Atheism and Christianity debate

[bm-21Lemko]

ok, It was truly a joke. I'm sorry Volodya, Very Good answer though. I hope no offence was taken.

Now on a not serious note.

yes I hate unicorns. They kill mantiscenes to get their horn.

Santa ate my cookies


--------------------------
Alright, i will be serious now.

You don't have to answer this.

Why do you believe God does not exist?



------------------------------------------------------
Obviously my ukrainian heritage is different.

My Ukrainain grandmother made me pray every night.

She said ask god anything and he shall answer.

[V-G]

Originally Posted by bm-21Lemko

--------------------------
Alright, i will be serious now.

You don't have to answer this.

Why do you believe God does not exist?



------------------------------------------------------
Obviously my ukrainian heritage is different.

My Ukrainain grandmother made me pray every night.

She said ask god anything and he shall answer.

Sorry I didn't catch on with the joke ... but I wouldn't rush with the idea that my Ukrainian grandma didn't tell me the exact same thing yours did . In fact she said the same thing, but she didn't even know she was lying .

Is God real, or is he imaginary? It is one of the most important questions in America today.

If God is real and if God inspired the Bible, then we should worship God as the Bible demands. We should certainly post the Ten Commandments in our courthouses and shopping centers, put "In God We Trust" on the money and pray in our schools. We should focus our society on God and his infallible Word because our everlasting souls hang in the balance.

On the other hand, if God is imaginary, then religion is a complete illusion. Christianity, Judaism and Islam are pointless. Belief in God is nothing but a silly superstition, and this superstition leads a significant portion of the population to be delusional.

But how can we decide, conclusively, whether God is real or imaginary?

Since we are intelligent human beings living in the 21st century, we should take the time to look at some data. That is what we are doing when we ask, "Why won't God heal amputees?"

If you are an intelligent human being, and if you want to understand the true nature of God, you owe it to yourself to ask, "Why won't God heal amputees?"

[bm-21Lemko]

Originally Posted by V-G

If you are an intelligent human being, and if you want to understand the true nature of God, you owe it to yourself to ask, "Why won't God heal amputees?"

Well, Volodya I have thought about this before, not just right now as you brought it up and did ask myself that question. Why did my sister have to go through three painful surgeries. Is it to be punished. Why are there poor people? Why does he make you watch you loving grandma lose her memory through a condition of alzheimer's and she forgets everthing that was so deer to her? My grandfather had his arm amputeded in a farming accident and his son died of cancer. I'm almost positive he asked why god? Why?

You want to know my conclusion, it is a test. A test of how well you will live on, being a good person and how you will contribute to life and society. How well morality and character will play out in your role called life.

Why me, why not some one else. You know what, I know they are ok. They are in a better place now, where they can't feel pain any longer.

I believe a famous man once wrote by the name of Benjamin Franklin. "It is not a doctor who heals, but it is god who grants

the healing to the doctor."

Is it not all a test. Even the strongman is tested by corruption. We see people who have it easy, but do they really have it easy? Seeing can be believing, but it can also be decieving.

[V-G]

So it all is a test. I like it, as far as good explanation goes it covers all basis. Can I say *clever* ?

With your permission I would like to take you back to 1700, in particular late 1600 (Augustus the Strong comes to mind) and early 1700 ... this is the first time when the phrase "It easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, then for a rich man to get into heaven" starts actually making sense to me (historically speaking). This is a time of change in Europe and finally the Empire the way it was known is not the same, it used to be that the Empire was one person, a monarch and now it starts to be an entity where a monarch is empowered to act on behalf of the empire. I hope you would catch me here and say "hold on, what about Roman empire? Wasn't that a city?" - and you would be right but the way they lived was with slaves and everything so it doesn't count in my argument. I make this long introduction to show that Catholics were promoting the idea that there was a virtue in suffering, a virtue in being poor - it was all a test. Just like you did right now with your post. But back then it used to be that if you were born poor you had no way of ever being anything but poor, you were a tool for prosperity of the select elite. That slowly changed (lucky for us, eh?). Why can't we too look at religion and say "hold on, none of this makes any sense... it is a vehicle to get me to behave a certain way, but I am not delusional, so I won't"?

