DEBATE: Thunderf00t VS. Gman! Atheist VS. Creationist! (DP)

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

The way I see it, good can exist without evil within its own scale. If every action is good, the question is not whether it's good, but how good it is. God is the source of all good and empowers us to do greater good deeds.

 

Nobody is capable of doing actions that they consider wrong, they just do the right thing based on what they consider the right thing to be, and others who disagree call them wrong, bad, evil, etc because they have different notions of what the right actions are. But in God's eyes, everything is good because he created it knowing the ultimate good because he's omniscient, so people that use terms like wrong, bad, evil, etc do so because they don't understand the goodness in whatever it is they are calling bad.

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

So in your mind, rapists, and murderers will not and should not be punished because they are not evil in God's eyes?

I don't want to live in that kind of world, simple as that. So I'm sorry but you'll never be able to change my idea on it.

[Aix]

Not sure if troll, but some of what you said can be taken as some sort of debate argument.

Rather than spending hours trying a moral debate, which is another topic entirely, I'll take the logic approach which much more relevant. You can't just say that kind of thing, you can't just say "there's something out there that we can't possibly comprehend" because there's no proof of it and all the proof against. True, we logically cannot completely disprove it, just like we can't disprove that there are magical dancing unicorn princesses who are invisible, leave no traces and can't be perceived by any method yet known to man. All the proof we have points to that, unless there's some really abnormal circumstances involved, stuff like rape and murder is "bad", as it is destructive and detrimental to human society, and it causes more grief than good. If you are going to say that in some incomprehensible way that it is actually good, well you have no proof and if you have any sort of rational mind, you would not make claims without proof. All evidence and past experiences of mankind points to that logical thinking is the way to go, and the only reasons it fails is due to chance or a mistake/miscalculation.

As I have said before, you are no longer speaking about any religion we have today (that I know of) if you are saying nothing is wrong/bad.

[D.A._Sakuyamon]

Not sure if troll, but some of what you said can be taken as some sort of debate argument.

Rather than spending hours trying a moral debate, which is another topic entirely, I'll take the logic approach which much more relevant. You can't just say that kind of thing, you can't just say "there's something out there that we can't possibly comprehend" because there's no proof of it and all the proof against. True, we logically cannot completely disprove it, just like we can't disprove that there are magical dancing unicorn princesses who are invisible, leave no traces and can't be perceived by any method yet known to man. All the proof we have points to that, unless there's some really abnormal circumstances involved, stuff like rape and murder is "bad", as it is destructive and detrimental to human society, and it causes more grief than good. If you are going to say that in some incomprehensible way that it is actually good, well you have no proof and if you have any sort of rational mind, you would not make claims without proof. All evidence and past experiences of mankind points to that logical thinking is the way to go, and the only reasons it fails is due to chance or a mistake/miscalculation.

As I have said before, you are no longer speaking about any religion we have today (that I know of) if you are saying nothing is wrong/bad.

Is this at me or cop?

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

So in your mind, rapists, and murderers will not and should not be punished because they are not evil in God's eyes?

I don't want to live in that kind of world, simple as that. So I'm sorry but you'll never be able to change my idea on it.

 

Only God can judge them properly, but people do so out of necessity to protect themselves and have God behind them in doing so. But I very much pity rapists and murderers because it often seems like they result from linear and desperate paths based on their conditions and had little other choice because they knew nothing else and nothing else was around to ease them into a less desperate life, as if they hadn't had as much access to God for whatever reason. I should hope that they would later on find God and his guidance in prison.

 

Since God is benevolent, all things happen for a reason though, including rapes and murders, for which only God knows the reason, hence the expression "God only knows".  

 

 

You can't just say that kind of thing, you can't just say "there's something out there that we can't possibly comprehend" because there's no proof of it and all the proof against.

 

Depends on your sources. 

 

 just like we can't disprove that there are magical dancing unicorn princesses who are invisible

 

Does it matter if His physical manifestation exists when the idea of Him alone serves to guide and empower so many people with faith?

[Aix]

Is this at me or cop?

Cop, though now that I think of it, the same sort of applies to your belief, except for the fact that there is no proof for or against parallel worlds, unless there's some physics thing out there that's against it. I don't follow developments in physics.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

Take or leave what I say, I was addressing Cow anyway.

