Why is it an acceptable answer for atheists to merely say "God didn't do it" when believers are expected to be held to a higher standard of proof when saying that God did do it?
He didn't create the known Universe.
He didn't create us (life).
He didn't come to us a a man (Jesus Christ).
He didn't heal anyone. (As is presented as evidence of His Being * existence*).
He never raised anyone from the dead! ( " ).
He didn't change anyones life!
He didn't write a book (agreed, but inspired men to do so!)
I recon that just about covers the majority I have seen/read!
Okay well I will take the stand of I don't know if he did and I don't think anyone else does either. The only thing I will say he didn't do (if he is real) is God didn't protect me as a child. For me to truly believe that though it would take believing he is real.
Sorry to butt in [ you can still get next in line peeples, lol ].
How ya been dj?!
Looks your short, sweet and to the point is clearing things right up.
Ok, ok. I'm done. Just soicalizing. heh heh
Been looking in, just staying out.
Too busy these days to keep up appearances.
Not me man.. My girl has a maintenance requirement list.
I get in trouble if I'm not handsome and spiffy for her at 7:00...
But she treats me like a king so what can I do? lol
I know you can't keep appearing for good reason. Yours has you on lawn duty right?
"Trim the bushes and the hedge, through the trash over the neighbors ledge.... ::whistle::"
aka, I consider myself atheist. I do not believe in God, however I do not pretend to "Know" anything. Agnostic, atheist, maybe a little of both
It's all just semantics, really.
I don't mind whether you are one or the other, both, or neither.
You are an individual, with infinite value, and responsible for your own choices in life.
All of which have their own set of consequences.
I just happened to make different choices.
Can't speak for your actual intentions there, but typically that "all of which have their own set of consequences" type of remark is said with feigned civility while the speaker hears the drums beat a "dun dun DUN" in the soundtrack of their patronizing actual intent. The old benign-seeming-but-implied-threat thing. It's tedious and no less responsible for the contempt religion gets these days than the endless condescension and attempts to obstruct freedom and justice the more brazen practitioners employ.
Frankly, I have more respect for a religious person who tells me I'm going to burn in eternal hell fire, condemned to torture and agony for all time by a loving God, than I do for someone who pretends to mean well. It's the difference between a wolf and a snake. I don't really want to hang out with either one, but there's just something icky about snakes.
Just from the beginning of the first paragraph, are you suggesting you know people have no consequence for anything after death?
Because I'd like to see some "proof" [isn't that what you guys call it? ] for your "solid" conclusion.
dj, states that because you're going to ask for "proof" if he gives you anything further.
He does mean well. I don't like people making good intentions look bad by twisting slighty myself, speaking of ickiness and snakes.
If there are consequences here, it serves the purpose to learn from this experience, as it's all you have to observe, to build a basis for the "if" to come.
Counting out there may be consequences after death prematurely would be about as smart as concluding the boat doesn't need a dinghy just in case.
Many a fool went overboard mid ocean from a boat ablaze without a back-up to drop in before them.
Nope, I am not suggesting that. To suggest I know anything about what happens after death would be stupid. Anyone who claims to know what happens after death is ridiculous. Go die, then come back and tell me what happened... and be dead for more than a few minutes, way beyond the reach of medical science. Then I might not not roll my eyes when you start talking about ghosts and fairies and whatever else people who claim this sort of knowledge tend to want to talk about.
Yeah, call me crazy that I want some proof when people start telling me how to live. When people have rule sets, want to dictate legislation, justify wars (or jihad), spread hate and intolerance, and ask for 10% of my income in tithes... just to name a few popular schemes of the "faithful,"... yeah, I ask for proof.
When someone drops a little comment like that subtle little innuendo that really says ... "Hey, it's all cool. We all get to make choices. Sure, some of our choices will cause eternal suffering, but some won't. But I respect everyone." Yeah, whatever. That's a sneaky, back-handed way of saying, "Well, do what you want blind, faithless moron, but you will suffer eternal agony when my loving god finally gets to smite you and torture you forever because you didn't believe ME when I told you the TRUTH that I have for you." Bleh. I call a snake a snake when I see it slither; I don't need it to bite me to know what I'm looking at.
I expect you probably don't realize you are making Pascal's Wager there, which has been beaten down so many times I'm not even going to bother. If you actually care, go do ALL the reading on that topic (not just a Wikipedia scan) and get back to me. I know you probably have little inclination to do so--and I don't really care if you get back to me--but if you're going to take this sort of stance defending your religion, you really ought to be familiar with ALL of the conversations around it so you can not make that mistake again.
It seems I struck a small nerve. Maybe just a little one.
I'm not telling you how to live. I'm stating what makes sense as well as my brain allows me to rationale. You can disagree all you like because like dj said, your choices affect you, and in comparison my choices affect me.
It looks to me more like your paranoid or suspicious all Christians are talking down to you. I myself notice I sound that way sometimes, but we have standards set by the Bible that tell us everyone will answer for their good and bad.
It also says to go and tell: Time is at hand, repent, believe the gospel.
Now, I'm not here to preach to you, pretty sure you know the story. I debate apologetically because others take the initiative to slander what I believe in.
We have enough people thinking Christians are liars. Well we are sinners by nature, and fools to the world because we see something in a book that is amazing. Truth.
There is nothing in this world on level in comparison to the Bible as far as it's influence on the world in general. It's been seen as good, and twisted by greedy people seeking power.
My stance is that Christ lives and I hope you look as far into every possible angle on the subject as you can. I'll never regret it, and when you see something amazing what do you do? You tell people.
It took me years and some seriously accurate undeniable arguments before I was doubt free.
And if you seen what I have, you'd be debating the issue as well.
Just imagine you're trying to do good for someone and they keep slapping you in the face.. You'd have to really love that person to keep trying to help or ignore their ill manner.
It's what I do daily. I go about it wrong sometimes, but I know what I know, and I can't say I don't know it's true because then I am liar.
That doesn't mean you have to soak it in and not weigh it. A grain of salt goes well with any perceived opinion...
