Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Which Would You Personally Prefer...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Which Would You Personally Prefer...

    1. To be created by amoral, non-rational forces of nature, or...

    2. To be created by a rational, morally good Being?

    I'm not asking if you believe or not in a god, but which scenario would you prefer, and perhaps why...
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

  • #2
    2.
    One would make it impossible for me to trust my own thoughts.
    sigpic

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by TheWall View Post
      2.
      One would make it impossible for me to trust my own thoughts.
      That is what CS Lewis says: “Supposing there was no intelligence behind the universe, no creative mind. In that case, nobody designed my brain for the purpose of thinking. It is merely that when the atoms inside my skull happen, for physical or chemical reasons, to arrange themselves in a certain way, this gives me, as a by-product, the sensation I call thought. But, if so, how can I trust my own thinking to be true? It's like upsetting a milk jug and hoping that the way it splashes itself will give you a map of London. But if I can't trust my own thinking, of course I can't trust the arguments leading to Atheism, and therefore have no reason to be an Atheist, or anything else. Unless I believe in God, I cannot believe in thought: so I can never use thought to disbelieve in God.”
      Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

      Comment


      • #4
        I think a lot of people would say #1 because otherwise they are morally responsible for their actions to their creator.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Sparko View Post
          I think a lot of people would say #1 because otherwise they are morally responsible for their actions to their creator.
          I wonder, following what Wall said - if they would generally trust their reasoning abilities more if they were created by a rational Being rather than non-rational forces?
          Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

          https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

          Comment


          • #6
            I am going to go with 2 as well (not surprisingly).

            In my mind, I don't believe that creation can just be an accident. To me that just doesn't make any sense at all.

            Comment


            • #7
              Number 2 for me. I like order.

              Comment


              • #8
                2, because I could not imagine coming to terms with ultimate mortality under 1. It is well noted that Woody Allen and Larry King, both atheists, have opened up about being terrified of death.

                I don't get the point of the question, though. Personal preferences have no bearing on what is true.
                Last edited by KingsGambit; 03-07-2018, 05:41 PM.
                "I am not angered that the Moral Majority boys campaign against abortion. I am angry when the same men who say, "Save OUR children" bellow "Build more and bigger bombers." That's right! Blast the children in other nations into eternity, or limbless misery as they lay crippled from "OUR" bombers! This does not jell." - Leonard Ravenhill

                Comment


                • #9
                  Number 2 is obviously preferable. It opens up the pleasant possibility of a nice afterlife.

                  Sadly the God of the bible is morally atrocious (hell, genocides, etc) and so obviously doesn't fit #2. He's #3:
                  3. To be created by an irrational, vengeful, unjust being.

                  Number 1 is probably preferable in general to #3, but #2 is preferable to #1.
                  "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                  "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                  "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                    I think a lot of people would say #1 because otherwise they are morally responsible for their actions to their creator.
                    I have never in my life heard that view put forward by any atheist. I see zero reason to believe that anyone actually thinks like that and I think you're just making up a completely silly idea.


                    Originally posted by TheWall View Post
                    One would make it impossible for me to trust my own thoughts.
                    You often seem to have strange views, so I'd generally recommend against trusting your thoughts.

                    I have to say I've neither thought this argument was convincing in the slightest. Obviously beings capable of accurate thinking have an evolutionary advantage over beings not capable of it, so evolution inherently favors it. An intelligent creator, on the other hand, could decide to create rational beings, or irrational beings, or anything in between, depending on his whims, and so is zero guarantee our thoughts or our world would be rational. So, if anything, the argument works the other way - an intelligent creator being is capable of intentionally deceiving us, whereas the process of evolution isn't going to set out to intentionally deceive us.
                    "I hate him passionately", he's "a demonic force" - Tucker Carlson, in private, on Donald Trump
                    "Every line of serious work that I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, against totalitarianism and for democratic socialism" - George Orwell
                    "[Capitalism] as it exists today is, in my opinion, the real source of evils. I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy" - Albert Einstein

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by seer View Post
                      1. To be created by amoral, non-rational forces of nature, or...

                      2. To be created by a rational, morally good Being?

                      I'm not asking if you believe or not in a god, but which scenario would you prefer, and perhaps why...
                      It makes no difference. How we got here is insignificant compared to the fact that here we are. Paying attention to that is the whole point of our existence.
                      “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
                      “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
                      “not all there” - you know who you are

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Starlight View Post
                        Number 2 is obviously preferable. It opens up the pleasant possibility of a nice afterlife.

                        Sadly the God of the bible is morally atrocious (hell, genocides, etc) and so obviously doesn't fit #2. He's #3:
                        3. To be created by an irrational, vengeful, unjust being.

                        Number 1 is probably preferable in general to #3, but #2 is preferable to #1.
                        It is true that your warped version of the God of the Bible is morally atrocious. The problem is that your version has no relationship to the real description of the creator in the Bible.
                        Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          BTW The idea that non-living substance and forces of nature are creative is incorrect. That implies intention and there is none until life begins.
                          “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
                          “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
                          “not all there” - you know who you are

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by KingsGambit View Post
                            2, because I could not imagine coming to terms with ultimate mortality under 1. It is well noted that Woody Allen and Larry King, both atheists, have opened up about being terrified of death.

                            I don't get the point of the question, though. Personal preferences have no bearing on what is true.
                            Do you think your beliefs are motivated by your inability to come to term with death under 1?

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
                              BTW The idea that non-living substance and forces of nature are creative is incorrect. That implies intention and there is none until life begins.
                              Fine...

                              To me it is absurd to think that the universe and beings that can contemplate our own existence exist just because.

                              To quote the great Trey Parker:

                              "Basically… out of all the ridiculous religion stories which are greatly, wonderfully ridiculous—the silliest one I've ever heard is, 'Yeah… there's this big giant universe and it's expanding, it's all gonna collapse on itself and we're all just here just 'cause… just 'cause'. That, to me, is the most ridiculous explanation ever."

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by whag, Yesterday, 03:01 PM
                              39 responses
                              155 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post whag
                              by whag
                               
                              Started by whag, 03-17-2024, 04:55 PM
                              21 responses
                              129 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                              Started by whag, 03-14-2024, 06:04 PM
                              80 responses
                              426 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post tabibito  
                              Started by whag, 03-13-2024, 12:06 PM
                              45 responses
                              303 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                              Working...
                              X