|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
posted July 16, 2013 12:36 PM |
|
|
Quote:
My exact words were these:
If in such a huge universe and such great length of time, a belief is based on a God who puts some humans above everything else and spends his time watching things such as if they had sex out of wedlock or not, that level of anthropomorphical egocentric behavior can only be described with the word CHILDISH to me. I'm sorry, it's not deep, it's not sophisticated, it's actually quite primitive.
Well, if you think Christianity teaches God has to sit around watching people to know what they are doing then it just shows your ignorance of Christianity. Yeah, that would be a primitive and childish view of God, one the Bible does not put forward.
Quote:
And then you accuse me of bullying you when I tell you, you dont know what an evidence is. It is something you can display objectively to begin with. This is just... sigh.
I accuse you of bullying because you continually insult me.
And no, if I have a personal experience with God that is evidence of God whether I can show you my encounter or not.
Quote:
How can Jesus want to reach someone and fail (be misunderstood) if he is God and God is omnipotent?
God reaches out to everyone. But people can refuse to hear and harden their hearts over time for various reasons. People can misunderstand what God is saying because they don't seek God with their whole heart. Not everyone WANTS to understand.
Quote:
Quote:
Continually repeating that you can make dogmatic claims and have to offer no evidence but theists do have to offer evidence for their claims is not rational.
I will continually repeat it as long as you tactically ignore it:
Your statement is irrational.
Quote:
Besides, the mythologicalness and the anthropomorphism of your specific God, alone, is enough to rule him out as a rational explanation.
Atheism is the most irrational belief system to come out the darkened heart of any man. No myths can match the irrationality of that belief system.
Atheists must irrationally believe the universe is eternal or irrationally believe the universe created itself out of a steady state of absolute nothing.
The first cause had to be timeless, spaceless, self-existent, powerful, and intelligent. God.
@Angelito
Quote:
With arguments in a way like this, you make it even more impossible for atheists or non-believers to even think about a little truth in religion and the bible at all.
Oh, the atheists here, never present any rational reason at all for their irrational beliefs. Basically, the atheist arguments usually consist of one insult after another.
I can always rely on you to pop in and throw some slur my way.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted July 16, 2013 01:15 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 14:00, 16 Jul 2013.
|
Oh, this again. Atheism is not a belief to begin with and no matter how you mystify it, a God punishing you for every day stuff is a God caring and somehow watching every day stuff not so different than the pagan ones but... Elodin, just look around, there is not a single person that defines what you call evidence, evidence. You are so clueless about the basic definition of concepts itself and fill in the words out of proportion so arbitrarily, it becomes almost impossible to answer to you without getting rude. And then you go playing victim on me. Faith is not knowledge, faith is faith, historians using the Bible to examine ancient Egypt or Rome or kings is not historians accepting miracles or approving Bible proves the existence of God. Those are TOTALLY different things. Experiences such as yours are seen from members of all religions and saying but mine is really the true religion holds absolutely zero value objectively. It's just common human psychology. These are not things people even debate about, they are very simple, they are the least common denominator. So, let me speak to you with your way of understanding things:
- Allah came to me last night and said you were wrong, the Bible was altered and Quran is the true word of him. He said that Elodin is wrong about everything. I experienced this and you can't prove that I didn't, I have my experience as proof, you have nothing. Allah, the one true God told me your experience is fake.
Capiche? Now, let's move on please I really feel like we're wasting time. Oh, and when I use the word irrational I actually talk about things that are flawed in reasoning, treating the word like a ping pong ball and "talking it back" won't help you much. It actually has a meaning.
|
|
Hobbit
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted July 17, 2013 12:37 AM |
|
Edited by Hobbit at 00:49, 17 Jul 2013.
|
Quote:
Atheists must irrationally believe the universe is eternal or irrationally believe the universe created itself out of a steady state of absolute nothing.
The first cause had to be timeless, spaceless, self-existent, powerful, and intelligent. God.
Eternal vs. self-existent? I'm sorry, but now you're just trolling, right? I respect your intelligence, you proved to be an intelligent man in some other threads and topics, so that's the only explanation I can find. Is that true?