Nope, just engaging in the conversation. I think it's more telling that you want to think you've had some powerful emotional impact. It's the same sort of condescending thing I was talking about before. It's that sort of self-importance that puts everyone off. So, if you want to know why Christianity is hemorrhaging followers by the day and reduced to converting backwoods people in third world jungles to prolong its spiral towards the scrapheap of dead religions where so many of its predecessors are, well, that's why.
Yeah, I'm fine with that. It's the snarky stuff that draws criticism, but I already hit that, so I won't go over it again.
On one hand, I'm glad you acknowledge that you condescend and come off as arrogant. That's a great first step. On the other hand, I'm just stupefied by the fact you acknowledge it and still don't care. If we ignore the obvious social implications of such a thing, what about the fact that you defeat your very own purpose by doing it. Nobody is going to listen or believe anything that an arrogant and condescending person has to say. IT's like, as a would be salesman for Jesus, you really aren't thinking your strategy through very well at all.
So if I have a book that says my God wants me to have my dog crap on your front porch every morning, you're going to be okay with that as an argument for why my dog is crapping on your front porch every morning?
Your truth. Not the truth of the majority of people in the world, or the majority of people collectively throughout human history. (And yes, I know, you don't care what anyone else thinks... F-them, you're going to condescend, by your own admission, and keep trying to cram your beliefs down everyone's throat "for their own good" etc., etc. I get it. (sigh). It's exhausting.
LOL, really? And what is that little "fact" based on? To be honest, saying stuff like that destroys any tiny particle of credibility you might have. I realize this is the Internet and all, but you can't just sling stuff like that out there and not get called on it.
I have looked, and I don't regret it. There is great insight and capacious understanding of human nature in those myths. The Bible, like many other mythologies of the world, are collected from the profound teachings of truly brilliant and insightful people with the vision and perspicacity to see and articulate the nature of cultures and human social interactions, which include the necessity for rule sets by which the simpler folk can be guided towards proper social behaviors for the good of the society as a whole. Trust me, I have looked, and there is awesome stuff in there. I even get how some people will make the leap from the wisdom to believing in the magical beings, because that is a nice sort of mental-device to hold the magnitude of it all in some kind of manageable form. I get it, genuinely I do.
I am debating it. With you. The guy who champions the cause of condescension. I can't help it. I feel that someone has to argue the side of reason. The belief that you have some super-natural backing of something is what makes you dangerous if you find people willing to follow along. It's how religion went from binding cultures to serving as an excuse to kill, torture and take. Once you have a GOD on your side, you can do whatever you like. That's where the arrogance comes from, and that's the part I detest.
Yeah, in your mind you're doing them a favor. In their mind, you're just a condescending, self-righteous, unremitting zealot that simply won't go away no matter how hard they try to tell you they don't want what you are selling. I mean, do you go to a bar and hit on chicks and when they slap you (to use your analogy) you just keep grabbing them or chatting them up? I mean, you KNOW it is TRUE that you are the best man they'll ever have, so, I mean, you just keep going no matter how many times they slap you, right? "I love you baby; I'm in your face and pawing at you for your own good."
This is really the crux of the whole Christian/Everyone else problem right now, the arrogance that infuriates everyone else.
Yeah, we've all heard the grain of salt a hundred zillion times. But, yeah, you don't care. You're smarter than the rest of us, so you are just going to keep trying. Too bad they don't make a spray, like OFF or something.
See aka they say a Christian (I'm assuming there sorry if I'm wrong) and an atheist can't have a polite conversation in a forum! To each his own, If we were all the same life would be boring!
It is not an acceptable answer.
Both atheists and believers claim they "know" something that neither can prove. Frankly, both sides drive me batty, because I have to sit here and watch people going back and forth, often mean and nasty on both sides, neither able to move the other, neither moving from their place of "truth," and yet none of them know anything other than what they feel. Which is all fine and dandy, but none of them will admit it's all just feelings. Everybody is so pompous sure they are RIGHT! My feelings are TRUE! Your feelings are WRONG! And here is my lame evidence that doesn't prove anything to anyone but me.
It's irritating. And, as history has proven time and again, dangerous.
It would depend on which god you are referring to. If they are referring to any god then it is not acceptable since they cannot back up their claim.
If they are referring to the christian god as described by the bible, then it is perfectly reasonable to deduce that such a being does not exist since the bible describes him as a contradictory, physically and logically impossible being.
I don't understand your question. Provide an example, please.
Because explaining a self existent reality that is predisposed to a materialistic bias, would require an intelligent and thoughtful response and would open it up for rebuttal.
Aguasilver, I'm still waiting for a bit more explication.
Apologies Chasuk, got busy elsewhere!
The topic was one I posted as I went to bed to see what would come up, nothing complicated, just my observation that I see 'god dunnit' in many troll posts used as a derogatory remark, and wondered why (and how) folk presumed that there was no ability for we believers to say 'So did God do this?' as I just answered to Randy.
It perplexes me that those who refuse to accept God exists will blame Him for anything they find inexplicably nasty or outside of their comfort zone, then deny He exists in a later post.
Does that suffice? otherwise rephrase and ask again please!
It suffices, and I will try to answer it to the best of my ability.
Atheists aren't admitting to God's existence when they say "god dunnit." Instead, they are mocking the propensity of Christians for thanking God for all things good, yet holding him blameless for anything bad.
This is perceived as having one's cake and eating it, too, or, non-idiomatically, trying to hold two incompatible positions.
Does that suffice? :-)
Just a quick one, as I need to go out.
Your assessment above is certainly true of many Christians who I have met, however it misses the fact that there is also an enemy, and enemy who prowls around seeking to destroy those he may, and that enemy is authorised by God to do so, that may not seem fair, but in effect when someone places themselves outside of Gods protection, the enemy has rights in accordance to the level of 'approval' he can raise from men's tongues.
Obviously anyone who denies God also denies the enemy, however that changes not on jot, the enemy has power and authority over anyone who is not under Gods power and authority.
Like Bob sung, "You gotta serve SOMEBODY"
So yes, bad things happen, and yes God has allowed a situation to exist where folk making the wrong choices can experiences those bad things, and yes believers are also able to be caught up in those bad situations.
If you choose to live amongst a community where open sin is permitted and encouraged, there can be no complain when you get caught in the deluge of evil that encompasses it.
Added that because I guess that Randys photo was of New Orleans....
This reply actually exacerbates the problem, rather than ameliorates it, for several reasons.
First, because it feels dishonest. I'm not saying that it is dishonest -- in fact, I understand absolutely that it isn't -- but it unavoidably feels that way, to the atheist. The atheist has already extended a courtesy to the Christian, a courtesy in the form of a thought experiment in which God exists. The atheist expects that his courtesy will be reciprocated by a reply within the bounds of reason, but instead the Christian invokes a second fictional being as explanation for criticism of the first fictional being.
This is like responding to a criticism of Superman by invoking Batman.
Second, because it feels more than dishonest, but actually disingenuous.
As a parent, tell a judge, "I didn't murder or rape my children, I just allowed someone else to do it, so obviously I'm not guilty," and see how that works as a defense.
"Your Honor, they made the bad choices that put them in those bad situations, so it obviously wan't my fault," you argue.
"Your son was four, and your daughter was two," the judge would reasonably reply, right before your just conviction.
When the atheist says, "god dunnit," he is wearily mocking all of this equivocation.
I've argued against the existence of God hundreds -- maybe even thousands -- of times, and, most of the time, I forewarn the Christian, "You would be better off saying, 'god dunnit' right at the beginning, because that's how this conversation will ultimately end." Sometimes, they ruefully smile, and we skip the argument.
The intellectually honest atheist -- the atheist who isn't just arguing as an egotistical troll -- accepts faith as an answer. They accept "god dunnit." However, they prefer that this trump card be thrown down at the beginning.
But the correct analogy would be:
As a parent, tell a judge, "I murdered and raped my children, I just allowed the enemy to influence me, so obviously I'm guilty," and see how that works as a defense.
"Your Honor, I made the bad choices that put them in those bad situations, so it was my fault," you plea.
"Your son was four, and your daughter was two," the judge would reasonably reply, right before your just conviction.
....and the enemy would smile in the corner as he observed the scene.
I will repeat:
When someone denies God, then they must also deny the enemies existence.
The believer knows this to be a dangerous error, God will allow rebellion in His creation, that is their choice, but rebellion allows the enemy free rein over those rebelling.
Some who deny will be used to pontificate on forums, some will progress to allowing (unwittingly, as they profess there is no such thing) demonic powers to start influencing their lives, and from there it will depend on the restrain that the person is able to exert to stay good and pure and naturally self righteous (which has no value).
As no atheist can allow for the existence of the enemy, for obvious reasons, the enemy can work unobserved, except by those who have spiritual discernment.
Likewise, no believer, who has a personal relationship with Christ and has been in filled with the Holy Spirit, can deny they exist, no matter how hard the atheist tries to convince them they are deluded, mislead, hallucinating or just plain crazy.
Logic and reasoning and demands that all evidence fits atheists standards are irrelevant and ignored, once someone is truly saved and in Christ.
Guess it's a hopeless scenario.
Yes - it appears to be.
In terms you may understand - you are working for "the enemy" and he has convinced you that you are working for the good guys. This is why your religion causes so many fights. What a shame you refuse to understand that.
Explain your reasoning, assume I am a dummy.
Explain your reasoning, assume I am a dummy.
You have created a scenario whereby you preach a message that is divisive.
It is divisive because it takes a "them or us," stance.
It is (according to you) irreconcilable because "Logic and reasoning and demands that all evidence fits atheists standards are irrelevant and ignored, once someone is truly saved and in Christ."
So - you will ignore logic and reasoning. Thus the conflict (and ill will) will continue.
So - you are causing conflict and have determined that it is a "hopeless scenario."
I assume your stated "enemy," thrives on conflict and ill will and your stated "savior," craves peace and understanding.
Therefore you are working for your "enemy," because there is no reconciliation or peace and understanding to be had given the stance you have taken.
And please don't blame it on the atheists for rejecting evidence. This is what your enemy would want you to do.
Interesting, I have just had a guest arrive to stay tonight, so I will reply in more depth when time permits.
In the mean time, I hear David Cameron is looking for someone to write his speeches, as he also needs to try and persuade everyone that good is bad and bad is good.
I'm guessing that you missed the point of my analogy. In my analogy, God was the parent. For your analogy to be analogous to mine, GOD would be saying, "I murdered and raped my children, I just allowed the enemy to influence me, so obviously I'm guilty," which puts the blame squarely on God, exactly where it should be.
I doubt that was your intent.
However, all of this is moot, as I have now answered your "why" question to the best of my ability, which is what I set out to do. :-)
Again, I accept "faith" and revelation form the Holy Spirit as legitimate answers, within the context of your belief system. Most other atheists do, as well. Don't let your perception of atheists be colored by the bored trolls you encounter on HubPages (and similar venues). However, because we consider your belief system delusional, the scenario is indeed hopeless, at least insofar as exploring questions of faith.
To change the subject ENTIRELY, you live in Malaysia, right? The wife and I currently live in South Korea, and really have no aspirations ever to return to the US. Malaysia seems like an attractive option. I guess I'm asking, what is involved in taking up permanent residence in Malaysia, for someone who is considering doing so in a few years time?
If they dont "see" it, they just dont see it. Sometimes you have to quit casting "pearls" in order to avoid falling into fault ourselves. Great question. Seed planted somewhere Im sure.
Because the truth penetrates the nonbeliever and makes him or her feel uncomfortable.
....they love any opening to show us all that *cough* "intellectual superiority" they've fooled themselves with...
I see you now are attempting to twist things. Your individual basis for the path of thought you've chosen is empty.
Believer: God is real, God exists, God exist outside reality, God is omnipresent, God is omniscient, God is omnipotent.
