Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Our God has never lied to me about anything else, so why should i not believe it when He speaks of life eternal? God has more than "proven" Himself trustworthy to me--so for me His Word IS my Proof.
That only goes to show that most people are credulous. Millions of people believe that Santa Claus exists, but that doesnt make it true. That you would think that an argument from popularity is a valid argument is another problem.
Really? How many corporate laws are Biblically based? How many traffic laws are Biblically based? How many of the Ten Commandments form the basis for our laws? Laws against stealing and murder are pretty much universal in all cultures so you can hardly count them as being uniquely Biblical. How many of the other Commandments form the basis for our laws and why is there no Commandment against rape?
Why not? Why are you unwilling to answer hypothetical questions?
The fact that millions have experienced a close loving relationship with God has nothing to do with popularity or "the majority rules." It has to do with the fact that when people are humble enough to admit their need of God, He ALWAYS most eagerly "runs" to manifest Himself to them and initiates with them an eternal relationship in Love which no one can gainsay by comparing it to the silliness of Santa Claus.
Our country was founded and organized by mostly theists, a few deists, and with ZERO atheists counted among the Founding Fathers. The legal foundations of our Country reflect these peoples' spiritual beliefs. As Calvin Coolidge--the thirteenth President of the United States observed: "The foundation of our society and our government rest so much on the teachings of the Bible that it would be difficult to support them if faith in these teachings would cease to be practically universal in our country." Likewise, John Adams, the second president of the United States stated, "The highest story of the American Revolution is this: It connected in one indissoluble bond the principles of civil government with the principles of Christianity."
"If out in the country a man happens to meet a girl pledged to be married and rapes her, only the man who has done this shall die. Do nothing to the girl; she has committed no sin deserving death. This case is like that of someone who attacks and murders his neighbor, for the man found the girl out in the country, and though the betrothed girl screamed, there was no one to rescue her.
What a charming person you are.
Yes, but lacking credible, physical evidence for your Gods existence, you once again resort to an analogy for an argument and it is a poor analogy at that. You are comparing the physical phenomenon of a sunsetwhich is easily visible to anyone with functioning eyesto your invisible, undetectable, supernatural God. A better analogy would be nine people claiming to have seen a ghost and a tenth asking them to provide some credible, physical evidence that it exists. It is a case of people deluding themselves into thinking they see something that isnt there. Dispense with the analogies and provide some sound, objective evidence instead. If your God is as obvious as a sunset then where is it? There is plenty of sound, objective evidence to show that sunsets exist. How is it that in all of human history, no one has ever produced a single shred of sound, objective evidence to show that any gods have ever existed?
How quaintly parochial. Do you think that the U.S. is the only country making up society? And, predictably, you evaded my questions. How many corporate laws are Biblically based? How many traffic laws are Biblically based? How many of the Ten Commandments form the basis for our laws? Laws against stealing and murder are pretty much universal in all cultures so you can hardly count them as being uniquely Biblical. Please indicate specifically which laws are uniquely Biblically based.
Just how bad can this growing ungodliness be if atheists are in such small numbers? Around 92% of the entire U.S. population still believes in a God. Are you claiming that it is only atheists who rape, murder and steal? Or are you saying that Christians are so weak-willed that they can easily be led into moral turpitude by a handful of atheists?
Wonderful. So if a man rapes an engaged virgin, he is to be put to death, but if she isnt engaged then she is forced to marry her rapist and can never seek a divorce. How delighted and grateful she must feel. Just one question though What about the case where she isnt a virgin? Does the Bible have nothing to say about raping married women or non-virgins? Oh wait, I think Ive found something
Yes, the Bible certainly teaches some charming moral lessons.Numbers 31:17-18 said:
You are too kind.
You certainly appear to be doing what you can to evade my questions.
Sadly, your questions have no answers which you are ready to accept at this point in time--even after going around in circles several times.
I will never be ready to accept bare assertions that have no sound evidence and no valid reasoning supporting them. The reason discussions appear to you to be going around in circles is because religious believers constantly evade the questions or return to belief without evidence as an answer, which I find worthless so I ask again in the vain hope of receiving a reasonable response. Sadly, as you say, very few such replies are forthcoming.
I know there are atheists who value human life. My point was that there is nothing in atheism itself that warrants them doing so. Atheists must borrow from worldviews that have some ethical dimension in order to justify their concern for human well-being. As far as I'm concerned, this is a tremendous flaw in the atheistic worldview.
I'm afraid your simply saying my point is irrelevant doesn't make it so. Empathy as a basis for valuing others is, for the reason I gave, weak. That you would be satisfied with such a fragile foundation for valuing others, and that it must be borrowed from some other philosophical worldview, speaks volumes about the deficient nature of your athiesm.
I would, obviously, have a different basis for valuing human life; one that would be, as yours is, weaker and easily subjectified.
