22 Mar 06
Originally posted by knightmeisterThere is plenty of evidence for unicorns, the lockness monster ghosts and many other phenomena. This doesnt make them real nor put them into seperate categories. To you the evidence for God is more believable, to me it isnt. So for you it is a seperate category for me they are all the same. Interestingly none of the evidence you mentioned can be considered evidence for the Christian God as everyone of them is seen with similar frequency amoungst members of other religions.
This argument is based on the idea that there is no evidence for the existence of God. The fact that there is some evidence (eg - spiritual experiences , answered prayer/jungian Synchronicity , existence of morality , healings etc) puts God in a different catagory from Unicorns. You may dispute the interpretation of this evidence but it is evidence nev ...[text shortened]... lieve in God but not have to believe in Unicorns. Unless you have evidence for them that is....?
Also the fact that other more plausible explanations exist makes them invalid as evidence for God.
22 Mar 06
Originally posted by whodeyI am deeply moved by your post. I've decided to start believing in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the Tooth Fairy. I am ridding myself of negative belief systems, brother! I can feel the weight of hopelessness lifting already.
Yes, disbelief is faith in reverse. It is faith in the negative rather than the positive. Faith requires hope as where disbelief requires dispair. Disbelief says that there is no God and we will all perish. Faith says that we have a loving creator who wants to save us. Disbelief says that there is no hope for you in the end and you are without hope of an ...[text shortened]... life, and I think that faith enables us to acheive this goal much easier than with disbeleif.
22 Mar 06
Originally posted by BigDoggProblemExcept unlike the Christian God they actually give you tangible things on Earth: presents, delicious candy and a shiny quarter (in that order, though the last may need to be inflation-adjusted).
I am deeply moved by your post. I've decided to start believing in Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the Tooth Fairy. I am ridding myself of negative belief systems, brother! I can feel the weight of hopelessness lifting already.
22 Mar 06
Originally posted by FreakyKBHMy position would be that atheism represents the default position for humans - it's impossible [nearly] to worship god if you have no knowledge of god. Theists, rather than atheists, hold an opinion on the existance of god. Unfortunately for my atheistic brothers and sisters, the theistic community has attempted to insert itself into the mechanisms of governance for hundreds or thousands of years, in a power grab for our souls, mandated by your god. Atheists have been forced therefore, to attempt to repel this unwelcome attack upon our right not to believe. My own wish is not to waste my time discussing this non-entity you guys call god, only to prevent you from spreading non-sense such as creationism, as opposed to the scientifically accepted theories like the big bang, old earth, evolution, etc.
Sounds like you are equating it with, "No opinion."
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
22 Mar 06
Originally posted by scottishinnzThat and our brothers and sisters were burned at the stake as heretics.
Unfortunately for my atheistic brothers and sisters, the theistic community has attempted to insert itself into the mechanisms of governance for hundreds or thousands of years, in a power grab for our souls, mandated by your god.
And they thought Christ suffered!
23 Mar 06
Originally posted by whodeyI would say yes it does.
Think about this for a minute. When those of faith say that they are 100% convinced that there is a God, then those who do not beleive ask us to prove it or retract our statement. However, those who say that they are convinced 100% that there is no God are not held to the same standards. Prove to us that there is no God or retract your statement as well. ...[text shortened]... e facts. Well? What are these facts? Personally, I don't have enough faith to be an atheist.
23 Mar 06
Originally posted by scottishinnzDefault position? Explain how every society in human history shares similar stories, relative to supernatural creative being(s). Every person is born with an innate God-thirst.
My position would be that atheism represents the default position for humans - it's impossible [nearly] to worship god if you have no knowledge of god. Theists, rather than atheists, hold an opinion on the existance of god. Unfortunately for my atheistic brothers and sisters, the theistic community has attempted to insert itself into the mechanisms of ...[text shortened]... s opposed to the scientifically accepted theories like the big bang, old earth, evolution, etc.
23 Mar 06
Originally posted by FreakyKBHFirst, show me a devout new-born.
Default position? Explain how every society in human history shares similar stories, relative to supernatural creative being(s). Every person is born with an innate God-thirst.
People are people are people, and they want to understand where they come from. In the absence of natural explanations it's pretty normal for people to invent supernatural ones.
For example, Japan was formed when a god dipped his sword into the Pacific, and the 4 perfect drops that fell from the tip became the four island. The Maori, of course, know that the world was created when Papatuanuku, the Earth mother, and Ranginui, the Sky father, were pulled apart from their enbrace by their children, and that the South Island of New Zealand was Maui's huge boat (with Stewart island as an anchor) and the North Island was a huge fish pulled from the depths. The aborigines of Australia know that the world was created in the "Dreamtime". Christians know it was created 6,000 years ago, over a period of 7 days, and more recently scientists, relying on physical evidence know the earth formed 4.5 billion years ago. The norse just have plain wierd version of creation.
I don't think it's god-lust or god-thirst, and none of these explanations make sense when you try to reconcile them with each other, but all people want to know where they came from - they just have different ways of doing that.
23 Mar 06
Originally posted by whodeythe whole first line is a great starter for a debate, by now its probably a flaiming contest (didnt read it through) but i really like this statement. From a religous standpoint I believe, due to the link of CONCLUSIVE evidence, that the evolutionary theory is just that...a theory.
Personally, I don't have enough faith to be an atheist.
In our schools, our teachers teach it as fact and anyone (christian or otherwise) who questions the facts are ridiculed, being labled ignorant, stupid, and religous, even if the debat is on a philisophical or scientific debat.
From a christian stand point, it seems that your statement (see quote) is true, it does take more faith... If a christian is wrong, he wasted his life serving a false god, attempting to make lives better for others. But if an athiest is wrong, then hell awaits.
23 Mar 06
1 edit
Originally posted by c guy1Well, there is no definative proof of god; there isn't even any definative evidence of god, but 150 years of searching has never disproved evolutionary theory. With a little more education my friend, you would know that a theory is the very highest form of explanatory statement in science. A theory must take every measurement ever made into account, and explain them all: evolutionary theory does that for biological diversity. You'd also be able to spell the word "debate".
the whole first line is a great starter for a debate, by now its probably a flaiming contest (didnt read it through) but i really like this statement. From a religous standpoint I believe, due to the link of CONCLUSIVE evidence, that the evolutionary theory is just that...a theory.
In our schools, our teachers teach it as fact and anyone (christian or other ...[text shortened]... god, attempting to make lives better for others. But if an athiest is wrong, then hell awaits.