Question for religious folk

[mrbios]

This has sparked my interest out of a video going round from sky news of a woman who lost her dog after the Oklahoma tornado and the dog appearing as she's being interviewed.

 

Essentially all the comments are thanking god for answering her prayers and what not, lots of comments going to similar effect, as well as the woman in the video thanking god. What i can't grasp is how someone can thank a deity after such an event?

 

I mean if "God" caused that dog to be alive and found, then why not everyone else such as the children that are missing or dead? Why thank god for saving one life but taking another? Why thank god for saving someone and not curse him for causing the tornado?

 

It probably makes sense to a religious person but as an atheist/agnostic (i sometimes like to play with ideas making me agnostic but generally have a strong opinion that we're on our own haha) i just can't understand the thought pattern that follows when someone thanks god for something AFTER a catastrophic event?!

[sted]

religion isnt rational you either believe in whatever you believe and nothing will shake that or you think its all a load of made up tosh. its like surveys the question dictates the answer and people have blind spots

[Alkaline]

It depends if you think god caused the event. And if he did does he care about individual life.

[witch]

The thing is, if you are religious then you believe that God has a plan that is not revealed to us (I think)

I've always thought that if there was a God, he knows what we are going to do but he does not control us or the earth. Which explains why people get cancer, and there are tornados and such.

People like to believe that there is a higher power looking after them and bringing their loved ones back to them.

[Disaster]

If it sounds a bit odd or far fetched then all you have to say is God works in mysterious ways. It's better than the alternative...

[Garacesh]

Had this exact discussion with my housemate last night. He has quite a few friends in the States and a few of them are deeply religious. One of them posted something to the effect of 'Thank God for helping the survivors of the tornado.", yet when questioned about the dead, especially the children, her response was "God needs more Angels in Heaven."

 

Personally, I'm an atheist. I believe if the universe could be attributed a single human characteristic, it would simply be indifference. The universe does not care. It keeps doing what it does and if you're in the way, it keeps doing it anyway. If there were to be 'proof' there is no God, then I can't say I have it. What I do have, however, is a firmly-set opinion that if there is a God, s/he turned their back on us long ago. A God that is omnipotent could have prevented this, yet didn't. Are they, therefore, not omnipotent?

 

I can't remember who said it, but something to the effect of 'If God cannot stop these events, he is not all-powerful. If he can, but chooses not to, he is apathetic to our suffering. If he causes them himself, he is malevolent. Either way, he is not worthy of worship.'

Edited May 22, 2013 by Garacesh

[Pyroman]

Watch Andy Hamiltons - Search for Satan

It's a great evolution of the story of god and the devil. God "allows" stuff like this to happen because he's a vengeful ba**ard, look at the Old Testament!

[Sunnyknight]

You'll find this helpful, i hope

 

Professor : You are a Christian, aren’t you, son ?

Student : Yes, sir.

Professor: So, you believe in GOD ?

Student : Absolutely, sir.

Professor : Is GOD good ?

Student : Sure.

Professor: Is GOD all powerful ?

Student : Yes.

Professor: My brother died of cancer even though he prayed to GOD to heal him. Most of us would attempt to help others who are ill. But GOD didn’t. How is this GOD good then? Hmm?

(Student was silent.)

Professor: You can’t answer, can you ? Let’s start again, young fella. Is GOD good?

Student : Yes.

Professor: Is satan good ?

Student : No.

Professor: Where does satan come from ?

Student : From … GOD …

Professor: That’s right. Tell me son, is there evil in this world?

Student : Yes.

Professor: Evil is everywhere, isn’t it ? And GOD did make everything. Correct?

Student : Yes.

Professor: So who created evil ?

(Student did not answer.)

Professor: Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things exist in the world, don’t they?

Student : Yes, sir.

Professor: So, who created them ?

(Student had no answer.)

Professor: Science says you have 5 Senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Tell me, son, have you ever seen GOD?

Student : No, sir.

Professor: Tell us if you have ever heard your GOD?

Student : No , sir.

Professor: Have you ever felt your GOD, tasted your GOD, smelt your GOD? Have you ever had any sensory perception of GOD for that matter?

Student : No, sir. I’m afraid I haven’t.

Professor: Yet you still believe in Him?

Student : Yes.

Professor : According to Empirical, Testable, Demonstrable Protocol, Science says your GOD doesn’t exist. What do you say to that, son?

Student : Nothing. I only have my faith.

Professor: Yes, faith. And that is the problem Science has.

Student : Professor, is there such a thing as heat?

Professor: Yes.

Student : And is there such a thing as cold?

Professor: Yes.

Student : No, sir. There isn’t.

