Atheists Who Celebrate All The Good That God Causes.

EVERY national level issue relates to ALL America.

I know Trump wants to lead only a portion of America. He goes out of his way at every opportunity to state that he does NOT believe in a united USA - he believes in a Trump pals vs. the rest America.

But, that is a FALSE view of America. There is a UNITED States, and its issues are shared by all.

 

Your approach to writing responses does not move the
conversation forward, but that's okay. No problem.

JAG


``

 

Are you saying that you believe that part of you
that suggested I go and read that SpaceTime article
will decompose? And be gone forever?

That part of you that loves to think about your area
of work and about intellectual problems, will decompose?

Do you believe that You ARE your Body&Brain like this::
WillReadMore = His Body&Brain ?

Do you believe that when you die, you cease to exist?

JAG

 

Well yeah.
But I never denied that.
I said this:
JAG Wrote:
"America has only two national political parties that can win
national elections. The GOP and the Donks and neither
one has Secular Humanism {much less atheism}
on their political platforms. Both parties claim to believe
in God. There are tens of millions of Christians in both
parties. America is roughly 50%-50% divided between
the GOP and the Donks with tens of millions of
Christians in both parties.
There are at present, to the best of my knowledge,
no national-level issues that relate to atheism.
The so-called "new atheists" have kicked up some
dust, but not at the national-level."___JAG

Is there anything in what I said, that is incorrect?

The United States is not very much united these days.
The politicians get along like cats and dogs,
The GOP hates the Donks.
The Donks hates the GOP.
Most people in D.C. get along together like The Donald & Nancy P
There isn't a lot of Love in D.C. is there?

JAG


``

 

Sorry - I thougt you were leading in that direction with your repeated "donks" reference.

But, let me just comment on that, as you brought up a number of issues that you point out as sure to result in political debate.

I'd suggest that Jesus wasn't interested in government as Christians certainly are today. So, maybe he didn't see politics as a requirement in following him. I doubt he would have pushed to turn sins into laws, thus making mankind to be the judge of sin.

As for the "donks", I might propose that progressive direction is actually closer to what Jesus asks than I think you give it credit for.

Frankly, I don't understand the relationship of Republicans today and Christianity. How can Christians treat immigrant children and their familes like they advocate? How can Christians ignore the healthcare needs of those who are priced out of our system? How can Christians tolerate the racism that is rampant in America today?

I'll let the others on your list go, as this is really off topic.

I just want to raise this as issue that needs to get thought about - maybe not here, but somewhere.

 

Sorry - I thougt you were leading in that direction with your repeated "donks" reference.

But, let me just comment on that, as you brought up a number of issues that you point out as sure to result in political debate.

I'd suggest that Jesus wasn't interested in government, certainly not as Christians are today. So, maybe he didn't see politics as a requirement in following him. I doubt he would have pushed to turn sins into laws, thus making mankind to be the judge of sin. While Paul was seen as a threat by Rome, he didn't go there to overthrow the government.

As for the "donks", I might propose that progressive direction is actually closer to what Jesus asks than I think you give it credit for. The fact that there are tens of millions of Christian donks might be a clue that your view of donks is not representative of Christianity as a whole.

Frankly, I don't understand the relationship of Republicans today and Christianity. How can Christians treat immigrant children and their familes like they advocate? How can Christians ignore the healthcare needs of those who are priced out of our system, especially now at a time when a million per month are losing coverage? How can Christians tolerate the racism that is rampant in America today? How can Christians aid in the ethnic cleansing of Palestine, or tolerate the open air penitentiary holding the citizens of Gaza with no objection?

I'll let the others on your list go, as this is really off topic.

I just want to raise this as issue that needs to get thought about - maybe not here, but somewhere.

- your progressive whom you may call as you like

 

I don't get your comment about spacetime.

But, absolutely. When a life form dies, it returns its constituent parts. It may take a while, as humans practice mummification, encase bodies in vaults, etc., and natural processes can include fossilization, etc.

Things like thoughts, feelings, etc. are atributes of life.

This isn't new, so I'm surprised at the question.

 

Much of this is about their terrible fear of death.

