Somebody here mentioned couple of times the "footprints" of god. When I asked for him to be more specific, I received no reply. Either he missed my request or he knows that I will give him a very hard time. In this context, I thought to myself: ok, what the heck, I go first then. I will not show what I consider to be "footprints" of god. Instead, I will show footprints of why I consider god to be the greatest scam in human history, and I will call them "dilemmas". Instead of posting all the dilemmas that I can think of (quiet much actually) at once, I will keep posting them in short batches provided that there is a nice discussion that will follow... All dilemmas altogether are solved very elegantly if one simply assumes: " god is the greatest scam in the history of the universe! ". If not, then long exhausting and probably insufficient explanations will be required. My favorite one is: "god's ways are greater than you and your small thinking ", but correct me if i'm wrong. Dilemma NO. 1 god exists. it always existed. Not muslims, Not Christians, Not Jews, Not hindus invented him. God existed even before history in million shapes and colors. here is a scientific theory about that, which is in short: "god already resides within our brains from the moment that we are born. We are ready to accept it, and do it in a very natural way". But this is not enough for me. I think that there is another thing to say about that. The monotheistic theological approach to explain the millions of gods is known to every school boy: people invented unreal gods out of their imaginations, but then the "real god" showed up and delivered his message. But, at the same time, the same people believe that the same god created these people and controlled what they do and think. This basically means that he suffers from a severe psychological disturbance: he makes them invent stupid gods, sits in heaven with a glass of beer and watches them pray to statues animals sun and moon for thousands of years, and then one day he decides: "ok, enough with the prank, lets show them who I really am". So he goes down to moses, tells him to start a new people. Later, he gives this people the bible, which is written in Hebrew. But wait, it gets even more absurd. God is not satisfied again with the creatures he created. So he sends jesus to humanity, to deliver a bible in the Koine Greek language. It is enough? no way. God gets pissed off again. He sends Mohammed to humanity, to deliver another bible. This time, the bible is written in Arabic. And lets not forget that all of this happened not before he already destroyed all of humanity with the rain... God, what's your thing with the languages? why not pick one language or stick with it? Kinda looks suspicious that god always picks to use the language of the culture which is the world's dominant at the time, no? Its like being a fan of a football team only if u're sure they'll make it to the super bowl. Or maybe, just maybe, god is always reinvented by the dominant culture of the time? Oh wait, the world's most dominant culture of today just invented another religion. Do we see a pattern here? and please dear Jews Christians and Muslims, please don't tell me that your religions make more sense Dilemma NO. 2 All modern religions claim that humans have a "soul". In services and sermons, the human body consists of two important constituents: the heart and the soul, and some other minor organs like eyes or ears as decoration. It is pretty rare (if not impossible) to hear the word "brain" in synagogues and churches. As if the brain is not what makes as what we are. Religious people say, that our ability to think, to engage in social life, to care for other human beings and creatures, to mourn the dead and above all: to be self aware, which animals do not poses, are due to the existence of a "soul". There we get to the dilemma: Elephants like art. They mourn their dead. They are altruistic. They have a complex social structure and they are VERY self aware. source According to judaism Christianity and Islam, does elephants have a soul? if we pick them up with us on the way to church on sunday, will they make it to "heaven"? Dilemma NO. 3 A few days ago I had to visit Bnei-Brak. Travelling in the city with my car it become apparent to me that among the men I see in the city, the ratio of men with glasses is higher than what I would see in Tel-Aviv, at home. I don't have the statistics, but just by walking the streets it was obvious that this is the case. The explanation for it is simple as well: Bnei Brak is an orthodox jewish city. (most of the) Orthodox jews do not work, they study vast amount of jewish scriptures instead. The women go to work and if it is not enough to make a living, my hard earned tax money unwilligly covers the rest..... Orthodox jews spend more time in front of books, and this is why the ratio of people with glasses is higher. Everybody knows that reading too much or siting in front of the computer for too long harms you vision. The reason is simple: our eye lense is built in a way in which in the "relaxed" mode, the focal length of the lense falls on the vision nervs, and the light beams focus there. When objects get closer, the light beam fall slightly away. In order not to see things blur, we need to contract the muscle and shift the focal lense forward to correct for this. This action wary and damages the muscle. Or, in simple words: our eyes are created to see for a large distance (1.5m and above), and not closer. But that's a bit weird, no? In all religions, god expects humans to read his books. At the same time, he creates eyes which are unsuitable for reading. Is he a sadist? Or maybe our eyes simply evolved in order to allow us to spot georgeous looking babes and warn us if a hungry lion is around, and not for reading of "holy books"? So, what do you think guys? Anybody can settle the dilemmas with something that makes more sense than "you will never understand god". Any "footprints" that suggest god's existence posted would also be appreciated, I promise that me and the other atheists around will do our best to dismiss them Cheers
Chaos, Ive allready debunked too many atheists (the latest being logicflux and stox) on too many issues of god. How many times must I do this? Today youll find a little of this and a little of that. Tomorrow you will find something else to nitpick. What I am still trying to understand is why you are even asking this considering your an israeli atheist? This term just doesnt kick in with me????????? How can you go against your own religion when you fully know that it is because of judaism that you even have a chance to live in israel. My mind is totally boggled loooooooooooool. As far as your question, I think I have proven myself enough to let someone else take this. Mossadegh took all day to debunk logicflux. I cant do it all by myself. Im not god you know
I like how you presented this Chaos, and yes, G-d may be the greatest scam in the history of the universe... It's funny though, I've started thinking this way to a higher degree, from hanging out on DP. I've considered myself as an agnostic, but with the position that the existence of G-d is possible. That's still true, and yet, I find myself leaning more towards atheism as time goes by. Dilemma 2 I think, relates to the believing of scripture, no matter if it seems ludicrous, or even contrary to common sense. It's about having blind faith in what is written in an old book, above and beyond your own judgement and reasoning. The greatest footprint in my opinion, may be dilemma 3, it does not disprove G-d, but it indicates that if one does exist, it is fallible, incompetent, uncaring, evil, or cruel. That idea seems to be supported by religious text that speaks of slavery, rape, and murder.
