emotional

Oh my God. Rational questions again. When I have stated time and again that I'm not a rational person.

Once and for all: I believe in God an in life after death because I want to, not because there's any good evidence or logic for it.

scombrid

Feeble-minded man might not be able to concieve a perfect replicator but an omnipotent and omniscient god surely could. That is unless he intended that evolution occur along with the pitfalls associated with the imperfect replication that is necessary for evolution to occur as observed. Shoot, that omni-god could conceive of an imperfect replicator that results in evolution without the suffering born of grievous errors. I can't really imagine it, but I'm not all knowing or the creator of everything.

Kvalhion

One thing we all have to deal with in life, regardless of religious belief, is the fact that there are some things we simply will never know. Whether it's how life and the universe began, who committed a murder, how a particular magic trick was performed, etc, the answers to some things will remain forever unknown.

Of course, there are several ways to deal with this fact. You can assume an answer and live as if the assumed answer is fact. You can develop a best idea given enough evidence that supports it. You can also merely shrug your shoulders and let mystery be mystery.

The religious perspective strikes me as the kind that must have answers for nearly everything. They frame reality like a coin that has heads on both sides, then flip it and act surprised when heads shows up time and time again. This perspective is never really challenged, it is only affirmed. That is how two completely opposite things can both be attributed to how great the assumed god is. Personally, if it makes people happy to live in an unfalsifiable fantasy, that's great. However, please don't assume I am a part of it or that I wish to be.

Science, of course, consists of methods for gathering evidence and methods for evaluating that evidence. We may not know things from science "for sure", but we have a pretty good idea and are continually evaluating and verifying the truths science provides.

As for letting mystery be mystery, as an atheist I am quite content to live this way. I do not have to know the particulars of how life began, of what happens after death, of who killed JFK, of what the future holds, etc, to find meaning and happiness in my life. I can and do appreciate the wonder and beauty of nature even if I do not understand the minute details of what nature is comprised of. I appreciate and enjoy mystery, even if I do not eventually discover the answers to everything I am mystified about. While I do continually search for more knowledge, I do not let the things I will likely never know rule and control me. I certainly do not let others exploit the desire for knowledge by deciding for me what I should and should not believe.

All I would suggest is find what works best for you and respect the right of others to believe differently.

Roland98

This entire thread makes me want to cry. From the OP suggesting that atheists don't see anything of beauty in the world, or any significance to life, to those horrible pics, to the attempt to reconcile them with the idea of a loving God. If I were a mother to one of those babies, and some crackpot Christian tried to "console" me with a line about Jesus' suffering, I would punch them right in the mouth. What a load of horseshit.

Biff the unclean

Could a mistake proof world have been created so that the human genome with its billions of variables would never ere in transmission. No scientist could envision such an error-free system in our world of fixed physical laws
That is because scientists are dealing with reality. These errors are unavoidable, not only unavoidable but they are the motive force behind evolution.
What we Atheists are asking you to do is to compare your story of a god that you declare is reality against observable reality. Put it to the test. Because your story doesn't stop after you declare that there is a god. It also includes gods powers and abilities and his likes and dislikes. Some of these attributes are perfection and compassion which you do not see reflected in this mistake riddled world.

I'm sure the CS Lewis book…
I can never understand what Christian Brit's see in Lewis. I've read several of his books and find his thinking muddled and heavily flawed and his writing style ponderous and almost unreadable.

To view each person as precious in God's eyes because they have been created in his image, that is, with a spirit also helps me in this area.
I can almost hear an audible "CLICK" as your friend's brain switches off.
Would you let a person, say your baby, who is precious in your eyes come to harm if you could help it? Of course you wouldn't, you would do everything in your power to prevent it.
But according to his job profile god is "Almighty" meaning he has the power to do anything.
However when we compare observable reality to this claim we do not see this claim confirmed.

(Baby)Archie was deaf, had a gruesome cleft pallet and had no eyes, only empty sockets.
If you as an ordinary person were given the power to prevent this happening to this poor baby would you save him?
The god story says that god has this power, yet the child wasn't saved.
Many commented on how they knew Archie would be loved and cared for as a gift from God, and how they couldn't imagine better parents for him than Paula and Adrian. This has proved to be the case
I find this a completely heartless and mindless thing to say. Not only is Archie's life a horror, Paula and Adrian's lives, because they love him, are ruined too.

If I believed each person was only a physical being, then for those with any sort of disability, there is no hope.
Then your friend goes on to discount physical suffering. He's a sick bastard. I suggest you find some new friends, one's who have respect for human dignity.

All suffer physically to some degree or other. But, it's temporal - the spirit is eternal and can live for ever in bliss...
Take a tour of the London Dungeon sometime. All of those horrible instruments of torture you'll see there are left over from the golden age of Christianity. The sentiments that your "friend" is expressing is what made them all possible.