 

Well, that's the central point of this line of the discussion (or at least, whether atheists could be expected to say it, post about it, etc.). If I am right in saying that atheists actually believe 14, they just don't see a reason to state it, and if in addition I can show that they are justified in not stating it, then I can show that the crux of the entire thread (whether atheists could be expected to "celebrate all the good things God causes", as in the title) is resolved, and that the issues in the thread are not due to any inconsistency in atheists' posts, but in your misunderstanding of the atheist standpoint.

That being said, we've branched into other things, like the trolley problem, which I don't see how they hearken back to that original issue. It seems to me that they are merely a distraction, or a excuse to say that a post has been answered even though the core of the post hasn't actually been addressed. That being said, I don't want to assume that it couldn't (and it is pretty interesting), so I'm happy to sustain that conversation too. It is very annoying when you ask a pointed question and the "opponent" assumes that it is unrelated and therefore don't answer it, so I try not to assume stuff like that.

For someone who doesn't care what they believe, you've created an awful lot of posts on the subject, including the thread with the title and central conflict centred around it.

This seems to me a precarious situation. If you're unwilling to consider opposite views, then you have no way to determine that they are worse than yours, other than sheer stubbornness, which is hardly a guide to truth. It's like the Mitchell and Web sketch with some Nazis who are struggling to ask themselves the question "are we the baddies?".

I think part of the issue here is that you've framed this very strangely. This is probably the reason why people keep misunderstanding your hypotheticals. In this framing, you straight up say that you agree that you are an atheist (in my bolding). Your phrasing includes some of the framing of the hypothetical, but not all of them, making it very tricky to assess it.

I guess this is one of the reasons you should be considering other people's views. You seem to have missed the point of my objection completely. You keep reposting the same argument, and every time you fail to address my actual objection, the fact that you mix up believing 14 and "advocating" 14.

And why should they care whether 14 is true? They have a reason to state 12 (the argument of evil), but not for 14. You have provided nothing but a deafening silence on the topic.

 

■ Your "people" up there are atheists and Secular Humanists.
■ I have patiently explained all this MANY MANY times to your "people."
■They keep misunderstanding because they do not want to understand
■ There is nothing that can be done to unlock a human will, that is
determined to remain locked-down.
■ Thread-atheists generally are determined to resist all things that in
any possible way, will allow God to "get His foot in the door" and
my {14} is one of those things.

■ My view is that you have misunderstood my Opening Post and all
my follow-up posts in this thread. You did not even know that in
my list of 14 items that I was saying that the atheists were saying
those 14 items, and NOT ME saying them.{see below}

There it is again.
Total misunderstanding on your part of a VITAL & CRUCIAL element.
One that I have explained OVER & OVER & OVER again and again.
Here it is again:
It is NOT ME that is saying those 14 items.
Those 14 items are WHAT ATHEISTS SAY.
How is it that you could have missed that?
Is it because you are determined not to see it?
I have explained it MANY times in this thread.
My view is that you do not want to see it.
My view is that your FREE WILL is LOCKED-DOWN on this.
_______

My view is this has nothing to do with Logic and
intellectualism, but everything to do with the
Secularist's determination to "keep God out"
of the picture by any means possible.
________

My view is that both atheists and Secular
Humanists despise and hate the message
of the Opening Post and the message of
my follow-up posts and that they will spin and
twist and wiggle and squirm intellectually in
order to try to make it go away.

Here is this list again down below:
I have explained it MANY times in this thread.
You did not hear it.
There is another poster in this thread that has had it
explained to him MANY times.
He does NOT want to understand it.
He does NOT hear it.
His free will is LOCKED DOWN and he is
determined NOT to see it.

I will once again explain it to you.
This list below is WHAT ATHEISTS SAY:, , , ,

{1) I am an atheist.
{2} i don't believe in God.
{3} But He may exist.
{4} I can't prove He does.
{5} I can't prove He doesn't.
{6} The Bible says He is Omnipotent.
{7} That means He is all powerful.
{8} He could have created a different world.
{9} But He did not do that.
{10} He created the world we now have.
{11} That means He is responsible for all that exists.
{12} Therefore God is responsible for bone cancer in children.
{13} I want to be consistent with this principle.
{14} Therefore God is also responsible for Hospitals and the Red Cross

, , , and NOT what JAG is saying.