____________
Horn of the
Abyss on AcidCave
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted July 17, 2013 01:38 AM |
|
|
artu said:
You are so clueless about the basic definition of concepts itself and fill in the words out of proportion so arbitrarily, it becomes almost impossible to answer to you without getting rude.
artu, I have asked you politely several times now to please tone down the combative rhetoric. And yet you persist in the aggravating and provocative approach to this topic. There is no need to call people clueless, childish, and so forth when you disagree with their opinion. If you can't, as you put it, "answer to [Elodin] without getting rude", then I suggest you don't answer him at all. Here is your reminder of the Code of Conduct rules, in case you need a refresher:
6) NO provocation or aggravation.
Provocation is unfriendly behavior that causes anger or resentment from others. Aggravation is causing, continuing or increasing irritation or trouble. This includes being a detriment to the peacekeeping of the forums.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 17, 2013 11:09 AM |
|
|
artu said:
Oh, this again. Atheism is not a belief to begin with....
If a person says "I don't believe in God" then he is not making a dogmatic statement about the existence of God and I'd not classify that as a religion.
But when a person says "God does not exist" he is making a dogmatic statement that God does not exist. A statement for which he has no evidence. That sort of atheism is a religion. Those sorts of atheists usually also feel a need to "evangelize" and to attack other religions and followers of other religions.
Quote:
....and no matter how you mystify it, a God punishing you for every day stuff is a God caring and somehow watching every day stuff not so different than the pagan ones but...
God is all knowing so he knows what you will do even before you do it. He does live at every moment in space and time and transcends such and so he "experiences" your actions as well. He is not "wathing" you in the same sense as someone fixing their gaze on what you are doing.
Quote:
Elodin, just look around, there is not a single person that defines what you call evidence, evidence.
Oh, I beg to differ. Religious people consider their experiences with God as evidence of the reality of God.
Quote:
You are so clueless about the basic definition of concepts itself and fill in the words out of proportion so arbitrarily, it becomes almost impossible to answer to you without getting rude.
Quote:
ev·i·dence (v-dns)
n.
1. A thing or things helpful in forming a conclusion or judgment: The broken window was evidence that a burglary had taken place. Scientists weigh the evidence for and against a hypothesis.
2. Something indicative; an outward sign: evidence of grief on a mourner's face.
3. Law The documentary or oral statements and the material objects admissible as testimony in a court of law.
tr.v. ev·i·denced, ev·i·denc·ing, ev·i·denc·es
1. To indicate clearly; exemplify or prove.
2. To support by testimony; attest.
Idiom:
in evidence
1. Plainly visible; to be seen: It was early, and few pedestrians were in evidence on the city streets.
2. Law As legal evidence: submitted the photograph in evidence.
Quote:
Faith is not knowledge, faith is faith,
You do not know what Biblical faith is.
Quote:
Hebrews 10
32 Remember those earlier days after you had received the light, when you endured in a great conflict full of suffering. 33 Sometimes you were publicly exposed to insult and persecution; at other times you stood side by side with those who were so treated. 34 You suffered along with those in prison and joyfully accepted the confiscation of your property, because you knew that you yourselves had better and lasting possessions. 35 So do not throw away your confidence; it will be richly rewarded.
36 You need to persevere so that when you have done the will of God, you will receive what he has promised. 37 For,
“In just a little while,
he who is coming will come
and will not delay.”[f]
38 And,
“But my righteous[g] one will live by faith.
And I take no pleasure
in the one who shrinks back.”[h]
39 But we do not belong to those who shrink back and are destroyed, but to those who have faith and are saved.
Hebrews 11
1 Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see. 2 This is what the ancients were commended for.
Quote:
...historians using the Bible to examine ancient Egypt or Rome or kings is not historians accepting miracles or approving Bible proves the existence of God.
Your statement is very broad. Many historians are Christians and do believe the Bible is an evidence for God. But regardless of what anyone else believes I see the Bible as one evidence for God. There are things predicted hundreds or more than a thousand years beforehand that came to pass.
Quote:
So, let me speak to you with your way of understanding things:
- Allah came to me last night and said you were wrong, the Bible was altered and Quran is the true word of him. He said that Elodin is wrong about everything. I experienced this and you can't prove that I didn't, I have my experience as proof, you have nothing. Allah, the one true God told me your experience is fake.
If you had such an experience it would be evidence for you.
If I see a killer murder someone and I am the only witness but can't prove that he is the killer that still would not mean that what I saw is not evidence or that I need someone else to verify my experience.
____________
Revelation
|
|
Drakon-Deus
Undefeatable Hero
Nixonite
|
|
posted July 17, 2013 11:54 AM |
|
|
I had a vision from God myself..but I don't run around screaming about itbecause I know it was meant for me to strenghten my faith, others have proof as well.
