For example, it disregards the theology of a naturally occurring physical reality born out of entropy which eventually creates a god-like being which recreates the pre-god universe in order to resurrect it non-physically (a minor theology from around the first to fourth centuries CE).
A more modern version of a similar paradigm is simulation theory.
There’s a pretty wide array of options out there, it’s just that the most common tend to effectively fall into your groupings.
For example, it disregards the theology of a naturally occurring physical reality born out of entropy which eventually creates a god-like being which recreates the pre-god universe in order to resurrect it non-physically (a minor theology from around the first to fourth centuries CE).
Sounds like variations on ‘Not paying attention to reality and believing whatever delusion you feel like.’
None of these have any bearing on or foundation in actual physical existence. They do nothing to describe or predict. There is nothing to them. They just fulfill some desire in the believer.
Sounds like you’re saying that children dying is the good ending…? And, that Hitler being forced to hide and shoot himself in a bunker while his evil empire was ripped to shreds was getting away with it unless someone believes in your version of god?
So, you’re clearly in some demented version of option 3, the most common option, as I outlined.
Maybe option 1 with the whole child death thing though, idk…
You’ve never faced down your own mortality or been in a seriously dark place, have you? I have. I don’t care how bad Hitler was, it’s not a pleasant feeling to contemplate ending things. It’s painful. It’s a position that you are put in by pain. I have enough empathy to realize that.
But more importantly, I’m not super fixated on punishment in general. I think that Hitler was obviously a horribly bad person, and that by him ending things he could no longer cause harm.
That people who believe in some god or other seem hyper fixated on retribution is not something in your favor. It does not paint your or your god in a good light. Good would be preventing bad things from happening in the first place.
Similarly, with regards to children, it is better not to have them if you can’t even make a reasonably successful effort to provide them with a more hopeful and better world full of greater opportunity and wonder and joy. That is the merciful route.
Not having children is merciful. Wishing children die before puberty is monstrous. You argue to create pain in innocents.
You religious people with your notions of duty and retribution, pain and punishment are not painting a world or paradigm created by any kind of good entity.
You come into an atheism community and act all high and mighty as if you have something to impart to US?
It’s laughable. You have nothing but unfounded trash. You don’t come here to convince us. Be honest with yourself for one goddamned second. You come here to try and firm up the non-existent foundations of your faltering faith.
You have no proof or value to offer. Just gaping, naked need.
You’ve never faced down your own mortality or been in a seriously dark place, have you? I have.
I’m sorry you lived something which left that kind of mark on you. However my or your anecdotal experiences do not constitute an argument.
So basically what you are saying is you don’t care about justice?
Evil needs to exist for us to recognise good. How can you acknowledge that something is good if you are not able to fathom its absence?
Also you seem to subtract the human element in whatever bad things happen as an action of someone, acting upon his free will. If we as a species are allowed the freedom to decide, it means we can act in a good way or in a bad way.
It is proof we have free will. If God only allowed good, it means we do not have free will.
Wishing children die before puberty is monstrous.
I never said I wished such thing. Don’t straw-man me.
You come into an atheism community and act all high and mighty as if you have something to impart to US?
I want to see you defend your point of view. I’m still waiting…
Many atheists I see online have been hurt by out just mock (sometimes rightfully) Christianity and then paint all religions with the same brush.
Often points are copied and shared around in such communities, like the problem of evil, without knowing that these points have been answered by scholars or philosophers.
If I’m being honest here, I don’t want you to argue out of ignorance and seek to open the door of the echo chamber to show you the other point of view so you can decide rationally.
You might think religious people (I’m talking about Islam) cannot defend their position, but it is the opposite actually with atheism.
Look things up, study, learn and make educated decisions. Don’t be afraid of your intellect.
None of us atheists come to your mosques. Yet, you come in here with unprovable notions and demand others prove them wrong for you. I’m done going point for point with you and extended you far too much courtesy.
Yet, you come in here with unprovable notions and demand others prove them wrong for you
I never asked to disapprove my paradigm nor am I seeking to prove mine. I specifically challenged yours.
Without delving into the subcategories, basically agnostics say “we don’t know” when asked about the existence of God. They might not be convinced by the arguments for the existence of God but they do not take a position.
Atheists make the claim “there is no god”.
So I agree that whoever makes a claim needs to back it, so I simply ask about the arguments for the position you say you take.
Btw I don’t shy away from giving the proofs for my position. In this discussion I was not asked why I believe God exists.
No one in the real world cares about justice whether they’re religious or not. It’s always been a nebulous concept and one quickly rejected at the slightest hint of it being inconvenient to the rich or the community at large. No deity in ANY belief system changes that fact; if anything, they only highlight how illusory justice really is.
