Atheist reply to religous "question".

[fould12]

I agree for the most part, however I have a few small issues:

Furthermore, from what I read in the bible, everything makes sense to me. There are no loop holes, gaps in logic, lack of morality, or conflict with recorded history

So it is morally okay to:
1) Kill someone for looking at their hometown being destroyed
2) Stone gay people
3) Stone witches (yes, you also have to believe witches exist)
4) Offer your daughters up for rape (since Lot was "righteous" in God's eyes
5) Kill 42 children for mocking a bald guy
6) Commit genocide
7) Rape people (because if you don't get found, she didn't shout loud enough).
etc

1) That was because she was directly disobeying what god said to her.
2) They are horrible human beings, and so back then, they were supposed to be killed.
3) Of course, they are evil.
4) It was better than offering the guys to be raped.
5) They were directly mocking a man of god, and that's something very serious.
6) The Isrealites wiped out many people, all of which god judged worthy of death.
7) I can't really remember that law very well, but I think it was if she was being raped within hearing distance, and she didn't make an effort to shout out, than it was also her fault for the fornication.

And that a loving and omniscient God would make 5 of his 10 commandments about himself, and make others superfluous, and not even mention rape. 10 (don't covet) makes 7 and 8 unnecessary.

He was making it obvious to the Isrealites the sins they were committing; if you followed "Love god with your whole heart, soul, strength, and mind" and "Treat your neighbor as yourself", you wouldn't need the ten commandments.

If you add up the odds, the overall chance of this scenario happening is astronomically small.

Sounds fair, but wait, didn't you just say:

The beginning of the universe is in complete mystery to most people...there are no laws of the universe, no logic, nothing holding it to any standards

So basically, it is held to absolutely no standards of logic, and we can't know anything about it, but you can work out the probability of things happening as they did? We cannot talk about the probability of the universe forming as it did unless we have a thorough understanding of HOW universes are formed, which we don't

No, you missed my point. I said, If there is absolutely nothing, then there are no laws of the universe, no logic, nothing holding it to any standards; I was talking about the time before the beginning of the universe, or anything for that matter. In the first quote, I was talking about the time after the creation of the universe, where there is logic, and something to evaluate. I have hardly any idea of how the universe was formed, but I can make approximations with chances of certain scenarios happening.

Well, the bible has been reprinted in one thousand different copies. If it was the word of god, wouldn't one book had been enough?

The bible has been reprinted because many people have tried to translate it in many different ways, and in many different languages. Some people might have used more complex words, or another guy thought it was easier just to use one phrase instead of another, etc.

Even if there is a god, there's nothing that can point towards the will of that god; One is not even able to say if he's actually involved in any of our religions.

If god wants the people to know his will, he will make it available, by any means necessary. And the religion that is truthful, logical, and describes an all-powerful god(unlike some religions with in-perfect demi-gods); is the religion that god is behind.

Now, nr.1 is more likely than nr.2, for a being randomly created that is everything requires nr.1 to be true in the first place. Otherwise, he couldn't even get into existence. Now, we have to roll the dices. God or no god? Magic or no magic? Now, I will not say it's not a possibility, but I find it to be odd that nothing and randomness would randomly become order in a matter of split seconds. Would randomly create god. There, the chances of a house appearing in the middle of nothing is indeed greater than the creation of a perfect being.

Not really, if you went to mars and saw a vacant city; it appeared to be made for inhabitants, and had everything necessary of survival, but no living beings; would you assume:
a) a random fluke chance caused the beings to be created, which then made the city.
or
b) a random fluke chance caused materials to be randomly placed together, just right for habitation.
It would be more likely that a) is true, even knowing b) is also possible.
When I think about how the world is, to me, it seems it was created by something, since it has so much order, stability, and functionality. It might have been created by random chance, but there is probably a greater chance that a higher being was created first(by random chance).

The future thing seems unlikely, unless we created that being ourselves, since the original requirements for god was, that there was random and nothingness. Well, maybe our universe is destined to go back to that stage at one point. Who knows.

I won't say it couldn't happen. I'll just say it's unlikely to have happened. The creation of god. That's my thoughts on the matter.

Well, you can think of it like the Q race(from Star Treck); they evolved into higher beings, and had the ability to do almost anything. If there is no god, that might eventually happen; it has forever to occur.

[IrrelevantComment]

1) That was because she was directly disobeying what god said to her.
2) They are horrible human beings, and so back then, they were supposed to be killed.
3) Of course, they are evil.
4) It was better than offering the guys to be raped.
5) They were directly mocking a man of god, and that's something very serious.
6) The Isrealites wiped out many people, all of which god judged worthy of death.
7) I can't really remember that law very well, but I think it was if she was being raped within hearing distance, and she didn't make an effort to shout out, than it was also her fault for the fornication.

Yes well, if you are a homophobe, a misogynist and stupid enough to believe in witches then no doubt you would find good stuff in the Bible. I know several homosexuals, and let me tell you, they are much better people than you are.

“You can safely assume you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.” ― Anne Lamott

And for the record the law actually states that if a woman was raped in a TOWN, she must have not shouted loud enough. So you must believe that about 90% of the rapes that happen in the modern world are actually the woman's fault

[kingofbrocoli]

come on bro everybody know yahoo answers is a giant trolling festival

personally I found the idea of a magic bearded man who lives in heaven, watches me fap and then judges me, ridiculous.

[talin]

I wrote a big TL;DR but I'll just go with these questions and a statment.

Questions:

Why would the existence of god be a good thing?

Why would the existence of god be a bad thing?

What meaning in life would a god give us?

What meaning in life would we have if there was no god?

Statement:

I believe that as long as the one or more people/beings doing something are making sure that they know all the implications and reasons behind doing whatever they are doing, whatever they are doing is consensual, and whatever they are doing is exclusively affecting only them in a direct way (no one is losing or gaining something without their consent and the action is not intended to inflict unwanted emotions/conditions on another), then it is not morally wrong.

Is there something wrong with this? Does it allow something that you believe is wrong?

[BlueLight]

I wrote a big TL;DR but I'll just go with these questions and a statment.

Questions:

Why would the existence of god be a good thing?

Why would the existence of god be a bad thing?

What meaning in life would a god give us?

What meaning in life would we have if there was no god?

Statement:

I believe that as long as the one or more people/beings doing something are making sure that they know all the implications and reasons behind doing whatever they are doing, whatever they are doing is consensual, and whatever they are doing is exclusively affecting only them in a direct way (no one is losing or gaining something without their consent and the action is not intended to inflict unwanted emotions/conditions on another), then it is not morally wrong.

Is there something wrong with this? Does it allow something that you believe is wrong?

Question? Are those question asking in a "God all mighty" level (Deductive) or a "Demi-god" level (Inductive)
I ask because it might lead to nearly the same answers but the way one would go about answering would be different.

[fould12]

Yes well, if you are a homophobe, a misogynist and stupid enough to believe in witches then no doubt you would find good stuff in the Bible. I know several homosexuals, and let me tell you, they are much better people than you are.

First of all, I love women, and I believe witches have existed in the past(if god exists, then demons must exist as well), but not necessarily in the present. The reason I hate homosexuals is because they go against human nature, what they were born as, and strive to be the opposite of what a man should be like. They may seem like nice people, but they obviously have something wrong with them, whether they show it or not.

“You can safely assume you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.” ― Anne Lamott

That's not a safe assumption, since you could be hating people for all the right reasons.

And for the record the law actually states that if a woman was raped in a TOWN, she must have not shouted loud enough. So you must believe that about 90% of the rapes that happen in the modern world are actually the woman's fault

The way I read it, it says that she should be stoned if she didn't scream for help, not if she didn't shout loud enough.

[IrrelevantComment]

" If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, 24 you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death—the young woman because she was in a town and did not scream for help, and the man because he violated another man’s wife. You must purge the evil from among you." - Deuteronomy 22 : 23-24

It quite clearly does NOT say "if she did not scream" for help. It says that she did not, because it couldn't be possible for her to scream and not be saved, could it.

