Why do we need a god?

[SnailyBoy 10]

I have read plenty on this before Snaily Boy- bottom line is, there is no answer for our ability to reason/make decisions, show empathy etc under an atheistic world view.

 

Even atheists admit this- people like Alex Rosenberg, Dawkins- in fact under their MOVING NATURALISM FORWARD- discussing issues surrounding naturalism, these were some of the issues raised.

 

In fact before you even go anywhere- you cannot even account for your ability to reason under a naturalism/atheistic world view.

 

Put simply, you cannot even trust your mind.

 

Oh boy, here we go into hard solipsism.

[Guest]

Oh boy, here we go into hard solipsism.

 

Look, here we go with throwing big words in to avoid the problem:)

 

You have to tackle the issue- not ignore it.

 

It is something discussed by evolutionists, biologists, psychologists etc

 

I will go on and say, for someone like you and few others who throw the 'show us proof' or 'show us the evidence'- well to understand any of that, you need reason. You my friend, cannot account for the origins of reason.

 

To make the decision of what is right and wrong- you need REASON. Evolution via natual selection does not require this-its about survival. Darwin admitted that.

 

I will leave it there as in no way will you or others be able to hurdle over this. It is why on forums it is easier to try throw in big words and fallacies- in reality, face to face with atheists (from experience) they have no knowledge but are mostly sheeps- follow the crowd, the Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris- you are mostly socialized into this.

Edited February 23, 2018 by Guest

[SnailyBoy 10]

Look, here we go with throwing big words in to avoid the problem:)

 

You have to tackle the issue- not ignore it.

 

It is something discussed by evolutionists, biologists, psychologists etc

 

Come on now, you're just starting your presuppositional apologetics.

 

Let me guess, you have an answer?

[Guest]

Perhaps go back to the OP- that in itself represents more issues, because studies show there is an innate belief in God.

 

Justin Barrow from Oxford Uni showed this, you also have the Pew research where in the Soviet Union, even under an atheist rule, people still believed in God and this has now increased.

 

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/05/30/orthodox-christians-in-europe-more-likely-to-believe-than-practice-their-religion/

 

So how do you account for this belief under naturalism- what is the source?

 

I honestly think some athiests are desperate for answers but unfortunately, use the wrong tools and come to wrong conclusions. How many threads about God/belief are started by atheists- pretty much most.

 

Why? May be it is the fact that we are pre wired and this is something that does get lost (for some) as we get older and question things.

 

But the answers are there- and hence why I have used the point about reason.

[SnailyBoy 10]

Perhaps go back to the OP- that in itself represents more issues, because studies show there is an innate belief in God.

 

Justin Barrow from Oxford Uni showed this, you also have the Pew research where in the Soviet Union, even under an atheist rule, people still believed in God and this has now increased.

 

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/05/30/orthodox-christians-in-europe-more-likely-to-believe-than-practice-their-religion/

 

So how do you account for this belief under naturalism- what is the source?

 

I honestly think some athiests are desperate for answers but unfortunately, use the wrong tools and come to wrong conclusions. How many threads about God/belief are started by atheists- pretty much most.

 

Why? May be it is the fact that we are pre wired and this is something that does get lost (for some) as we get older and question things.

 

But the answers are there- and hence why I have used the point about reason.

 

You're still not saying what the answer is?

[leviathan13 348]

'Animals' show all of the characteristics humans do, just on different levels and in different ways.

 

Some animals show signs of grieving in times of loss; some animals show compassion; animals use reason all the time hence why many are fantastic hunters because they weigh up a situation before rushing in - some choose to hunt in packs, some use stealth alone - they use reason to fashion a conclusion.

 

Many animals can understand human speech, but we struggle with theirs. And great, we can make a cup of coffee... we also try to kill each other in the name of God. Who is the most intelligent or 'evolved'? Sharks are better at being sharks than we are, it doesn't mean we've evolved further. If we were that perfect, we'd be able to live as every other animal as well as a human... but we can't. A tiny bug can kill us we're that fantastic.

 

But again - people site religion as the basis of good and bad, right and wrong, yet animals obviously understand this concept or there'd be pile upon pile of carcasses from animals just killing at will.

