Is religious tolerance a bad idea?

[andyandy]

I have facts that Atheists and agnostics in America are poorly treated and distrusted. You have what facts exactly?

You don't seem interested in a proper debate. I've posted the two scientific studies twice now. They both concluded that those of a religious persuasion coped better with depression than those without a religious framework. Both found a significance even when controlled against other factors taking into account lifestyle and social variables. If you have significant evidence as to why these studies are erroneous then perhaps you would like to share that. But to be honest, i don't expect you to give any credence to the studies simply because you're arguing from a rather subjective position.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

You don't seem interested in a proper debate. I've posted the two scientific studies twice now. They both concluded that those of a religious persuasion coped better with depression than those without a religious framework. Both found a significance even when controlled against other factors taking into account lifestyle and social variables. If you have significant evidence as to why these studies are erroneous then perhaps you would like to share that. But to be honest, i don't expect you to give any credence to the studies simply because you're arguing from a rather subjective position.

Did you not read my responses? Obviously not. Here it is.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1950947#post1950947

I won't repeat myself.

 

[ceo_esq]

Nonsense. Evidence that the universe was created by a God from darkness? Zilch. Evidence that god smote the limbs off of snakes? Zilch. Evidence that god turned a woman into salt? Zilch. Evidence of a worldwide flood within the reign of humanity? Zilch. Evidence of Heaven? Zilch. Hell? Zilch? Evidence that prayer works? Zilch. Evidence that god is good and loving? Zilch. Evidence that god is cruel and wrathful? Zilch.

Evidence that people will persist believing a fireside fairy tale told by ignorant desert nomads to put their kids to bed despite the way it contradicts every single thing we've learned about the universe and how is works? Plenty.

Don't give me that "the absence of evidence" tripe. There's no proof that invisible gossamer dragons who eat intangible tigers who eat incorporeal unicorns don't exist, but if someone proclaimed belief in those, we'd throw them in the looney bin, and rightly so.

Thanks for that fascinating digression, but to return to the question at hand, are you or are you not aware of overwhelming evidence of the falsity of all forms of theism, as you plainly suggested you did? If all you really had to say was that you were aware of no evidence establishing the truth of any form of theism, a simple "Sorry, everyone, I overstated my case again" would have sufficed.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Thanks for that fascinating digression, but to return to the question at hand, are you or are you not aware of overwhelming evidence of the falsity of all forms of theism, as you plainly suggested you did? If all you really had to say was that you were aware of no evidence establishing the truth of any form of theism, a simple "Sorry, everyone, I overstated my case again" would have sufficed.

No, there is no evidence at all supporting any sort of theism and the god of Christianity is most definately disproved by evidence. Prayer doesn't work and the Bible's account of history is false. Ergo, the Christian god can clearly be stated to be completely false.

 

[elliotfc]

Another standard non-answer Elliot. When you are painted into a corner in a discussion you resort to sarcastic wise cracks to cover up the fact that you cannot answer with facts, and refuse to acknowledge the facts in the opposing argument. Try sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "Nyah-nyah-nyah. I can't hear you!" Same effect. You simply refuse to acknowledge a rational argument that refutes your own, or a rational point that conflicts with your view. Probably part of the suspension of disbelief required to believe in supernatural beings.

I've never said that your arguments are irrational.

-Elliot

 

[elliotfc]

No, there is no evidence at all supporting any sort of theism and the god of Christianity is most definately disproved by evidence. Prayer doesn't work and the Bible's account of history is false. Ergo, the Christian god can clearly be stated to be completely false.

I agree that you can clearly state that the Christian God is false.

-Elliot

 

[trvlr2]

Perhaps this may shed light on the relative? happiness of religionists?

My old GF, Annie, used to tell me "ne'er did a frown cross the brow of an idiot."

 

[andyandy]

Did you not read my responses? Obviously not. Here it is.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=1950947#post1950947

I won't repeat myself.

no i can see why you wouldn't want to repeat yourself -

Don't try the turn around with me. Have you considered the possibility that the atheists and agnositcs who were studied were treated poorly by their counselors and therapists? I had a counselor once tell me that the root of all my problems is that I'm not religious. She wouldn't address any of my problems until I "accepted religion." How do you think a theist would respond if their therapist demmanded they give up religion?

anecdote. No evidence to support your claim.

You have no evidence of cuasation. I have evidence that atheists cannot join the boy Scouts, are the least trusted minority in the U.S.A., and that people all over this country loathe and despise atheists. Do you REALLY need me to provide you evidence that people hate atheists and agnostics? Have you been living under a rock?

no attempt to provide evidence for widespread "hatred" - nor any attempt to relate this to the study. If you're suggesting that this "hatred" is independant of the controlled for "social support" (perhaps that even those with friendship groups are still hated by those in those groups due to their religious beliefs?) then again please provide any evidence as to why you believe this. If not i'll have to conclude you have nothing of interest to add to the discussion.