 

As I have said before, you are no longer speaking about any religion we have today [b](that I know of)[/b] if you are saying nothing is wrong/bad.

 

Indeed.

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

Only God can judge them properly, but people do so out of necessity to protect themselves and have God behind them in doing so. But I very much pity rapists and murderers because it often seems like they result from linear and desperate paths based on their conditions and had little other choice because they knew nothing else and nothing else was around to ease them into a less desperate life, as if they hadn't had as much access to God for whatever reason. I should hope that they would later on find God and his guidance in prison.

 

Since God is benevolent, all things happen for a reason though, including rapes and murders, for which only God knows the reason, hence the expression "God only knows".  

Okay so, if God judges them, then you're admitting there are things God does that God believes is punishable, which goes against what you originally claimed.

And there are people who rape and murder who believe in God so....

 

But, your last line finishes this for me. If you really believe that I am not going to continue debating with someone who thinks rape happens for a reason. I'm done with debating with you on this, sorry that's too far for me.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

"Judge" and "punish" are two different words. If you want to believe in evil, go ahead. I find it pointless and akin to fear and pessimism really, in that nobody seeks to do wrong and in condemning them by calling them bad people you're only avoiding attempting to understand them. Besides, rapes and murders aren't made any better by happening for no reason than being predestined, they're a thing either way. 

[Aix]

I would very much like to see your source that has proof of an incomprehensible logic being logically possible.

I will not deny that faith has it's psychological benefits, but I hope that the world will someday improve and advance enough that people will no longer have to rely on illogical conclusions.

Mostly here I am presenting why I do not believe that God exists. It is wholly illogical. The time has passed when we use fairy tales to explain things.

I would like to know why you bolded my lack of knowledge of various religions. Is there actually a mainstream religion that does not enforce principles of good and evil?

[Tentacruel]

I would very much like to see your source that has proof of an incomprehensible logic being logically possible.

I will not deny that faith has it's psychological benefits, but I hope that the world will someday improve and advance enough that people will no longer have to rely on illogical conclusions.

Mostly here I am presenting why I do not believe that God exists. It is wholly illogical. The time has passed when we use fairy tales to explain things.

I would like to know why you bolded my lack of knowledge of various religions. Is there actually a mainstream religion that does not enforce principles of good and evil?

Buddhism exists. 

 

Also, since we're being honest here, this is why I think it's a bit silly when atheists QQ about being misrepresented.  

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

Mostly here I am presenting why I do not believe that God exists. It is wholly illogical. The time has passed when we use fairy tales to explain things.

 

First of all, what logic outright denies any possibility of the existence of God? Second, in the very act of denying the existence of God, you refer to Him. That, in of itself, is acknowledging His existence on one level. Of course, the same could be said for my thoughts on evil, but I acknowledge that evil exists as a concept and choose not to believe in it in the sense that I do not subscribe to it. 

 

I would like to know why you bolded my lack of knowledge of various religions. Is there actually a mainstream religion that does not enforce principles of good and evil?

 

What you may or may not know isn't my responsibility is all.

 

I would very much like to see your source that has proof of an incomprehensible logic being logically possible.

 

There was a time when religious ideas could be freely discussed without onslaughts from "logicians". Theology is its own science with a rich history, it used to be called "the Queen of the Sciences" back in its heyday and wasn't written off as "illogical". Anyway, there is much that remains a mystery to the type of inductive/deductive syllogistic reasoning that has become so dear to "logicians" nowadays, but sometimes it takes more than the eyes to see. Myths are not meant to be taken literally. They are metaphors that relate to the heart, the mind, the emotions, and general ideas rather than our physical surroundings. "Fairy tales" as you call them are vital to human understanding. By the same coin, the scientific trends of today will be the stuff of ridicule sooner than you think. 

[Tentacruel]

First of all, what logic outright denies any possibility of the existence of God? Second, in the very act of denying the existence of God, you refer to Him. That, in of itself, is acknowledging His existence on one level. Of course, the same could be said for my thoughts on evil, but I acknowledge that evil exists as a concept and choose not to believe in it in the sense that I do not subscribe to it. 

Dude, that's some pretty zen shit.

 

 

But really, I feel like the "fairy tale" bit falls in the category of some logical fallacy somewhere.

[Aix]

I'm saying it's an illogical thing to believe without evidence.