_______________

I will respond to the rest of your post as soon as possible , , ,

JAG



``

 

Here is why they should care:
Here is what many atheists say:
{1) I am an atheist.
{2} i don't believe in God.
{3} But He may exist.
{4} I can't prove He does.
{5} I can't prove He doesn't.
{6} The Bible says He is Omnipotent.
{7} That means He is all powerful.
{8} He could have created a different world.
{9} But He did not do that.
{10} He created the world we now have.
{11} That means He is responsible for all that exists.
{12} Therefore God is responsible for bone cancer in children.
{13} I want to be consistent with this principle.
{14} Therefore God is also responsible for Hospitals and the Red Cross
_______________

See the list of 14 items above.
You keep repeating the same question over and over and over
again and again and again, therefore I will keep repeating the
same answer to your question over and over and over again
and again and again.

Because of {1} through {14} above.
You are very enjoyable to talk to.
And I have come to like you.
But we have reached the point where I am going to
have to start interpreting your posts on this subject as
theological and intellectual ,poetry and respond poetically.
For example the exchange might be something like this:
"And why should they care if 14 is true?"___Swensson
JAG Replies:
"Twas brillig, and the slithy toves Did gyre and gimble
in the wabe: All mimsy were the borogoves,
And the mome raths outgrabe.."__quoted by JAG

For the same reason they should care that on their
atheism they have the identical same ultimate destiny as
a cockroach, namely oblivion as in ceasing to exist.

That is only what YOU say.
My view is that Alvin Plantinga Free Will Defense has destroyed
"their reason" to state 12.
My view is that neither you nor your "people" have refuted
Planting's argument that destroyed "their reason" to state 12.

Deafening silence according to YOU.
Mt view is that this below is NOT deafening silence.
Just becasue YOU are determined not to see ti,
does not mean that it is deafening silence.
It only means that YOU are determined NOT to see it.
Here again is your "deafening silence"

Here is why they should care about {14}
This is what many atheists say:
{1) I am an atheist.
{2} i don't believe in God.
{3} But He may exist.
{4} I can't prove He does.
{5} I can't prove He doesn't.
{6} The Bible says He is Omnipotent.
{7} That means He is all powerful.
{8} He could have created a different world.
{9} But He did not do that.
{10} He created the world we now have.
{11} That means He is responsible for all that exists.
{12} Therefore God is responsible for bone cancer in children.
{13} I want to be consistent with this principle.
{14} Therefore God is also responsible for Hospitals and the Red Cross

More later , , ,



``

 

No.
Not strangely.
Strangely is not the issue.
The issue is that you and atheists in general "do not like" the
way that it is framed, which is this:

My opening Post and this thread is not on the subject of God's
Omnibenevolence. This particular thread is about this:

Many atheists say the following:
{1) I am an atheist.
{2} i don't believe in God.
{3} But He may exist.
{4} I can't prove He does.
{5} I can't prove He doesn't.
{6} The Bible says He is Omnipotent.
{7} That means He is all powerful.
{8} He could have created a different world.
{9} But He did not do that.
{10} He created the world we now have.
{11} That means He is responsible for all that exists.
{12} Therefore God is responsible for bone cancer in children.
{13} I want to be consistent with this principle.
{14} Therefore God is also responsible for Hospitals and the Red Cross

___________________________________________

"My point is NOT that God IS good or that God IS evil.
My point is that God PERFORMS both good and evil acts
based upon {6} through {14}. Remember {6} through {12}
is what atheist say --- {6} through {12} is NOT what JAG
says. I do NOT have to be consistent with a position
that I do NOT hold. But atheists do. Why? because they
DO hold {6} through {12} to be true and they DO advocate
for {6} through {12} all the time in threads."___JAG
_____________________________________________

Many atheists want it both ways.
They want to say that the "God-That-Does-Not-Exist causes
or is ultimately responsible for the evil in the world. They say
this in threads all the time. They base this on {6} through {12} up
there.
So? So if {6} through {12} are not true, then they ought to stop
claiming that the God-That-Does-Not-Exist is ultimately responsible
for the evil in the world.
And if {6} through {12} is true, then God is also responsible for causing
the good in the world, Hospitals, Warm Beaches, the Red Cross, etc
and we're back to {13} and {14} being true."___JAG



``

 

You are not right. You are wrong.
World Atheism has NOT said they believe {14}
My view is that you have no possible way to know what
World-Atheism believes about 14 and that you do not
know what they believe.

