you take any admission of ignorance as an admission of error, and say WRONG WRONG WRONG it IS GOD. I can't believe I'm being sucked into this again.
While that certainly is *A* question, it isn't the answer to that question that is the basis for my personal disbelief in any of the gods believed in now or in the past. We now get to some of the "therefores" that I referenced in my earlier post. we start with the assertion 1 that a god created all of existence. next assertion #2 - there is no link between that creator god and any god that is believed in now or has been believed in in the past. now the therefores because of #2, we have no reason to believe that anything we understand about the gods we believe in now or believed in in the past are true of the god of creation, or what the god of creation wants of us, does for us, etc. furthermore, since there is no link between any of our modern beliefs about god and the creator god, the answer to the question "does the creator god exist?" becomes moot. Whether or not he exists, we have no idea if our current understandings and beliefs apply to him. and again because of #2, there is no reason for me to personally believe anything delivered by any religion, since none of them can prove that they are right AND everyone else is wrong and has always been wrong. I think that is the basis if my "atheism". if it makes you feel better to label me an "agnostic" then that's up to you, it doesn't make me any more likely to believe in your version of god. "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan |
February 1st, 2018 at 12:24:56 PM permalink | |
Evenbob Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 146 Posts: 25010 |
To mold my thinking, to get my mind right, like you had your's shaped from an early age to be receptive to whatever your Church told you? Are you familiar with how religious cults work? The tactics they use to 'help' people see things from the cults point of view? It's really quite effective. Fortunately I have been spared the type of brain washing you're suggesting with the 'right person or group' to help me get my head on straight. Thank *god.. *the generic god, the one that doesn't exist, the one we use to thank and damn things from moment to moment.. If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose. |
February 1st, 2018 at 1:16:43 PM permalink | |
Nareed Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 346 Posts: 12545 |
Some people just can't give serious consideration to an argument which goes against their beliefs. It helps they get to move the goal posts, and point out they don't need evidence for their crucial claim, because there is evidence for every other step of their argument (such as it is). Donald Trump is a one-term LOSER |
February 1st, 2018 at 1:56:53 PM permalink | |
Evenbob Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 146 Posts: 25010 |
I've never seen a believable logical argument for gods existence. It shouldn't be an argument anyway, something as big as god should be right there in your face, like gravity and air. Indisputable, inarguable. The only argument should be how to worship, not if there is anything there TO worship. If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose. |
February 1st, 2018 at 7:58:58 PM permalink | |
FrGamble Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 67 Posts: 7596 |
By definition a logically consistent argument is correct but based on the premises the conclusion could be correct but false.
I have never heard a logically consistent argument against the existence of God. If you have one I would never dismiss it out of hand.
No I completely understand ignorance is not an admission of error. In fact in science ignorance is the ground from which answers are discovered. Not knowing something should be looked at an exciting possibility for science. However, you still miss the point. No matter what we learn about A or maybe B or even if we learn all about Z - science still cannot speak about a supernatural entity that exists outside of time and space.
Thank you for your honesty. It doesn't sound like you would like to go into all the therefores you mentioned but I hope you can see that an honest agnostic position allows for these discussions while a atheistic position shuts down any discussion based on a false unjustified belief. “It is with the smallest brushes that the artist paints the most exquisitely beautiful pictures.” ( |
February 1st, 2018 at 8:00:55 PM permalink | |
FrGamble Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 67 Posts: 7596 |
And that is a very sad thing that stops people from learning and growing in the pursuit of truth and even from growing in their own beliefs. There is nothing more important I think that hearing and considering arguments against one's beliefs.
I'm curious as to what you mean by this. “It is with the smallest brushes that the artist paints the most exquisitely beautiful pictures.” ( |
February 1st, 2018 at 8:05:58 PM permalink | |
FrGamble Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 67 Posts: 7596 |
Everything that begins to exist has a cause. The universe began to exist. Therefore the universe has a cause. Everything that is in motion has had a force act upon it. The universe is in motion. Therefore some force acted upon the universe. What you nor any of us have ever seen is a believable logical argument for the non-existence of God.
You are right, it is painfully obvious.
You are conflating the argument for the existence of God with the many arguments about who this God is and how to worship Him. One step at a time please. “It is with the smallest brushes that the artist paints the most exquisitely beautiful pictures.” ( |
February 1st, 2018 at 8:24:35 PM permalink | |
Evenbob Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 146 Posts: 25010 |
The universe has no beginning and no end, it's been here forever. End of story. Quit forcing your narrow parameters for existence onto the universe, quit trying to cram it into your little box. The universe is more complicated than we can possibly understand, every discovery only opens a hundred more questions we don't have the answer to. And none of those answers will ever be 'god'. If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose. |
February 1st, 2018 at 8:30:56 PM permalink | |
FrGamble Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 67 Posts: 7596 |
How can you say this so definitively while ignoring the evidence of science and the scientific consensus that it did.
Narrow parameters?!? Existence is existence. Do you doubt that if something began to exist it has a cause? Did you begin to exist? Do you have a cause? These are not narrow parameters, they are part of the beauty and fact of anything that exists.
The universe is more complicated than we can ever possibly understand, I'm glad to hear you say that. Yet you dash my hopes for you as soon as you follow that up with such a closed minded statement as eliminating out of hand certain answers. Why do you do that? Why do you limit truth and discover, you are the one putting things in your own little box. Think outside of the box and you will see that all the answers will always be God. “It is with the smallest brushes that the artist paints the most exquisitely beautiful pictures.” ( |
February 2nd, 2018 at 4:23:36 AM permalink | |
Dalex64 Member since: Mar 8, 2014 Threads: 3 Posts: 3687 |
My statement: You also dismiss out of hand any other logically consistent arguments on the basis that it does not agree with your beliefs. By that, and the paragraph after, and your ""dismissal" of that form of reasoning, I was not talking about an argument against god, but was talking about a non-supernatural, scientific explaination for the origin of all creation. "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan |