"I am tired of Christians trying to convince me that there is a God."
The reason I said this is that certain forum members who shall remain nameless have tried to turn this thread into a debate on religion. I posted why I didn't believe in god, with an explanation. Then some people have the audacity to tell me that I'm wrong, and that I am ignorant and stupid and obviously haven't "understood" the bible properly. I was just trying to get them to shut up about it all.
Can you point out the bits in my post that try to convince you there isn't a god? All I am doing is saying why I don't. Though it seems some people have a problem with that.
"But let me just say, if you're willing to change your beliefs because of some chat on the internet, then you were never that solid in them to begin with."
And I still see this as either an invalid argument or arrogance of the highest order. Being solid in your beliefs surely comes as believing them yes? So if someone casts a new and convincing light on this evidence, then you wouldn't change them? Despite being "solid" in them? Saying that you won't change your mind is just a tad stubborn, don't you think?
"I don't expect to be able to solve every Biblical paradox and every arguement ever brought against Christainity."
And yet I am expected to solve every single argument ever brought against the scientific community, it would seem. Sigh.
"And once more, I do believe your logic is flawed."
Not as far as I can see. It goes something like this:
You cannot prove there is a god
You cannot prove there is not
So what do I believe?
Do I believe what I can see with my own eyes, or do I believe what my faith teaches me?
Chris and I have merely taken the former option, and we are just trying to explain why we do so. The words "brick" "head" "bang" and "wall" spring to mind.
"Who made God? Nobody, he always has been and always will be. That is the best answer you're ever going to get from anyone and you should probably accept it as so."
No. We have already explained to you that we both believe the best answer to be god does not exist in the first place. To me at least, that makes a billion times more sense that the "well god exists really but obviously there's no real way to tell" method.
Why should we just accept it because that's the best answer the religoius community can come up with?
"No, there wouldn't have been a 9/11 attack, because odds are the WTC wouldn't have existed."
Irrelevant.
" How can you blame WW2 on Religion? Do you really think that Hitler would have stayed silent if he had no "religion.""
Hitler was a devout christian. He believed in the moral, spiritual and physical superiority of the Aryan race. He used both of these to convince the people to go to war with him. Not only did he tell them they were the finest race on earth, but he said they had god on their side too. Seems like a pretty god incentive to me.
"Now understand that to measure the odds of something, it must be possable. For God to create something, He Himself must exist, therefore, in a very subtle on your part and nitpicky on my part way, you've admitted that he does exist."
Good example of a non-logical assumption.
"Let's give this man a hand-- he understands the most basic part of propaganda and debate."
What was this for? It serves no rational purpose, therefore I cann only conclude that you too are indulging in petty insults.
"Actually it was written by a variaty of authors spanning the last tenthousand or so years and put together by the council of carthage in-- 414 AD I believe. Then again, I could be wrong about the date."
You could also be wrong about the monkeys. Please, be a little more intelligent in your mercurial way of deciding what is fact and what is fiction and what cannot be determined.
"The origional manuscripts are still around-- for the most part anyway-- and I welcome you to take a gander at them and tell me that all of the books of the Bible were written by some village idiot who wanted to keep his friends in line."
Oh I believe quite the opposite - IMO they couldn't have been written by an idiot. They are too well a crafted method of control.
"Again, using the same logic, you can't prove that he doesn't exist so I come to the conclusion that he is real."
This is not logic. This is faith. Logic would dictate "I cannot determine if there is or is not a god. Therefore I shall start from a blank slate and see if I can find out how the universe works, and perhaps that way I can determine which is true"
What you are saying is I don't have an answer, therefore this question must be the right one. To me, it makes no sense to say that just because you don't have an answer for something then it must be due to a god. Maybe it's just me.
"but I'll do what I can to help you reach them yourself."
Surely it would be better if you just left him to do his own thinking?
"If Scientists discover somthing that gives conclusive evidence that God does exist, and he did make this planet, and half of the scientist are still skeptical about it, which stance would you take?"
Why would half of the scientists still be sceptical about it? Again, you misunderstand the scientific method.
The stance I take ios based on reliable material evidence. Nothing more, nothing less. If irefutable evidence were shown of gods existence, then yes I would believe it, as would every scientist worth their salt. This paragraph I imagine will lead you into "then what would prove that god did exist for you then?" I imagine. Sigh.
" I suggest closing the topic."
He's got a point. People are getting too aggressive over all of this. It is not meant to be a debate about religion, it os meant to be explaining to the theists why I am not one of them.
"This WHOLE topic is about us non-believers telling you why we don't believe."
You would have to say that this logic is irefutable, Leon and BJW.
"It's MY logic, I (*I*) think it's logical."
This is a good pint, that I don't believe anyione has made yet. Logic is as much a personal thing as belief. You may think I am illogical in assuming there is no god, I of course take the exact opposite stance. Logic is as much a matter of opinion as whether you prefer Heinz or HP sauce on your chips.
Simply put: I can no longer understand how anyone in possession of the knowledge that I have can believe in a god, because the two are mutually exclusive in my mind. To me, science has disproved god and I can no longer accept that gods exist, because it is in contradiction to observable facts and my logisitical procedure.
"and sdtpikachu did a pretty fine job of that."
Not fine enough I imagine. Give it a few posts and I'll be expected to explain quantum mechanics in how matter can form from nothing. As well as all the rest of it.
"The universe always has been, and you should probably accept it as so."
Why stop there? sdtPikachu always has been, and you should probably just accept it.
""So if you can't feel space, and if you can't touch it, smell it, hear it, or taste it, then you have no clue if it's real, don't you.""
Like I said, on a fundamental level it is impossible to prove that anything exists at all. This however is not a very useful standpoint. So we just have to accept that what we can see does exist. And for me, by extension, things I can't see, never have seen and never see any evidence of DON'T exist.
"Well if you haven't tried every religion, then how would you know if another one didn't work better?"
You would have to agree this is a fair point, Leon. Who knows, you may find becoming a member of
the natural law party more fulfilling than your current beliefs. Who knows until you try?
"I agree... "
I fourth... but it would be nice to see if the people who want to know have actually figured out why I think like I do first.
"This isn't a debate idiot"
No Chris, it isn't and wasn't ment to be. It may be galling to be insulted, but it won't get you any further by retaliating in the same fashion. Chill man.
"guys, a lot of you said this topic was pointless and its not going to convert somebody. well, those weren't my intentions"
Ah someone with their head screwed on at last. For all those of you having difficulty understanding THIS IS NOT A DEBATE ON WHY RELIGON/SCIENCE IS RIGHT/WRONG. The chap just wants to find some stuff out for himself in order to understand people like me better.
Surely this isn't something that should be vehemently argued over?
Linear Mode