Mike, there's an invitation here for you "To him who is thirsty I will give to drink without cost from the spring of the water of life."
Mike, here's a warning to you. Don't let your baby anywhere near this heartless person.

God is not immune from suffering. Jesus choose to die the most gruesome death for you.
CHOOSE, he CHOOSE
He didn't chose just to forgive you, as you would for anyone you were forgiving.
He didn't chose to forgive you by doing something pleasant like having an ice cream soda or taking a sacred vacation in Hawaii.
He didn't chose to die in his sleep after a long rewarding life
Jesus choose to die the most gruesome death for you.
Jesus choose, nobody forced him, gruesome death, to save you. To save you from what? To save you from god's punishment. To save you from god.

This is sick. The god this story is about is a monster. What kind of sick person would believe something like this?

The photo you showed was indeed horrible. Please take time to imagine these images, painted prophetically by the Psalmist & Isaiah, of Jesus who chose to suffer and die for you...
That baby didn't chose it's lot nor did poor little Archie

As I've said before, I cannot be sure of all the questions you pose....However, I do know that Jesus endured this for you.. Of this I am sure.
This guy really deserves a punch in the nose. His disdain of human suffering is unspeakable. The god he describes from the bible quotes he chooses is a psychopathic monster.

Queen of Swords

Regarding children with severe deformities, my parents had a friend whose daughter was born with profound mental retardation and certain physical handicaps as well. Even though the girl's parents are christians, they do not consider her a gift, unless you define "gift" as "someone who will stay in a stagnant and unresponsive state for decades, requiring constant attention and a great deal of money, and in the process making the lives of the family almost unbearable". If this is the kind of "gift" that the Christian god hands out, I can only imagine what it does when it doesn't like you.

Marduk

“If god is totally "hands off" with living people why should you expect him to become "hands on" with dead ones? In other words why would a god who didn't care enough about us to help us while we were alive even provide an after life at all?”

This one is easy, because you are dead a lot longer than you are alive. Essentially your living years equal 0% of your existence so they are irrelevant. Divide your age at death by infinity, = 0%
What do I win?

Doctor X

Wow!

Whispers:

First, just for the record, I am not accusing you of "making things up." I was just making a point that I did not care. I did not take any offense with your openning post, but I can understand why others did--some have used such tactics. So . . . if I was wrong, I just made the point I did not care.

I have to agree with the "sense of the board" here that your friend is a fool--perhaps a well-meaning fool. On another board, I happened to read the story of a person who moved from fundamentalism to atheism--his regrets were for the people he hurt--homosexuals, non-Christians--and, in a way, he cannot hate fundamentalists because he use to think that way.

So . . . no, perhaps you should not punch out your friend.

Your friend, the writer you quote, and everyone here seems to recognize the problem that an omniscient, omnipotent and loving deity cannot exist based on what we know about reality--the cases presented here. There are many "horrors" in the world, but people can try to "explain them."

Why did the Holocaust happen? Well . . . "bad men" and, rest assured, they are all being punished--with . . . like pokers and mandatory square dancing and stuff. . . .

Whom do you blame for birth defects--well, unfortunately--some do blame the parents--whether or not any evidence exists.

This is why I often choose the example I use--it is resistent to ridiculous post hoc analysis.

Now you, your friend, everyone, is stuck.

Some people beat on emotional--for good reason . . . have you seen how he dresses? Do you know he is a fan of "Lilith Fair?"--for essentially being an "atheist" who believes in an afterlife. Actually, as he admits above, he just wants one.

Well fine! Big deal! I can understand that. In a way, I almost envy it! Just as it is unseemly to come to a board to "convert" people to, say, Christianity, it is unseemly to try to "ruin" others.

I do not want either atheists or Jehovah's Witnesses on my doorstep on an early morning . . . unless they are nubile blonds and brunnettes . . . all between the ages of sixteen and [Get on with it!--Ed.]

Right, I think your comment:

I perfectly reasonable.

It is more comforting to believe that someone "died for your sins" that a Big Daddy somewhere cares and Auntie Zelda, whom you loved exists in a great place where you can meet her again . . . but not horrid Auntie Prudence . . . who smelled of linement . . . she is "someplace else!"

The problem is that it creates problems. I recall the Mr. Klass reacting rather angrily at suggestions that finding Susan Smart alive was a "miracle." Did his daughter and all of the children never found "not deserve" the same mercy? Did her parents love her more?

Leaving the comfort leaves what I think is a greater horror--that someone out there cares enough to hurt you. Cares enough to be capricious.

Instead, enjoy what you have. Recognize the fortune of it. Accept your responsibility for the problems you create in your life as well as the good. Understand that somethings cannot be made better and, unless someone starts funding research better, we are all mortal.

--J.D.

winstonjen

You just answered your own question - they like the bible, don't they?