There some quote somewhere about the mark of an intelligent mind is the ability to entertain possibilities without accepting them.

Flawed concepts exist, I fail to see your point. Yes I acknowledge the concept of unicorns as well.

Fairy tales, in my context, means "stories that are not true" e.g. biblical stories. As an atheist, to me those are nothing more than stories. Yes, it is biased language as it belittles religion and may offend some. If it has, I apologize, it just slipped in. However, I'm not sure what you mean by a logical fallacy.

[Tentacruel]

I mean intentionally using belittling or biased language to undermine an opposing viewpoint.   Forgive me if I seem skeptical when you say, "I'm sorry it just slipped in." 

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

I'm saying it's an illogical thing to believe without evidence.

There some quote somewhere about the mark of an intelligent mind is the ability to entertain possibilities without accepting them.

Flawed concepts exist, I fail to see your point. Yes I acknowledge the concept of unicorns as well.

Fairy tales, in my context, means "stories that are not true" e.g. biblical stories. As an atheist, to me those are nothing more than stories. Yes, it is biased language as it belittles religion and may offend some. If it has, I apologize, it just slipped in. However, I'm not sure what you mean by a logical fallacy.

 

They were never meant to be true on a literal level. Also don't worry about the rhetoric, I've gone pretty ham with my scare quotes throughout the thread. ^____^

[Thar]

That's all that God is to me: a folk tale that I grew out of.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

Alright, respect. What did you replace Him with? 

[Aix]

Ignoring the attack on my trustworthiness, every single word, phrase or term in the English language, or any language for that matter, has connotations. If I were to analyze your phrase there, the "forgive me" puts you onto the reader's good side in a display of courtesy or it also could be interpreted as highly sarcastic and mocking which puts me down. Putting quotation marks on my phrase implies further that it is a apparently a lie. Did you notice that? However, we're not here to analyse the use of language.

They are not meant to be taken literally, then tell that to all the creationists out there saying the earth can't be billions of years old because something the Bible said. (I resisted the temptation of saying "some book" instead of the Bible.) Metaphors are fine and create a way of life, but if you tell me to believe in talking snakes, I will not. A way of life some might say is not what you call a religion. Many do not define Buddhism as a religion.

Anyway, wasn't the original topic creationism? What proofs are there of denying things like evolution?

[Thar]

Alright, respect. What did you replace Him with? 

 

Myself. As a pursuer of engineering, I intend to use the resources around me to forge my own path in life. It makes no difference to me who made them or how they got there. All that matters is that they're there to be used.

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

They are not meant to be taken literally, then tell that to all the creationists out there

 

If they want to come here then they can but I'm not going to hunt them down or anything. I'm not looking to wage any Holy Wars here. I was just talking with Cow initially since I thought it was going somewhere interesting but he bailed on me. Alackaday! 

 

 

Metaphors are fine and create a way of life, but if you tell me to believe in talking snakes, I will not.

 

[LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow]

Myself. As a pursuer of engineering, I intend to use the resources around me to forge my own path in life. It makes no difference to me who made them or how they got there. All that matters is that they're there to be used.

This is such a sensible idea, I like it. Just felt like mentioning that.

 

Also, I bailed because something you said disturbed me and I felt it was better to stop there than to continue debating and getting too upset during it as I'm wont to do

[Tentacruel]

God damn you sound pretentious.  Don't analyze the English language if you're going to immediately say we're not here to analyze the English language.   But yes, I did notice all of that.
 
No one is telling you to believe anything, but you are telling people not believe things.

 

If they want to come here then they can but I'm not going to hunt them down or anything. I'm not looking to wage any Holy Wars here.

Holy War is a good analogy.  Atheism is not a religion, but people sure as hell treat it like one.  If you actively (and aggressively) promote a belief (or lack thereof if you want to be cute about it), you're really no different than any religious person doing the same. 

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

I'm not an Atheist, but okay. Nvm that was for someone else nvm. ^^;

 

 

Myself. As a pursuer of engineering, I intend to use the resources around me to forge my own path in life. It makes no difference to me who made them or how they got there. All that matters is that they're there to be used.

 

God is a resource. :P

[Tentacruel]

Also just to clarify the part about aggressively promoting a belief or lack-thereof yadaydayada is mainly referring to the guy in the video, as we're getting back on topic.