I am not trolling, I am very serious.
____________
Horses don't die on a dog's wish.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted July 17, 2013 12:41 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 13:42, 17 Jul 2013.
|
Quote:
If a person says "I don't believe in God" then he is not making a dogmatic statement about the existence of God and I'd not classify that as a religion.
But when a person says "God does not exist" he is making a dogmatic statement that God does not exist. A statement for which he has no evidence. That sort of atheism is a religion.
As I said before, I will not let you ignore simple explanations and play the wall, the more they don't sink in the more I'll repeat:
Atheism is NOT TO ASSUME God, since there is no valid or necessary reason to. EVERYTHING can be explained in much simpler and rational ways, not to mention ALL social sciences, psychology indicates man created God not vice versa.
Quote:
Those sorts of atheists usually also feel a need to "evangelize" and to attack other religions and followers of other religions.
May I remind you how this begin, me and JJ were discussing a social
aspect when YOU made a comment about my observations of how even religious people don't believe in miracles anymore (which by the way is generally true, the average person today, religious or not, do not believe in contemporary miracles and do not explain daily phenomenon by them,you are a minority).
Quote:
God is all knowing so he knows what you will do even before you do it.
Well, good luck with that, because that kind of futuristic omniscience is not compatible with your claim of free will.
Quote:
Oh, I beg to differ. Religious people consider their experiences with God as evidence of the reality of God.
I meant the people here, participating in the discussion. And if your church buddies (who will of course have a strong tendency to believe your experience)define those as evidence, they are also wrong and have a misconcepted terminology. If I go to a court and say I know that man is the killer because I feel it in my guts, the guy walks free. Your cherry-picking from the dictionary is the broadest sense of the word and we both know you didn't mean it that way, when JJ indicated you might and I replied "he means proof" by looking at your context, you didn't object.
Quote:
You do not know what Biblical faith is.
Oh, it's not as unique or unimaginable as you think it is. I can assure you EVERYBODY thinks the same way about their own religion including the pagans. I can quote you some similar stuff from the Quran, "You will see's, Don't you know's, They are blind's"
Quote:
Your statement is very broad. Many historians are Christians and do believe the Bible is an evidence for God. But regardless of what anyone else believes I see the Bible as one evidence for God. There are things predicted hundreds or more than a thousand years beforehand that came to pass.
A historian may have faith in his personal life which is none of my business but as a historian doing his job, he will not take Biblical miracles for a fact. So the miracles are not considered HISTORICAL FACTS. Even the very existence of Jesus is handled in a scientific, secular way, because that is the basic principle and methodology of history as a social science:
The biblical account of events of the Exodus from Egypt in the Torah, and the migration to the Promised Land and the period of Judges are not considered historical in scholarship.[91][92] Regarding the New Testament, the setting being the Roman Empire in the 1st century CE, the historical context is well established. There has been some debate on the historicity of Jesus, but the mainstream opinion is that Jesus was one of several known historical itinerant preachers in 1st-century Roman Judea, teaching in the context of the religious upheavals and sectarianism of Second Temple Judaism.
As you can read, it does not say the mainstream opinion is he is the son of God. Btw, the "predictions" you talk about are not specific or accurate enough to count as real, proof-material future telling.
Quote:
If you had such an experience it would be evidence for you.
If I see a killer murder someone and I am the only witness but can't prove that he is the killer that still would not mean that what I saw is not evidence or that I need someone else to verify my experience.
No, if I had such an experience it would also very well mean, it's a psychological mechanism which feeds my wishful thinking, it may also mean I have a mental illness and I have delusions.
And this can definitely not be compared to witnessing a murder because we have incompatible religions' believers declaring they have experienced things such as you. So to continue the analogy, we have 30 people all claiming to see the killer and giving us different names and profiles, while the camera on the crime scene simply shows no one.
|
|
Drakon-Deus
Undefeatable Hero
Nixonite
|
|
posted July 17, 2013 01:06 PM |
|
|
<< if I had such an experience it would also very well mean, it's a psychological mechanism which feeds my wishful thinking, it may also mean I have a mental illness and I have delusions. >>
But you see, not all people think like you do...
