It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why do people laugh at creationists?

page: 10
6
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 06:43 PM
link   
reply to post by TruthParadox
 


Haven't you learned that logic and the Bible, to a literalist, just don't mix! It reminds me of a school board meeting I once attended. The high school needed to replace the foriegn language textbooks, and the budget only allowed the teaching of one foriegn language (small town). The student body wanted to switch from French to Spanish, so this required school board approval. The debate was rather so so on the issue, until this Bible thumping redneck stood up in the back of the room and stated quite loudly, "If English was good enough for Jesus Christ, it's good enough for our kids!" He assumed this because his Bible was in English, so this was the language that Jesus spoke! The school board unanimously passed the measure to switch to Spanish. I admit it's an extreme example, but literalists don't want to hear, nor will they listen to logic. It's just a "The Bible says so, and that's that!" mentality, so you are wasting your breath if you think logic will play into the debate.




posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 06:57 PM
link   
reply to post by TruthParadox
 


T.P. I'm starting to think you're arguing just for the sake of arguing or even to convince yourself due to some doubts about your beliefs you may be having. I have come to this conclusion after interacting with you in multiple threads but it definitely becomes apparent now:

1). 'Knowing God exists takes omnipotence.' Nope! But knowing he does NOT exist does. I already explained this thoroughly.


2). 'You don't know if it's God you're feeling. We could be in the Matrix-like envirnoment.' This is something I see nonbelievers accuse Christians of all the time- that the reason we believe are the 'Googly Goo feelings we get.' Sorry, not in many cases and not in my case. Next?

3). Aliens/Monsters. Talk about totally missing the point of an analogy. Again, it looks like you are desperate to convince yourself- not me. Aliens and sleep paralysis. Sure, some accounts may be. But all of them? It becomes less likely. Regardless, I really don't want to derail this on the existence of aliens. I made it quite clear it was an analogy and not a very good one due to there being nothing that compares to God. Likewise, some 'God encounters' could have logical explanations as well. But all of them? And can you REALLY convince an individual of what they know of YOUR 'logical explanation?' Nope. They will know better than anyone else every single time. If they are lying, unsure, or 100% positive, that is something only they can conclude. It would only be guesswork from everyone else.

4). 'You think you know.' LOL Now you're telling me what you think I think I know. Sorry, I guess try to convince yourself but don't try to argue with something you were not privy to. It makes no sense. I'm skeptical of many things in this world but one thing I won't do is haggle with people over their personal experiences or knowledge. Only they can answer if they know in their heart it was real, sketchy, or utterly false.

5). 'Ape into man.' You are just as convinced in the knowledge of man as I am convinced in the knowledge of God. I remain highly skeptical of the evidence for intermediaries and you remain highly skeptical of the evidence/existence of God. I also particularly and personally remain very skeptical of the intermediaries, and gave one example as to why. Too many hoaxes, cases of mistaken identity, and blatant distortions of evidence. The evidence may be enough to convince you- and it obviously has- but not for me. I remain very skeptical.

6). 'Man and Woman.' This is where you totally shift the goal posts. You were first concerned about 'male and female' but after getting an answer you are now trying to bring up a new objection. I particularly and personally do not believe 'animal to man' is compatible with the Genesis account. However, this other author does not believe there is a contradiction and I can understand his reasoning and follow along even if I do not fully agree with his conclusions. He believes whatever happened in the past, happened in the past and Genesis only begins with the creation of the universe then concentrates on the garden. I'm not swallowing his theories without question but it is interesting to read.

Note: Anything in the quotes above are not direct quotes. It was just a paraphrasing of the argument. I don't want to be accused of misquoting anyone because they are not direct quotes- only summaries.

Note: Sorry, dealing with other stuff so sorry if I misunderstood something. It took me like an hour on and off to write the above in spaced out segments. :p

Enjoy.



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 07:21 PM
link   
reply to post by AshleyD
 


Your argument shows more than most that it should be formless. They'll love nothing more than a proper row over Cain's colour and racism. The details are irrelevant, now.



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 07:23 PM
link   
reply to post by redled
 


I think you're right.



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 07:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by AshleyD
reply to post by redled
 


I think you're right.


A few years ago, that attitude would have gotten us hanged. We must subscribe to the form of Christ.... lol.



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 08:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by AshleyD
T.P. I'm starting to think you're arguing just for the sake of arguing or even to convince yourself due to some doubts about your beliefs you may be having. I have come to this conclusion after interacting with you in multiple threads but it definitely becomes apparent now:


I don't see how you can say this. I also don't see how you can look at the logical falacies I present and just ignore them. Then again, I suppose I do see because when I was a Christian I did the same. It's all about perspective. I'm learning more and more how a person's perspective changes everything. I can assure you of one thing, that my perspective is of one seeking truth, not supporting my truth or stroking my own ego. I know that I know next to nothing in the grand skeem of things, but I also know that I prize the truth over my truth. I know that because I am human, I must be wrong about many things, but this is not one of them because the contradictions can not be answered. I have yet to recieve an answer from anyone about the contradictions of an omnipotent God, and I suppose I never will. I even prayed to God innumerable times asking for answers to these questions, or at the very least, some kind of reassurance. Anything. I got nothing. God works in strange and mysteries ways, huh?


Originally posted by AshleyD
1). 'Knowing God exists takes omnipotence.' Nope! But knowing he does NOT exist does. I already explained this thoroughly.