All of these are assertions based on what exactly? It's not logic. It's not rationale. You received it through reading a book, which isn't logical or rational.
So, lets address your assertions before we get to the "God didn't do it" aspect.
God is real- This mean G/god exists in the physical world. Please point HIM out?
God exists- Really? Where?
God exists outside reality- Then HE is not real. Fairly simple to understand. If HE exists outside of reality then HE is not real. So assigning HE to IT is absurd. "HE" is a human characteristic. If G/god is a spirit existing in the spiritual realm? Then you have proven you're intellectually dishonest. The "spiritual realm" is mysticism. Mysticism was debunked years ago as being individually intellectually dishonest. If you're hearing this for the first time, then I'm saddened because you should have heard of it long ago.
God is omnipresent- This would mean that G/god is everywhere taking up every ounce of space available. There would be no atom or molecule with which isn't G/god. And, if you really want to take a journey down this road, then our reality would be a complete illusion because every ounce of everything in existence is G/god. Meaning, we don't exist in any physical form whatsoever. AND, if you want to take it further- then it could be said that we(everything known(including universe(s)) are actually INSIDE of G/god. Meaning there's nothing outside of G/god. Thus completely rendering all consciousness, spirituality, morality, reality and everything else in existence to be a mere nothing.
God is omniscient- This would mean that time has no meaning and every thought that ever existed would tracked and traced to every path of choices available. Therefore knows the outcome regardless. Well, to be honest any human can do that. It just takes a while to do it with a bit of concentrated effort.
God is omnipotent- This would mean all powerful and then that runs the paradox- that God isn't all powerful for the pure and simple fact that HE wouldn't be able to create a rock in which he himself wouldn't be able to move. So, with that said, anyone claiming their G/god is omnipotent is nothing more than a liar.
Hmmm...I wonder if there's any other arguments left?
But, to answer your question- there's no rhyme or reason to think a G/god exists to begin with, much less make a claim that IT didn't do something.
There's no logical or rational reason for a G/god to exist.
Looks like a hurricane or flash flood did that, not a mythical god.
No, these sinners CHOSE to be disobedient.
God, purple unicorn, Sarah Palin's brain.....or some other mythical entity.
OK, so God was not responsible and neither was anything else by your reckoning...
I narrowed it down to 3 equal possibilities.
Can't wait to see you attempting an explanation before God about comparing Him to a horse with a horn and the brain of a half-blind women that wears too much make-up.
You'll be in for a long wait. If this god of yours does actually exist, the first thing I will do upon meeting him will be to inflict a righteous Rochambeau on his sorry ass.
Thanks for the laugh.. And the fly will swat me too right??
A fly swatting you is more likely than me ever meeting up with your god.
Yeah, you'll never die and energy is consumed too right?.. lol
Yes, I will die, so will you. Neither of us will meet our maker though.
And when you die would you change your definition of what it means to "exist" if you could?
peeples, what your not understand of God, is written in the first Chapter of Genesis. He gives us freewill. Which means he doesn't interfere in our lives without asking. If he doesn't answer your request, that doesn't mean he didn't hear you, or didn't respond. Too many people assume if they don't get what they asked from him, that he doesn't care nor exist. Sometimes his response is simply not to do anything. Since we aren't God, and can't possibly think Him, or understand his reasons, we resort to the old "He doesn't exist", mind set.
God said we have freewill, he isn't a dictator God. He wants you love freely given as he freely gives it to you, he don't want fakers, that's what Lucifer did, and that's why he isn't in heaven. He isn't going to dictate to mankind what they should or shouldn't do. Yes, he did lay out his rules and regulations that get you to heaven our final home. But, he isn't going to force anyone do submit to them. You choose if you want to live in heaven after your finished here, or if you want to spend eternity in Hell. You choose. You follow His rules, and you get to go to heaven, if you choose not to, well...then you don't. It's that simple. Every where you go there is rules even in this life.
If you want to win that $10,000 sweepstakes, you have to play to win. They aren't just going to give you $10,000. Sometimes you have to perform things to get that money. You might not even like the tasks you have to preform to get it, but if you want it, you have to do them.
Now, to your comment. I could say that as well actually. I didn't have a golden spoon childhood either. But, I don't say he didn't protect me. I'm still alive, I have seen His hand on people who hurt me. Not all of them, but some of them. The ones I didn't see vanished from my life so I didn't get to see what He did.
Sometimes God himself puts things in our paths to teach us things. It's all in how you perceive or accept his guidance.
My experiences in life has helped me grow closer to God rather then away from God. Because I know what happens here doesn't really matter. Your here for a very short time. Your there for eternity. Eternity is a long time.
You do realize that using the Bible as evidence to support ideas presented in the Bible is never going to convince anyone, right?
That is called "begging the question." It's a logical fallacy.
Examples of logical fallacy:
The Bible is true because it says its true.
I am awesome because I am so awesome.
People should not eat cats because cats are not supposed to be eaten by people.
I am not trying to say you are right or wrong, just pointing out that you are trying to make a case using the source of your original claim as the source of the evidence for the claim too. You may be right, but you aren't proving it with arguments like you just made. You are actually working against yourself in the eyes of reasonable people who do not share your beliefs.
Until you can find another way to prove your points, nobody with an eye for reason and logic is going to believe you.
Gina, I'm glad that works for you, however I was raped everyday for over 10 years I can not accept that some god would allow that for the sake of giving someone else (my abuser) free will. Protecting me would have been seeing to it that it never happened to me.
I'm betting someone will swoop in here and tell you that was part of God's plan, and it was meant to make you stronger or some other hogwash.
Usually they just get quiet and uncomfortable.
I'm not quiet nor uncomfortable. I have my horror stories also. Yours isn't nay worse then mine.
I'm not gonna swoop in here and telly it was Gods plan either. I'm not God, and I can't answer for him.
I will say, first I am sorry this happened to you, secondly I am sorry you feel the way you do.
Shades, I'm not using the Bible to prove anything. In fact, I'm not trying to prove anything at all. In fact, I really don't care if you believe or not. I give ya what I know, you take or or leave it, and apparently you left it, so what. No skin off my nose. You got nothing, I got something who cares.
