Ask an Atheist

[doseofreality]

The Word of God is self-authenticating. It doesn't need to be 'proved' from outside. 'Thy Word is Truth' (John 17.17).

Agreed. However, from the outside that is considered circular reasoning.

Is it true that you take that on faith?

If I am to take the bible to be completely true, then I need faith .... that is what you are proposing, correct?

**Furthermore, the only reason I do not take the bible as completely true, is because I no longer have faith.

 

[Deadtosin]

it is evidence that a single "miracle" occurred, that some mysterious force caused you amd your friend to be temporarily blinded by a light and forced to kneel down in some way.

yes and that mysterious force was by a man who said he had walked away from his life 30 years before to lead a revolution for God and the words he used just before the miracle were out of the bible "Thus says the Lord God"

Keep in mind how colossal that is for someone who says this is all just as ridiculous as santa and unicorns.

 

[SkepticJosh]

"why does anything need a reason to be? Does a ball have a reason to land where it lands when it falls? No its just the result of gravity and other forces. Unguided. Why would the universe be different on any larger scale?" -SkepticJosh

first I want to take the time to thank you again for your patience and openness, you have given many of us something interesting to engage in lol.

second, I find your statement about the ball inaccurate- "does a ball have a reason to land where it lands?-no" you then tear your own reasoning apart stating that indeed it DOES have a reason to land where it lands- as it is in the jurisdiction of laws that it cannot avoid (gravity and other forces). Forces so consistently applicable that you can count on them to effect everything. Ironically the ball itself (as a simple ball implies a man-made toy) would require construction and then, how did it get into the air in the first place? There are MANY reasons why that ball will land Exactly where it will land. Including the specs to which the ball was created in the first place.

​

I explained to pie this was just poor choice of words on my part. When I said it doesn't have a reason I mean it doesn't have a guided divine purpose or meaning to why it fell. But the cause of its falling is due to the laws of physics and such. Just swap out the word reason for my explaination above an it should make more sense.

A junkyard contains all the bits and pieces of a Boeing-747, dismembered and in disarray. A whirlwind happens to blow through the yard. What is the chance that after its passage a fully assembled 747, ready to fly, will be found standing there? (

2).

If this event only occurs once then the odds are extremely small. Almost none. However if this event is replicated trillions of times with trillions of different ways the parts are placed on the ground and the way the wind currents blow and the odds increase dramatically. Still though this particular situation would still have very low odds even with those trial numbers. I'm assuming you're going to relate this to the odds it would be that the big bang or evolution will occur which is a flawed argument either way but I can't fully address it until you make it.

"A common-sense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question."-Fred Hoyle.

who was Fred Hoyle?

Sir Fred Hoyle FRS was an English astronomer noted primarily for his contribution to the theory of stellar nucleosynthesis.

He lived over 6 decades ago and probably never fully understood the big bang theory seeing how he coined the term inaccurately as a joke. I hardly care about the thoughts of a man who lived over 60 years ago and misrepresented the theory out of ignorance.

 

[SkepticJosh]

Not to gloat, but I gotta give you a high five.

Read my response to it before claiming victory.

 

[SkepticJosh]

"My stance is that nothing should be believed without good reason"-SkepticJosh

Long story short, I parked my car at a convenience store across the overpass from the Austin Bergstrom International Airport. My friend and I walked beneath the overpass to the other side to give a homeless man two dollars (who was dressed like an apostle complete with robes, sandals white beard and long hair) after I gave him the money he told us that he had been leading a revolution for God for 30 years- just walked away from his life. Then his eyes grew big and stared off into space and he said "THUS SAYS THE LORD GOD!" and as he continued to speak I was on a knee, curling the corners of my hat shielding my eyes. He went on and on and I couldn't even lift my hat to see his sandals. My eyes argued with me "I don't know where you THINK you are going to look, you are not looking at that man" he continued on and on and on and on, when he was finally finished I stood up, extended a handshake and spun around, I didn't even look up at him, when I spun around the world was normal. I heard my friend say goodbye and we walked in silence toward the other side of the overpass toward the car. I looked at my friend "did you see me there kneeling like that? He swore "**** NO I DIDN'T SEE YOU JEFF I WAS KNEELING RIGHT BEHIND YOU HOW THE **** COULD I SEE YOU?"

the story goes on and the experiences grow long.

good enough reason for me to believe Skeptic?

For you maybe. I on the other hand have no way of determining whether this really happened at all or that what you perceived was accurate. Imy sure if it was that this would be justification to believe in something maybe. I don't know if the event points directly to the conclusion that God Is real and the bible I true or more that something strange happened that needs to be farther investigated. And Id like to think that in that scenario I'd methodically try to debunk what had occured and find a more logical explaination instead of jumping to such a bold conclusion. But maybe not. In short: maybe for you sure.