But are you even in touch with reality? Rapists don't just say "oh hai thar, ima rape you kthx" and give the woman a chance to scream. There is usually a knife or a gun involved, or the woman is knocked out/kidnapped.

The reason I hate homosexuals is because they go against human nature, what they were born as, and strive to be the opposite of what a man should be like. They may seem like nice people, but they obviously have something wrong with them, whether they show it or not.

Firstly you are basing this off of circular reasoning. Why is it against human nature to be gay? No doubt simply because the Bible says so. In actual fact, homosexuality has been encountered in over 400 species of animal, so it is perfectly natural. And call me stupid, but I don't see why there is something "obviously" wrong with people who like the same gender. Differing from the norm does mean you have something wrong with you.

[Smackman]

There is no God, there is no supernatural, there are no magical forces.

People fashion their God after their own understanding. They make their God first and worship him afterwards.
-Oscar Wilde

I bring up this point because I think it explains the acceptance of the supernatural in peoples minds. Everyone thinks the universe is specially designed for them.

But riddle me this:

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?”

Epicurus – BC 341-270

So you guys who worship omni-benevolent Gods such as the christian god... wtf?

Now Russel's Teapot. Is it reasonable to believe all unsubstantiated claims like "Hey there's a man in the sky watching you, this 8000 year old book that can't have its authenticity verified said so"? No it's not. This isn't an unsubstantiated claim like "Hey don't swim in that lake i think it might be contaminated", this is unfalsifiable to the point where it literally cannot be wrong or right. It's trapped in a realm between fact and fiction. But see if I believed that the events of Lord of The Rings happened 20000 years ago and told you that Tolkien was a prophet you'd call me a lunatic. But in reality I just gave LOTR the same amount of credence as christians give the bible, and why should it deserve less if I believe it to be true?

The reason the christian god's and stuff are believed so much is because these gods are crafted in your image, they ideologically match them to the every man. The narcissism of mankind is used against itself for the purpose of subjugation. The kings of old used their own gods and the democratic leaders today are pulling the same tricks. Note how today's society doesn't use the entire old testament, just whatever reflects the typical morals of the average people. Morals become divided and I worry that the US is going to have another civil war on its hands soon.

We were not created in god's image, he was created in ours.

[Smackman]

and fould if you think homosexuality is wrong maybe you should take that kirby pony off as your picture

[Smackman]

Personally I don't believe in wrong or right, I believe in destructive and constructive. In a society with so many orphaned children homosexuality is constructive.

[IrrelevantComment]

Personally I don't believe in wrong or right, I believe in destructive and constructive. In a society with so many orphaned children homosexuality is constructive.

[Smackman]

Yep, so far evidence shows that gay parents are just as good as straight ones... but right now a lot of the adoption agencies hold extreme christian values etc. that needs to be abolished. put these kids somewhere. That and things that were considered crimes against humanity to ancient hebrews because they prevented procreation are completely irrelevant with a world population at 7 billion. Thats the only reason they put it in leviticus, (which also says wearing mixed fabrics is a sin) because homosexuality was actually dangerous in an underpopulated world

[BlueLight]

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?”

You're acting like all of these deductive true and thus should be believed.

1 Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
It is correct to say "Then he is not omnipotent."

2 Is he able, but not willing?
I can think of several reasons with in the first minute why he wouldn't be willing so saying "Then he is malevolent." doesn't work since there are other logical possibilities

3 Is he both able and willing?
Took me about 2 minutes but i did come up with a reason. "Then whence cometh evil?" so again this is deductive.

4Is he neither able nor willing?
"Then why call him God?” this would be correct unless we're talking about demi gods... which we aren't.

I always get bugged by that quote because people act like it proves everything in a deductive manner but if you think then you can come up with reasons why it's not true thus making it inductive.

[Smackman]

You didn't read my entire post by the looks of it. I mean I don't really care because you just like watching yourself type and I'm tired of dealing with your bullshit.

[fould12]

" If a man happens to meet in a town a virgin pledged to be married and he sleeps with her, 24 you shall take both of them to the gate of that town and stone them to death—the young woman because she was in a town and did not scream for help, and the man because he violated another man’s wife. You must purge the evil from among you." - Deuteronomy 22 : 23-24

It quite clearly does NOT say "if she did not scream" for help. It says that she did not, because it couldn't be possible for her to scream and not be saved, could it.