I explained how you can never know. You can't prove that what you are feeling is anymore than that - a feeling. It's just a simple fact. Until you can prove otherwise, you can say that you know, but I can say that you don't.


Originally posted by AshleyD
2). 'You don't know if it's God you're feeling. We could be in the Matrix-like envirnoment.' This is something I see nonbelievers accuse Christians of all the time- that the reason we believe are the 'Googly Goo feelings we get.' Sorry, not in many cases and not in my case. Next?


You don't even admit that it's a possibility? How blind can you be? Don't you see that it's at least possible that the feelings you get could not be from God? I know that a Christian would never admit this, but it seems that you completely ignore my point and just say "nope, not the case". The truth is that you can't know. The truth is that no human can know the truth about such things, and it's the hardest thing for us to admit due to our vast egos.


Originally posted by AshleyD
3). Aliens/Monsters. Talk about totally missing the point of an analogy. Again, it looks like you are desperate to convince yourself- not me. Aliens and sleep paralysis. Sure, some accounts may be. But all of them? It becomes less likely. Regardless, I really don't want to derail this on the existence of aliens. I made it quite clear it was an analogy and not a very good one due to there being nothing that compares to God. Likewise, some 'God encounters' could have logical explanations as well. But all of them? And can you REALLY convince an individual of what they know of YOUR 'logical explanation?' Nope. They will know better than anyone else every single time. If they are lying, unsure, or 100% positive, that is something only they can conclude. It would only be guesswork from everyone else.


I didn't miss the point. My point is that you can't know no matter how much you think you can. Also, my point about the human brain is that so little is known about it and yet we trust what we see even though it can't be proven. Consider that hundreds of years ago, nothing was known about SP and therefor many demons, ghosts, and angels were seen with no other explanation than it must have been a demon, ghost, or angel. What else do we not know about the mind. The mind, after all, determines what we percieve as real. You percieve God to be real, but I do not. He is not a constant, he is merely in the mind of a believer.
Do you think it coincidence that the more you begin to believe in God the more he becomes real?
Fun experiment:
Imagine you are being watched. At first, you will know that you are not really being watched, but as you continue to give into the thought of invisible entities watching you, you will see that it becomes more and more real. After half an hour, you will begin to actually feel it. Now consider that Christians believe in God, not for 30 minutes, but for years. Have you even thought that there very well could be a reaction with the brain? A reaction that is even proven through psychology. It explains all feelings and encouters from every religion.


Originally posted by AshleyD
4). 'You think you know.' LOL Now you're telling me what you think I think I know. Sorry, I guess try to convince yourself but don't try to argue with something you were not privy to. It makes no sense. I'm skeptical of many things in this world but one thing I won't do is haggle with people over their personal experiences or knowledge. Only they can answer if they know in their heart it was real, sketchy, or utterly false.


Then why do you argue with me? I have personal experiences and knowledge and I conclude that there is no God. You laugh that I said "You think you know", yet anyone of any other faith who claims daily that they know, with as much truth as you say, you would say the same thing to them that I did to you, would you not?


Originally posted by AshleyD
6). 'Man and Woman.' This is where you totally shift the goal posts. You were first concerned about 'male and female' but after getting an answer you are now trying to bring up a new objection. I particularly and personally do not believe 'animal to man' is compatible with the Genesis account.


I never shifted my concern. I stated from the start the problem with evolution before Adam and Eve. I think you simply misunderstood.

One thing I can't stand is people accusing me of not wanting the truth, because I would die for the truth, let alone take a blow to my ego. I've been wrong before, and I have publicly admitted it when I was proven wrong. So don't play that card of "You're only arguing because you're trying to convince yourself".
Instead, question your perspective.
Is it one that seeks the truth, or is it one that says "The Bible is right and everything else is wrong, end of discussion"?
I'm guessing the latter. I'm also guessing that you would admit it



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
Haven't you learned that logic and the Bible, to a literalist, just don't mix!


It's all about perspective. Many have made up their minds and will not consider logic but will instead sweep it under the rug when necessary.


Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
It's just a "The Bible says so, and that's that!" mentality, so you are wasting your breath if you think logic will play into the debate.


I'm not wasting my breath. Somone will listen. Everyone has had these questions concerning the Bible, most simply sweep it under the rug. I'm simply trying to lift that rug back up and reveal all the filth therein.



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 09:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by TruthParadox
I don't see how you can say this. I also don't see how you can look at the logical falacies I present and just ignore them.


I haven't ignored them, TP. I believe you posted them in some other threads, too. I might not always respond to posts but I do always ponder things silently to myself. That way it becomes less 'ego' and wanting to win an argument and more sincere reflection. Those contradictions aren't that hard, some of them have answers right there in the Bible where the alleged problem is already explained, some are false dilemmas, etc. I believed I tried helping you and others with contradictions in the other thread about losing Christianity only to be snubbed. I feel no need to bang my head against the wall. Hope that helps you understand where I am coming from.



I explained how you can never know.


Yes, with a sci-fi 'Maybe it's all just a big matrix' scenario. Occam's razor, remember?



You can't prove that what you are feeling is anymore than that - a feeling. It's just a simple fact. Until you can prove otherwise, you can say that you know, but I can say that you don't.


