The Flaw of Monotheism (1 Viewer)

[Bereie]

Shut up BBJ. She's Muslim and that's the real issue.

 

[ClockworkSoldier]

mate, stop acting so ethnic with your distancing yourself from the question. do yourself a favour and prove to us all that you are aussie.

Your ignorance is a demonstration of about 85% of Australia, and even the world population.

Why would someone need to "prove they are Australian"? If they are an Australian citizen, were born into the country etc. that, by law and governance means they are Aussie.

You don't have to say mate every second word when talking to someone to be Aussie. You don't need to drink yourself under the table every friday to be Aussie. You don't need to like BBQ's to be Ausse etc.

Your attitude is immature and would embarrass any self-respecting individual.

 

[17028354]

Monotheistic religion emerged about 4,000 years ago, yes?

no.

even some of the books of the old testament of judaism and christianity was COLLATED 8000, to 12 000 years ago.

 

[Phoenix Fury]

hahahaha

 

[ClockworkSoldier]

mate, no need to take this all personal.

Im just sticking up for Australian values which are incidently saying gday mate, drinking a VB and having a barbie every Saturday arvo.

Yes, I represent 85% of Australia because 85% of Australians believe in what I saw is truth.

mate, start being proud of being Aussie, mate.

No. You're sticking up for the stereotype. They aren't values, they are activities.

I'm not proud of being part of such a drugged up, unintelligent, ignorant country which you are blind to.

 

[Phoenix Fury]

No. You're sticking up for the stereotype. They aren't values, they are activities.

I'm not proud of being part of such a drugged up, unintelligent, ignorant country which you are blind to.

Sup m8?

 

[Venetiad]

no.

even some of the books of the old testament of judaism and christianity was COLLATED 8000, to 12 000 years ago.

I'd like to see some evidence for that.

Just noting that I'm highly doubtful of any form of sophisticated written language that old. Anything older than that, written (visuals, etc) or spoken can't be seriously considered as it could easily have been mis-read or changed by word of mouth.

 

[Sadiah]

mate, stop acting so ethnic with your distancing yourself from the question. do yourself a favour and prove to us all that you are aussie.

I was born in Australia. I live here.

But, I like to say I am not Aussie.

My heritage is not Australian.

Therefore, I don't need to prove anything to anyone. Thanks very much=)

 

[Sadiah]

Shut up BBJ. She's Muslim and that's the real issue.

LOL...issue?

Yes, I'm Muslim.

Anything else? What are you going to do? Act hardcore with the keyboard and say all the shyt you can about Islam and Muslims? Lol, go for it

 

[mirakon]

Let me ask a question of those that follow the main monotheistic religions here (Judaism, Christianity, Islam).

God is omnipotent, omni-benevolent and omniscient? Yes? Good.

Now whilst it is basically a fact that modern humans have been around for the past 200,000 years (that is, in our relatively current form, as opposed to earlier hominid evolution which we can trace back for millions of years before), let us operate with a minutely small assumption that they have been around for only 70,000 years.

Monotheistic religion emerged about 4,000 years ago, yes?

So for 66,000 years, God watches. He watches while humans die, mostly of simple bodily infection, with ridiculously high infant mortality rates. They probably live for perhaps 20-30 years, on average, in comparatively squalid conditions, and die in horribly painful ways. For 66,000 years God watches and does nothing. He watches as humanity suffers and toils, as thousands of generations struggle and die in such conditions, as thousands of children die before they reach the age of 3 and does absolutely nothing.

This is to say nothing of the wars and evils they will inflict upon eachother, as opposed to those they suffer by virtue of their very existence.

After 66,000 years (perhaps 62,000 to anticipate the argument that the events described in the earliest parts of the Bible constitute an intervention) of such suffering, God decides "that's enough of this, I'll fix all this up" and finally decides to intervene in the world by picking one group of people and furthering their cause to the detriment of those who once inhabited the land that he helped them violently invade (what a coincidence, those people just happened to write that book, but let's put that aside for a second).

Several thousand years later, he decides that his previous solution really won't do, and says "I'll fix this up again", essentially by offering human sacrifice in the most brutal and torturous of ways.

How fortunate that the evidence to suggest that such a ghastly dogma is true is precisely nil.

Why is it, then, that such a nonsensical ideology currently holds an inordinate amount of control over the legislative and executive governmental arms of many apparently secular nations, such as ours and the USA?

The greatest error in this is quite simple. You only account for a Biblical God. Other gods, such as a Spinozan God are different in terms of characteristics.

Just becuase you disregard a Biblical God due to lack of evidence, it doesn't automaticcally follow that there is no God.

 

[ilikebeeef]

mate, no need to take this all personal.

Im just sticking up for Australian values which are incidently saying gday mate, drinking a VB and having a barbie every Saturday arvo.