Sorry about that; she didn't scream out, and that's one of the ways to prove that they were having sexual relations.

But are you even in touch with reality? Rapists don't just say "oh hai thar, ima rape you kthx" and give the woman a chance to scream. There is usually a knife or a gun involved, or the woman is knocked out/kidnapped.

Those verses weren't talking about rape, they were talking about sexual relations; if you want to get specific, the original text was ושכב, which basically means 'he lies down with her'. In verse 25, it explains that if she was out in the fields and a man raped her(ושכב האיש בה והחזיק which basically means 'he forces her and lies down with her'), then only the man should die, since it's rape; and the woman couldn't do anything about it, since she was out in the fields where no one could hear her.

The reason I hate homosexuals is because they go against human nature, what they were born as, and strive to be the opposite of what a man should be like. They may seem like nice people, but they obviously have something wrong with them, whether they show it or not.

Firstly you are basing this off of circular reasoning. Why is it against human nature to be gay? No doubt simply because the Bible says so. In actual fact, homosexuality has been encountered in over 400 species of animal, so it is perfectly natural. And call me stupid, but I don't see why there is something "obviously" wrong with people who like the same gender. Differing from the norm does mean you have something wrong with you.

If you think about the way they say animals and organisms evolve, they say that beneficial mutations are passed down through the generations, and mutations that don't benefit them usually die out. So if homosexuality serves no benefit to the species, then why was it passed down through the generations?
And if you think that god has designed everything, why would he make it so that only men with women can conceive children through sex, if he intended for there to be people who have sex with the same gender? Either way, it doesn't make sense the way I see it. Plus, I have never seen any evidence of homosexual animals.
Also, differing from the norm isn't wrong, but differing from the right way of living, is.

“Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God?”

God has a purpose for keeping evil. If he tried to rid all evil from us, then he would take away our humanity; since with humanity, comes imperfection. Talin had a good idea when he thought of a god that made imperfect parts of himself to give purpose, since making human beings can give god a purpose in this universe; to help beings try to reach perfection.

Now Russel's Teapot. Is it reasonable to believe all unsubstantiated claims like "Hey there's a man in the sky watching you, this 8000 year old book that can't have its authenticity verified said so"? No it's not. This isn't an unsubstantiated claim like "Hey don't swim in that lake i think it might be contaminated", this is unfalsifiable to the point where it literally cannot be wrong or right. It's trapped in a realm between fact and fiction. But see if I believed that the events of Lord of The Rings happened 20000 years ago and told you that Tolkien was a prophet you'd call me a lunatic. But in reality I just gave LOTR the same amount of credence as christians give the bible, and why should it deserve less if I believe it to be true?

Like I've said before, to me, the bible makes sense, it's logical, gives meaning to life, and describes how to be good. Also, it fits in with other recorded events in the past, so it's reasonable to believe that the bible is a truthful source of information. With Lord Of The Rings, you know that it was made up by someone, since it was made obvious by the writer. There always is a small chance of it being correct, but it doesn't make any sense, it's illogical, doesn't fit with the history of the world, and has no known source.

The reason the christian god's and stuff are believed so much is because these gods are crafted in your image, they ideologically match them to the every man. The narcissism of mankind is used against itself for the purpose of subjugation. The kings of old used their own gods and the democratic leaders today are pulling the same tricks. Note how today's society doesn't use the entire old testament, just whatever reflects the typical morals of the average people. Morals become divided and I worry that the US is going to have another civil war on its hands soon.

We were not created in god's image, he was created in ours.

That's a theory, but it could be that god is the one that crafted us, and we were made in his image. Yes, many leaders of the past made up gods similar to the god from the bible, but they changed and made up some of the laws and the morals so that they could subjugate the people(e.g. the god of grain wants you to send 1/10 of your harvests to his servant the king). The truth and wisdom never change, but people's ideas of them do. People in the government probably do the same today(e.g. Jesus said to love your neighbor, so that's why you shouldn't hate homosexuals.), they take a good moral and twist it around so that you do something that benefits them.