This is interesting. For one, because I have already clearly explained it is so much more than 'a feeling' in many people's cases, including mine. Second, you bring up the word 'prove' and tell me I cannot prove it. This is humorous to me because until I go around telling everyone they should believe in God, too, because of what happened to me, I have no burden of proof. Third, personal experiences cannot be replicated. So this discussion is going nowhere fast. lol


You don't even admit that it's a possibility? How blind can you be? Don't you see that it's at least possible that the feelings you get could not be from God? I know that a Christian would never admit this, but it seems that you completely ignore my point and just say "nope, not the case". The truth is that you can't know. The truth is that no human can know the truth about such things, and it's the hardest thing for us to admit due to our vast egos.


It's like you're trying to evangelize me into atheism. lol Like I said, I typically don't haggle with people over what is personal to them- that is because I understand only they will know. One can lie to others but they cannot lie to themselves. And then you say it is ego. Can your reluctance to believe in God also be due to ego? Hm. That is a question. Again, it is much easier to receive proof of a positive compared to proof of a negative. If I were you, I'd seriously ponder this. I have received what I consider proof of the positive. Can you honestly claim you have received proof of the negative? That is a personal question for you to consider- it's none of my business.



Imagine you are being watched. At first, you will know that you are not really being watched, but as you continue to give into the thought of invisible entities watching you, you will see that it becomes more and more real. After half an hour, you will begin to actually feel it. Now consider that Christians believe in God, not for 30 minutes, but for years. Have you even thought that there very well could be a reaction with the brain? A reaction that is even proven through psychology. It explains all feelings and encouters from every religion.


That might be true for many people yet irrelevant to others. For instance, what of the people who required the validation before acceptance? I know you do not believe in the Bible or it's stories so this is just an example that we will both be familiar with. Paul's conversion. That is what it took to convert him and come to the realization of Christ. It was not a gradual process of googly goo feelings evolving and increasing over time. Was Paul's experience 100% for real? Only he can answer that. Hope that helps. It's not always a case of conversion then knowledge. In many cases it is a case of knowledge and then conversion, acceptance, etc.


Then why do you argue with me? I have personal experiences and knowledge and I conclude that there is no God. You laugh that I said "You think you know", yet anyone of any other faith who claims daily that they know, with as much truth as you say, you would say the same thing to them that I did to you, would you not?


Because, again, it is so much more likely and possible to have a positive validated than a negative. Think about it.



I've been wrong before, and I have publicly admitted it when I was proven wrong.


I've seen you do that. It is very commendable. My 'respect meter' always skyrockets when I see members acknowledge such things. It does that, because I know how hard it is to admit when we're wrong because I've had to do it myself on here as well.
Denying ego for the sake of truth is something we all need to do. I'm not asking you to prove your reasons for your atheism to me- I understand where you are. Believe me, I do. The only person we have to truly explain our reasons to is ourselves.
If you feel utterly confident in where you are- then it is absolutely out of line for me to challenge that or to criticize you for it. You can be an atheist. God allows us all to choose so I haven't the right to tell you any different.


Is it one that seeks the truth, or is it one that says "The Bible is right and everything else is wrong, end of discussion"?
I'm guessing the latter. I'm also guessing that you would admit it


Yes I would admit it. I admit it all the time on here and often say, 'And I say that without shame or apology.' The best I can explain it like in a marriage. (And I think you and I already had this discussion- if not it was with another member recently). For so long I doubted the Bible only to have it later be validated. Then I would doubt certain facts in the Bible, only to have it later be revealed it was right yet again and I was wrong again. This pattern repeated itself for years. When a relationship is new, you will not know your partner well enough to believe with confidence they are faithful to you. But as time goes on, they prove themselves to you. You trust them. Likewise, I might not be able to ever know in this lifetime for a fact Methuselah lived to be 969 years old, that John the Baptist really did wear a camel-skin garment, or that Moses had a speech impediment. But the more I study apologetics, the more I see even some of the craziest Bible stories having support, the more God reveals aspects of His personality to me- even a sense of humor of all things, and the more I walk in the confidence of Christ. So, yes. God gets my trust due to his track record of faithfulness.

Hope that helps. It both seems we're pretty set in our ways.




[edit on 9/24/2008 by AshleyD]



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 10:04 PM
link   
reply to post by TruthParadox
 


From your fingertips to 'God's' monitor, my friend!



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 10:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by AshleyD
I haven't ignored them, TP. I believe you posted them in some other threads, too. I might not always respond to posts but I do always ponder things silently to myself. That way it becomes less 'ego' and wanting to win an argument and more sincere reflection. Those contradictions aren't that hard, some of them have answers right there in the Bible where the alleged problem is already explained, some are false dilemmas, etc. I believed I tried helping you and others with contradictions in the other thread about losing Christianity only to be snubbed. I feel no need to bang my head against the wall. Hope that helps you understand where I am coming from.


I've never heard answers from anyone about the contradictions of God, only a few answers about some contradictions in the Bible - explaining it as translation errors.


Originally posted by AshleyD
Yes, with a sci-fi 'Maybe it's all just a big matrix' scenario. Occam's razor, remember?


I never was one for a shave. And the matrix was just an example. The point is that there are infinite possibilities for what you feel or 'know' besides God. I believe it's due to the brain. I know because I experienced the same things.