(The lecture theater became very quiet with this turn of events.)

Student : Sir, you can have lots of heat, even more heat, superheat, mega heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat. But we don’t have anything called cold. We can hit 458 degrees below zero which is no heat, but we can’t go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold. Cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.

(There was pin-drop silence in the lecture theater.)

Student : What about darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as darkness?

Professor: Yes. What is night if there isn’t darkness?

Student : You’re wrong again, sir. Darkness is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light. But if you have no light constantly, you have nothing and its called darkness, isn’t it? In reality, darkness isn’t. If it is, well you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn’t you?

Professor: So what is the point you are making, young man ?

Student : Sir, my point is your philosophical premise is flawed.

Professor: Flawed ? Can you explain how?

Student : Sir, you are working on the premise of duality. You argue there is life and then there is death, a good GOD and a bad GOD. You are viewing the concept of GOD as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, Science can’t even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing.

Death is not the opposite of life: just the absence of it. Now tell me, Professor, do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?

Professor: If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, yes, of course, I do.

Student : Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?

(The Professor shook his head with a smile, beginning to realize where the argument was going.)

Student : Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor. Are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you not a scientist but a preacher?

(The class was in uproar.)

Student : Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the Professor’s brain?

(The class broke out into laughter. )

Student : Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor’s brain, felt it, touched or smelt it? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established Rules of Empirical, Stable, Demonstrable Protocol, Science says that you have no brain, sir. With all due respect, sir, how do we then trust your lectures, sir?

(The room was silent. The Professor stared at the student, his face unfathomable.)

Professor: I guess you’ll have to take them on faith, son.

Student : That is it sir … Exactly ! The link between man & GOD is FAITH. That is all that keeps things alive and moving.

[Garacesh]

Student : Sir, you can have lots of heat, even more heat, superheat, mega heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat. But we don’t have anything called cold. We can hit 458 degrees below zero which is no heat, but we can’t go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold. Cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.

(There was pin-drop silence in the lecture theater.)

Student : What about darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as darkness?

Professor: Yes. What is night if there isn’t darkness?

Student : You’re wrong again, sir. Darkness is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light. But if you have no light constantly, you have nothing and its called darkness, isn’t it? In reality, darkness isn’t. If it is, well you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn’t you?

Admittedly an argument I have no response to, although I'm sure that many scientists would agree. 'Darkness' doesn't exist. It simply reaches a point where your eyes cannot interpret the light hitting it because there is too little of it. I'm not sure they'd say they darkness existed as a physical thing. This argument seems to imply that they would. Huh, I guess I have a response after all.

 

Death is not the opposite of life: just the absence of it. Now tell me, Professor, do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?

Professor: If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, yes, of course, I do.

Student : Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?

(The Professor shook his head with a smile, beginning to realize where the argument was going.)

Student : Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor. Are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you not a scientist but a preacher?

Not opinion. Evolution: The reason you need a new Flu shot every year. Also, not monkey. Common ancestor.

 

Student : Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the Professor’s brain?

(The class broke out into laughter. )

Everything onwards from this is just silly. If we so desired, the Professor's brain can be empirically and repeatedly proven to exist through various methods of scanning and - if push came to shove - cutting open his head and poking it. We can realistically assume the Professor has a brain without doing this due to observable patters in similar circumstances (i.e. other humans). There is no 'similar circumstance' for us to reasonably assume God (or any deity for that matter) exists.

Edited May 22, 2013 by Garacesh

[Sunnyknight]

Faith.

 

That's all there is to it.

 

Nothing more, nothing less.

[E_G_R2]

Try these for starters;

 

Untitled Document

Why Does God Let Innocent People Suffer?

Why does God allow innocent people to suffer?

 

Original Sin

[sdc]

Also, this: If God is all powerful, then why does he allow suffering?

[X-13]

Original Sin

 

Which was forgiven by the death of Jesus.

 

Also, how is a God fair and just when they punish people for things they didn't do.

[tech_guy]

I believe in God as a belief system, a concept, a set of codes. My God is not your God.

 

No wonder I'm not very popular at my local synagogue....

[E_G_R2]

But only if you accept that as the case and take Jesus into your heart

 

"Also, how is a God fair and just when they punish people for things they didn't do." see SDC post

[X-13]

"Also, how is a God fair and just when they punish people for things they didn't do." see SDC post

 

Taken from said link:

 

"You are asking, How can a righteous judge allow a criminal to suffer? How can a just judge allow a violent offender to be punished"

 

You can [censored] right off.

 

I'm asking how can you punish someone who hasn't done anything.