You seem to have taken a stance that all religion in all its forms under all conditions is bad in every sense, and therefore seem unwilling to approach the subject with anything approaching objectivity. This is a shame.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

I agree that you can clearly state that the Christian God is false.

-Elliot

It is claimed that the Christian god grants whatever you ask for in prayer, yet this has been conclusively shown to be false. Ergo, the Christian god does not exist. A different, ignorant, uncaring or incoptent god might, but not the god which is described in the Bible.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

no i can see why you wouldn't want to repeat yourself -



anecdote. No evidence to support your claim.





no attempt to provide evidence for widespread "hatred" - nor any attempt to relate this to the study. If you're suggesting that this "hatred" is independant of the controlled for "social support" (perhaps that even those with friendship groups are still hated by those in those groups due to their religious beliefs?) then again please provide any evidence as to why you believe this. If not i'll have to conclude you have nothing of interest to add to the discussion.

You seem to have taken a stance that all religion in all its forms under all conditions is bad in every sense, and therefore seem unwilling to approach the subject with anything approaching objectivity. This is a shame.

Andy, this is all stuff which is all over this board. I repeat, have you been living under a rock? I know you've participated in some of thethreads I've refered to. Here's one, which you did not participate in, for example.

http://www.internationalskeptics.co...hp?t=54165&highlight=Most+mistrusted+minority

 

[ceo_esq]

It is claimed that the Christian god grants whatever you ask for in prayer, yet this has been conclusively shown to be false. Ergo, the Christian god does not exist. A different, ignorant, uncaring or incoptent god might, but not the god which is described in the Bible.

I don't know many denominations that claim that "God grants whatever you ask for in prayer" - whatever that claim actually means - so I think we may safely consider that a strawman. Certainly the fact that there are several obvious senses in which it is not, and probably cannot logically be, true has nothing to do with whether the Christian God exists. Nor would it necessarily indicate that such a God was ignorant, uncaring or incompetent. I'm as much of a nonbeliever as the next fellow here, but displays of reasoning like the posts quoted above invite ridicule upon atheism, which is the sort of thing I hope we all wish to avoid.

 

[andyandy]

Andy, this is all stuff which is all over this board. I repeat, have you been living under a rock? I know you've participated in some of thethreads I've refered to. Here's one, which you did not participate in, for example.

http://www.internationalskeptics.co...hp?t=54165&highlight=Most+mistrusted+minority

that was from before i joined - i'm a relative newbie you know

From the link http://www.ur.umn.edu/FMPro?-db=rel...ewsreleases/releasesdetail.html&ID=2816&-Find

From a telephone sampling of more than 2,000 households, university researchers found that Americans rate atheists below Muslims, recent immigrants, gays and lesbians and other minority groups in “sharing their vision of American society.” Atheists are also the minority group most Americans are least willing to allow their children to marry.

I'm not sure i'd equate those findings with "hatred" to be honest, but the summary is a little vague really to do justice to the actual data. What were the breakdowns? Even if we accept a general atmosphere of hatred in America (which i'm not sure i do) does that mean we can remove that consideration from looking at studies of depression and religion that were carried out outside the US - say in the UK (or Europe) where such animosity/mistrust towards atheists is not present?

 

[Freethinker]

I don't know many denominations that claim that "God grants whatever you ask for in prayer" - whatever that claim actually means - so I think we may safely consider that a strawman. Certainly the fact that there are several obvious senses in which it is not, and probably cannot logically be, true has nothing to do with whether the Christian God exists. Nor would it necessarily indicate that such a God was ignorant, uncaring or incompetent. I'm as much of a nonbeliever as the next fellow here, but displays of reasoning like the posts quoted above invite ridicule upon atheism, which is the sort of thing I hope we all wish to avoid.

Look at it this way: I postulate a particular god exists who answers all prayers. Let's call him Joe. Thousands of devout believers in Joe pray for a wide variety of things. After collecting the results, the data shows that nothing happened outside the range of chance. We therefore conclude that our postulated god does not exist as described.

The Christian god's description has changed radically over time, and continues to change. This is because as our level of knowledge provides clear explanations for actions previously attributed to god, there exist only two options: Acknowledge god doesn't exist as described and change the description or acknowledge he doesn't exist. (I guess there's a third; Ignore the obvious. )

There are so many contorted interpretations of John 14:13-14, and so many translations that it is hard to say how many Christians interpret it as written, but there are many who believe it. I don't believe it can be dismissed as a strawman. The Church of Christ translates it as follows:

John 14:13-14

I will do whatever you ask in my name, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If in my name you ask me for anything, I will do it.

