I should say at the start that I am a christian, but don't hold it against me! I am always interested in what other people think, and enjoing reading the posts on this website. So i'd like to throw some questions out to get more insight into atheism. Your help is appreciated.
Qn: If there were two universes, one with a God, and the other without, which one would you want to live in and why?
Qn: If scientific theory began to support theism (more than atheism) would you change your position
(like Antony Flew)?
Try really hard to avoid answers like: 'that would never happen.. etc.'
Qn: Would you describe your position as "There definitely is no God" or "Naturalism does not need a divine being and so God is improbable" or something else?
All respectful discussion welcome!
I meant to mention that I am not unaware of what the Bible says, I did a degree in theology and read it daily. I have obviously come to different conclusions to you though. Its not the topic if the thread but just wanted to respond on that as you seemed to think I am unaware of Biblical content.
I do not see you as "nasty" at all. I do not wish you to believe that we are nasty either. We are good people and I believe all people are good and want to do right by others for the most part. I think we have our moments of selfishness and we have temporary lapses in judgment but for the most part I am an optimist with regard to individual human beings. Now humans en mass, then I worry. But that is another thought for another day.
You are welcome to chat any time and I am sorry my comments may have made you feel that outsider but you have to admit your ideas and your world view is in contradiction with the majority of the folks on this site. So you would have to expect to hear some things that you might not like. I applaud your bravery in coming here to inquire, as well as the time you are spending on this project.
I realize you have a degree in theology and that is all well and good but I question your ability to look at the bible with a critical eye and still believe and follow it. It is not a very nice read in many aspects and I will not point them all out here, as it has been done in other posts. It is a very mancentric, not to mention it does have some pretty serious contradictions as pointed out by some other folks here.
As far as presuppositions are concerned, I agree we all come with them, but I think your initial comment meant presuppositions about Christianity and not society as a whole. Many of us here are pretty well read when it comes to the bible as well as our studies in world wide religions. One of the primary reasons for this is that many of us came here after a long journey of searching for a belief system that fit our way of thinking and after shopping the cereal isle of available religions none seem to fit the bill. So many of us come to the conclusion of non-belief by having a fairly extensive understanding of world religions.
But it does not stop here, I think that most of us also have a very hearty appetite for knowledge and the bible, I am afraid does not answer our questions.
Hey Trevor, we still love ya....after all we are all brothers an sisters here on planet earth, its just our ancestors that set us apart, and then there's that religious stuff..lol.
By the way, I purposefully didn't say Bible or Christianity in my original questions, I was talking theism as opposed to atheism.
You started the post stating that you were a Christian when you could have just as easily stated theist. You also used 'God' as a proper noun, which makes it appear as if you are referencing a specific one. (Actually, on rereading, I notice that you mixed it up oddly in the first question by capitalizing 'god' and using an indefinite article. In the third question use it only as a proper noun). In a number of English speaking regions, 'God' most commonly refers to the Abrahamic god, most notably as described by Christians. The gods of other religions are typically described by their names. Using the singular also excludes polytheism, so it doesn't really give the impression that you were referring to theism in general.
It's not surprising that many people would interpret your questions as having a Christian bent. As for talking about theism in general, that's unwieldy. 'Theism' is not a very cohesive grouping of beliefs. Concepts of gods vary so dramatically, that simply stating 'God' in the most general sense is vague and not all that meaningful. this is why many people asked for clarification. It's possible that their answer may change depending on the definition of 'God'.
It is important to be clear with language in these conversations, especially in your position where you are pretty much guaranteed to get more responses than you can reasonably respond to. If the question is muddled, you're either going to get muddled answers or numerous requests for clarification.
Kris, thanks. Point taken.
Take your shit elsewhere....
Sorry you feel that way. It was never my intention to force my views on anyone I mainly wanted to learn more about why athiests think the way they do, and engage in discussion. But I guess the posts are getting more and more along the lines of yours, Ninja chickens and all. So I will comply with your request.
Thanks to everyone who did engage with me, it was helpful.
The only way there can be change for the better in a society is if people are encouraged to try to understand each other, and the most socially reprehensible and irresponsible thing you can ever do is discourage that in the few people who are cognitively developed enough to do it.
That might well be the most sane thing I have read on this website so far. Thanks!
Qn: If there were two universes, one with an invisible ninja chicken fluent in French, and the other without, which one would you want to live in and why?
Qn: If scientific theory began to support the existence of an invisible ninja chicken fluent in French (more than atheism) would you change your position (like Antony Flew)?
Try really hard to avoid answers like: 'mmmm .... barbecued chicken would hit the spot right now.'
Qn: Would you describe your position as "There definitely is no invisible ninja chicken fluent in French" or "Naturalism does not need a French-speaking being and so an invisible ninja chicken fluent in French is improbable" or something else?
hahaha dude, you are seriously hilarious
you just made my minute :D
Clever counter-argument. Only the creationists will never understand why!!