 

If someone does something wrong, you punish THEM. Not everyone else. Stuff like that is why I don't like most religion.

[E_G_R2]

I'll not enter a debate but is some if not all of the links you will find that there is no one who in your words "hasn't done anything".

[localzuk]

Student : Professor, is there such a thing as heat?

Professor: Yes.

Student : And is there such a thing as cold?

Professor: Yes.

Student : No, sir. There isn’t.

(The lecture theater became very quiet with this turn of events.)

Student : Sir, you can have lots of heat, even more heat, superheat, mega heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat. But we don’t have anything called cold. We can hit 458 degrees below zero which is no heat, but we can’t go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold. Cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.

(There was pin-drop silence in the lecture theater.)

Student : What about darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as darkness?

Professor: Yes. What is night if there isn’t darkness?

Student : You’re wrong again, sir. Darkness is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light. But if you have no light constantly, you have nothing and its called darkness, isn’t it? In reality, darkness isn’t. If it is, well you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn’t you?

This section is flawed. Cold is just a word - it describes a certain state of heat. For example, we super cool things. There is no such thing as heat either - it is simply a word we use to describe something. Neither prove or disprove the other.

 

Professor: So what is the point you are making, young man ?

Student : Sir, my point is your philosophical premise is flawed.

Professor: Flawed ? Can you explain how?

Student : Sir, you are working on the premise of duality. You argue there is life and then there is death, a good GOD and a bad GOD. You are viewing the concept of GOD as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, Science can’t even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing.

Death is not the opposite of life: just the absence of it. Now tell me, Professor, do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?

Professor: If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, yes, of course, I do.

Student : Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?

(The Professor shook his head with a smile, beginning to realize where the argument was going.)

Student : Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor. Are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you not a scientist but a preacher?

(The class was in uproar.)

Student : Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the Professor’s brain?

(The class broke out into laughter. )

Student : Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor’s brain, felt it, touched or smelt it? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established Rules of Empirical, Stable, Demonstrable Protocol, Science says that you have no brain, sir. With all due respect, sir, how do we then trust your lectures, sir?

(The room was silent. The Professor stared at the student, his face unfathomable.)

Professor: I guess you’ll have to take them on faith, son.

Student : That is it sir … Exactly ! The link between man & GOD is FAITH. That is all that keeps things alive and moving.

 

This section is entirely flawed, as everything that the student says that we don't understand or can't prove can be understood and can be proven through testing. We can prove the professor has a brain by cutting his head open. Not a great experiment, I agree, but its doable. We can prove evolution occurs, and we *can* see it happening in a lab environment via bacterial studies. You don't take anything in science on faith. It is demonstrable. Its repeatable. Its observable. You can take things on faith if you want to, but you don't have to.

 

That's the difference between science and religion. Science allows you to out and check things yourself, so long as you have the knowledge, time, money and ability. Religion doesn't.

[X-13]

I'll not enter a debate but is some if not all of the links you will find that there is no one who in your words "hasn't done anything".

 

Original sin, IIRC, was eating the apple.

 

I didn't eat the apple. Therefore, I shouldn't be punished for it.

[pauljonze]

Perhaps she should have said "Thank Dog".

 

Many of the points made by the student in the Professor/Student extract are just playing on words. Science accepts change and adapts to new information, it undergoes review and is developed by experiment, it is based on questioning and reasoning; two things which religion expects you to give up.

[sted]

Religion ... Everyone is entitled to their beliefs and such but I think anyone who believes that a god actually exists has a mental condition.

It has to be the biggest lie ever told.

 

biggest possibly not most dangerous undoubtedly

[pcstru]

Belief in god is not itself irrational, it is just another axiom - like 1+1=2. In terms of "right" to my "opinion" to saying "I like cheese". Irrationality comes when the axiom is used to explain other phenomena or justify actions and behaviour. I think the OP's confusion comes from their view that everything has to 'make sense'. Outside of the domain of mathematical proof, that's a fairly arbitrary standard.

[sted]

Belief in god is not itself irrational, it is just another axiom - like 1+1=2. In terms of "right" to my "opinion" to saying "I like cheese". Irrationality comes when the axiom is used to explain other phenomena or justify actions and behaviour. I think the OP's confusion comes from their view that everything has to 'make sense'. Outside of the domain of mathematical proof, that's a fairly arbitrary standard.

 

well no i believe the technical term is ontic dumping. I cant control the weather i wonder who can hey presto a "god" then more and more gets dumped in the same pidgeon hole someone writes down some commandments (which on the whole are not a bad set of rules to live by) and you have a relegion

[pcstru]

well no i believe the technical term is ontic dumping. I cant control the weather i wonder who can hey presto a "god" then more and more gets dumped in the same pidgeon hole someone writes down some commandments (which on the whole are not a bad set of rules to live by) and you have a relegion

 

Ontic Dumping - I like that! But I'm not sure what specifically you are disagreeing with -"well no".