Originally posted by AshleyD
This is interesting. For one, because I have already clearly explained it is so much more than 'a feeling' in many people's cases, including mine. Second, you bring up the word 'prove' and tell me I cannot prove it. This is humorous to me because until I go around telling everyone they should believe in God, too, because of what happened to me, I have no burden of proof. Third, personal experiences cannot be replicated. So this discussion is going nowhere fast. lol


Whether a feeling or not, it can be explained by human psychology. Also, you're the one that brought into the conversation that you know God exists and that an atheist can not know that he doesn't. This is why I say you can't prove that you know. Many people of every religion you can imagine claim to know just as you do, they can not prove it so why should they include that as a point in their arguments? Likewise, I brought it up because you can not prove it and therefor it is irrelevant in an argument.



Originally posted by AshleyD
It's like you're trying to evangelize me into atheism. lol Like I said, I typically don't haggle with people over what is personal to them- that is because I understand only they will know. One can lie to others but they cannot lie to themselves. And then you say it is ego. Can your reluctance to believe in God also be due to ego? Hm. That is a question. Again, it is much easier to receive proof of a positive compared to proof of a negative. If I were you, I'd seriously ponder this. I have received what I consider proof of the positive.


But many people have received 'proof' of their gods. This doesn't make them correct.




Originally posted by AshleyD
Paul's conversion. That is what it took to convert him and come to the realization of Christ. It was not a gradual process of googly goo feelings evolving and increasing over time. Was Paul's experience 100% for real? Only he can answer that. Hope that helps. It's not always a case of conversion then knowledge. In many cases it is a case of knowledge and then conversion, acceptance, etc.


To bad God doesn't give that luxary to all. Proof before faith. But many religions make such claims. It's like the example of sleep paralasys. There ARE aspects of the human mind that can cause such events.


Originally posted by AshleyD
So, yes. God gets my trust due to his track record of faithfulness.


Do you mind me asking what age you converted to Christianity? It seems that many people change their beliefs at a certain age, and are unlikely to change their beliefs again after they are 25-30. Just curious. Much of the reason I'm interested in these discussions is because of psychology.


Originally posted by AshleyD
Hope that helps. It both seems we're pretty set in our ways.


Yah yah yah... Agree to disagree. It seems we do this little dance every time. My legs are getting tired.



posted on Sep, 24 2008 @ 11:06 PM
link   
reply to post by TruthParadox
 


Ok we seem to be going around in a merry-go-round of the same things over and over again so briefly:

1). Confidence in theistic beliefs vs. confidence in atheistic beliefs. It's always more difficult to confirm a negative- especially in the case of the existence of God. He is even often referred to as 'unfalsifiable.' It's much more possible to be confident in the existence of God than it is to be confident in His non existence.

2). Actual Personal Experience vs. 'Logical explanations.' This will always be up to the individual to decide. Someone who wasn't there cannot tell the person who was and who experienced something that they know more about the person's own experience than the recipient did. And some cases might be more shaky (dreams, visions, etc.) and some will truly have logical explanations (sleep paralysis), but there is no standard explanation for all experiences, on all levels.

3). Contradictions. The link I posted previously was a multi-series article. The first page dealt with the introduction, then scribal errors, then translation errors, etc. A different 'set' of alleged contradictions are on each page. Then on one page it consisted of supposed theological contradictions. It was a huge article. lol

 


Ok, New stuff. Yay.


But many people have received 'proof' of their gods. This doesn't make them correct.


Absolutely. That is why you need to consider and review ALL the evidence, IMO. As they say, they can't all be right. As they also say, they could also all be wrong. I believe the God of the Bible, however, is the only one who actually validates His existence beyond personal experiences. In things like the falsifiable testing of prophecy, the Mazzaroth, etc.


Do you mind me asking what age you converted to Christianity? It seems that many people change their beliefs at a certain age, and are unlikely to change their beliefs again after they are 25-30. Just curious. Much of the reason I'm interested in these discussions is because of psychology.


Oh I hate this question. lol My conversion is a very long story. There were actually two incidences. At the age of 19 and then confirmed, no going back, at the age of 23. I'm 29 now. How old were you when you officially left Christianity for atheism?



Yah yah yah... Agree to disagree. It seems we do this little dance every time. My legs are getting tired.


lol I did that a while back. Now I genuinely enjoy hearing your thoughts.


[edit on 9/24/2008 by AshleyD]



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 06:59 AM
link   
reply to post by TruthParadox
 





just playing devils advocate .... your trying to nail a ghost to the floor boards


i guess that bit slipped passed your logic i am an atheist ^_^

but its so easy to skip and dance around i dont have to disprove your logic i can ignore and keep spouting what ever i want and the angrier and more forceful you insist the worse you look

you want to bring logic to a religeous discusion, thats like bringing a bomb to a sword fight

that why we say dont try and prove there is no god, who cares anyway argue the actual science not logic that can be drawn from it

theres more then enough proof for evolution unless you want to ignore it or deny it, so hit them with that evidence and beat them to death with it if you gotta but thats all you do

the easiest way to get someone to fight you is to go against thier beliefs, use tha back door teach em evolution and then let them try and make sense of it within thier religeous beliefs

by demanding they listen to how right you are just gets you railed against
in the same way funndies get railed against becasue tehya re right so there attitude



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 07:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by noobfun
you want to bring logic to a religeous discusion, thats like bringing a bomb to a sword fight




Most intelligent thing that's been said in this whole discussion



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 07:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by AshleyD
1). Confidence in theistic beliefs vs. confidence in atheistic beliefs. It's always more difficult to confirm a negative- especially in the case of the existence of God. He is even often referred to as 'unfalsifiable.' It's much more possible to be confident in the existence of God than it is to be confident in His non existence.