The bible also tells me if a filthy man is filthy, let him be filthy still, if a holy man is holy, let him be holy still. Another words, I can't force anyone to believe anything. I can just give it and what they do with it is their is their business.
I don't even sweat that stuff.
Sorry you failed creative writing, but your supposed to pause the sentence at a colon, if you did that you would have understood it.
oops Im sorry I mean to say "If" you failed creative writing. My bad.
First off, I've never taken a creative writing class. I only remarked on the fact that I found your statement interesting. Apparently you have no interest in knowing why I found your statement interesting, which is evident from your response, which by the way was ego driven. Your humility will in the fact that you don't know how to use the forums, which is derived by your consecutive posts, which shows that you don't know where the edit button is on the forums.
In your haste to respond to my post, you made a mistake. Actually, you made several. Not to mention, the reason I posted my post was because your statement "something who cares" is irrational and shows your confusion.
Something? This means you're unable able to identify whatever it is.
Then you assign "who" to that something. If you're unable to identify it, then how can you rationally assign "who" to it? Much less would you know whether or not it cares.
Do try to enjoy your time in the forums. I can see from you low number of posts, that you don't visit often. And, don't let my post here persuade you into leaving the forums. I'm just pointing out what I am reading. That's all.
Cagsil, ok I get it. It appeared to me you mistook my message. That's fine. I do apologize for my hastiness.
"Creative writing" must be the kind where you use "your" instead of "you're".
Because the person believing in something has to prove its existence. Think about it without using the concept of God. If I was to say there are unicorns on Earth whose duty would it be to prove its existence or non-existence? It would be mine of course. There is the the over-used quote that the absence of evidence is not the evidence of absence, but if there is no evidence where there should be at least some then it can be safe to say it doesn't exist. This proves true for unicorns, Big Foot, and even the almighty himself.
I agree with Mtbailz.
Try something: look up the religion of Haiti (voodoo) and watch the national geographic. What they do/believe might seem crazy to Christians..
If you asked them to explain their religion to you- you'd think they're nuts.
And if you explained your religion to them, they would think you're religion is crazy.
it's sort of the same for a non-believer. Each thinking one another is crazy...
But non-believer is a little bit more logical (to me anyways, I'm biased)
Well, I think there's plenty of evidence that people disregard, and then they claim "no evidence."
This evidence may be indirect, as obviously we can't see God's face.
But if technology comes about by innovation alone, "caused" by man, and parallel to that on a higher scale is the sophisticated machinery of the human body, how do we conclude innovation did not bring this similar system of far more intelligent design and greater capabilites into being?
In effect, only two possibilities exist. Something far more intelligent than us created us, or something far stupider accidentally became us, and even in the latter where did the far stupider come from? [i can't see the latter as logical in any fashion either, personally]
And to top it off, the entire universe of chemicals and black empty space operates in a complex manner with consistency and precision interacting as if alive.
An uncivilized tribe lost in the tropical forests somewhere that have a robot sent in to them may think it's alive because the properties given to it came from life - us.
But in fact the materials were programmed to operate in a fashion which without the cause - us- there would be no life-like property for the tribe people to notice.
I think the "laws" of physics are about as blatent as it gets that intelligence far beyond our comprehension exists and had the major role in our coming in to being.
It is never safe to say god doesnt exist in the deep south. Someone will jump you in the night and stab you in the heart with their bible.
If someone jumps you and stabs you in the heart with their bible (I have no idea how that's possible, but anyway...) They aren't being Christian. God doesn't want us forcing our beliefs on anyone. We are supposed to give it to them and let them do as they will with it.
Yes the bible is complexed, but it can be understood. That's why we bible study.
Not exactly Gina. The Old Testament is pretty explicit when describing what should be done to non-believers. It's not pretty. Maybe those who follow the Bible word for word would be more Christian than those who pick and choose what they wish to follow from that same ancient text.
The Old Testament, means Old Agreement.
Which is why there is a New Agreement as soon as the Saviour came.
Well yes and no Vector. I mean yes in the sense that it was the old agreement between God and his chosen people, but no in the sense the Jesus is explicit about following the old testament. He, in his own words, was not here to destroy the laws of old; only to fulfill them all.
“For truly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, not an iota, not a dot, will pass the law until all is accomplished. Whoever then relaxes one of the least of these commandments and teaches men so, shall be called least in the kingdom of heaven; but he who does them and teaches them shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.” Matthew 5:18-19
I rarely quote the babble - it gives the wrong impression. Still - if you wait around long enough (not very - no doubt one of the believers will stop by to explain why using "scripture to interpret scripture," (the process of ignoring contradictions by using one part to say another part gets ignored)) this doesn't count.
King James Version
30 When Jesus therefore had received the vinegar, he said, It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.
By: Jesus Christ
You and I both know, Vector, that this is not what Jesus meant by "it is finished". He was talking about his sacrifice on the cross, not the fulfillment of laws. It's not logical or ethical to take things out of context.
Jesus came to save didn't he?
Why? Because no one could fulfill [follow] the "Law" such as was given to God's chosen people the Israelites, the Nation of Abraham.
When He "finished" the sacrifice, John 15:13 and 3:16, He fulfilled the Law in our stead to be the Saviour.
Buddy, Christ is my King. I've spent more time in the scriptures than you have on the toilet....
His sacrifice was BECAUSE we cannot fulfill, or follow, all of the Law and thereby deserve consequence. Christ is sinless, because He never sinned. [never broke the Law of God]
When He said it is finished, He meant He lived the perfect life and followed the Law down to every Iota and Dot for us. John 10:15 - FULFILLED.
Actually, far from being finished, Christ's ministry had just begun.
The reference is more towards the fact that the enemy had lost the war, no matter what, because Christ had defeated the enemies greatest weapon: death.
The law no longer held effect to condemn us, still useful guidelines, but no longer binding unless you place yourself under them, a new age had truly begun when Christ defeated death and rose in victory.