I love the name of your post: "some dilemmas I have with god". - As they are with God, why not ask Him to sort them out for you? - I know it would take courage. Do you have the guts to do it?
Nice! But how do we convince people that this is not the right thing what they are doing and it may not be appropriate to the rest. I think we need to have a more proper way to do that suggestion. LOL... I'm sure most of them will not acknowledge this statement of yours. It's partially correct. I can tell you that much for sure. Hmm... Some people believe in that. There are evidences to prove that it is the other way. But then, it is again debatable. Religion and god in itself are debated here. So, we cannot explain it conclusively and convincingly for others. however, I liked your point to an extent.
hehe Scan my 800 posts, and you will never find me saying that I am a follower of the jewish. I do not consider myself to be jewish, but rather as a Nihilist, which is 1 step beyond atheist. an atheist is one who say: "I don't believe", a Nihilist is one who say: "I am convinced that its all BS, a great scam" . Pingpong, you are not alone there. It is also very likely to hear that "I am jewish" from random people I meet on the street. This is the most annoying thing about religious people: they tag you. Everybody must be tagged into some kind of religion, makes to world look simple. In this context lets not forget that 99.99% of the followers of ANY religion of the world did not pick their religion. They did not went on to do years of research and studies before they thought: "hey! this religion makes a lot of sense!". Instead, they were tagged, this time by their parents and/or school, and in such an early age that the irreversible damage has been done and they can't just click "untag". Regarding Israel and judaism, we had a small conversation about that already and I hope I clarified couple of your questions, but Israel is not the topic of this thread so we'll leave it for some other time. I call you to join my army of salvation. My goal is that in 300 years time, religions will exist only in the history text books. It is a very ambitious goal, I know, mainly because believing in nonsense and making zany rituals that make absolutely no sense is imprinted in our most basic nature: It is actually pretty obvious that humans needed religion to survive! we did it since 15,000 years. It is a by-product of our over sophisticated cognitive brain. But society managed to reduce (and even outlaw) other phenomena which are integral within us like rape (on my to-read list, still controversial though), so there are good prospects for the future. Does he answer emails or have a fax number? how can I contact him? I would love to get explicit answers for my dilemmas, as his followers are giving none so far. We should start by convincing people simply to use their common sense, and not about "right" or "wrong". The goal is: ASK THE QUESTIONS THAT EVERYBODY WHO HAS A BRAIN MUST ASK. And if you can't ask then, I do it for you in this thread. Dilemma NO. 4 Women. וַיֹּ×מֶר יְהוָה ×ֱלֹהִי×, לֹ×-טוֹב הֱיוֹת ×”Ö¸×Ö¸×“Ö¸× ×œÖ°×‘Ö·×“Ö¼×•Ö¹; ×ֶעֱשֶׂה-לּוֹ עֵזֶר, ×›Ö°Ö¼× Ö¶×’Ö°×“Ö¼×•Ö¹. in the old testament, in free translation: "and god said: man is lonely, that's not good. I will create something for him to be against him" (look for better old-testament translations.... ) When I read this, I think that god didn't say to himself: "I need to figure something out so that man could reproduce", after all, this is the main thing that tell men and women apart, no?. Our gracious god said to himself instead: "Poor man, he is lonely, lets make him a pet". But that's not the main dilemma. The main dilemma is this: It is not written at any point that women are less capable of thinking. As a matter of fact, in the western world as well as the less advanced parts of the world, women are a majority among university students. But in the anti-thesis of university, religions, women are considered as having inferior ability to think - so inferior, that there are no "preistesses", "rabinesses", and "sheikhnesses" - at all. It is even worse. It is not just that they are incapable of thinking straight - god just don't like them. He never talks with "prophetess", but always male prophets. In all religions without exception, god likes men, and don't like women too much..... couldn't he at least make all other men on earth like men and leave all the women for myself? , which leads me to Dilemma NO. 5 Dilemma NO. 5 Homosexuality. In all major religions, homosexuality is one of the greatest sins. on the other hand, god created homosexuals. They exist in all cultures, in all periods of history, they come from all layers of society: from the simplest poeple to kings and queens. Religion people like to say: "homosexuality is not natural". This is not backed by science: Recent studies show that homosexuality is genetic source. However, they are not conclusive and beyond doubt. Nonetheless, everybody who has a little brain and life experience would know that people don't just decide to be gays, either they are born with it, or they acquire it in the very early non-adult stages of their life, which can be effectively considered as from birth. And besides!! religious guru's, use some common sense !! If you find gay sex repulsive, you should know that I find it repulsive too. And this is EXACTLY why I think that gays were born like that, and did not acquire it in some evening seminar.... humans are not the only animals in which exhibit homosexual behavior (source1, source2) Why ban the existence of gays which you created? The sadistic characteristics of our glorious god again.