You have no proof that god was created in our image, but you state it as if it were a fact. As I've explained before, it is more reasonable, logical, and makes more sense if we were created in god's image, not the other way around.

and fould if you think homosexuality is wrong maybe you should take that kirby pony off as your picture

Why? How is it homosexual? Kirby is a cute puffball, and the ponies that I like are cute miniature cartoon versions of horses. Liking something cute isn't homosexual, but acting like a woman is(for a man). My avatar doesn't represent who I am as a person, but it does represent some of my likes and interests.

Personally I don't believe in wrong or right, I believe in destructive and constructive. In a society with so many orphaned children homosexuality is constructive.

Because earth is being overpopulated? If that's true, then why aren't you a homosexual? Or do you believe people are born homosexual? Plus, if being constructive is beneficial, than isn't it right?

Yep, so far evidence shows that gay parents are just as good as straight ones... but right now a lot of the adoption agencies hold extreme christian values etc. that needs to be abolished. put these kids somewhere.

From what I've seen, straight parents have a much higher chance of having better morals than homosexual parents, since homosexuals already have something majorly wrong with them and their morals.

That and things that were considered crimes against humanity to ancient hebrews because they prevented procreation are completely irrelevant with a world population at 7 billion. Thats the only reason they put it in leviticus, (which also says wearing mixed fabrics is a sin) because homosexuality was actually dangerous in an underpopulated world

So you believe that China's law of one child per couple is good? God didn't make the law against homosexuality because he was worried about an underpopulated world, he made it because of the immorality of homosexuality.

[IrrelevantComment]

So you believe that China's law of one child per couple is good?

Yes I do actually, and I hope to hell that Kenya puts in place the 4 Child policy they have talked about. This is a result of studying these countries in school and looking at the problems of overpopulation.

Or do you believe people are born homosexual?

Yes, I do. Either that or it is partially a result of environmental factors, but in either case it is NOT a choice, just as you do not choose to be attracted to women, so your previous question was irrelevant.

Also, it fits in with other recorded events in the past,

What, like the flood? What about being a scale factor of a million out on the age of the Earth?

As for the rape thing, you didn't address my point about not being able to scream when you are being raped.

And if you think that god has designed everything, why would he make it so that only men with women can conceive children through sex, if he intended for there to be people who have sex with the same gender?

By that logic, God didn't intend for condoms or anal sex(heterosexually) to be used, and he didn't intend for infertile or old couples to have sex, so they are morally wrong. Conception is NOT the only purpose of sex.

Plus, I have never seen any evidence of homosexual animals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual ... in_animals
[inb4 "wikipedia isn't reliable": it references many primary sources - check those out if you want]

From what I've seen, straight parents have a much higher chance of having better morals than homosexual parents, since homosexuals already have something majorly wrong with them and their morals.

This is why I will no longer debate you: you put forward a completely bigoted point of view as if it were fact and offer no evidence for it.

[fould12]

So you believe that China's law of one child per couple is good?

Yes I do actually, and I hope to hell that Kenya puts in place the 4 Child policy they have talked about. This is a result of studying these countries in school and looking at the problems of overpopulation.

Limiting natural human rights is morally wrong from my standpoint; taking away your power to have as many children as you want is like saying you can't eat anything except what they give you. From my standpoint, the whole world's going to be destroyed and be replaced by a new one, so overpopulation won't make much of a difference in the end.

Or do you believe people are born homosexual?

Yes, I do. Either that or it is partially a result of environmental factors, but in either case it is NOT a choice, just as you do not choose to be attracted to women, so your previous question was irrelevant.

God wouldn't make it that way, he believes that it's deserving of death to be a homosexual; he wouldn't he make it so you can't choose.

Also, it fits in with other recorded events in the past,

What, like the flood? What about being a scale factor of a million out on the age of the Earth?

Yes like the flood, what recorded events are there that say otherwise? And the earth could have been around for millions/billions of years, just because it says 'days' in genesis, doesn't mean it was actual days.