This is really an opinion. When I was a Christian, I was confident 100% that God existed. I would have jumped off a building knowing the whole way down that there would be an afterlife.
I was confident that the dream I had last night was real. I would have jumped off a building knowing that when I hit the ground, I would die.
You see, for me, becoming an atheist was exactly like waking up from a dream. I now know and am confident that my belief in Christianity was false, just as I know and am confident that the dream I had last night was only a dream.
How many dreams have you had that, at the time, you were confident were all real?
I can never disprove God just as you can never prove God. However, I'm fairly certain that the first 18 years of my life was a dream.


Originally posted by AshleyD
2). Actual Personal Experience vs. 'Logical explanations.' This will always be up to the individual to decide. Someone who wasn't there cannot tell the person who was and who experienced something that they know more about the person's own experience than the recipient did. And some cases might be more shaky (dreams, visions, etc.) and some will truly have logical explanations (sleep paralysis), but there is no standard explanation for all experiences, on all levels.


But there CAN be explanations for all experiences I've heard of. I would be interested in knowing what kind of experiences you are talking about. When I was a Christian, I pinned many things on God, and I was 100% confident because of them. The mind really is that powerful, and most people just don't know it.


Originally posted by AshleyD
3). Contradictions. The link I posted previously was a multi-series article. The first page dealt with the introduction, then scribal errors, then translation errors, etc. A different 'set' of alleged contradictions are on each page. Then on one page it consisted of supposed theological contradictions. It was a huge article. lol


Does it answer the following:
1) Why an omnipotent God created us the way he did knowing that many of us would not believe.
2) Why God created Satan when he would have known what Satan would have become, and indeed being omnipotent, would of had to CREATE him for the PURPOSE of being evil. Pure evil can not come from pure good.
3) The contradiction of a perfect omnipotent God creating a flawed world.
4) Why does he not offer the same luxaries to other creatures? If he is infinite, then we look the same in comparison to him as animals do. Infinity is to 5 as infinity is to 5000.
5) The contradiction of an infinite being creating something.
6) The contradiction of a creator judging his creation. If I paint a painting and am not satisfied with it, do I torture the painting (assuming this were possible), or do I create a better painting the next time?
7) Why would an infinite God want our love? Infinite would imply that he does not want or need anything as he would already be 'complete' in every way.
8) In the beginning, why did God not give the same message and testimonies to the world as he did with the Jews? Being omnipotent, he would have to know that this would later result in what we have today, which is China for example being full of 'heathens'. Is God racist? Why not give them the same chance as others? Sure they can all choose to convert, but the fact is they are far far less likely to , thus they do not have the same probability of going to heaven simply due to their location of birth.
9) Why create us to make logical decissions and then ask us to take him on faith?

There are many many more. I could literally go all day if I wanted. The thing is, these are not complicated questions. Many of these questions are asked by children and are met with a reply such as "don't question your faith", because no one can answer some of the stronger arguments without contradicting logic or assuming things which make no sense.
And there's no need for you to attempt to answer these questions. I know that these are the types of questions most Christians hate because there are no good answers to them. This is why I had to look at these questions and many more when coming to my decision on Christianity.



Originally posted by AshleyD
Oh I hate this question. lol My conversion is a very long story. There were actually two incidences. At the age of 19 and then confirmed, no going back, at the age of 23. I'm 29 now. How old were you when you officially left Christianity for atheism?


That's what I thought. I was 18 when I left Christianity.
It seems like 90% of the people that make these decisions make them between the ages of ~ 17- 21. I know there has to be a reason for this. Probably the whole comming of age and looking at your beliefs with greater scrutiny. The intersting thing is that, like I said before, people are much less likely to change their opinions after the ages of ~ 25-30. I believe this is because it's to hard to let go of beliefs at this time due to ego. At this point it seems to be all or nothing with most.
I just think it's interesting because the more I can understand why we make the decisions we do, the more I can understand if the decisions are made for the right reasons.


Originally posted by AshleyD

Yah yah yah... Agree to disagree. It seems we do this little dance every time. My legs are getting tired.


lol I did that a while back. Now I genuinely enjoy hearing your thoughts.



I do as well. But still, all of my replies to you seem to be long winded, and I have small lungs.



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 08:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by noobfun


just playing devils advocate .... your trying to nail a ghost to the floor boards


i guess that bit slipped passed your logic i am an atheist ^_^


I guess it did, didn't it.


Originally posted by noobfun
but its so easy to skip and dance around i dont have to disprove your logic i can ignore and keep spouting what ever i want and the angrier and more forceful you insist the worse you look


That's not true. I've gone up against many people that spout illogical words like a waterfall. I come across looking right because most people reading this arn't that stupid. I always get more stars when arguing against such a person, which is actually an accomplishment considering that most people believe in God. 80% in America.


Originally posted by noobfun
you want to bring logic to a religeous discusion, thats like bringing a bomb to a sword fight


Yet the bomb wins does it not? Rock, paper, scissors. My logic trumps religious babel. People like AshleyD who actually use logic to support their beliefs is one of the main reasons I argue my possition in the first place. So you're wrong, there are people who can discuss their position with logic and not just say "wah wah wah, my mommy told me God exists. You're wrong. Poo."