____________
Horses don't die on a dog's wish.
|
|
Hobbit
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted July 17, 2013 01:25 PM |
|
Edited by Hobbit at 13:26, 17 Jul 2013.
|
...so that still wouldn't count as a fact. I assume that if you saw someone from your family that died several years ago just passing you by on the street, you wouldn't try to convince ANYONE that he's alive and everyone who doesn't agree with you has some irrational beliefs (opposed to "totally rational" beliefs about such dead person). It's because your personal experiences aren't reliable when it comes to facts, even to your family.
Why Elodin and many other theists don't accept such logic - that's the whole point of this discussion.
____________
Horn of the
Abyss on AcidCave
|
|
master_learn
Legendary Hero
walking to the library
|
|
posted July 17, 2013 07:37 PM |
|
|
@Hobbit,concerning logic I like that you don't deny the spiritual side of the reality and only have problem with the First cause.That's how you are in your way to understand better what we say.
My point is that when one definition of something real doesn't work,we as humans just change it with a working one,without saying "that particular definition" doesn't exist.
I,as theist,don't understand the sticking with the ONE AND ONLY DEFINITION,as if there is a thing with ONLY ONE definition.Such thing surely doesn't exist.
____________
"I heard the latest HD version disables playing Heroes. Please reconsider."-Salamandre
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted July 17, 2013 07:47 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 19:51, 17 Jul 2013.
|
You are not talking about any theism here, you are talking about a specific religion, which has a book and a doctrine. You can not arbitrarily change what it can mean and what it teaches. You didn't claim to be just a theist, you said you were a Christian. Of course, history changes the way religions are practiced but that's not the same as you taking out any verse you disagree on. And if there's nothing wrong with that, why not be bolder and leave it for good and became a non-religious theist? Cultural bounds, family tradition, habit?
Spirituality is a vague term by the way, is poetry spiritual? Is the music of Mozart? One can value things without the need to mystify them. Knowing that our consciousness is a neurological process and it will end when the brain dies does not mean we are robots or we should live like one. It's just being realistic about a natural state.
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
|
posted July 17, 2013 10:48 PM |
|
|
Hobbit said:
Why Elodin and many other theists don't accept such logic - that's the whole point of this discussion.
Because belief doesn't fit with logic...quite simple.
Just look all the southamerican football players. How the pray to God right befor the game starts, or how they pray to God just when they have scored a goal. Do they really think an ominpotent being like God watches a simple football game and decides "Ok...today I think I will help that guy with the red shirt and the number 9 on it, while I will make it happen that the guy with the blue shirt and the number 11 on it will NOT score the penalty in minute 68.!"
As Elodin alreadsy mentioned...God is everywhere and everytime. He knows everything. So why on earth do the believers PRAY at all? This won't help anything. All men are equal...so why should he help ONE boxer win his fight, while he let's the other one down?
Evidence: Logic and belief do not fit.
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
Drakon-Deus
Undefeatable Hero
Nixonite
|
|
posted July 17, 2013 11:32 PM |
|
|
Yes, the idea that God favors someone in sports is actually un-biblical but there are many who just believe in "pop" Christianity if you know what I mean.
____________
Horses don't die on a dog's wish.
|
|
bloodsucker
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted July 18, 2013 02:27 AM |
|
|
All man are equal
Sorry but I have to desagree with you.
That is one of the major diferences between non theistic persons and comum believers of an antropomorphical god.
We think an hypotetical God should look at all humans like equals and judge only by valor or nor judge at all but to a believer of those religions God is as parcial as one can get is susceptable to flatter and for that his true follwers are invited to a diferent club then all other humans.
So, I would have to consider you superior to these gods in some matters. At least you sucessed in been imparcial in disputes regarding your own site, you don't use criptic rules to govern, you don't punish our posts with a curse on our children and I can even say "I don't believe in you" without fear of eternal punishement.
I'll vote in You for AllMighty any hour.
P.S. I'm trying a nominie to 'Best Ass-Kisser of the Year' 
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 18, 2013 03:35 AM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 03:51, 18 Jul 2013.
|
artu said:
Quote:
If a person says "I don't believe in God" then he is not making a dogmatic statement about the existence of God and I'd not classify that as a religion.
But when a person says "God does not exist" he is making a dogmatic statement that God does not exist. A statement for which he has no evidence. That sort of atheism is a religion.
As I said before, I will not let you ignore simple explanations and play the wall, the more they don't sink in the more I'll repeat:
Atheism is NOT TO ASSUME God, since there is no valid or necessary reason to. EVERYTHING can be explained in much simpler and rational ways, not to mention ALL social sciences, psychology indicates man created God not vice versa.
