15 Apr 12
Originally posted by whodeyFrom what I gather, the primary reason is because there is no evidence for the existence of God.
I think I have dwindled down the reasons people do not believe in God to two reasons.
1. God cannot be proved.
2. If there is a God, he would not allow "X" or cause "X" to happen.
What say you? Are there any others?
So it isn't because "God cannot be proved". Hopefully you'll understand the difference, though since you framed it that way in the first place...
15 Apr 12
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneOnly a fool would say there's no evidence for the existence of God.
From what I gather, the primary reason is because there is no evidence for the existence of God.
So it isn't because "God cannot be proved". Hopefully you'll understand the difference, though since you framed it that way in the first place...
- Joined
- 29 Dec 08
- Moves
- 6788
15 Apr 12
Originally posted by whodey3. When I introspect I find no belief in God. If there is a "because" I am not aware of it.
I think I have dwindled down the reasons people do not believe in God to two reasons.
1. God cannot be proved.
2. If there is a God, he would not allow "X" or cause "X" to happen.
What say you? Are there any others?
15 Apr 12
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneDepends on what you mean by "self-centered".
Do you believe that, on the whole, non-theists are more self-centered than Christians?
A Christian by definition is Christ centered, but in practical terms that doesn't always ring true.
On the other hand, a "non-theist", that is, anyone who has not trusted in what Christ did on the cross on their behalf, is "self-centered" in the sense that they live their life as unto themselves and do not seek to do the will of God, and cannot do otherwise because they do not have the life of God within.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
15 Apr 12
Originally posted by whodeyWhich god?
I think I have dwindled down the reasons people do not believe in God to two reasons.
1. God cannot be proved.
2. If there is a God, he would not allow "X" or cause "X" to happen.
What say you? Are there any others?
And that is far from an exhaustive list of reasons for not believing in gods.
you can't be paying attention if those are the only two reasons you can think of for not believing in gods.
The simplest is that one should believe nothing on blind faith.
Belief should be based on evidence.
Until there is evidence for gods (or anything else) then one should not believe in gods
(or anything else not supported by evidence).
15 Apr 12
3 edits
Originally posted by josephwMatthew 25
Depends on what you mean by "self-centered".
A Christian by definition is Christ centered, but in practical terms that doesn't always ring true.
On the other hand, a "non-theist", that is, anyone who has not trusted in what Christ did on the cross on their behalf, is "self-centered" in the sense that they live their life as unto themselves and do not s ...[text shortened]... the will of God, and cannot do otherwise because they do not have the life of God within.
34“Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’ 37“Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’ 40“The King will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.’
Are you claiming that non-Christians are incapable of doing the above? You'd be wrong because I personally know a number of non-Christians who do at least some of the above.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
15 Apr 12
Originally posted by josephwYou keep asserting this but this argument has been rebutted and refuted many times so
The evidence is all that exists.
Difficult to understand?
unless you can present an argument that shows that this assertion is actually correct we
can just dismiss it out of hand.
http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=First_cause
http://wiki.ironchariots.org/index.php?title=Cosmological_argument
http://freethoughtblogs.com/greta/2010/03/15/why-everything-has-a-cause-is-a-terrible-argument-for-god/
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
16 Apr 12
Originally posted by ThinkOfOneI would like to add to that that while it may well be impossible to disprove the existence of
From what I gather, the primary reason is because there is no evidence for the existence of God.
So it isn't because "God cannot be proved". Hopefully you'll understand the difference, though since you framed it that way in the first place...
gods it should be quite easy for any god or gods that wanted to to prove their own existence.
And the existence of some gods could well be provable even without their cooperation...
Although that doesn't apply to any of the major religions of today.
Mainly because gods you can easily prove or disprove get disproven and thus not followed.