Originally posted by noobfun
that why we say dont try and prove there is no god, who cares anyway argue the actual science not logic that can be drawn from it


I'll state it for the 12,957th time. I am not trying to prove there is no God. I can't do that. I am merely showing the logical fallacies of the God in the Bible.


Originally posted by noobfun
the easiest way to get someone to fight you is to go against thier beliefs, use tha back door teach em evolution and then let them try and make sense of it within thier religeous beliefs


There are very precise reasons why I do not believe in God. You may not have these reasons, but I can point out the logical fallacies.


Originally posted by noobfun
by demanding they listen to how right you are just gets you railed against
in the same way funndies get railed against becasue tehya re right so there attitude


But everything I present in my arguments is based on clear cut logic. I don't dodge the issues or ignore facts.


Also, your last few posts seem to be attacking me and not the argument at hand. What's the problem? I'm presenting my opinion. My opinion has a logical bases. Anyone that tries to deny my opinion must first attack the logical bases I set it on. AshleyD knows this, which is why she is arguing in a logical and coherent manner. So why do you spout illogical words and yet claim creationists to be the prime suspect? The only illogical words I see here are yours.


Edit: I'd also like to point out that I was a Christian for 18 years and I know how Christians think. Most will ignore the hard questions and sweep them under the rug. These questions can not be ignored, so I am bringing them up again and again. You say that I should use science. No Christian is going to change their opinion because of science, it's something called faith. I'm attacking the root of the belief which is the Bible. If the Bible is wrong, then most people would no longer believe in God, as the Bible is the prime reason for most to believe in God.

[edit on 25-9-2008 by TruthParadox]



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 10:45 AM
link   
I find that since he's allegedly an ever loving 100% good God that it's odd that he has such a hard time showing himself. I have a problem with a God who simply wants his followers to convince themselves that he is true instead of actually appearing in front of them and showing all the world that he exists yesterday, today and every day till the sun burns out. If he's the father of humanity, he's being fairly irresponsible by not actually looking out for them.

One of the teachings that I remember quite well from church was that Satan battles for your belief and unbelief (and hence, faith) in the mind. Well with my new perspective I can really understand why that is, because he's a figment of the imagination, his only realm of power is the mind.

The reason I need some proof for God beyond reasonable doubt is because of the problematic and fickle human mind, so something that simply doesn't come down to interpretation or point of view. The mind is completely incapable of discerning truth and preception without examination and scrutiny.

Part of human nature is that we just don't like to be wrong, we put so much stake on being right about God and the afterlife that it's just to hard to face the possibility of being wrong. Only a few can get real and examine their beliefs with scrutiny. I also believe that most people know deep down that they are just trying to convince themselves when they know it's all a sham.

Case in point, my past creationism. I came to a moment when (as a creationist) I wondered what I actually expected to see if I went back through time and visited 65 hundred years ago and 65 million yeas ago. I actually expected to see dinosaurs and in that moment I realised that what I was trying to convince myself of was a sham. Same thing happened a couple of months ago when I dropped Christianity for agnosticism.

Once we face up to what we really believe is true and what might be true, we no longer need to spend all our time indoctrinating ourselves. Suddenly we embrace logic over apologetics and reason over faith.

A true God would have no need for apologetics or faith.

[edit on 9/25/2008 by Good Wolf]



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 11:15 AM
link   
As for your conversion from Christianity to atheism- thanks for sharing. It was interesting to learn that about you. It also takes a lot of guts to open up around here and share what led us to believe the way we do. There's always someone waiting around the corner to 'argue you out of it' lol which is almost always futile so I'll just say again thank you so much for sharing that with me.

Here is a quick answer to your contradictions:


Originally posted by TruthParadox
Why an omnipotent God created us the way he did knowing that many of us would not believe.


We are all given the gift of life, a choice, and are all given free will. To consider it a 'contradiction' that we are actually granted all of the above and are free to make our own decisions (in this case to choose God or reject Him) makes no sense to me. This isn't a contradiction- it's simply a theological question (Answered in the Bible, nonetheless). However, if, for instance, God gave us life, and did not give us the ability to choose but we were simply all 'mindless paintings' (referring to your analogy below) then that still would not be a contradiction- it would simply be terribly unfair. However, we are given life and the ability to choose. Claiming this as a contradiction makes no sense- it's simply a 'why' question that is answered in the NT.


2) Why God created Satan when he would have known what Satan would have become, and indeed being omnipotent, would of had to CREATE him for the PURPOSE of being evil. Pure evil can not come from pure good.


See, I do not believe God created Satan for the sole purpose of being evil. Satan was one of the highest angels but rebelled out of his own free will. As for your Pure evil and Pure good comment- this is as simple as cold and heat. There is no such things as cold by itself- it is simply the absence of heat. Likewise, 'pure evil' is the absence of 'good.'


3) The contradiction of a perfect omnipotent God creating a flawed world.


We are told the world was created 'good' and then became flawed. We are also told nature will be restored. We are told all natural fell out of whack due to the fall but it was never created that way and it will not stay that way.


Why does he not offer the same luxaries to other creatures? If he is infinite, then we look the same in comparison to him as animals do. Infinity is to 5 as infinity is to 5000.


This question I don't understand. Are you saying why aren't animals offered salvation? What do you mean by 'luxuries?' And 'creatures?' Or are you asking why don't animals have a relationship with God? Let me know what you mean by luxuries and creatures.


5) The contradiction of an infinite being creating something.