Available options include:
Most people choose option 3.
Those really aren’t the only options.
For example, it disregards the theology of a naturally occurring physical reality born out of entropy which eventually creates a god-like being which recreates the pre-god universe in order to resurrect it non-physically (a minor theology from around the first to fourth centuries CE).
A more modern version of a similar paradigm is simulation theory.
There’s a pretty wide array of options out there, it’s just that the most common tend to effectively fall into your groupings.
Sounds like variations on ‘Not paying attention to reality and believing whatever delusion you feel like.’
None of these have any bearing on or foundation in actual physical existence. They do nothing to describe or predict. There is nothing to them. They just fulfill some desire in the believer.
Removed by mod
Sounds like you’re saying that children dying is the good ending…? And, that Hitler being forced to hide and shoot himself in a bunker while his evil empire was ripped to shreds was getting away with it unless someone believes in your version of god?
So, you’re clearly in some demented version of option 3, the most common option, as I outlined.
Maybe option 1 with the whole child death thing though, idk…
Removed by mod
You’ve never faced down your own mortality or been in a seriously dark place, have you? I have. I don’t care how bad Hitler was, it’s not a pleasant feeling to contemplate ending things. It’s painful. It’s a position that you are put in by pain. I have enough empathy to realize that.
But more importantly, I’m not super fixated on punishment in general. I think that Hitler was obviously a horribly bad person, and that by him ending things he could no longer cause harm.
That people who believe in some god or other seem hyper fixated on retribution is not something in your favor. It does not paint your or your god in a good light. Good would be preventing bad things from happening in the first place.
Similarly, with regards to children, it is better not to have them if you can’t even make a reasonably successful effort to provide them with a more hopeful and better world full of greater opportunity and wonder and joy. That is the merciful route.
Not having children is merciful. Wishing children die before puberty is monstrous. You argue to create pain in innocents.
You religious people with your notions of duty and retribution, pain and punishment are not painting a world or paradigm created by any kind of good entity.
You come into an atheism community and act all high and mighty as if you have something to impart to US?
It’s laughable. You have nothing but unfounded trash. You don’t come here to convince us. Be honest with yourself for one goddamned second. You come here to try and firm up the non-existent foundations of your faltering faith.
You have no proof or value to offer. Just gaping, naked need.
I’m sorry you lived something which left that kind of mark on you. However my or your anecdotal experiences do not constitute an argument.
So basically what you are saying is you don’t care about justice?
Evil needs to exist for us to recognise good. How can you acknowledge that something is good if you are not able to fathom its absence?
Also you seem to subtract the human element in whatever bad things happen as an action of someone, acting upon his free will. If we as a species are allowed the freedom to decide, it means we can act in a good way or in a bad way. It is proof we have free will. If God only allowed good, it means we do not have free will.
I never said I wished such thing. Don’t straw-man me.
I want to see you defend your point of view. I’m still waiting…
Many atheists I see online have been hurt by out just mock (sometimes rightfully) Christianity and then paint all religions with the same brush.
Often points are copied and shared around in such communities, like the problem of evil, without knowing that these points have been answered by scholars or philosophers.
If I’m being honest here, I don’t want you to argue out of ignorance and seek to open the door of the echo chamber to show you the other point of view so you can decide rationally.
You might think religious people (I’m talking about Islam) cannot defend their position, but it is the opposite actually with atheism.
Look things up, study, learn and make educated decisions. Don’t be afraid of your intellect.
None of us atheists come to your mosques. Yet, you come in here with unprovable notions and demand others prove them wrong for you. I’m done going point for point with you and extended you far too much courtesy.
“Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”
You have no evidence. And, absolutely nothing extraordinary.
The burden of proof lies on you. And, this is not the place for it it any case.
I never asked to disapprove my paradigm nor am I seeking to prove mine. I specifically challenged yours.
Without delving into the subcategories, basically agnostics say “we don’t know” when asked about the existence of God. They might not be convinced by the arguments for the existence of God but they do not take a position.
Atheists make the claim “there is no god”. So I agree that whoever makes a claim needs to back it, so I simply ask about the arguments for the position you say you take.
Btw I don’t shy away from giving the proofs for my position. In this discussion I was not asked why I believe God exists.
No one in the real world cares about justice whether they’re religious or not. It’s always been a nebulous concept and one quickly rejected at the slightest hint of it being inconvenient to the rich or the community at large. No deity in ANY belief system changes that fact; if anything, they only highlight how illusory justice really is.
And the third option: to change humanity to make it more just, never occurs to you
Man, religious people are a trip