If you make the dogmatic statement that God does not exist you are speaking from faith, not fact. You have not one shred of evidence that God does not exist. In my opinion that makes you a very religious person. And you are constantly evangelizing, every day.
Quote:
May I remind you how this begin, me and JJ were discussing a social
aspect when YOU made a comment about my observations of how even religious people don't believe in miracles anymore (which by the way is generally true, the average person today, religious or not, do not believe in contemporary miracles and do not explain daily phenomenon by them,you are a minority).
Stop making false statements. I already linked to a study on page 71 that showed that most people do believe in miracles. And most people believe in God. Atheism is a tiny cult and anti-theism is a tiny branch of that cult. You are very much in the minority belief in the world.
Not that minority belief makes someone wrong.
Quote:
Various polls peg U.S. belief in miracles at roughly 80 percent. One survey suggested that 73 percent of U.S. physicians believe in miracles, and 55 percent claim to have personally witnessed treatment results they consider miraculous.
Quote:
Quote:
God is all knowing so he knows what you will do even before you do it.
Well, good luck with that, because that kind of futuristic omniscience is not compatible with your claim of free will.
Foreknowledge is not causation.
Quote:
Quote:
Oh, I beg to differ. Religious people consider their experiences with God as evidence of the reality of God.
I meant the people here, participating in the discussion.
The OSM is top-heavy on atheists, many who seem to be anti-theists, and certainly does not reflect the makeup of the general population.
Quote:
And if your church buddies (who will of course have a strong tendency to believe your experience)define those as evidence, they are also wrong and have a misconcepted terminology.
I already quoted a definition of evidence. My experiences with God are evidence to me that God is real. You have no evidence that God does not exist.
Quote:
If I go to a court and say I know that man is the killer because I feel it in my guts, the guy walks free.
Pardon me, but could you point out where my experiences with God amounts to I feel him in my guts?
Quote:
Your cherry-picking from the dictionary is the broadest sense of the word and we both know you didn't mean it that way, when JJ indicated you might and I replied "he means proof" by looking at your context, you didn't object.
I don't cherry-pick. And I meant it exactly like I said. Evidence, not proof.
Quote:
Quote:
You do not know what Biblical faith is.
Oh, it's not as unique or unimaginable as you think it is.
]
Your statements prove you don't know what Biblical faith is because your statements about faith contradict the Biblical definition of faith. Like I've said many times, the atheists who go around constantly attacking religion and religious people don't have a clue about the religions they attack.
Quote:
A historian may have faith in his personal life which is none of my business but as a historian doing his job, he will not take Biblical miracles for a fact. So the miracles are not considered HISTORICAL FACTS. Even the very existence of Jesus is handled in a scientific, secular way, because that is the basic principle and methodology of history as a social science:
You can't say what they take as fact or indications of fact. The eye-witness testimonies of the miracles recorded are evidence they occurred.
Quote:
No, if I had such an experience it would also very well mean, it's a psychological mechanism which feeds my wishful thinking, it may also mean I have a mental illness and I have delusions.
Studies show atheists are more prone to mental illness and suicide than religious people. So if you want to talk delusion, it is the atheist who is more likely to be the one living in his own little fantasy world. 
Quote:
And this can definitely not be compared to witnessing a murder because we have incompatible religions' believers declaring they have experienced things such as you. So to continue the analogy, we have 30 people all claiming to see the killer and giving us different names and profiles, while the camera on the crime scene simply shows no one.
Witnesses describing someone differently is not an indication that no one was there. As former law enforcement I can attest that it is not unusual to have witnesses describe someone differently.
You have no camera showing "no God." All you have is your faith and your incessant preaching of your "no God" dogma and your vigorous crusade against other religions.
____________
Revelation
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted July 18, 2013 03:46 AM |
|
Edited by Elodin at 03:53, 18 Jul 2013.
|
angelito said:
Hobbit said:
Why Elodin and many other theists don't accept such logic - that's the whole point of this discussion.
Because belief doesn't fit with logic...quite simple.
Well, Mr Moderator, certainly nothing rational or logical is connected to atheist beliefs. However, I contend my beliefs are quite logical and thus far no one has proved any of my beliefs to be illogical.