That's pretty well saying "Anything you want"

A great many people I know seem to operate on the concept that if enough people pray hard enough, it will happen. We have local prayer chains where you start calling a list and they call a list, etc., etc. and you have hundreds praying that somebody's aunt's neighbor's cousin's friend from school gets home safely from Bugwhackistan, where they've been trying to teach the heathens the error of their ways. How can 1000 people praying be different to an omniscient god than one sincere person praying? This is like saying "God doesn't want to do it, but if we gang up on him he'll change his mind.". This, IMO, largely conflicts with the argument that John 14:13-14 means "Whatever you want, as long as god wants it anyway".

 

[elliotfc]

It is claimed that the Christian god grants whatever you ask for in prayer, yet this has been conclusively shown to be false. Ergo, the Christian god does not exist.

Not this again.

A different, ignorant, uncaring or incoptent god might, but not the god which is described in the Bible.

OK, name the Bible verses, I can put up with another iteration I guess. Go.

-Elliot

 

[elliotfc]

Look at it this way: I postulate a particular god exists who answers all prayers. Let's call him Joe. Thousands of devout believers in Joe pray for a wide variety of things. After collecting the results, the data shows that nothing happened outside the range of chance. We therefore conclude that our postulated god does not exist as described.

Agreed.

Or...
1)God answers prayers in ways that we may not consider to be acceptable...or commensurate to answers.
2)God answered *every* prayer in the best way possible in Jesus.
3)God will directly answer prayers when he chooses to, and not when we would have him answer them.

The Christian god's description has changed radically over time, and continues to change.

Agreed. Theology is an ongoing approach to alignment with the objective truth of God, whatever that may be.

This is because as our level of knowledge provides clear explanations for actions previously attributed to god, there exist only two options: Acknowledge god doesn't exist as described and change the description or acknowledge he doesn't exist. (I guess there's a third; Ignore the obvious. )

If it really was obvious, there wouldn't be so many people who believe in God.

That's pretty well saying "Anything you want"

The "in my name" phrase being...let's just call it a loophole. Or, you can think that you're asking for something in God's name, but you really aren't. If you accept that the Our Father is the template, prayers that go against the spirit of the Our Father...or those prayers in God's name?

A great many people I know seem to operate on the concept that if enough people pray hard enough, it will happen. We have local prayer chains where you start calling a list and they call a list, etc., etc. and you have hundreds praying that somebody's aunt's neighbor's cousin's friend from school gets home safely from Bugwhackistan, where they've been trying to teach the heathens the error of their ways. How can 1000 people praying be different to an omniscient god than one sincere person praying?

It *is* different, isn't it? 1000 people praying is 999 more than 1 person praying.

This is like saying "God doesn't want to do it, but if we gang up on him he'll change his mind.". This, IMO, largely conflicts with the argument that John 14:13-14 means "Whatever you want, as long as god wants it anyway".

I get your point.

God wants all sorts of things, but everything that God wants does not necessarily happen.

I don't think the number of people who pray to God will change God's mind...in the sense that there exists an objective threshhold where God will necessarily do something, if the number of persons is reached.

I probably shouldn't speak for those who create prayer chains, maybe you can pin one of them down. And if not, maybe you can will us in on how they would respond.

-Elliot

 

[Freethinker]

Agreed.

Or...
1)God answers prayers in ways that we may not consider to be acceptable...or commensurate to answers.
2)God answered *every* prayer in the best way possible in Jesus.
3)God will directly answer prayers when he chooses to, and not when we would have him answer them.

You are correct, but all of the options conflict with the originally postulated god. Scientifically, we could postulate a new god who complies with one of your options (or the numerous other ones), but they are considerably more difficult to prove or disprove.

In essence, this has happened over the ages. A new god wasn't postulated, but Christans' belief in what he would do changed to accomodate new understanding of the universe and deeper reading of the bible. As the gaps in our understanding grew smaller, Christians' "postulated" god shrank to fit those gaps, and has become confined to possessing qualities and powers that can't be observed or refuted. To me, this has a logical conclusion that the Christian god does not exist. Others may reach a different conclusion with the same data.

 

[Freethinker]

Sorry to split this into two posts. I forgot to finish.

The "in my name" phrase being...let's just call it a loophole. Or, you can think that you're asking for something in God's name, but you really aren't. If you accept that the Our Father is the template, prayers that go against the spirit of the Our Father...or those prayers in God's name?

I won't quibble about the interpretation of the bible, but what I think is important is the common believer's understanding of it. I don't think most Christians share that interpretation.

It *is* different, isn't it? 1000 people praying is 999 more than 1 person praying.

But if god only grants prayers that are already his will, it shouldn't matter what the number is. If nobody prays that chickens gain the ability to fly, but god wants it to happen, it's going to happen. If all of humanity prays for or against chicken flight, it won't affect god's will, so it won't affect the chickens. If it doesn't matter what the number is, it doesn't matter whether you pray or not.

