Chat
Discord
06-30-2012, 04:58 PM
If I can defend my arguments that my beliefs are useful, I won't ever think about being an atheist. But in fact, every argument that defends my beliefs always lose in one or two sentences. That sucks. I'm tired of losing. I want to switch sides, to the more logical one, actually. I wrote a few examples of how the arguments lose below. Well, if you can find any argument that is strong enough to hold on to the beliefs, that will be very influential.
Dixon's post isn't quite off topic.
He pointed out that not everything in the bible is good. In fact, you cannot find anything that a normal human, without the help of God, could not have written 2,000 years ago. It's just logical to point out that the bible is just another man-made fiction.
The bible even use knowledge from 2,000 years ago that is now scientifically proven wrong. For example, the creation of different species. Back then, people don't know about the theory of evolution, so that the story of the creation of the world was written that way. Today, it's proven wrong from many evidence (including fossils, for instance).
When one part of the bible is proven wrong, can we still believe the truth of the other parts? XD
Well, actually people has got one way to get out of it: rationalization
- when the bible says something wrong, then it must just be an illustration. e.g. God created the world in 6 days, it must be an illustration to an actually very long time span.
- when something good is going on, it must be the blessing of God
- but when something bad is happening, it must be a trial from the God
Apparently, with rationalization we can make everything seems correct.
The origin of universe is also a very weak argument, because the existence of God itself is just as impossible, and since he still has to create the universe after he impossibly appear, it's just more impossible than just the universe.
Actually, I'm glad to hear the facts that in some other countries it is okay to be an atheist. In my country, the first point in our official Phylosophical Foundation is "Belief in the one and only God" (from the Wikipedia, so translation should be good). Since that's number 1, that's the most important ._. . Belief in God. Over here, we all have to.
Dixon's post isn't quite off topic.
He pointed out that not everything in the bible is good. In fact, you cannot find anything that a normal human, without the help of God, could not have written 2,000 years ago. It's just logical to point out that the bible is just another man-made fiction.
The bible even use knowledge from 2,000 years ago that is now scientifically proven wrong. For example, the creation of different species. Back then, people don't know about the theory of evolution, so that the story of the creation of the world was written that way. Today, it's proven wrong from many evidence (including fossils, for instance).
When one part of the bible is proven wrong, can we still believe the truth of the other parts? XD
Well, actually people has got one way to get out of it: rationalization
- when the bible says something wrong, then it must just be an illustration. e.g. God created the world in 6 days, it must be an illustration to an actually very long time span.
- when something good is going on, it must be the blessing of God
- but when something bad is happening, it must be a trial from the God
Apparently, with rationalization we can make everything seems correct.
The origin of universe is also a very weak argument, because the existence of God itself is just as impossible, and since he still has to create the universe after he impossibly appear, it's just more impossible than just the universe.
Actually, I'm glad to hear the facts that in some other countries it is okay to be an atheist. In my country, the first point in our official Phylosophical Foundation is "Belief in the one and only God" (from the Wikipedia, so translation should be good). Since that's number 1, that's the most important ._. . Belief in God. Over here, we all have to.
TEMPE
Spoiler (Click to View)