[featured_spectre]

I often use simple logic when people knock on my door/preach in the streets, and I would say I have managed to get people to question their beliefs quite effectively using the following LOGICAL arguments about god and religion.

 

[*]Creationism is often the root of the monotheastic faith structure. With the wealth of reasonable evidence at your disposal concerning its infeasibility, you might include arguments concerning evolution, radiocarbon dating--as ridiculous as it may sound, many believe that the earth is 6,000 years old--and asking for an admission where creationism is given some theoretical weight, besides the bible or other religious texts.

[*]Challenge the belief there is any "science" in religion, except for the fact that there are a few scientific theories that explain that the paranormal isn't impossible (written by actual scientists, not zealots) and that scientists only understand about 4% of the universe. The difference between science and religion is that the former is always willing to reconsider any of its theories, laws and rules. The catch is that the longer a theory is supported by evidence, the stronger the evidence must be to disprove it. Ask any religious person if they would accept any evidence disproving the existence of his/her god(s) and the answer will always be "No." That is why religion can never be classified as "science" regardless of what name you give to it.

[*]Point out that some religious beliefs may require you to "dumb down" your mind in order to have faith. The mortal enemy of faith is knowledge, a scientific fact that has been demonstrated by researchers at the University of British Columbia.[1] The basis of any religion is that you must believe something someone else tells you is true, even though your mind tells you it is a lie and it makes no sense. There is name for that: fideism. Without fideism, the concept of religion would not exist.

[*]Show them morality does not require any religious belief. Many people believe that without religion, the planet would descend into immoral chaos. The reality is that the majority of heinous crimes committed against people on this planet across all of recorded history had their roots on religious beliefs, but the ability to distinguish right from wrong does not require any religious beliefs. In addition, animals who are incapable of understanding our human concept of religion show clear evidence of understanding moral behavior and distinguishing between right and wrong.

[*]The God Delusion. Challenge their religion's roots. Examples of this might include (if challenged by a Christian) that the "devil" was not present in religious texts until the nomadic monotheists ran into polytheists and borrowed the idea.

[*]Point out that religion, throughout history, has been used to control the masses, rather than enlighten them. An example of this includes the Christian crusades, and the present day suicide bombings of Muslims. Are (insert any monotheist faith here) really that different?

[*]Target the religious texts. In the case of the bible, often entire verses, stories, and anecdotes were falsified for the sake of making a point. Even the concept of the "holy trinity" is a fabrication created not by any god, but for political reasons by a zealot named Theophilus of of Antioch in 412 AD. Exploit the plot holes, inconsistencies and illogical and impossible things.

[*]Relate to your religious friend. Ask them for a reason as to why they believe so strongly in their faith besides being raised in the dogma's environment. Be aware of the Hundreds of Proofs of God's existence* they may try to use.

[*]Demonstrate that people believe whatever they're told to believe. Ask your religious friend if he believes in a specific belief of another religion--for example, if he's Jewish you can ask him if he believes Jesus was the son of god. Assuming he would answer negatively, then ask him whether he thinks he would believe that if he were raised Christian.

[*]Religion has often been used to explain the unexplainable. The Greeks used Poseidon to explain how earthquakes happen, which we now know is due to the movement of tectonic plates to relieve pressure. What happens when we can prove, and you can't deny, the Big Bang theory and Evolution, which both have such large amounts of logic behind them that it's hard to deny that they are true. This is called "The God of the gaps" factor.

[*]What happens after death? Many Christians try to use this argument to trick you into thinking you have to go to heaven. However, try relating this to something that has already happened. What happened before you were born? Nothing in the bible says anything about this. Ask them to explain near-death or death experiences that many people have related, and why they never speak of seeing any "heaven," "god," "angels" or anything of the sort.

[*]Use simple logic.

Christians believe their God is omniscient and knows everything, including everything that has happened and will happen, as well as every thought your mind creates before you think it. If that's the case, there is no "free will."

They also believe their God is omnipotent, and can do anything. Problem is, if their God can do anything but doesn't lift a finger to stop all the disasters, massacres and wars that have happened, are happening now and will happen in the future, their God is also a psychopath who enjoys watching our misery.

However, if the Christian God is not omniscient or omnipotent... well, in that case their God is not a "god" and doesn't exist.

 

I no longer have Jehovas Witnesses knocking at my door as the last 2 that did, went away questioning their faith.