Why the comparison???

I side with haredawg: these tired “see how ignorant and silly Christians are” arguments made by choosing something everyone knows is false and a figment made to take in children as a equivalency to belief in a/the god/s is nothing more than a silly joke with no intellectual value whatsoever. Logically, it doesn’t stand up. There are much better arguments you could make than these. [StealthPudge18]

I disagree. I’m not making the comparison for the reasons that you and haredawg attribute to me. When I choose to discuss faith something that everyone knows in false, I have a specific purpose in mind.

We know that Santa is false, the important question is “why we know this”?

Or, why do you think that a sock-god doesn’t exist?

I can give very good reasons why I do not believe in a sock-god.

I think a theist, who posits a being above and beyond any conceivable scientific test or measure has a much harder time justifying the belief in one non-testable non-physical being while at the same time rejecting a different belief in a different non-testable non-physical being.

“I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.” ~Stephen Roberts

And I’m trying to bring that point out fully.

Psychologically, a god who punishes humans for eternity one way or another based on something as arbitrary as socks is not very satisfying…

However, as someone once said, “it would indeed be very nice if there were a God, who was both creator of the world and a benevolent ruler, if there were a moral world order and a future life, but at the same time it is very that odd that all this is just as we would wish it ourselves.”

So, theists believe in all kinds of gods, but there are certain characteristics that are never believed in. They aren’t all wish-fulfillment gods, but as Boyer writes in his book Religion Explained, religious belief can be largely explained as a product of the human psyche.

That Stephen Roberts quote is one that theists should try to take seriously.

Why do they reject the belief in a specific Hindu God?

They can’t answer, “because I believe in this other God first, and that excludes that second one…”
Because anyone could back up the belief in any other God using the same exact argument.

haredawg

November 26, 2004

The Stephen Roberts qoute states something different than you do though. Stephen Roberts affirms his belief, he doesnt impugn his own integrity by claiming to believe in something he doesnt to negate someone elses belief. You dont believe in Santa, a sock god or unicorns.

A theist, an atheist and an agnostic hear a bump in the rooms upstairs. The theist states its Satan, the atheist states its only the wind, the agnostic states he doesnt know what it is. To the agnostic the other two are arrogant. You state its Santa Claus dont you guys feel stupid.

StealthPudge18

For one, monotheism is a better option logically because it is abductive (an appeal to the simplest solution.) If you walk into a room and see a table, the logical conclusion is that someone 1.) built it and 2.) put it there. The abductive is not to posit more than one tablemaker if one will fulfill all the necessary and sufficient conditions for the presence of the table.

Second, God is not beyond science, it is just insufficient to explain him/it/them fully. If the science I’ve read is correct science has limited explanatory power because it can never answer the questions of origin or purpose. If you deny origin and purpose, you defy both logical and human existence, negating your own existence for the sake of your nihilism.

Third, the Roberts quote is ridiculous and a mockery of language. It is ridiculous for an atheist to use the word god in an absolutistic statement in the way that quote suggests. Affirm there is no God. Do not affirm that you believe in one fewer gods. That statement has to affirm there god exists to affirm there is not a god. I don’t think the quote is deep. I think it is nonsense.

BlessedDarkness

November 27, 2004

You’re in college — please act like it!

to believe there is no god is as much nonsens as to say i made myself,.. for we know neither you nor your parents made themselfs, for thern parents indriectly made them, yet they themselfs didn,. bring it back all generations and non of em created themselfs,.. , yeah then the evolution therorie wont stand to cuz of to many coincidence that u just overbridge as a simple step, but fact is science..

comes closer now, as of many scientist belife now that ther is a creator and not the luck in accident creation,.. so what was though of it in the past is now a disbelieve anmong most scientists,. to proof is harder for ur reality of truth, is in lies and not in truth itself.. therfore ur struggle wont even come close to see in right, therfor it wonr matter to u untill ull get to see it fro yaself.

to take the mistake of humasn and to put it on god is as much nonsens as to say every american is bad,.. what u r is not on the outsied neither you yourself know your true heart,.. but is known to god,.. therfor your disbelife in god will create more holes into lies and keep ya further awya from truth,.. example -> for iam a bad male makes all males bad,.. same lie same stuipid blindness…

it aint the best example to put on,.. but its hard to find some that is,.. so i make it this way.. / god=good humans=?,.. if humans r on ? in thereen way, god is still good, to than make him that what we r from the ? to either good or bad is for u to chnage a car into a motorcicle, yes i know this was put on believe, but im just pointin ya blindness that is in the old lie coming in a dif variation

Did you know that you can take the Bible and put it through the three test they use on all secular literature to prove authnicity and it passes with flying colors? Yet people still see it as a simple fairy tale book. I have no desire to debate on anything, but did you also know that this diary supports exactly what the Bible itself says??? Ofcourse if you never have read any of the Bible..

then you have no idea what I’m talking about. But also if you haven’t read any of the Bible (not only read, but study what you read) then you have no basis for anything you post on here…It’s simply your opinion. At least the Christians that post on here have a historical document to back them up…(Ofcourse the world will always tell you otherwise.<<which is how the Bible explains it would)