Wilso wrote:real life wrote:young_thinker wrote:......... I think it is the strongest base that religiousman has to attack an aethiest.
Well, even assuming the Big Bang occurred ( a ' scientific miracle' occurring, as you termed it), the obvious question is:
where did the matter and energy that interacted in the Big Bang come from?
And you say it must be god, for lack of any other explanation. The typical theist cop-out.
He at least gives an answer. An answer you don't approve? Then what is your answer? Please do not give the typical atheist cop-out.
Is it a cop out to admit ignorance and seek the truth, or to deny ignorance and invent the truth?
Barticus, I really did not want to give credence to what you have said by responding to it, but I will. We are talking about Calcutta, man. We are not talking about the family who has to shop in Target instead of Neiman Marcus. We are talking about unspeakable poverty. We are talking about people unable to properly feed and clothe their families.
Have you done more for these than Mother Theresa in your mind?
Phoenix,
Let me ask a question. Knowing the conditions these people were in do you feel they had any responsibility in not producing children? I am not against birth control. I am just wondering if you think these people had any responsibility at all in not having children?
Bartikus wrote:Wilso wrote:real life wrote:young_thinker wrote:......... I think it is the strongest base that religiousman has to attack an aethiest.
Well, even assuming the Big Bang occurred ( a ' scientific miracle' occurring, as you termed it), the obvious question is:
where did the matter and energy that interacted in the Big Bang come from?
And you say it must be god, for lack of any other explanation. The typical theist cop-out.
He at least gives an answer. An answer you don't approve? Then what is your answer? Please do not give the typical atheist cop-out.
An answer that falls back on the tripe of faith, to explain whatever science hasn't yet broken through. I'm going to wind up as crazy as you pack of nut jobs if I don't stop reading this garbage.
Doktor S wrote:Is it a cop out to admit ignorance and seek the truth, or to deny ignorance and invent the truth?
Seeking the truth is never a cop out. Removing the possibility of God as being the explanation without knowing.....is.
Who can invent truth?
Truth, as accepted by billions, has been invented a thousand times over.
That it is not truthful does not seem to dissuade the adherents.
Arguing the "big bang" and creation is garbage, Wilso's got that straight.
Occam's razor destroys the creation argument. Ironic, too, as William of Occam was a christian scholar.
The theist contention that god created the universe can be questioned by demanding to know who created god. Inevitably, no matter how the theist squirms, they end by asserting that god is eternal. Applying Occam's razor, one then asks why the universe itself cannot be eternal, thus eliminating the middle man.
Evangelicals go positively whacko over the "big bang," it's one of their biggest [/i]bete noirs[/i].
Entia non sunt multiplicanda . . .
I don't know of there is a god, but a god is not logically necessary.
As for 'removing the possibility of god'
Have YOU removed the possibility of reincarnation?
Or of being a brain in a vat?
Have you removed the possibility that the bhagavad gita is literal truth?
go forth and multiply said to the most diseased, dibilitated and over-populated nation on earth. Teresa inhanced the suffering of all she touched, especially the children. (all in gods name of course)
"In my unpopular opinion, Mother Teresa, notwithstanding her undoubtedly good intentions, did nothing to make the world a better place in any lasting sense. It is absolutely true that she would have relieved more suffering by handing out contraceptive pills to women burdened by too many pregnancies than by telling them they must accept god's will that using contraception is a mortal sin. It seems to me that Mother Teresa was more accepting of others' suffering and death than her own. When she became ill she went into an expensive clinic, and when she had to decide whether to have surgery to save her life she retired to pray and--surprise--came back with the answer from god that she should have it. Mother Teresa never asked why the poor were poor. She never protested about about the huge extremes of wealth and poverty in the country in which she worked. She never became angry. Yet even jesus christ became angry when he found the money changers in the temple. Mother teresa was agood woman; but her world view and her religious dogmatism, like that of her friend and mentor the pope, belongs to another time. It belongs to a time when the moral imperative was to go forth and multiply , to populate the earth. The moral imperative today is to slow world population. Overpopulation is the most seriuos problem for India as awhole, and the greatest cause of ill-health and misery for individual Indian women."
Well argued dyslexia and Phoenix.
The fact that Mussolini allegedly got the trains to run on time implied nothing about the macro-effects of fascism, even if it briefly impressed the locals.
Individual acts of humanitarian selflessness occur throughout the world on a daily basis and go largely unreported. They do not require "faith" as a prerequisite. Indeed those who are conscious of even a whiff of "martyrdom" or "sainthood" can hardly be said to be acting entirely selflessly.
Over-population causes war, famine, disease and de-humanization as there is a fight over scarce resources with huge appetite and demands from a frightful over-populated human society. The starved society inevitably sinks to an animalistic state where genocide, cannibalism and thievery abound.
When the freaks and the nut jobs prove to me that the Easter bunny doesn't exist, then I'll prove that god doesn't exist.
That's how ridiculous such requests are!
"?