Well, you are certainly right about one thing: pure atheism is completely unethical. You aren't exactly correct, however, about the promises atheism makes (or, rather, doesn't make). It does "promise" that there is no God and from this tumble a number of other "promises": there is no judgment, no hell, no life after death whatsoever.
And the relatively affluent, self-satisfied, and comfortable often dabble in philosophical ideas that are empty, hopeless, and ultimately destructive.
Secular doesn't necessarily mean atheistic. I think its very telling that you've offered this organization as evidence of atheism's charitable work. I don't think it is mere coincidence that it was a Christian, not an atheist, who founded this charitable organization.
But you see I have found Him to be as good as His word in regard to many of His other promises, so I have strong confidence in this the greatest of His promises. I have a 30 year history of walking with God as evidence upon which to rest my faith in His promise of what comes after the death of my body.
I notice that you omitted my qualifiers. Certainly, religious believers attempt to provide evidence and reasoning for why they believe what they do, but usually the evidence is not sound and the reasoning is not valid. If you think you can use sound evidence and valid reasoning to demonstrate that your God exists then please do so. Did you use sound evidence and valid reasoning to convince yourself that your God exists? If so then just tell me what that sound evidence was and show me your valid reasoning. Or is it that you used unsound evidence and invalid reasoning to convince yourself that your God exists?
On the contrary, I certainly will accept sound evidence and valid reasoning. The problem is that religious believers disregard the words sound and valid when answering my questions. Did you notice how NewToLife just omitted those qualifiers when responding? And while you use those words, you apparently disregard their meanings when you offer the Bible and perceived miracles as sound evidence. In the context of my questions, when I say sound, I mean free from error, fallacy or misapprehension and when I say valid, I mean well-grounded, justifiable and logically correct.
No, Im not looking for a fight. What you perceive as fighting or contention is the result of one simple principle of mine. I will not accept baseless assertions that are not supported by sound evidence and valid reasoning. Unfortunately, the bulk of the responses I receive are just that so I am constantly forced to ask again. Ask yourself; would you accept answers that were riddled with errors, fallacies and misapprehensions? Would you accept answers that were ill-grounded, unjustifiable and logically incorrect? Who would accept such answers and base their beliefs on them?
Thats a good question. Im here to explore the way religious believers think, which in the case of this particular site is predominantly Christians. I find it fascinating that people who would not accept answers based on unsound evidence and invalid reasoning in other aspects of their lives will readily accept such answers when it comes to their God belief. Im trying to see how far that acceptance extends and Im trying to discover why people accept such things. I ask questions to probe the boundaries of this unsupported belief and the underlying cause for abandoning valid reasoning. It appears to me that, at a certain point based on a persons natural levels of insecurity and credulity, emotions such as hope and fear will override reason and rationality. I seem to be on the low end of that spectrum and Im interested in learning about why the majority of people think differently. Again, I find it fascinating to try to learn how people think.
Think of it as helping me to further my education.
No, when there is no sound evidence supporting an assertion, there is no need to justify a lack of belief in that assertion, but I am interested in how you justify your belief in such circumstances.
There is no such thing as "belief without evidence" in Christianity. Were Christianity really founded on this type a shaky foundation, it would have died out several thousand years ago--or more likely been still-born. Had the Disciples, for example, never really seen their risen Lord on Pascha morning, they would never have been heard of again--let alone accepted martyrdom in order to spread the Good News of the Resurrection.
The problem here, and this is the last time Im going to bother saying this, is that atheism is not an ethical viewpoint, but you are trying to present it as such. Atheism is simply a lack of belief in Gods, nothing more and nothing less. You may as well start attacking a lack of belief in ghosts for not providing a reason to value human life. You are attacking a straw man. The reasons why people who lack a belief in gods value human life are many and varied and are independent of their lack of belief in gods in the same way they are independent of a lack of belief in ghosts.
You didnt answer my questions. Would you still value human life if it turned out that your God is imaginary? Do you actually need to believe in your God for you to place a value on human life? Even without a god belief, my value for human life is strong enough that I dont feel the urge to murder, rape, steal or commit many other immoral or unethical acts. Would your value for human life be less than mine if you didnt have your God belief?aiki said:
So your answer would be no then, wouldnt it? You havent actually tested the promise of life after death, have you? And no one else has ever provided any sound, tested evidence that it is true, have they?aiki said:
Why do you keep saying this when it is obvious that people will believe all sorts of unsupported nonsense and have done for millennia? Astrology originated more than 2,000 years ago and it hasnt died out yet, despite the fact that there is no sound evidence supporting it. I think the popularity and longevity of a belief is directly proportional to the amount of hope it offers to the believer. It seems that when the insecure and credulous are offered enough hope, they become willing to accept almost anything as evidence to support their belief no matter how worthless it may be. What could offer more hope than a religion that promises eternal life?
No, the missing ingredients are sound evidence and valid reasoning supporting your belief. If you think you can provide me some then please do. And please dont disregard the meanings of the words sound and valid.