Of course the enemy still runs battles with humanity to try and deceive us, but those battles will be won or lost individually, the war was won by Christ alone, and nothing can ever change the outcome.
You just need to win a few battles, and again with Christ as your defender, knowing He has your back, you don't need to fear, you will win, if you follow the instructions.
Or you get cancer and die a long miserable death that lingers and brings agony and financial ruin to your family and no magical beings show up to help at all...
Or someone you love more than life is taken from you in some horrible way and guts you emotionally and no matter how many times you read the dusty old Bronze Age stories, you are still devastated and, again, no magical beings show up and help ...
Or it turns out one of the literally thousands of other religions of the world is right and all that stuff in your favorite and particular set of myths turns out to be totally wrong and the magical beings from another religion come and cut out your guts and throw you into eternal torture for having picked the wrong set of magical stories ...
Or there's just nothing... but at least you got to feel good about yourself during your life and hopefully not be too condescending to others in your certainty about stuff you can't prove... hopefully you didn't just make other people unhappy in your desire to "save" them during the one life we all get.
Or you make folk think about things they thought they knew and they find fulfilment.
Sorry if your experiences have embittered you, nobody is seeking to 'save' anyone, because only YOU can make the first move.
Anyhow, the post you try to castigate was answering a question, how you read it shows more about how you think than about what I wrote.
If my faith were in error, then I got it wrong and will suffer whatever consequence there is, so be it.
That's why I studied long and hard before I made a decision, based upon personal evidence that decided me that Christ was not fooling when He said: "No man comes to the Father except via me"
How you view things and make decisions is your business.
My point is mainly to suggest that when you champion this sort of thing, you give people false hope, or at least hope that, statistically, will be as reliable as a sandal with a broken strap. I'm happy it's working for you. I've just seen so many more people hurt by this sort of thing than helped. And I'm not even talking about the history of death and murder etc. Just people who realized there was nothing behind the thing they'd put so much time and faith into. ... and yes, I know, that's because their faith was weak or incomplete or whatever. I know how all that works. If it wasn't that easy to dismiss people who see through it, none of that stuff would still be around.
The problem (as I have seen it) is that too many folk join Churchianity in one of it's varieties, and never actually get introduced to Christ, or discipled in the word.
If you put someone untrained into a fast car, they will either drive it slowly until it clogs up the engine and they ruin the gearbox by staying in 2nd, or have accidents as they drive too fast for their capabilities.
Folk need to be mentored, then as they learn they will become more accomplished and be proficient at what they should do.
Ephesians 4 11-14
His gifts were [varied; He Himself appointed and gave men to us] some to be apostles (special messengers), some prophets (inspired preachers and expounders), some evangelists (preachers of the Gospel, traveling missionaries), some pastors (shepherds of His flock) and teachers.
His intention was the perfecting and the full equipping of the saints (His consecrated people), [that they should do] the work of ministering toward building up Christ’s body (the church),[That it might develop] until we all attain oneness in the faith and in the comprehension of the [full and accurate] knowledge of the Son of God, that [we might arrive] at really mature manhood (the completeness of personality which is nothing less than the standard height of Christ’s own perfection), the measure of the stature of the fullness of the Christ and the completeness found in Him.
So then, we may no longer be children, tossed [like ships] to and fro between chance gusts of teaching and wavering with every changing wind of doctrine, [the prey of] the cunning and cleverness of unscrupulous men, [gamblers engaged] in every shifting form of trickery in inventing errors to mislead.
That's the job description, unfortunately few will accept the training, or the job.
Oh and my answer to this question
Believers often don't have any logical arguments. (know I might get jumped on for this)
And you believe the stuff in the bible, which has a lot of contradictions, brings up a lot of unanswered questions, and it just.. doesn't make sense. Sometimes I feel the world would be better without religion.. people have to understand the world works perfectly without it. But maybe we need religion because that's what gives people an idea of "purpose".. I think just existing in this universe is pretty neat
mariexotoni, you have to study it to understand it. Its not designed to just read it and "Poof" there it is.
It is a complexed book. but it takes a hell of a lot of study and reading, not reading it from cover to cover and think you will know anything when your done. Because you won't. Your mind has to be clear, and opened to grasp the points made. Its not as simple as reading Harry Potter.
I've heard people talk that have studied it plenty. I use to go to church for about four years.
In the real world, people talk to hear themselves talk. Even among Christians. many say they read, but don't.
Going to church without a constant study of the bible (If your wanting and understanding of it) is frivolous. I'm not knocking going to church. But you want an understanding. You won't get it without coupling it with true bible study.
After looking at the historicity of the Bible it just does not fit with reality. Studying does bring a sense of metaphorical understanding but to jump to the conclusion that it actually depicts real events is like thinking the Lord of the Rings was a real series of events. The lessons learned can be enlightening (although many are a bit barbaric and grotesque) but to take a story and then claim it's real is a true mistake.
mtbailz, it doesn't fit your reality. If you realize your talking about a God here, not Houdini, its safe to believe he is capable of all things. It doesn't have to make sense to you. You think and logic like a man, he thinks and logics like a God.
He Created everything. Light, dark, good and bad. Material, and immaterial. No comparison to The Lord of the Rings at all. They're not stories, They are books much like a diary.
Believe as you wish..
Most historians would have to disagree, but if you are willing to live on faith alone that's fine with me; just keep it to yourself.
Keep yours then.
You have faith in man buddy. Or evo.. Or the chair your butt is sitting in.
Considering your thoughts are plastered all over the thread I'd be nice instead of telling people not to speak their opinion when you are boldy.
Unless you're better?
Well most Christians don't know what's in the bible, when they should in order to defend their beliefs with at least semi-logical, respectable arguments besides 'he just did'
Well, yes they should, but they don't unfortunately. But this is what Church is for. No I'm not contradicting myself. Remember above I said "if your wanting an understanding".
In most Christian faiths, the most important part of the bible in John 3:16 where it says "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not parish but have everlasting life". Every thing else in the bible is important, but Christians focas on Salvation. Blessed is he who believes and not seen. That's called faith.