Vasyl', I know you seek an explanation, sooner or later you will ask me "so, what do you believe in?" and I'll tell you that I simply don't have an explanation but I know that the one you have right now is wrong. Religion is a superstition and you should reject it.

The dictionary defines the word "superstition" in this way:

An irrational belief that an object, action, or circumstance not logically related to a course of events influences its outcome. [ref]


We have all seen plenty of superstitions. There are the superstitions that a rabbit's foot or a four-leaf clover bring good luck. There are the superstitions that breaking a mirror or seeing a black cat bring bad luck. And we all know that these superstitions are silly. A rabbit's foot or a broken mirror has no good or bad influence on the course of events. This is obvious to any intelligent person.

So let's imagine the following situation. Let's say that you have cancer. You are lying in the hospital after a round of chemo and you feel terrible. A person pops into your room with a bright smile on his face and a horseshoe in his hand. He says to you, "This is an amazing and lucky horseshoe. If you touch this horseshoe, it will cure your cancer. But I need to charge you $100 to touch it."

Would you pay the man $100?

Of course not. We all know that touching the horseshoe will have zero effect on cancer. The belief in lucky horseshoes is pure superstition.

It is also very easy to scientifically prove that the horseshoe has no effect on cancer (or anything else). The way we would do it is simple: we would take 1,000 cancer patients and split them randomly into two groups of 500. We would let 500 of the cancer patients touch the lucky horseshoe and we would leave the other 500 alone in a double-blind way. Then we would look at cancer remission rates between the two groups. What we would find is zero benefit from the horseshoe. We would see no statistical difference between the remission rates in the two groups of 500 patients.

Prayer

Now let us imagine another situation. You have cancer, you have just finished a round of chemo and you feel terrible. This time, a person pops into your room with a bright smile on his face and a bible in his hand. He says to you, "There is a being named God who is the all-powerful, all-knowing, all-loving creator of the universe. I am his representative on earth. If you will allow me to pray to God on your behalf, God will cure your cancer."

You agree to the prayer, and the man prays over you for 10 minutes. He invokes all the healing powers of God, beseeching him, reciting verses of scripture and so forth. Afterwards, as he is getting ready to leave, the man says, "Oh, and by the way, God says that you should tithe 10% of your income to the church. Would you consider making a tax-deductible donation today?"

The question is: Is there any difference between the two men? Will the prayer have any effect greater than the horseshoe?

The answer is: No. The belief in prayer is just as superstitious as the belief in lucky horseshoes.

The fascinating thing is that we can prove that prayer has no effect in exactly the same way that we can prove that horseshoes have no effect. We take 1,000 cancer patients. We pray over 500 of them and we leave the other 500 alone. Then we look at cancer remission rates between the two groups. What we find is that prayers have zero benefit. We would see no statistical difference between the remission rates in the two groups of 500 patients.

In other words, we can prove that the belief in prayer is pure superstition. The belief in the power of prayer is no different from the belief in the power of lucky horseshoes.

[V-G]

If you are interested, read the following article:
A prayer for health - The Boston Globe

[bm-21Lemko]

Ok, you bring some valid points.


Lets say that the horseshoe is powerful and lucky and it resembles a bible. The man does not want to continue kemo because it is painful. He has to throw up constantly he wants to die, he can not bear the pain any longer. He has a family that loves him and does not want to give up. They need him to live on. So, the man walks into the room and talks to him and he beholds the bible and says God cures those who are pure. The man then suddenly feels better by the sound of those words and continues the awful treatment of Kemo. He has to go through it three more rounds and each time he is puking out his guts in the toilet he remembers what the man said holding the bible, it sticks in his mind the whole time and eventually this cancer patient becomes cancer free and he still remebers each year, and year after year the man holding the bible.

Now is that not a test of faith? How could the man really know? I will tell you, a test.

Somebody brings hope to another person to continue on, now that is a test.

Even if it is a stupid fake horseshoe and it is lucky. The person has to go up to another individual and actually convince him that this will cure him. i would say it is a test to the messanger and the reciever.

[bm-21Lemko]

Thanks for the article, but i still stand behind my beliefs.