As to the prayer chains, I cite them only as an example that the average Christian that I encounter apparently believes that it is possible to change god's will through prayer, and the more people praying, the better.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

I don't know many denominations that claim that "God grants whatever you ask for in prayer" - whatever that claim actually means - so I think we may safely consider that a strawman.

Wrong. Try reading the Bible now and then.

1) And Jesus answered and said to them, "Truly I say to you, if you have faith and do not doubt, you will not only do what was done to the fig tree, but even if you say to this mountain, `Be taken up and cast into the sea,' it will happen. "And all things you ask in prayer, believing, you will receive." (Matthew 21:21-22 NAS)



2) Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks, receives; and the one who seeks, finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened. (Matthew 7:7-8 NAB)



3) Again I say to you, that if two of you agree on earth about anything that they may ask, it shall be done for them by My Father who is in heaven. For where two or three have gathered together in My name, I am there in their midst. (Matthew 18:19-20 NAS)



4) Amen, I say to you, whoever says to this mountain, 'Be lifted up and thrown into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart but believes that what he says will happen, it shall be done for him. Therefore I tell you, all that you ask for in prayer, believe that you will receive it and it shall be yours. (Mark 11:24-25 NAB)



5) And I tell you, ask and you will receive; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks, receives; and the one who seeks, finds; and to the one who knocks, the door will be opened. (Luke 11:9-13 NAB)



6) And whatever you ask in my name, I will do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you ask anything of me in my name, I will do it. (John 14:13-14 NAB)



7) If you remain in me and my words remain in you, ask for whatever you want and it will be done for you. (John 15:7 NAB)



8) It was not you who chose me, but I who chose you and appointed you to go and bear fruit that will remain, so that whatever you ask the Father in my name he may give you. (John 15:16 NAB)



9) On that day you will not question me about anything. Amen, amen, I say to you, whatever you ask the Father in my name he will give you. Until now you have not asked anything in my name; ask and you will receive, so that your joy may be complete. (John 16:23-24 NAB)

http://www.evilbible.com/Jesus_Lied.htm

 

[elliotfc]

You are correct, but all of the options conflict with the originally postulated god.

Originally by who exactly?

Let's take the Twelve, and let's assume they heard the exact words as related in the bible regarding prayer. How did they react? Did they start praying for anything and everything with the expectation that it would happen? Did Simon or Judas or James start praying that Jesus would be accepted by everybody and that all wars would stop and anything else?

I suggest that the *original* acceptance of the words of Christ were "nuanced" approaches kept within the totality of Christ's message.

That's where I'd place an original postulate. Where do you place it?

Scientifically, we could postulate a new god who complies with one of your options (or the numerous other ones), but they are considerably more difficult to prove or disprove.

I think difficult to prove is an understatement.

I'm trying to get across that the *PROBLEM* many atheists/agnostics declare when it comes to "ask and you shall receive" is, apparently, *not* an insurmountable problem to believers.

In essence, this has happened over the ages. A new god wasn't postulated, but Christans' belief in what he would do changed to accomodate new understanding of the universe and deeper reading of the bible. As the gaps in our understanding grew smaller, Christians' "postulated" god shrank to fit those gaps, and has become confined to possessing qualities and powers that can't be observed or refuted.

That all sounds fine I guess. Christians believe that Jesus, as a person, possessed qualities and powers of God, and we also believe that Jesus was observed so I dunno.

I'm thinking that you're thinking that Christianity has evolved survival or defense mechanisms to remain viable ("observed or refuted"), and as a Christian I think there's something to that.

To me, this has a logical conclusion that the Christian god does not exist. Others may reach a different conclusion with the same data.

There's definitely "logic" in conclusions which conclude that the Christian God doesn't exist. And if the Christian God *does* exist, that would not determine that the conclusion that the Christian God did not exist was illogical. We do the best we can.

-Elliot

 

[ImaginalDisc]

There's definitely "logic" in conclusions which conclude that the Christian God doesn't exist. And if the Christian God *does* exist, that would not determine that the conclusion that the Christian God did not exist was illogical. We do the best we can.

-Elliot

You still don't understand.

Firstly, an omnipotent and morally good is impossible, for reasons that have been repeated incessantly on this forum.

Secondly, the Christian god allegedly grants all prayers made in Jesus's name. That's an easily testable claim. In Jesus's name I pray for my hair to turn into vipers, and for the snakes to bite my nose.

Vipers?

Hello, vipers?

No vipers.

Claim = false.

The Christian god also allegedly appears as a burning bush, turn women into salt, and floods the planet, none of which has ever happend. All claims made about the Christian god in the Bible are either untestable, or false.

Ergo, the Christian god is a complete fiction.

A different, uncaring, cruel, or incompetent god may exist, but such a god does not conform to the claims made about the Christian god.