LOL How is this a contradiction? Are you referring to the age old question of, 'If God made us then who made God?' Or do you think since He is infinite everything else should be too? I would be much more concerned about a FINITE being's ability to create something.


6) The contradiction of a creator judging his creation. If I paint a painting and am not satisfied with it, do I torture the painting (assuming this were possible), or do I create a better painting the next time?


Well, you seem to think we are like an inanimate objects incapable of any kind of rational thought process or decision making if you truly agree with your comparison of cognitive humans to something that cannot think or feel. That painting cannot make any type of decisions, accept grace, engage in sin, ask for forgiveness, etc. And those are things all of us humans do and can do. We're not sent to Hell just because we exist and ended up being an ugly painting that God doesn't like. The painting cannot choose to be ugly but humans can choose to be ugly by their actions and rejection of God.

Remember free will. That painting was offered no chances to redeem its own ugliness. We are. So that analogy of humans to an inanimate object is pretty far off. We have a way to 'be fixed' in essence- that painting does not. For some reason you have it into your head that our eternal fate is not dependent on our own decisions but is decided arbitrarily.


7) Why would an infinite God want our love? Infinite would imply that he does not want or need anything as he would already be 'complete' in every way.


This is really silly in my opinion. God very clearly Has emotions so why would He NOT want our love? I agree that He doesn't NEED it but I see nothing wrong with Him wanting it. And I see no contradictions whatsoever in a creator wanting His creation's love. To me that shows He wants a relationship with something He loves. That does not mean He is incomplete because of it. God will continue to be God in spite of our acceptance or rejection of Him.


8) In the beginning, why did God not give the same message and testimonies to the world as he did with the Jews?


I'm dividing the answer to this one in two parts. He did. In the very beginning (before the Jewish people were set apart and given a covenant), all of mankind had the revelation of the one true God. Then when Abraham came around, we are told (In Hosea I think) that God sees Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and they are like an oasis in the desert in His eyes. After the flood when mankind had become sinful again and had created their own religions, Abraham and his clan had stayed faithful to the one true God so they were the ones who received the covenant and the promise that the Messiah would come through their line. But this does not mean they were to keep it to themselves but were to be a testament to the whole world. This was also one of the reasons why the gentiles were later given the task of world evangelism after the Jews rejected Jesus who was the promised Messiah. So the Jews were blessed as the 'chosen people' but this does NOT mean they were the ONLY ones who would be given this blessing. Second, because of this, the Jews have suffered A LOT throughout history. It's something I'm very thankful to them for but not envious of, if that makes any sense.

A joke in apologetic circles is when asked, 'How can you possible believe God exists,' and answer is, 'The Jews.' This is because they truly have survived all odds, prophecy is always being filled concerning them, and they are constantly under Satanic attack to destroy them because they HAVE to exist for prophecy to be fulfilled. If you destroy the Jews, you destroy God's plan- but of course, God will always be triumphant. So the Jewish race as a whole is a testimony to the world- and were selected as the covenant people due to Abraham's righteousness and faithfulness but this does not mean the rest of the world is excluded.


Being omnipotent, he would have to know that this would later result in what we have today, which is China for example being full of 'heathens'. Is God racist? Why not give them the same chance as others? Sure they can all choose to convert, but the fact is they are far far less likely to , thus they do not have the same probability of going to heaven simply due to their location of birth.


This gets us back to our disagreement concerning 'Salvation via Geography' which I clearly said was a canard. Take China for instance since that was your example. Statistically, today China has one of the HIGHEST conversion rates to Christianity in the world. Yes- this is true and is caused by massive underground evangelism taking place over there right now. Anyways, We are told Jesus was given to us as the savior for ALL of mankind. No, God is not racist. That's silly and is an accusation that is direct contrast to what we are told in the NT.


9) Why create us to make logical decissions and then ask us to take him on faith?


This was one of my question I used to have as well. There is even a thread floating around on a forum I used to go to before accepting Christ. I asked the SAME question- why would God make us rational, analytical beings only to have go totally against our own God-given instinct and take it on faith!? I was WRONG. lol I could have sworn I already explained this in another thread twice over something like that last week. We are given two options. Remember the seek and find or ask and be given. We CAN research, analyze, investigate, reason, and come to a conclusion of God. OR we can do it the easy way and take it on faith. They will both lead us to God but the latter is the easy way. God makes it easy for us because He is merciful but if we choose to make things hard on ourselves, then that's ok, too. I explained it more in depth in our conversation on the other thread.



And there's no need for you to attempt to answer these questions. I know that these are the types of questions most Christians hate because there are no good answers to them. This is why I had to look at these questions and many more when coming to my decision on Christianity.


Well, you keep asking them in multiple threads so I finally couldn't help myself.



That's what I thought. I was 18 when I left Christianity.
It seems like 90% of the people that make these decisions make them between the ages of ~ 17- 21. I know there has to be a reason for this. Probably the whole comming of age and looking at your beliefs with greater scrutiny.


Well, we should lol. We should always analyze it. If not, we hear the indoctrination accusations.


I do as well. But still, all of my replies to you seem to be long winded, and I have small lungs.


You gave me Carpal Tunnel Syndrome.