 

[Deadtosin]

Josh! good to see you back man! hey I responded to our original discussion post 110 page 6


"If this event only occurs once then the odds are extremely small. Almost none. However if this event is replicated trillions of times with trillions of different ways the parts are placed on the ground and the way the wind currents blow and the odds increase dramatically. Still though this particular situation would still have very low odds even with those trial numbers" SkepticJosh

no, its not possible. Infinite amounts of chaotic tornado/typhoons would and could never attach every wire, every circuit board, every screw, coating, fuel etc. No amount of chaos could EVER build an airplane with parts swirling around in the air. Ever.

 

[Deadtosin]

For you maybe. I on the other hand have no way of determining whether this really happened at all or that what you perceived was accurate. Imy sure if it was that this would be justification to believe in something maybe. I don't know if the event points directly to the conclusion that God Is real and the bible I true or more that something strange happened that needs to be farther investigated. And Id like to think that in that scenario I'd methodically try to debunk what had occured and find a more logical explaination instead of jumping to such a bold conclusion. But maybe not. In short: maybe for you sure.

I did logically think about it. As soon as we got back in the car. "what happened?" well to answer that question I thought "what did he say? he said he was leading a revolution for God" then I thought, well which God? are we sure it was the bible? Then I thought of his words "thus says the Lord God" yes that's the bible. I would then be a moron to consider something different than what the situation clearly had shown.

 

[didymos]

I was going to stop, but I have to finish this.

Last one to post WINS!

 

[JimJimmers]

Atheist animators???

The South Park guys, Matt Groening, & Seth McFarland were the big four. Together, they make up a huge portion of the animated entertainment on TV. I think Josh gave a good answer, they probably don't shy away from controversy, ergo they are beloved by young, authority-questioning teens & YA's.

 

[Cycel]

Even the people who says that they are atheists remember God when they are in trouble.

What are you basing this belief upon? In my own experience this is not true. I was very ill when I was twenty-five and nearly died. A skilled surgical team saved my life. I was a week in hospital, and two weeks at home, when it suddenly occurred to me that during the whole experience I had not thought of God even one. Oh, and despite claims to the contrary there are atheists in fox holes.

To those who donot believe in God should look at this world and should observe their life...........they will see that behind every thing there is some creator...besides.....if we depend on our own knowledge for knowing God,then it should b remembered that our knowledge is very limited.There is a system that we see in this world and there is a spiritual system that is hidden.But the people who open the eye of their heart can see it.

I have been told that God is clearly visible in the world, but he is only clearly visible to those who already believe.

Years ago I believed in ghosts. I read everything about the subject I could get my hands on, and everything I read persuaded me further that what I believed was all true. Once I lost that belief the evidence no longer seemed believable. It appeared deeply flawed. I suggest to you that your own belief in God colours your perceptions in the same way as did my belief in ghosts. I think you are saying that you see the world as evidence of God; but I see only one world among billions in this galaxy alone.

 

[Cycel]

The South Park guys, Matt Groening, & Seth McFarland were the big four. Together, they make up a huge portion of the animated entertainment on TV. I think Josh gave a good answer, they probably don't shy away from controversy, ergo they are beloved by young, authority-questioning teens & YA's.

Jim, thanks for the explanation.

 

[penknight]

Read my response to it before claiming victory.

Dude, back off. Don't ask me to look at anything when you haven't answered one of my questions. So quit being a jerk.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

I respect a genuine egoless honesty and you display it here. I use the word ego in the Hellenistic Greek sense of ego eimi not the Freudian sense.

Simply to disassociate ego for the purpose of analyzing something objectively which may not support a perceived interest can be a real accomplishment for the average person not trained to do that.

Good job. The "person" wins something here regardless of the argument.

i must give props to this post as very well written.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Patently false.

God reveals Himself to nonbelievers in a multitude of ways (general revelation, the human conscience, the Person of Jesus Christ, special revelation, etc...) not to mention by precondition (metaphysical, supernatural, revelational, rational, semantical, epistemological, oppositional, linguistical, hermeneutical, historical, methodological, etc...). That's an enormous amount of ground right there but I certainly could continue listing the ways.

Some choose myopia and denial for blinders is all.

I have been told that God is clearly visible in the world, but he is only clearly visible to those who already believe.