Quote:
As Elodin alreadsy mentioned...God is everywhere and everytime. He knows everything. So why on earth do the believers PRAY at all? This won't help anything. All men are equal...so why should he help ONE boxer win his fight, while he let's the other one down?
Evidence: Logic and belief do not fit.
We pray for a number of reasons:
1) Out of humility
2) We acknowledge our dependence on God
3) We ask for his blessings on others
4) We ask for his blessings on us.
5) We ask for his guidance
6) We ask for understanding.
God does not necessarily help us unless we ask him, and ask in faith with our whole hearts.
Different people have different ideas. I don't think God will cause a specific team to win, ordinarily. But an athlete asking for help to do his best is different if he is not asking out of a a desire for self-aggrandizement.
If some people have a wrong belief that is illogical, their holding of such a belief does not make all belief illogical.
____________
Revelation
|
|
master_learn
Legendary Hero
walking to the library
|
|
posted July 18, 2013 09:49 AM |
|
|
artu said:
You can not arbitrarily change what it can mean and what it teaches.
Just point out where do you think I make an arbitrary change about what it teaches,please.
What it can mean is a different matter and I have the freedom of speech to talk about it.
artu said:
Of course, history changes the way religions are practiced but that's not the same as you taking out any verse you disagree on. And if there's nothing wrong with that, why not be bolder and leave it for good and became a non-religious theist? Cultural bounds, family tradition, habit?
I have a family members who are atheists,also who are following the doctrine strictly(I don't) and who have personal experinces as well.
Could you tell me what "a non-religious theist" means?
artu said:
It's just being realistic about a natural state.
But I have thought exactly like you in the past.I denied these faith statements with the same conviction that you do now.And I am realistic about the natural state.
____________
"I heard the latest HD version disables playing Heroes. Please reconsider."-Salamandre
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted July 18, 2013 10:30 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 16:43, 18 Jul 2013.
|
master learn said:
Just point out where do you think I make an arbitrary change about what it teaches,please.
What it can mean is a different matter and I have the freedom of speech to talk about it.
I remember you talking about nobody being punished or going to hell for not being a Christian etc etc. A yet again, "reformed" Christianity for global times focusing on the spirituality.. I thought you were talking about something like that again.
Quote:
Could you tell me what "a non-religious theist" means?
Pretty simple: Deists believe in a God which is only the first cause and does not intervene in the universe, pantheists believe the universe itself is God (which kind of turns it into just a word IMO), and theists believe in a god or gods that have personality and actually intervene in events, do things, punish, reward, listen etc etc. If you believe in such a God but none of the institutional religions and none of the Holy Books, you still believe in a theistic God but not any religion. Hence, you are a non-religious theist.
Quote:
But I have thought exactly like you in the past.I denied these faith statements with the same conviction that you do now.And I am realistic about the natural state
What I mean is, people who talk about spirituality and stuff usually talk and act like materialists are missing an aspect of life or live like robots which is not true at all. There are many people who identify "spirit" as a materialistic process of the brain, yet who are much deeper and emotional than many religious people. Spiritualism is not like being able talk another language that we, materialists can't, it is just defining things supernaturally. But depth is not necessarily supernatural.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted July 18, 2013 11:12 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 16:28, 18 Jul 2013.
|
Quote:
Certainly nothing rational or logical is connected to atheist beliefs.
Atheism is not a belief just like you not believing in dragons or Allah is not a belief. It is a position of not to assume. In every day talk, you'll say there are no dragons, you can't know with 100% certainty there are no dragons anywhere in the universe but since you have absolutely no logical reason to believe they exist, you ASSUME there are none.
Saying universe can't come out of nothing by itself (while the people whose job is to study the natural laws of that universe say it can, quite clearly with mathematical formulas) but claiming a creature who has personality can come out of nothing (or he doesn't have to cause he always was etc etc) is rational, yeah right.
When you say God is beyond nature and reason, you are WILLINGLY throwing rationality out the window. That is just a fancy way of saying, by rational standards I neither know or can explain anything about it:
- Universe can't create itself but God can. God is timeless, he always was and is.
- Why and... how?
- God is beyond reason (Read: Because I say so)
- How is it a rational explanation if it is beyond reason?
- You can't see that with only intelligence.
- For a moment here, let me accept that for the sake of the argument. If it is not a matter of intelligence, how is it a matter of rationality?
- Atheist are the ones who are irrational!
Quote:
Studies show atheists are more prone to mental illness and suicide than religious people.