But some Christians do want a better understanding. As I said, if you want a better understanding then you will study your bible.
We shouldn't have to defend our faith to anyone. That's like telling us we should defend the color of our skin, the town we live in, the school we go to.
It's our faith, let us be. As I have said before, believe as you wish.
you have a very false idea of understanding. there is so much truth out there.. just seek it! it doesn't lie in christianity believe it or not
I have the Truth. I don't have a false idea of understanding, my dear. You have blinded yourself. But that's ok. You have that right, and I'm not going to beat you in the head with it. I have nothing to prove. I am content with my faith. I have accepted yours as your own. Why can't you accept mine, as my own?
It's wrote in a deeper fashion than man-made thought.
A single point may be wrapped in an entire 4 chapters, yet the point may be immensely important.
The contradictions exist because God used man to write it, and chose specific events to teach us with. It's like a record of experiences.
I know what the OT looks like, and I also know people can nit-pick the text.
And that's exactly what they do before they ever start seeing the truth in it.
It's a "meanings" book, not a 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 steps to success laid out like people think should be because that's the way people write.
If you learn from others mistakes you don't have to suffer the pain yourself, and if you are to learn right from wrong you have to see both.
You can't understand something that is hidden or that never happens, so you can't prevent the bad unless the record includes it.
I know someone will pick at this the same way, but people don't become Christians overnight.. They hear, read, and see until one day something clicks, and then it's downhill from there.
There is truth in the Bible, and some have seen it and others fight to prove it isn't there.
Everyone just makes up what the bible means as they go along- whatever doesn't make sense it's a metaphor, whatever does, then woo there's proof.
i can't be apart of a discussion like this and stay civil when i'm arguing with nonsense and illogical..
good day to both of you, best wishes. hope you find the light of truth- it's beautiful
Well goodness. Consider the nerve struck.
Sounds like something got to crawling under your skin there.
No, I made nothing up. Even denied parts of the OT in the past.
Good to see you smiling with those harsh words... lol
I apologize. You have been very sweet and thorough with your replies. I'm more nervey and irritated with Gina. Your arguments have more value and I apologize for snapping
God doesn't exist!
There is no solid proof he does.
Ha! See? You can't disprove him!
That's not how it works. When you make a claim that something exists, you need proof. Burden of proof falls to the claimer, not "disproof" falling to the un-claimer.
Even if God came behind you and kicked you in your tail end, you would say "That wasn't him". You refuse to see anything. That's your fault.
This is untrue. There is simply no proof.
This is why your religion causes so many fights. That's your fault.
You are living proof of God Mark.
What, with your enmity toward the very idea no matter the circumstance.
And your justification of it by accustions toward human beings..
I'd say you alone would give me sufficient peace of mind to go all in on the bet..
Christianity does not cause fights. People hell bent on proving something they can't prove themselves does. We don't seek out unbelievers, they seek us out.
Quite right. You cannot prove your claims, so you start fights. Guess you actually agree with me then?
I'm sorry GinaCPocan, but I can't read these comments anymore. You are far too hostile, which is why I'm hesitant to post any hubs on Christianity, because god forbid
but read this
http://wisesloth.wordpress.com/2010/11/ … hristians/
LOL! Me Hostile? that's really funny, Ok, if you say so.What makes me sound hostile because I said if God came behind him and kicked him in the tail end? Oh WOW! i think you might be a little too sensitive.
Your the first who ever called me hostile. LOL! I guess there's always a first.
You won't post any hubs on Christianity? Why? I won't read your hubs, if that's troubling.
Your entitled to your beliefs, as I am mine.
I am, and I know of many at hubpages, who are not a product of the "closed" cycle.
If I were, then I wouldn't have previously doubted, researched, new information, faith restored, doubted, researched, new information, faith restored, doubted, researched.. etc and so forth.
I've followed my intellect immensely, but scrutiny of anything in a pre-concieved light can be the very "closed" cycle described in the beginning of the article.
My bias is a direct result of my studies.. Do I like the idea of eternal life? Yes.
Did I ever while researching consider the possibility likely? NO.
Many like to say all Christians are closed minded bigots, but I've found the truth is there are open-minded and closed-minded people in both groups, believing and non-believing.
Those who are open-minded and have a passion for knowing the truth will put forth the effort and they will find the truth.
Gina, you've got that steadfast resolutness that I so admire in a person
You're picking a single side. Weighing options requires two opposite options and an investigation into both.
Otherwise, turn around, face the field, and pee in the wind...
Because that's all your going to be doing with a one sided scale.
I like your honesty.
Believers [myself in this case.. ] start nuetral and as they stack on weights of what is sufficient "evidence" for them they begin to conclude.
And with years of research refined by questions from atheists and curious non-believers I couldn't doubt it for another second any longer. [I've doubted and switched plenty in the past due to arguments]
So now that I've weighed and continue stacking information that appeals to my personally accepted insight, I also admit I now have a bias.
But I still have two platforms on the scale, the non-God side of the scale simply rarely gets any weights.. I see none to add.
Woah, bud, assume my comments are laced with large amounts of cynicism and sarcasm. Except for this one, being serious here
why are believers hard to talk to? i don't understand and it upsets me.
Its faith... I think of myself as Catholic gone pantheist-esque, so you gotta understand that it isnt logic. Religion is like an asthetic judgement, you like it or you dont, no logic. You are or you arent. It is upsetting when people take it so seriously though... Meh, what can you do? Live y let live
What do you want to know, or discuss?
I'll be as kind, honest, and sincere as I can. If you actually want sincere dialogue, it would actually be refreshing.
I think I've already replied to a couple of your posts without any sarcasm at all above. Pretty sure at least [not checking, might be wrong.]
I have never been accused of being difficult to talk to..
But when it comes to my faith, I will take a stand. I won't budge. My faith is strong. Its all logical to me. Opposite ideas doesn't upset me, I simply let them know they won't change me. Call it what you want, but it's not fair to slam someones beliefs into the ground, simply because someone else differs. I don't get upset, I may have in my youth, but I have settled.
