Do people believe in GOD simply because there is NO GOD?

[Man of Steel]

You are relying on a logical fallacy, the appeal to popularity.   AKA an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or most people believe it. In other words, the basic idea of the argument is: "If many believe so, it is so."

The issue is, you support an ideology that is based on ignorance and holds unethical views, and not only that, historically it has been responsible for some pretty serious attrocities.  Now a lot of people don't like to support guilt by association, but it can't be avoided.  Everyone likes to let groups of the hook and find scapegoats, so if say the Police have a culture problem and they start to resemble organised criminals, they blame a few individuals, they find a scapegoat, but we all know the problem isn't the individual, it's the group, it's the culture.  So unless the group changes or becomes extinct, the problem remains, and you can throw out all the so called bad seeds all you like. This is the same with the Church, the culture is bad, the ideologies the group is based on are unsound, you can't fix it, it needs to be scrapped.

Nobody blinks an eye when they say a group of Nazis isn't to be tolerated, no matter how nice a group they are and charitable works they do.  This is recognition of the dangerousness of 'groups'.  Groups are dangerous because they can so easily scapegoat and blame individuals and the group can carry on with their agendas.  Groups need to be held accountable, a bit like in the army, when a soldier fucks up, others in the squadron are punished to encourage them to self regulate and avoid an individual affecting the whole group.  If you were punished for the indiscretions of your religion, you would soon stop supporting them if they didn't change their ways.

You are correct in that a popular opinion does not fully validate the truth or accuracy of a position.  If only the irony of this was understood....that's another topic though.

I think we have a simple misunderstanding.  I'm not stating an absolute position in regards to your argument and thereby making an appeal via a logical fallacy nor am I suggesting that the opinions of a polling sample make a definitive case.  

I asked you about hypothetical polling results which are often used to gather the opinions of others.  In fact, I asked you your opinion of what the hypothetical polling results might be (we have no actual pollling results LOL).

That said, the question is out there again and as it stands Agnostic fully agrees with your opinion.

[Radical Plato]

You are correct in that a popular opinion does not fully validate the truth or accuracy of a position.

You misunderstand though.  I'm not stating an absolute position in regards to your argument and thereby making an appeal via a logical fallacy nor am I suggesting that the opinions of a polling sample make a definitive case.  

I asked you about hypothetical polling results which are often used to gather the opinions of others.  In fact, I asked you your opinion of what the hypothetical polling results might be (we have no pollling results LOL).

That said, the question is out there again and as it stands Agnostic fully agrees with your opinion.

You seem perfectly nice, but so do some dictators, serial killers and pedophiles. I am sure in real life you act decently and are respectful of others, but so were the majority of Nazis.  It is your support of what I consider a perverse ideology that bothers me and what happens when enough people endorse the same views and the negative impact it has on other people.  It's not so much you as an individual that concerns me, it's what happens when their is a collective of such people, and the political power and influence they wield.  That's what bothers me, the company you keep.

[Man of Steel]

You seem perfectly nice, but so do some dictators, serial killers and pedophiles. I am sure in real life you act decently and are respectful of others, but so were the majority of Nazis.  It is your support of what I consider a perverse ideology that bothers me and what happens when enough people endorse the same views and the negative impact it has on other people.  It's not so much you as an individual that concerns me, it's what happens when their is a collective of such people, and the political power and influence they wield.  That's what bothers me, the company you keep.

You're correct again.  I can appear very nice online and be an absolute tyrant towards my family, friends, coworkers, etc.....

All you have is to judge is how I conduct myself online and my assurance that what you see online is what you get in person (and admittedly that doesn't mean much).  

Although, you can still form an opinion based on what you do know and that takes me back to my question in which I seek out your opinion about the hypothethical polling results.

[Agnostic007]

You are correct in that a popular opinion does not fully validate the truth or accuracy of a position.  If only the irony of this was understood....that's another topic though.

I think we have a simple misunderstanding.  I'm not stating an absolute position in regards to your argument and thereby making an appeal via a logical fallacy nor am I suggesting that the opinions of a polling sample make a definitive case.  

I asked you about hypothetical polling results which are often used to gather the opinions of others.  In fact, I asked you your opinion of what the hypothetical polling results might be (we have no actual pollling results LOL).

That said, the question is out there again and as it stands Agnostic fully agrees with your opinion.