As for the rape thing, you didn't address my point about not being able to scream when you are being raped.

The first 2 verses were talking about sex, not rape. Say someone found a guy having sex with some other guy's wife; it was obvious he wasn't raping her, since she wasn't crying out for help. If she wasn't able to scream, then it wasn't sex, it was rape; therefore they shouldn't stone the woman.

And if you think that god has designed everything, why would he make it so that only men with women can conceive children through sex, if he intended for there to be people who have sex with the same gender?

By that logic, God didn't intend for condoms or anal sex(heterosexually) to be used, and he didn't intend for infertile or old couples to have sex, so they are morally wrong. Conception is NOT the only purpose of sex.

In an ideal world, men and women would be having sex whenever they want, having babies as much as they wanted. But since we live in an imperfect world, there are infertile and old couples who can't have children, but that doesn't mean it's wrong for them to have sex. As well, some couples can't sustain a large family, and therefore wouldn't be able to have more children, but that doesn't mean they should stop having sex. But your right, anal(or oral) sex wasn't intended; and we'd be defiling our bodies if we did, and is therefore morally wrong.

Plus, I have never seen any evidence of homosexual animals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual ... in_animals
[inb4 "wikipedia isn't reliable": it references many primary sources - check those out if you want]

Most of the animals they say display 'homosexual behavior' are just displaying animalistic behavior. With their raging hormones and no control over themselves besides instincts, they would sometimes have sexual encounters with the same sex. But that instance with the sheep is something I didn't expect, and doesn't really make any sense to me. But still, it gives no reason for why humans should act the same way; after all we're reasoning beings, and like I've said before, god wouldn't make naturally born homosexuals.

From what I've seen, straight parents have a much higher chance of having better morals than homosexual parents, since homosexuals already have something majorly wrong with them and their morals.

This is why I will no longer debate you: you put forward a completely bigoted point of view as if it were fact and offer no evidence for it.

What have I been talking about for the last 4 posts!? I've been explaining how homosexuals are inhumane and evil, how they are deserving of death, and why they are screwed up mentally because of it! How is that bigotry!? I have been trying to reason this with you since my first reply, and you say I have a bigoted point of view!?

[IrrelevantComment]

it was obvious he wasn't raping her, since she wasn't crying out for help.

As you continue to ignore my point, I am getting increasingly frustrated. Are you stupid? Can you not read? Has it not even crossed your mind once, that YOU CANNOT ALWAYS SCREAM IF YOU ARE BEING RAPED. This could happen for a multitude of reasons, for example the man threatens to kill the woman if she screams.

I'm not even going to try and deal with the rest of it.

[talin]

Wow... suddenly my question of "should we focus on who is the real god or instead focus on what they are teaching" has become "is homosexuality good or bad?".

Sorry Fould, You're entitled to believe what you want I suppose but I have not problem with gays. Their attraction to the same sex happens due to a combination of possibly cross wired genetics and life experiences adding up to them desiring the same sex. They can't really help who they find attractive even if they can't reproduce.

I find this fairly ironic but despite them not actually being related, gays and bronies react in much the same way when they get attacked for their gayness/bronyness. They get all defensive, come out in force, and proclaim that they are here to stay. They form their own little communities and are there to back each other up. Even non-gays/non-bronies come out at ally themselves with their friends and show it's possible to co-exist. You may not like it but you share much with those you seem to despise.

Just one little question though... Isn't a sin to be a furry? At least gays are wanting other humans. That goes even more so if you ever enjoyed "clop". I would ask that you just sit back and at least think about what would be right or wrong if there really was no god watching. A good place to start is establishing the goal of human unification and peace, then work the morals out around that. Of course this is just a suggestion, if you can't make the transition without losing your sense of meaning in life or becoming too terrified of death to live then feel free to indulge in the fact that even I have absolutely no proof that there ISN'T a god and that I might just be a rebellious, youthful, heretic. Either way, know that I will never hate you for simply believing in something.

Ad quisque sua

[Smackman]

Yeah fould I really don't have respect for your opinions anymore. you obviously see logic where there is none and reject any logical retort to your opinions.