Yes, I represent 85% of Australia because 85% of Australians believe in what I saw is truth.

mate, start being proud of being Aussie, mate.

G'day mate how's it goin' mate. What d'ya like on your barbie mate. Mate, why are you so bogan mate. Mateeeeeeee.

 

[scaredytiger]

Eh, a much less long-winded argument is as follows:

Do you believe in predetermination?

If yes, then any sin you have committed is really the work of your God.

If no, do you believe God created everything and everyone in this world?

Yes? Then he created the exact circumstances for someone with the personality you were given (by God) to sin.

So why exactly is this God acting like it's all your fault? Seems a bit infantile to me.

 

[Scorch]

The greatest error in this is quite simple. You only account for a Biblical God. Other gods, such as a Spinozan God are different in terms of characteristics.

Just becuase you disregard a Biblical God due to lack of evidence, it doesn't automaticcally follow that there is no God.

Well I was specifically addressing followers of the Abrahamic religions, if I did not make that clear then my apologies.

Ideas such as the god of Spinoza or Einstein are far more plausible than the interventionist Gods of the Abrahamic religions. I would question, however, whether such a God described by Spinoza, as you cite, would really care if we worship him or not. I'd say he wouldn't.

However in this sort of culture, God is really synonymous with the ideology espoused by mainstream religion, as opposed to the more pantheistic or deistic Gods you mention.

I didn't exactly, on the other point, mean to assert that this proves there was no God. I don't believe there is evidence that there is a God. While such pantheistic or deistic deities are more respectable concepts, intellectually, I believe that with the scientific evidence concerned, the ideology of the Abrahamic religions is self-defeating, in that regard.

no.

even some of the books of the old testament of judaism and christianity was COLLATED 8000, to 12 000 years ago.

No. Not at all.

why do you plagiarize Christopher Hitchens? do you worship him or something? Is he your God?

This is the very reason I decided against sourcing it: religious people would avoid discussing the actual problem raised and poison the well via its source.

Now who's the irrational fundamentalist.

Still you, most likely.

Religion is retarded etc. etc. but the reason it has influence over politics in supposedly secular nations like Australia is because there has to be a balance between secularism and democracy. A truly secular and democratic government could only be reached if the majority of the population just weren't religious.

A process of equality must still be imposed upon popular opinion, however. Was slavery right because the majority of the population believed in it? Was it right to make homosexuality a criminal act because the majority of the population believed it should be so? etc. etc.

The law must be equal to everyone, and simple public opinion does not make the law immune from seeking equality in all of its forms.

Marriage is a secular and legal right that existed before Christianity and will exist long after it is relegated to the closet of mythical stories we laugh at as we do the idea of the existence of Zeus and Poseidon, and thus Christianity has absolutely no business deciding who can and can't enter into it.

 

[Lentern]

Let me ask a question of those that follow the main monotheistic religions here (Judaism, Christianity, Islam).

God is omnipotent, omni-benevolent and omniscient? Yes? Good.

Now whilst it is basically a fact that modern humans have been around for the past 200,000 years (that is, in our relatively current form, as opposed to earlier hominid evolution which we can trace back for millions of years before), let us operate with a minutely small assumption that they have been around for only 70,000 years.

Monotheistic religion emerged about 4,000 years ago, yes?

So for 66,000 years, God watches. He watches while humans die, mostly of simple bodily infection, with ridiculously high infant mortality rates. They probably live for perhaps 20-30 years, on average, in comparatively squalid conditions, and die in horribly painful ways. For 66,000 years God watches and does nothing. He watches as humanity suffers and toils, as thousands of generations struggle and die in such conditions, as thousands of children die before they reach the age of 3 and does absolutely nothing.

This is to say nothing of the wars and evils they will inflict upon eachother, as opposed to those they suffer by virtue of their very existence.

After 66,000 years (perhaps 62,000 to anticipate the argument that the events described in the earliest parts of the Bible constitute an intervention) of such suffering, God decides "that's enough of this, I'll fix all this up" and finally decides to intervene in the world by picking one group of people and furthering their cause to the detriment of those who once inhabited the land that he helped them violently invade (what a coincidence, those people just happened to write that book, but let's put that aside for a second).

Several thousand years later, he decides that his previous solution really won't do, and says "I'll fix this up again", essentially by offering human sacrifice in the most brutal and torturous of ways.

How fortunate that the evidence to suggest that such a ghastly dogma is true is precisely nil.

Why is it, then, that such a nonsensical ideology currently holds an inordinate amount of control over the legislative and executive governmental arms of many apparently secular nations, such as ours and the USA?

Yeah that's the only flaw.

 

[Cookie182]

This question is not copyrighted to Hitchens (though he puts it quite succinctly), it should occur to any serious person who challenges the rationality of the Abrahamic faiths within the CONTEXT of time itself.