yet. you insist for a jewish isreal Ali (The 4th righteous Caliph) said that God is the Master, and man is His servant. It is open to the Master to put the servant to test, but it does not behoove the servant to put the master to test. Ali added: "If we put God to any test, that means our lack of faith, and when faith is lost, everything is lost." He is the Master, He choses with whom He talks He Also created all the creatures, the Animals , the Plants Now next time you will complain that why God does not talk to Monkeys? God Also created the murderers the rapists , the also exist in all cultures Why don't we also start taking the desire to murder to kill and destroy others as "natural instinct" ?
God must then be a self centered egotistical bastard with an inferiority complex, but what else could be expected if he/she/it spent all eternity less 6,000 years or so alone. Enough to make any god go mad.
Chaos, I understand that you havent said that but I have a hard time understanding why you say you believe in zionism and your not jewish(in the religious sense) because the glue foundation of all zionism is based on religion. The fact that you are living in israel also is because of your countrymens religion. You keep saying zionism is a nationalistic movement, but everyone on earth, even jewish people themselves know its a religious movement. The fact that your israeli, and atheist and posting from israel is like saying that stox believes that hitchens can write books professionally and logicflux knows iranian recent history. Its like a total contradiction to believe in the movement you believe in and call yourself an atheist. As far as this having nothing to do with the subject, on the contrary it has everything to do with the subject. I think atheists are just a bit confused about many things. Ill give you another example of why im confused about atheists: Christopher hitchens says that saddam hussen is a tyrant and we were correct in invading iraq in 2003, yet in 1976 he almost glorified the man even a year after amnesty international told of his atrocities and in the first gulf war , he still believed saddam was a tyrant yet was against going to war with iraq even though he JUST INVADED KUWAIT!!!! I really believe that most extremist atheists who want to make the world one big despot of atheism forced on us are just as dangerous as far right religious nutcases. They both have the same extreme goal, except extreme atheists disguise it with a little bit of logic. SAME EMPEROR, DIFFERENT CLOTHING.
Or, In other words, Homosexuals == murderers and rapists ............. ................. ..................... what kind of miseducation a person need to absorb in order to be able to write a horrible, middle-age-thinking thing like this? even more sadly, this is definitely not a first for new......
since you think that being homo comes naturally so should be ok, so all other things that come natuarlly should also be OK?
Yes. I say that everything that comes naturally should be OK. Everybody who did receive worthy education as a child should also know by common sense that I also mean to add: "as long as it does not hurt anybody", which IS the difference between homosexuals and murders, and is why I brought up homosexuals, and not murderers in first place. You never stop amazing me..... with your horrible lack of intellect. Please new, spare us, lets try to make this a topic with a touch of theology, philosophy, and science. I don't want it to turn into "an introduction to the basics of western thinking of the early victorian era", especially for you. Go back to the George washington thread.
Those who commit murders also think that they are "not hurting anybody" and think it justified , same with homos they think it is justified and their need, whereas it isn't No, I also have to put the atheists (and so called atheists like you) on the right path
Plenty of people claim they speak to God. We accept them in our society and deal with them every day. It's the ones who claim they get answers back that we either : A) Lock up them up in a mental institution. B) Allow them to lead a congregation of believers. The line between being a crazy person and a religious leader is fine indeed. It basically just boils down to how many people you can get to believe/follow you.
George, we have extremists on both sides, the drunken leader of the extreme atheistic movement christopher hitchens is just one of them. That guy is a super kook.
Hitchens is no leader. He is just one idiot. Why are you trying to link all atheists to one man? He is just that, one man. You seem to care about him far more than atheists do. Your fixation is not healthy - it is bizarre.
It s not just me that is calling him a leader. Most of the neo-atheistic movement is calling him a leader brown. You are an atheist so you should be keeping up with the movement. What do they call him? One of the 4 horsemen of atheism. Its good that you acknowledged that he is an idiot. Now try telling that to stox. and by the way Galloway crushed hitchens in his debate as I saw half of it. It tells me something about these new agressive ,judgmental atheists . If they have a leader like this then that movement is in serious trouble lol. Brown, its funny that you cant see the obsession with your atheist buddies here, yet I just started posting on hitchens and yet I am the one with the fixation. So much for the unbiased reasoning and logic of the extreme atheist posters
I am a one man group. Nobody speaks for me. If you want trash people for bringing up Hitchens, go right ahead, but your issues with him are personal and have nothing to do with atheism.