 

[SkepticJosh]

Josh! good to see you back man! hey I responded to our original discussion post 110 page 6


"If this event only occurs once then the odds are extremely small. Almost none. However if this event is replicated trillions of times with trillions of different ways the parts are placed on the ground and the way the wind currents blow and the odds increase dramatically. Still though this particular situation would still have very low odds even with those trial numbers" SkepticJosh

no, its not possible. Infinite amounts of chaotic tornado/typhoons would and could never attach every wire, every circuit board, every screw, coating, fuel etc. No amount of chaos could EVER build an airplane with parts swirling around in the air. Ever.

And I can see why you'd say thay. Ido say you're pretty much right. But we're you going anywhere with this? Also sorry if I missed anything from you or anyone else for that matter. This thread got flooded pretty fast and I got caught up in 10 different discussions. I'll try to backtrack and find whatever I missed.

 

[penknight]

Last one to post WINS!

I wish that were true,. Thanks for the encourgement though, I really appreciate it.

 

[SkepticJosh]

I did logically think about it. As soon as we got back in the car. "what happened?" well to answer that question I thought "what did he say? he said he was leading a revolution for God" then I thought, well which God? are we sure it was the bible? Then I thought of his words "thus says the Lord God" yes that's the bible. I would then be a moron to consider something different than what the situation clearly had shown.

My beef wasn't with whether you were thinking of the right god. That seems like the most minor detail. I would be contemplating whether that light or whatever you experiencedo could've come from ANY other source. It's logical to try to debunk something and go with the answer that makes the least assumptions. I would probably sooner believe that it was a floodlight someone was operating from somewhere or the sun at a perfect moment. These are assumptions yes but more logical conclusions than jumping to the conclusion that God ezits and the bible is true. That makes a ton of assumptions. But again, I wasn't there, I don't know what happened, I didn't experience it, and I don't know if it ever really did happen. It very well may have been real and good enough for you.

 

[SkepticJosh]

Patently false.

God reveals Himself to nonbelievers in a multitude of ways (general revelation, the human conscience, the Person of Jesus Christ, special revelation, etc...) not to mention by precondition (metaphysical, supernatural, revelational, rational, semantical, epistemological, oppositional, linguistical, hermeneutical, historical, methodological, etc...). That's an enormous amount of ground right there but I certainly could continue listing the ways.

Some choose myopia and denial for blinders is all.

Most if not all of those can be explained by natural processes or in ways that are far more logical and make far less assumptions. God never reveals himself physically, literally, and blatantly right before us ever. It's apparently always through vague and easily dismissable means that look just like coincidences or just normal life. It takes no great strain to "force" on self not to see these apparent "revalations" when they're such poor methods of communication that can be interpreted naturally or in any thousand different ways besides the judeo christian way.

 

[Deadtosin]

And I can see why you'd say thay. Ido say you're pretty much right. But we're you going anywhere with this? Also sorry if I missed anything from you or anyone else for that matter. This thread got flooded pretty fast and I got caught up in 10 different discussions. I'll try to backtrack and find whatever I missed.

yeah I could see you got flooded lol and I understand.. I appreciate your effort.

Where am I going with this? It's pretty simple.

I was working at a church as a maintenance man and they had an event called "faith and science" there were many scientists in their respective fields especially those in the field of DNA. Interestingly enough it was the DNA and other scientific fields that brought them to look for God. They realized that it was FAR to intricate and all of it had to be absolutely precise. The deeper they dug the more they realized there was definitely a designer, it all had to be perfect- the first time. They had issues with the bible, still thinking there was some form of evolution but they were trying to find one where God still did the creating and tampering, trying to bridge their scientific beliefs with the bible. I don't agree with any mixture of course, I just think science is playing catch up.

My point is that DNA is far more intricate and complex than anything man has ever created and no amount of "chaos" is going to produce something THAT complex.

Think about it, any error in the DNA and we call it a "deformity" that means DNA, for every single creature alive is PERFECT. THAT in itself is an absolute miracle.

 

[Deadtosin]

My beef wasn't with whether you were thinking of the right god. That seems like the most minor detail. I would be contemplating whether that light or whatever you experiencedo could've come from ANY other source. It's logical to try to debunk something and go with the answer that makes the least assumptions. I would probably sooner believe that it was a floodlight someone was operating from somewhere or the sun at a perfect moment. These are assumptions yes but more logical conclusions than jumping to the conclusion that God ezits and the bible is true. That makes a ton of assumptions. But again, I wasn't there, I don't know what happened, I didn't experience it, and I don't know if it ever really did happen. It very well may have been real and good enough for you.

right, well anyone who has ever played with a floodlight in the afternoon would know that it can in no way blind you in competition with the suns light. Besides that if there were a building like the Hilton off in the distance reflecting light it should never have stopped me from lifting the bill of my hat to his sandals. Light has to travel in a straight line it can't curve down to the ground and up under the bill of my hat.