Notice, as always, the religious apologists have deviated from the question and produced no good answer. Simply put, its obvious that no good answer exists because the likely hood of the Abrahamic myths actually being true is far less then myself winning the lottery.

Now it is correct in saying that this does not disprove in the strictest sense a "god"/creator/designer, yet it does give a very strong push towards positive atheism. Since no evidence exists for one, why bother positing their existence?

The science will ultimately decide in the end whether the universe was created intelligently. Until that day, it is only rational to assume the least: like all we observe, the universe had a natural cause.

 

[Cookie182]

Where on earth do you get the idea that the human race is 200,000 years old... because the current estimate is 37,000 or less and if you go from the bible its between 6000 and 25000

First, it must be observed that current estimates for the age of mankind are still all over the board. The lack of reliable dating methods for organic material is a serious challenge for all paleo-anthropologists. This might surprise you, but the only reliable dating method for organic material is Carbon-14 dating. This procedure can date organic material such as bones and teeth accurately but only to a maximum of 25,000-30,000 years. Dating older organic material is nothing more than guesswork. In many cases these guesses rely on “leap of faith” assumptions by dating the rocks found near the organic material in question, wildly asserting these rocks were formed at the same time as the bones/skull/teeth were deposited. Obviously that is not science, but only wishful thinking.

and to say that people died more painfully then, where does that come from? What about the plagues of the middle ages, or outbrakes of plagues even more recently in the 17th century.

Rubbish creationist lies.

Do a geology course.

 

[Scorch]

Yeah that's the only flaw.

Well clearly not the only one. It is riddled with flaws, but this is one of the ones that would stand even if one did believe blindly in the circular logic of the Bible.

This question is not copyrighted to Hitchens (though he puts it quite succinctly), it should occur to any serious person who challenges the rationality of the Abrahamic faiths within the CONTEXT of time itself.

Notice, as always, the religious apologists have deviated from the question and produced no good answer. Simply put, its obvious that no good answer exists because the likely hood of the Abrahamic myths actually being true is far less then myself winning the lottery.

Now it is correct in saying that this does not disprove in the strictest sense a "god"/creator/designer, yet it does give a very strong push towards positive atheism. Since no evidence exists for one, why bother positing their existence?

The science will ultimately decide in the end whether the universe was created intelligently. Until that day, it is only rational to assume the least: like all we observe, the universe had a natural cause.

I could not agree more. However I wasn't suggesting that this proves that there is no God, it is, however, one of the flaws that makes the Christian ideology of God a contradictory pile of nonsense to anyone that can rationally analyse it.

Where on earth do you get the idea that the human race is 200,000 years old... because the current estimate is 37,000 or less and if you go from the bible its between 6000 and 25000

The human race (that is the species homo sapiens) has inhabited the earth for the past 200,000 years. The process of evolution that got us to that stage required the better part of the previous four million years.

If you attempt to lie about scientific fact to save the nonsense you believe in you will be caught out every time.

 

[nazfiz]

Let me ask a question of those that follow the main monotheistic religions here (Judaism, Christianity, Islam).

God is omnipotent, omni-benevolent and omniscient? Yes? Good.

Now whilst it is basically a fact that modern humans have been around for the past 200,000 years (that is, in our relatively current form, as opposed to earlier hominid evolution which we can trace back for millions of years before), let us operate with a minutely small assumption that they have been around for only 70,000 years.

Monotheistic religion emerged about 4,000 years ago, yes?

So for 66,000 years, God watches. He watches while humans die, mostly of simple bodily infection, with ridiculously high infant mortality rates. They probably live for perhaps 20-30 years, on average, in comparatively squalid conditions, and die in horribly painful ways. For 66,000 years God watches and does nothing. He watches as humanity suffers and toils, as thousands of generations struggle and die in such conditions, as thousands of children die before they reach the age of 3 and does absolutely nothing.

This is to say nothing of the wars and evils they will inflict upon eachother, as opposed to those they suffer by virtue of their very existence.

After 66,000 years (perhaps 62,000 to anticipate the argument that the events described in the earliest parts of the Bible constitute an intervention) of such suffering, God decides "that's enough of this, I'll fix all this up" and finally decides to intervene in the world by picking one group of people and furthering their cause to the detriment of those who once inhabited the land that he helped them violently invade (what a coincidence, those people just happened to write that book, but let's put that aside for a second).

Several thousand years later, he decides that his previous solution really won't do, and says "I'll fix this up again", essentially by offering human sacrifice in the most brutal and torturous of ways.

How fortunate that the evidence to suggest that such a ghastly dogma is true is precisely nil.

Why is it, then, that such a nonsensical ideology currently holds an inordinate amount of control over the legislative and executive governmental arms of many apparently secular nations, such as ours and the USA?

May i ask what religion you follow?

 

[Scorch]

May i ask what religion you follow?

Um ... none. Isn't that rather obvious?

 

[Bereie]

nazfiz is Muslim!! added to the list.