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 11:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by AshleyD
We are all given the gift of life, a choice, and are all given free will. To consider it a 'contradiction' that we are actually granted all of the above and are free to make our own decisions (in this case to choose God or reject Him) makes no sense to me. This isn't a contradiction- it's simply a theological question (Answered in the Bible, nonetheless). However, if, for instance, God gave us life, and did not give us the ability to choose but we were simply all 'mindless paintings' (referring to your analogy below) then that still would not be a contradiction- it would simply be terribly unfair. However, we are given life and the ability to choose. Claiming this as a contradiction makes no sense- it's simply a 'why' question that is answered in the NT.


But what basis do we make that decision on? How can we be sure that God exists? We cant. And even if we could, there is still the trouble of which God to chose, because there are many who are professed to be real.


this is as simple as cold and heat. There is no such things as cold by itself- it is simply the absence of heat. Likewise, 'pure evil' is the absence of 'good.'


I don't know why you think Bad is the absence of Good. Good could be the absence of evil. And cold isnt the absence of heat as temperature is just an energy level of free moving particles. You should use the 'dark is the absence of light' analogy.



5) The contradiction of an infinite being creating something.


LOL How is this a contradiction? Are you referring to the age old question of, 'If God made us then who made God?' Or do you think since He is infinite everything else should be too? I would be much more concerned about a FINITE being's ability to create something.


You misunderstand. If god is infinite then he would not need to make anything.


Remember freewill.


You mean the ticket to hell god gave the majority. There is no freewill. If God is all knowing then he knows the future. If the future is knowable then is is set like history is. He knows who is going to hell - to make it worse, he made them that way.


After the flood

You mean the flood the never happened. These are fables. Ancient stories that have little or no basis in reality.


OR we can do it the easy way and take it on faith. They will both lead us to God but the latter is the easy way. God makes it easy for us because He is merciful but if we choose to make things hard on ourselves, then that's ok, too. I explained it more in depth in our conversation on the other thread.


Well it's odd then that the reason and logic bit would actually lead man away from God is. If man could come to the conclusion that God exists by logic and reason then why doesn't the bible not teach it? Or the churches?

To take something on 'faith' is naive.



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 12:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by Good Wolf
But what basis do we make that decision on? How can we be sure that God exists? We cant. And even if we could, there is still the trouble of which God to chose, because there are many who are professed to be real.


LOL This question always amuses me. When someone asks deep theological questions about God, a temporary assumption is made that He does exist or could exist in order for the discussion to even exist or be worthwhile. If this temporary assumption is refused to be made, then there is never even a point in discussing theology. When someone asks me many questions about the Bible and the God of the Bible, the moment they say, 'But you can't prove any of this!' (dealing with theology- not things like facts), then I say, then there is no point in even discussing this any further.

It would be very similar to me asking a Muslim questions about their Koran and questions about Allah. I'm not going to ask them multiple questions, let them answer, and then say, 'But you don't even know Allah exists!' Then why on earth did I just waste my time asking and waste their time answering?

You also might have missed what started this side conversation. The point of the 'contradictions' presented to me was to show God could NOT exist. So my responses were to show that these were false contradictions. Pretty simple.



I don't know why you think Bad is the absence of Good. Good could be the absence of evil. And cold isnt the absence of heat as temperature is just an energy level of free moving particles. You should use the 'dark is the absence of light' analogy.


LOL Oy vey.


You misunderstand. If god is infinite then he would not need to make anything.


Oh you think? What do you base this on? And who said He NEEDED to make this? Not even the Bible says He NEEDED to. It just said He did.



You mean the ticket to hell god gave the majority. There is no freewill. If God is all knowing then he knows the future. If the future is knowable then is is set like history is. He knows who is going to hell - to make it worse, he made them that way.


LOL So are you a believer in predestination? And if you have a child one day, will you not know that they WILL eventually mess up on day? Does that mean you are FORCING them to make mistakes or you just know they will make mistakes and will be responsible for the choices they make? Or will you simply abort the child every time your significant other becomes pregnant so the child never even has the chance to make mistakes? Yes, Heaven and Hell are the two alternatives. But it is by OUR choice that determines the outcome.


You mean the flood the never happened. These are fables. Ancient stories that have little or no basis in reality.


LOL Oy Vey again.


Well it's odd then that the reason and logic bit would actually lead man away from God is. If man could come to the conclusion that God exists by logic and reason then why doesn't the bible not teach it? Or the churches?


The Bible does teach such a thing- on several occasions.


To take something on 'faith' is naive.


LOL atheists have faith too.



posted on Sep, 25 2008 @ 12:13 PM
link   
reply to post by AshleyD
 


Christians always seem to misunderstand many of the points I make. As I've said before, it's all about perspective. I'm no exception to the rule either. I wonder how much truth I'm missing just because my perspective doesn't allow me to see what others see.

Anyway, you're not seeing the points I'm making from an atheists perspective. Not that you should, just that it always causes confusion. For example, you say we have free will. That's true, but omnipotent means all knowing, meaning that when God made us, he saw everything at once. He saw that the way he made us would lend odds to most of us burning in Hell for eternity, and yet he chose to make us this way regardless. We have free will, but he could help us out in a million ways without disrupting that. If he simply showed himself, who on this planet would not worship him? Who on this planet would refuse his love? Who on these planet would then be sent to Hell?
Don't you see that ultimately, it's his responsibility for the actions we make? It's his responsibility because he made us the way we are knowing the outcome. Billions of people should not be sent to Hell for simply living their lives the way they were ultimately created to.

GoodWolf made some great points that I agree with as well.
I'll respond to your post in full later. My fingers need a break.




top topics



 
6
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join