My view is that those 4 atheists you claim said they
did believe in 14 is worth 00.00 and that you
cannot speak for the world's 500 - 750 million atheists
regarding what they believe about {14}

"According to sociologist Phil Zuckerman, broad
estimates of those who have an absence of belief
in a deity range from 500 to 750 million people
worldwide"___Wikipedia Demographics of Atheism

So?
So your vital and crucial point up there, fails.


``

 

I meant the Real You.
You have a body.
You have a brain.
You are not your body , , , WillReadMore = His Body is incorrect.
You are are not your brain , , , WillReadMore = His Brain is incorrect.

The real You is the part that can love and appreciate the wiki article on SpaceTime
You told me you really liked or loved that article and that I ought to read it.
That was not your mere Brain telling me that , , it was the Real You telling me that.

So if it was the Real You that liked or loved that Wiki SpaceTime article.
Then it was not your mere Brain that loved or liked it.
Your brain is merely a material vehicle that allows the Real You to think, reason, love, etc.
You ARE not your Brain.
YOU = YOUR BRAIN in incorrect.
You can picture in your mind what your brain looks like.
The web says it weighs about 3 pounds.
Your brain is about the size of a grapefruit? Or a large apple?
But Your Brain is NOT the Real You.

Your Brain is a mere tool that allows the Real You to really like and appreciate the
Wikipedia article on SpaceTime.

When your Brain dies, that does not mean that the Real You dies.

When your Brain ceases to exist {decomposes} that does not mean that the Real You
ceases to exist.

So that up there is what I meant by my comment about the Real You's interest in
that SpaceTime wiki article.

JAG

 

You can continue to put your "spin" on this issue to your heart's
content. Words will allow all kinds of "spin" and "wiggles"
and "twists" and "turns" in order to escape from a very simple
truth, which truth is this:

My opening Post and this thread is not on the subject of God's
Omnibenevolence. This particular thread is about this:

Many atheists say the following:
{1) I am an atheist.
{2} i don't believe in God.
{3} But He may exist.
{4} I can't prove He does.
{5} I can't prove He doesn't.
{6} The Bible says He is Omnipotent.
{7} That means He is all powerful.
{8} He could have created a different world.
{9} But He did not do that.
{10} He created the world we now have.
{11} That means He is responsible for all that exists.
{12} Therefore God is responsible for bone cancer in children.
{13} I want to be consistent with this principle.
{14} Therefore God is also responsible for Hospitals and the Red Cross

___________________________________________

"My point is NOT that God IS good or that God IS evil.
My point is that God PERFORMS both good and evil acts
based upon {6} through {14}. Remember {6} through {12}
is what atheist say --- {6} through {12} is NOT what JAG
says. I do NOT have to be consistent with a position
that I do NOT hold. But atheists do. Why? because they
DO hold {6} through {12} to be true and they DO advocate
for {6} through {12} all the time in threads."___JAG
_____________________________________________

Many atheists want it both ways.
They want to say that the "God-That-Does-Not-Exist causes
or is ultimately responsible for the evil in the world. They say
this in threads all the time. They base this on {6} through {12} up
there.
So? So if {6} through {12} are not true, then they ought to stop
claiming that the God-That-Does-Not-Exist is ultimately responsible
for the evil in the world.
And if {6} through {12} is true, then God is also responsible for causing
the good in the world, Hospitals, Warm Beaches, etc

_____________

Regarding your "believing":

World Atheism has NOT said they believe {14}
My view is that you have no possible way to know what
World-Atheism believes about 14 and that you do not
know what they believe.

My view is that those 4 atheists you claim said they
did believe in 14 is worth 00.00 and that you
cannot speak for the world's 500 - 750 million atheists
regarding what they believe about {14}

"According to sociologist Phil Zuckerman, broad
estimates of those who have an absence of belief
in a deity range from 500 to 750 million people
worldwide"___Wikipedia Demographics of Atheism

So?
So your vital and crucial point up there, fails.