Maybe we are hard to talk to because many of us are contented, and sometimes we feel invaded. Also our faith teaches us certain things in how we are to be on certain issues.
If we believe in the bibles teachings, we won't sway back and forth. We won't accept certain ideas, because it's part of our faith.
But, your beliefs are nonsense. This is why you need to seek out unbelievers and try and defend them.
This is why your religion causes so many fights. Good that you admit you are totally closed minded I suppose. Most believers lie and say they are open minded.
As a matter of interest - why is it not fair to "slam your beliefs into the ground" exactly? If you hold ridiculous beliefs - surely you should expect to be ridiculed?
Bang explanation please.
Not the aftermath either, the before.
"Mark Knowlesposted 6 hours ago in reply to this
But, your beliefs are nonsense. This is why you need to seek out unbelievers and try and defend them."
This just sounded so ludicrous.
"This is why your religion causes so many fights. Good that you admit you are totally closed minded I suppose. Most believers lie and say they are open minded. "
If I'm closed minded, then I'm closed minded, then. That's my prerogative. I'm not on this earth to you and the rest of your baiters happy. I do not have to submit to you. If a Christian tells you they're open minded, then in truth they aren't being true to their faith, because the bible tells us to separate ourselves from worldly things. It doesn't say to hate, dislike, or treat others who are different, badly. It doesn't say to ignore anyone, it does say to separate ourselves. If you don't understand this, what can I do? I can't explain it to you because you won't hear it.
We don't cause fights Mark. Get real with yourself.
Perfect example: This thread owner politely asked nonbelievers (as you call yourselves) not to bring this rhetoric to their thread. What do you all do, you all uninvitingly brought your rhetoric to their thread. That is starting fights. You all cause fights. None of these Christians caused any fights. You want to fight. So, get a backbone and take ownership of your actions.
Oh and just for the record, I don't have a religion, I have a relationship with Jesus Christ. But, you wouldn't understand that.
As a matter of interest - why is it not fair to "slam your beliefs into the ground" exactly? If you hold ridiculous beliefs - surely you should expect to be ridiculed?
This is such barbaric thinking, and hilarious. It's not fair, dude. I shouldn't have to explain that. Not if your a mature adult. Maybe your not. LOL!
No - I don't understand this - sorry. You make ridiculous statements. Surely it is not unreasonable to point this out?
Explain why not please, because I don't understand.
Its unreasonable to nit pic. its also unreasonable to ask for explanations that you won't accept anyway.
I am genuinely interested to know why you think you can make ridiculous claims, and not expect to be ridiculed.
On top of that–it appears you think that anybody who points out how ridiculous your claims are is at fault for doing so.
I genuinely don't understand please explain.
First Mark, people come to me as well with what I consider outrageous beliefs or theories. I don't ridicule them. If I don't agree, I say that. to ridicule anyone is silly. Why? Whats the point? State what you believe if you will, but whats the point to ridicule them? What is gained? it's not going to change them.
Don't take the "its your fault out of context' please
It wouldn't matter how much I explained or how long I spent on explaining, you will still find whatever I said wrong in your opinion. That's fine. I accept that. You will never understand why I believe the way I do. I don't expect you to. I can't force you to.
Yes, most christians claim to not have a religion.
You guys are funny.
If they'd read the book of James in the Bible they'd have that err cleaned up in their thoughts.
It states what is is quite plainly.
It would be kind if you stopped using the word "All" Gina.
"What do you all do, you all uninvitingly brought your rhetoric to their thread." Not "all" of us!
Why would you even respond to it, if it doesn't pertain to you? The Alls know who they are. But for the record, you on here too with your negative inputs also that the thread owner had asked people NOT to do. So yes, the Alls pertain to you also.
Find one time when I have ever been rude, please. Not once have I ever been rude to any Christian on any forum post. Please give me an example of me ever doing "negative inputs". I have stated my opinion in respect to others every single time. The only thing you can call negative is that fact I don't agree with Christians, which to my credit I do in a respectful manner. Have a great day Gina I hope one day you will see that all people are not the same!
I never said rude now, there's a difference between negative and rude. But you did however win this constructive argument. I was wrong about a few things I said up there. The Thread owner here opened the floor to all of this. I got this one mixed up with another one I'm on. My apologies. I'll step aside then.
God is real but as humans we lose focus and take are eyes off God. So sometimes He may do things to show us His power so we can once again put are mind and our heart back to Him. The link below explains His power in a poem.
These same arguments have gone on since mankind started down the road to here. Blah, blah, blah!
by Luke M. Simmons 2 years ago
Does anyone have any evidence for the existence of God?I am an atheist, which to me only means that I haven't been shown requisite evidence to convince me of an omnipotent, all-knowing deity of any kind. If you would, please bring forth this evidence and deliver me from a fiery...
by Thom Carnes 9 years ago
A few weeks ago I asked what I thought was quite a serious, searching question about the existence of God, and was rather disappointed when it got a very limited response. (This could have been because we were all wrestling this other equally important issues at the time.)Peter Lopez made a valiant...
by Mahaveer Sanglikar 22 months ago
Many believers like to say that Atheists should prove that there is no God. Believers should know that existence has to be proved, not the non-existence. If a thing exists, it is possible to prove its existence. So believers should prove the existence of God if he exists. But if they want to do it,...
by Link10103 4 years ago
I can understand the positives of putting your faith in such and such religion, which is why I do not think religion as a whole should be completely eradicated, however in this day and age I honestly wouldn't mind if it was.My question is this: why does religion NEED to exist? If you say "So...
by accofranco 9 years ago
If your answer is yes,what is your proof.And then which religion is the true religion and which one is false and why do you think so?
by Claire Evans 3 years ago
That's the typical Sam Harris argument. How does suffering negate God's existence? Maybe He's just watching. It doesn't mean He doesn't exist and for anyone to bring up suffering as proof of no God is indication of a logical fallacy.
Copyright © 2019 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|