We all know about your "studies" and the reliability of your links. They are joke material among the community, and if people even bother to read them once in a while, what's written usually don't back you up. Hearing voices literally, in today's world, is considered a sign of mental illness, if what you speak of is not hearing voices literally, it can be easily explained with psychology anyway.
Quote:
Foreknowledge is not causation.
Yes, but if I CAN change my mind anytime, foreknowledge isn't possible. If I can't, there's no free will.
Quote:
Stop making false statements. I already linked to a study on page 71 that showed that most people do believe in miracles. And most people believe in God. Atheism is a tiny cult and anti-theism is a tiny branch of that cult. You are very much in the minority belief in the world.
1- Most people don't claim they have evidence for god, they say faith is faith.
2- With better education and wealth religiosity decreases. Besides we've already been through that, there is no faith 51 percent supports and they are not accumulative, numbers are not your friend.
3- Most people don't believe in contemporary miracles and they certainly don't explain everyday stuff with them, as opposed to 500 years ago where anyone would believe any sort of miracle or ghost or evil witch or whatever crap they are sold. Secularity won.
4- Your link only focuses on extraordinary healing cases which can hardly be defined as true miracles. They can be called weird cases at best. I told you very clearly what I meant by miracle: Divide the Sea or grow a leg.
5- The general numbers are only from US and your puritanism don't reflect the world. The other statistics, outside US, are deceivingly made among Pentecostal church members to begin with.
Quote:
The eye-witness testimonies of the miracles recorded are evidence they occurred.
Nothing that ancient is considered eye-witnessed by today's standards.Especially if it is supernatural. History as a social science do not accept miracles, there is nothing you can do to change this simple methodological fact.
Quote:
Your statements prove you don't know what Biblical faith is because your statements about faith contradict the Biblical definition of faith. Like I've said many times, the atheists who go around constantly attacking religion and religious people don't have a clue about the religions they attack.
Your definition of "really knowing" the faith can actually be achieved only by believing it so what you're declaring here is a tautology. Same can be done in a reversed way: Only non-Christians can truly understand your faith because only they can be objective about it. I read the book, the history and I've seen the people. It's nothing special or beyond grasp. I may express how simple it is with clearer words but then you cry "offensive."
Quote:
If you make the dogmatic statement that God does not exist you are speaking from faith, not fact. You have not one shred of evidence that God does not exist. In my opinion that makes you a very religious person. And you are constantly evangelizing, every day.
You again ignored the explanation and your statement makes you a very ironical blend: A very religious person who doesn't know what religion means. And it is usually this very stubbornness on reproducing disinformation of yours that leads me to "evangelazing" as you put it, again with poor terminology.
Quote:
Pardon me, but could you point out where my experiences with God amounts to I feel him in my guts?
What else are they? Are you literally sitting next to him and having a chat? No matter how you mystify it, they are just feelings.
Quote:
Witnesses describing someone differently is not an indication that no one was there. As former law enforcement I can attest that it is not unusual to have witnesses describe someone differently.
You have no camera showing "no God." All you have is your faith and your incessant preaching of your "no God" dogma and your vigorous crusade against other religions.
Don't twist the metaphor, you very well know what is meant: Incompatible testimonies=incompatible faiths all claiming the same experiences, camera showing no one=no proof.
|
|
Hobbit
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted July 18, 2013 02:29 PM |
|
Edited by Hobbit at 14:31, 18 Jul 2013.
|
Elodin said:
Well, Mr Moderator, certainly nothing rational or logical is connected to atheist beliefs. However, I contend my beliefs are quite logical and thus far no one has proved any of my beliefs to be illogical.
Actually I already pointed out why your beliefs are illogical, but you're just avoiding my posts. Does it prove that anything you say is right?
And to be fair - I'm not saying that atheism is 100% rational, because for me it isn't. Even considering if God exists or not is for me irrational because that's like discussing if a magical pony from the rainbow eats grass or not - sure, it could be fun, but it has nothing to do with rationality. Although I know that atheists act often very rationally because they don't need any supernatural force to explain any of their actions like many theists do - they just think about what is wrong and what is right, not take orders from some superior being.
But that's not really the case. The point is: you WON'T prove your faith to be rational by claiming MY lack of faith is irrational. You're basically saying "You atheists are wrong so I have to be right". It's so ridiculous that I can't even describe it with words. Just think about how stupid would it sound if I said that.
____________
Horn of the
Abyss on AcidCave
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