Regarding your "advocating" , , ,

, , , here is my answer:

Many atheists say the following:
{1) I am an atheist.
{2} i don't believe in God.
{3} But He may exist.
{4} I can't prove He does.
{5} I can't prove He doesn't.
{6} The Bible says He is Omnipotent.
{7} That means He is all powerful.
{8} He could have created a different world.
{9} But He did not do that.
{10} He created the world we now have.
{11} That means He is responsible for all that exists.
{12} Therefore God is responsible for bone cancer in children.
{13} I want to be consistent with this principle.
{14} Therefore God is also responsible for Hospitals and the Red Cross


Many atheists want it both ways.
They want to say that the "God-That-Does-Not-Exist causes
or is ultimately responsible for the evil in the world. They say
this in threads all the time. They base this on {6} through {12} up
there.
So? So if {6} through {12} are not true, then they ought to stop
claiming that the God-That-Does-Not-Exist is ultimately responsible
for the evil in the world.
And if {6} through {12} is true, then God is also responsible for causing
the good in the world, Hospitals, Warm Beaches, etc

______________

Swensson, don't you think we ought to end this thread? Isn't there some
other subjects we can "kick around" besides this one?

JAG


`

 

Ii is a fact that you cannot speak for the world's some
500 - 750 million atheists and therefore a vital crucial
element of your argument fails.

The fact is that you do not know what those 500 -750
million atheists believe about 13 and 14.

JAG

 

Jesus is very much interested in
His future government of the world.
But not yet. The world will one day
be Christianized and then the Lord
Jesus will govern the entire world.
{But that is very long way off, many
mega-millenniums, me thinks.}

"For to us a child is born,
to us a son is given,
and the government will be on his shoulders.
And he will be called
Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God,
Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.
Of the greatness of his government and peace
there will be no end.
He will reign on David’s throne
and over his kingdom,
establishing and upholding it
with justice and righteousness
from that time on and forever.
The zeal of the Lord Almighty
will accomplish this."
___Isaiah 9:6-7

If you're talking about giving $$ money to poor people, then I have
no problems with doing that when there is a real need. The only
problem I see with giving other people's $$ money to poor people
is doing that for decades and decades destroys the poor's
self-image and their ability to earn their own living. Giving poor
people a "hand up" is better than giving them a "hand out"
from cradle to grave. But we ought to give them a "hand up"
to help them get on their feet so they can then earn their own
living, take care of themselves, and hold their head up high,
so to speak.

Regarding $$ Money, Money is NOT going to be an issue in the
relatively near future. There will eventually be a surplus of
$$ Money throughout the entire world. The way to make
$$ Money a non-issue is to create a Money-Surplus.

I would encourage you to read "Abundance : The Future Is
Better Than You Think" by Peter H. Diamandis and Steven
Kotler.
Here are a few quotes from the blurbs on the back cover:

"This brilliant must-read book provides the key to the
coming era of abundance replacing eons of scarcity.
Abundance is a powerful antidote to today's malaise
and pessimism."___Ray Kurzweil

"This is an audacious and powerful read! Abundance shows
us how today's philanthropists, innovators, and passionate
entrepreneurs are more empowered than ever before to solve
humanity's grand challenges."___ Jeff Skoll

"Our world faces multiple crises and is awash in pessimism.
Abundance redirects the conversation. spotlighting scientific
innovators working to improve people's lives. The result is
more than a portrait of brilliant minds -- it's a reminder of the
infinite possibilities for doing good when we tap into our own
empathy and wisdom."___ Arianna Huffington

One more quote from the inside cover:

"Since the dawn of humanity, a privileged few have lived
in stark contrast to the hardscrabble majority. Conventional
wisdom says this gap cannot be closed. But it is closing -- fast."

__________________________

This one is good too , , ,
Here is another book demonstrating that $$ Money is not
going to be an issue in the relatively near future , , ,

"Its Getting Better All The Time: 100 Greatest Trends Of The
Last 100 Years, by Stephen Moore and Julian Simon. Here are
a couple of comments from the blurbs:

"A refreshing breath of optimism and sanity amidst all the gloom
and doom."__John Stossel ABC News

"This book is so chock full of good news that it's virtually guaranteed
to cheer up even the clinically depressed. Moore and Simon dismantle
the doomsday pessimism that's still so commonplace in academia and
the media. The evidence they present is irrefutable: Give people freedom
and free enterprise and the potential for human progress is seemingly
limitless."__Lawrence Kudlow, Chief Economist, CNBC

I thank God for His blessings on America. God has blessed America
with an $18 trillion dollar annual economy. And a huge swath of America
does in fact use their wealth to help the people that you are rightly
concerned about.
.