Just to clarify.. I don't think your faith has made YOU more evil. I believe some very atrocious things have been done in the name of religous faith

[Man of Steel]

Just to clarify.. I don't think your faith has made YOU more evil. I believe some very atrocious things have been done in the name of religous faith

I appreciate that (and it means more than you know actually).  

I also agree with you completely that many, many folks claiming to represent Christ have done some terrible, terrible things in his name.  

The early church of Rome and the papacy itself became highly corrupt and both influenced and controlled by governing authorities in Rome.  Over time conditions slowly spiraled out of control in some instances.  

Hordes of degenerate folks were assembled to protect "the church" and in doing so committed all kinds of horrendous acts that they were never actually called to committ (but who's gonna stop a horde).  Church leaders and their followers therein also became corrupt by power and influence.  Many, many, many people that were directly associated with "the church" and those indirectly affiliated with (or hired by) "the church" did horrible things in the "name of God".  

None of it represented Jesus Christ and none of it was guided by the Holy Spirit.....these were all definite choices of men and women that either lost their way or never had "a way" to begin with.

I excuse none of it and make no apologetic pleas to defend it.....it was flat out wrong and anti-Christ.  What's worse is some of it still exists today.  If I had my way I'd shut "churches" like Westboro Baptist Church down.  Further the priesthood and papacy of the Catholic church should be required to have supervised visitations with children for a long time to come.  I know that one bad apple doesn't spoil the bunch, but one bad apple out of that bunch can spoil a lot of children (the most precious in Christ's kingdom).

[Agnostic007]

Good Post

[catracho]

These discussions seem to be a waste of time.  Those that don't believe still don't and those that do, still do.  But it is always those that don't that like to point out only the negative side of religion.  The wold is a cruel place sometimes, and men have used Christ's name to justify their greed and desire to kill.  Jesus never said to kill homosexuals and anyone else!  Some pope or king decided to use that for his greedy purpose.  Jesus wan't us to love one another, if that offends the non believers then that is too bad.  We will have to agree to disagree.

[Radical Plato]

These discussions seem to be a waste of time.  Those that don't believe still don't and those that do, still do.  But it is always those that don't that like to point out only the negative side of religion.  The wold is a cruel place sometimes, and men have used Christ's name to justify their greed and desire to kill. Jesus never said to kill homosexuals and anyone else!  Some pope or king decided to use that for his greedy purpose.  Jesus wan't us to love one another, if that offends the non believers then that is too bad.  We will have to agree to disagree.

Yeah, but the bible does.  Leviticus 20:13: "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."

You can't have it both ways, religion openly despises homosexuality and does everything to oppress them.  And since when have religious people ever cared what Jesus said.  Jesus repeatedly criticised the rich and preached a modest lifestyle, yet the Catholic Church is one of the richest organisations on the planet.  Face it, to be religious, is to be a hypocrite.

And the reason the argument never gets anywhere is because you can't reason with someone who comes to his conclusions based on the love of ignorance (faith), who believes being ignorant as the way to truth and shuns reason and evidence as a utilitarian intellectual tool to uncover the truth.  If someone doesn’t value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide that proves they should value evidence. If someone doesn’t value logic, what logical argument would you invoke to prove they should value logic?

"Tell a devout Christian that his wife is cheating on him, or that frozen yogurt can make a man invisible, and he is likely to require as much evidence as anyone else, and to be persuaded only to the extent that you give it. Tell him that the book he keeps by his bed was written by an invisible deity who will punish him with fire for eternity if he fails to accept its every incredible claim about the universe, and he seems to require no evidence what so ever."
― Sam Harris

[catracho]

And yet in your quote from S. Wienberg, you have a quote where he talks about a place without religion would still have evil people doing eveil things.  Isn't evil a religious concept?  you can't have it both ways.

[catracho]

I would agree with you that the Catholic Church, and most of those so called churches are corrupt.  But that is man, greedy and corrupt. Your problem is that you lump all Christians into one boat.  So you think Mother Teresa was a hypocrite? You think she wanted to kill homosexuals?  Really?

[Man of Steel]

These discussions seem to be a waste of time.  Those that don't believe still don't and those that do, still do.  But it is always those that don't that like to point out only the negative side of religion.  The wold is a cruel place sometimes, and men have used Christ's name to justify their greed and desire to kill.  Jesus never said to kill homosexuals and anyone else!  Some pope or king decided to use that for his greedy purpose.  Jesus wan't us to love one another, if that offends the non believers then that is too bad.  We will have to agree to disagree.