 

The only animal who goes out of it's way to kill is the human... the one with religion. The human race survived before religion and it will survive after.

[ENG601PM 10]

Mr Fisk, you are mixing up a misunderstanding of the catchphrase "survival of the fittest" with the scientific theories of natural selection and evolution. Evolution is not "nothing but surviving" and natural selection is not survival of the fittest.

 

The theory of the one god of many religions does seem to prove that survival of the fittest is not equal to either natural selection or evolution.

[babycatcher 10]

Comment deleted (husband typed response while my account was logged in)

[RootsBooster 24]

No, I stated that under atheism, if you hold the view that humans are nothing but a by product of a lengthy evolution chain, that there is nothing else etc- then you cannot hold any value.

 

Why not ?

[mossdog 10]

'Animals' show all of the characteristics humans do, just on different levels and in different ways.

 

Some animals show signs of grieving in times of loss; some animals show compassion; animals use reason all the time hence why many are fantastic hunters because they weigh up a situation before rushing in - some choose to hunt in packs, some use stealth alone - they use reason to fashion a conclusion.

 

Many animals can understand human speech, but we struggle with theirs. And great, we can make a cup of coffee... we also try to kill each other in the name of God. Who is the most intelligent or 'evolved'? Sharks are better at being sharks than we are, it doesn't mean we've evolved further. If we were that perfect, we'd be able to live as every other animal as well as a human... but we can't. A tiny bug can kill us we're that fantastic.

 

But again - people site religion as the basis of good and bad, right and wrong, yet animals obviously understand this concept or there'd be pile upon pile of carcasses from animals just killing at will.

 

The only animal who goes out of it's way to kill is the human... the one with religion. The human race survived before religion and it will survive after.

.......all I can say to that is that 2000 years ago a divine intervention event took place in history whereby "God", or shall we say the spirit of love,and by love we mean St Pauls description of love in Corinthians, inspired the human being Jesus Christ to try to inspire people against right and wrong..........it may come as no surprise he ended in a terrible death orchestrated by the religious leaders of the day!.......supreme love has a supreme enemy ,evil, or as the bible describes, God and the Devil. No, not the picture book characters we were brought up with of those who went to Sunday school of a bearded creature in the clouds or the horned beast with a tail. God and the Devil reside in each of us........ as Jesus said..."you shall know them by their fruits"........and you don't have to look far for clues!

Yes the human race survived before religion and may survive after! but after what? the human race will still carry on killing each other......so often in religions name. Organised religion has so much to answer for.........but Jesus Christ has nothing to answer for because he was the true expression of love!..............Gods son,or to understand the word God..... Loves son!

And no I don't believe all I read in the bible,I have long got past that stumbling block.......however I am inspired by most of the new Testament writings!

[Mister Gee 812]

.......all I can say to that is that 2000 years ago a divine intervention event took place in history whereby "God", or shall we say the spirit of love,and by love we mean St Pauls description of love in Corinthians, inspired the human being Jesus Christ to try to inspire people against right and wrong..........it may come as no surprise he ended in a terrible death orchestrated by the religious leaders of the day!.......supreme love has a supreme enemy ,evil, or as the bible describes, God and the Devil. No, not the picture book characters we were brought up with of those who went to Sunday school of a bearded creature in the clouds or the horned beast with a tail. God and the Devil reside in each of us........ as Jesus said..."you shall know them by their fruits"........and you don't have to look far for clues!

Yes the human race survived before religion and may survive after! but after what? the human race will still carry on killing each other......so often in religions name. Organised religion has so much to answer for.........but Jesus Christ has nothing to answer for because he was the true expression of love!..............Gods son,or to understand the word God..... Loves son!

And no I don't believe all I read in the bible,I have long got past that stumbling block.......however I am inspired by most of the new Testament writings!

 

Is there a competition on to be the next Billy Graham?

[Top Cats Hat 10]

..........but Jesus Christ has nothing to answer for because he was the true expression of love!.....

 

That is quite a claim to make about someone who even if they did exist, we know virtually nothing about.

 

There are countless figures in more recent history who would have a greater claim to that accolade because of real stuff we know for fact that they have done.