JAG

``

 

Your comments are perfect examples of what happens when
the pros and cons of this list is "debated"
We can now add your issues to the list.
_________
The Palestine-Gaza Problem
Poor people
Immigration
________
Donald Trump's Political Policies
Nativism
Xenophobia
Trans gender issues
Misogyny.
Abortion
Homosexual Marriage
Pornography
Free Speech
Racism .
Pollution
Homelessness
Climate Change
Overpopulation
LGBTQ Adoption Rights
The Iraq War {justified or unjustified}
Taxes
The Republican Party's Political Positions
The Libertarian Party's Political Positions
The Democratic Party's Political Positions
Human Rights
Black Lives Matter
And dozens and dozens more ,
_____________________________

The point being WillReadMore, is that you and your
political opponents will both claim to have Truth-Reality
on your side when you "debate" these political subjects:
The Palestine-Gaza Problem
Poor people
Immigration , , ,

, , and when you debate all the other subjects on that
list up there. Intellectuals on both sides all claiming
to have Truth-Reality on their side while holding
contradictory positions on these issues.
So?
So there is a lot of Faith out there when a lot
of people claim to have Truth-Reality on their
side and claim to KNOW they are right when
they hold contradictory positions on that list
of issues.

21st Century Christendom is divided on how to best solve your
issues up there. Have you not kept up with what Pope Francis
wants to do for the poor? Franny is very much a progressive-liberal.

And Protestantism has NOT a few liberals and liberal churches.

______________

Fact , , ,
The world's 2.3 billion Christians have not collectively announced
their views on your issues:
■ immigrant children
■ immigrant families
■ poor people priced out of our health care system
■ racism {your alleged racism in America}
■ The Palestine-Gaza issue


``

 

No. Aheists do not say that. This has been explained to you repeatedly.

You think you know what atheists say, but you have refused to listen to what they actually say - not just from me, not just from Swensson, but even from the hypothetical humans who made the weak argument you so illogically misrepresent.

You can't make up or grossly and purposefully misrepresent what someone else says and then think you have promoted your version of religion. So, I REALLY don't understand the "god's foot in the door"thing. Nohing you have said even remotely provides for that.

 

Humans are seriously powerful meat computers. Sorry, but that's all you get.

Our emotions are an evolutionary advantage that did not start with humans. Other animals exhibit very clear evidence that they have emotions, too.

This is an area of thought that is ancient in origin. But, the idea that there is a mini-me of supernatural substance that controls what I think and do has no evidence and no appeal to me at all.

 

That's just a dodge.

The very definition of atheism precludes your thesis. This isn't some sort of edge condition or hard problem. It is the single fundamental issue that distinguishes atheism.

 

There is massive evidence that individual giving is totally inadequate. There is no rational argument against this.

If rich folks did what Jesus directed (sell their posessions and give that to the poor) then it might work.

But, rich people don't like that idea - regardless of their religion.

 

Atheists DO say that.
The fact that atheists DO say that been explained to you repeatedly.
And it will continue to be explained to you repeatedly as long as I
can keep from dozing off with boredom from explaining it,

JAG


``

 

You missed the central point here.

The debate on ALL those issues will not be between atheists and Christians. There aren't enough athists in America, AND their point of view on these issues is the same as it is for huge numbers of Christians. And, there are other religious minorities in America as well - Muslims, Hindus, New Age, etc., etc.

The majority of those on each of the various sides in these debates on policy will be Christians, because there is an overwhelming number of Christians and because there is NOT a single religious view on those issues..

I suspect your position in that debate will be more on the conservative/political right.

But, those who would disagree with you would use the clear statements of Jesus in their arguments.

 

It is not.
Rather it is 100% true,

JAG Wrote:
"Ii is a fact that you cannot speak for the world's some
500 - 750 million atheists and therefore a vital crucial
element of your argument fails.

The fact is that you do not know what those 500 -750
million atheists believe about 13 and 14."__JAG


``