If the goal in these discussions was to convert one another then I agree completely....waste of time.

I defend my faith almost everyday not because I feel those that present their objections will convert, but for those that aren't posting yet are reading and haven't made a choice for Christ.  I do all I can to respond to every objection presented so the presentation is not one-sided (of course some comments are nonsense and I let that stuff go).  

I like to present the contrast between the objectors of Christ and the representatives of Christ and let others decide for themselves.  What's wonderful about objections is that they draw attention.  I've been in threads in which only 10 people are actively participating for a couple of days but the thread is viewed thousands of times...that's a few thousand people that may get the message of Christ when otherwise they might not.  I do all I can to represent Christ, keep a cool head, answer thoroughly, answer logically, answer biblically and answer honestly.  I rarely lash out, but admit that I have before and I regret that (it is a struggle not to at times).  Still, it's far easier for 10 people to post 30 objections than it is for 1 person to attempt answer them all (but I try).  The Lord gives me peace and he's my rock so I don't fear the objectors or let them draw anger and hate out of me.

My prayer is that others will PM me privately (and they do) and ask more questions about faith and Christ.  Now if the normal objectors decide to give their lives for Christ then praise God, but I'm under no delusion that they will make such a conversion as I know their minds are firmly and completely made up.

[catracho]

Well said.

[The Scott]

Yeah, but the bible does.  Leviticus 20:13: "If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads."

You can't have it both ways, religion openly despises homosexuality and does everything to oppress them.  And since when have religious people ever cared what Jesus said.  Jesus repeatedly criticised the rich and preached a modest lifestyle, yet the Catholic Church is one of the richest organisations on the planet.  Face it, to be religious, is to be a hypocrite.

And the reason the argument never gets anywhere is because you can't reason with someone who comes to his conclusions based on the love of ignorance (faith), who believes being ignorant as the way to truth and shuns reason and evidence as a utilitarian intellectual tool to uncover the truth.  If someone doesn’t value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide that proves they should value evidence. If someone doesn’t value logic, what logical argument would you invoke to prove they should value logic?

"Tell a devout Christian that his wife is cheating on him, or that frozen yogurt can make a man invisible, and he is likely to require as much evidence as anyone else, and to be persuaded only to the extent that you give it. Tell him that the book he keeps by his bed was written by an invisible deity who will punish him with fire for eternity if he fails to accept its every incredible claim about the universe, and he seems to require no evidence what so ever."
― Sam Harris

Hi stupid.

Leviticus was written for the Levites, one of the tribes of Israel.  I would say more but you already knew this, you steaming pile of ignorance.  And yes.  Homosexuality is a sin, you retard.  So is stealing.  So is adultery.  So are a great many other things.  Just be thankful being a stupid Aussie buttwipe isn't a sin, you stupid Aussie buttwipe.   

We are not called to take lives (like the Muslims, you retard), but rather to take time and pray for sinners (including ourselves).  I really don't care if people don't accept Jesus because I am more concerned with other, more important things.

Such as your being cured of assholism or whatever it is that causes you.  Yes, causes "you".   

But not you, you worthless Australian mutton muncher.   Stupid little man.

[Radical Plato]

And yet in your quote from S. Wienberg, you have a quote where he talks about a place without religion would still have evil people doing eveil things.  Isn't evil a religious concept?  you can't have it both ways.

Evil is a moral concept.  And morality predates religion, although the Religious like to think they invented it.

[Man of Steel]

Evil is a moral concept.  And morality predates religion, although the Religious like to think they invented it.

That's where I get my best theological guidance.....Seth Macfarlane LOL.

[Radical Plato]

That's where I get my best theological guidance.....Seth Macfarlane LOL.

So do I  

[Archer77]

So do I  

To be fair, there is a lot of this kind of thinking on the left.

[The Scott]

So do I  

That figures as Seth is a regular turtle head of an individual.

[Tedim]

So do I  

Well if the family guy said so...

Idiot

[Radical Plato]

Well if the family guy said so...

Idiot

Yet you believe in what a bunch of illiterate and ignorant desert dwellers said.  Go Figure...   

[catracho]

They have more credibility! lol

[Gonuclear]

I'll break it down in simple terms.

Some people NEED a God to go on and maintain and make sense of their world and upbringing, others don't.

There is a further simplification that you missed.  Some people NEED to constantly attack those who believe in G-d to assuage their own guilt and doubts.