“Stop following me! We’re not related!”

[AV1611VET]

My question is why do you even bother to post here since you are wrong in almost every single post of yours and you can't ever seem to learn?

In threads where saying Jesus walked on water is considered 'being wrong,' if everyone took your advice, no one would post here except whited ... er ... white coats.

 

[AV1611VET]

Are you trying to tell us that you don't know the answer to that question?

No ... I'm trying to get you to see that you are putting the cart before the horse.

 

[AV1611VET]

That could well be something all creationists suffer from, masochism, why else would they love to be knocked back all the time.

Masochism must run high in the peer review process then, eh?

 

[The Cadet]

How about first things first then?

Does God exist, or doesn't He?

Billions of Jews, Christians, and Muslims say YES, and have evidence.

Then I would like to see this evidence.

Look, the fact of the matter is that a billion people can easily believe in false things for bad reasons. You want to know how I know this? Because the God of the Christians and the God of the Muslims are not the same entity. One of those two religions must necessarily be completely wrong about the nature of God and what God wants. The adherents to one of those two religions has bad reasons for believing what they believe, and are wrong in their beliefs. And don't even get me started on the billion-plus Hindus, whose beliefs about God are, according to you, super turbo wrong. Do they all have "evidence"?

Settling which one is right is not a matter for atheists.

It very much is! Christians, Jews, and Muslims (and for that matter Hindus, Buddhists, Deists, and Zoroastrians) propose radically different Gods and Doctrines. Each must be evaluated on their own merits - it is not simply enough to show that a God must exist, you must show that this particular god exists, and that the proposed doctrines are what that God wants.

If someone told me not to go into a forest because there was a dragon in there; and someone else said it wasn't a dragon, but a Sasquatch, I'm not going to play the atheist card and assume there is nothing in there to be afraid of.

...Yeah, I don't think I need to respond to this. Nice self-pwnage.

 

[Subduction Zone]

In threads where saying Jesus walked on water is considered 'being wrong,' if everyone took your advice, no one would post here except whited ... er ... white coats.

Silly beliefs that you have no reasonable evidence for a not considered "being wrong", it is merely a foolish belief on your part.

 

[AV1611VET]

Then I would like to see this evidence.

Look out the window.

Look, the fact of the matter is that a billion people can easily believe in false things for bad reasons.

I'll admit I don't think like an atheist, but it seems to me they aren't qualified to determine what is "false things" and "bad reasons," when it comes to God's existence.

Just as we can know gravity exists by observing its effects; you should realize that we can know God exists by observing His effects ... which are everywhere.

Look out your window.

I'm sure you don't believe in gravity for "bad reasons" (observing its effects); but applying science to gravity, but not God is being selective in what you apply this method of observation to.

You want to know how I know this?

Presupposition?

Because the God of the Christians and the God of the Muslims are not the same entity.

Ooooo we.

How did you come to that [off topic] conclusion (which happens to be my conclusion as well)?

After all, some would disagree with you and say Allah and JEHOVAH are the same.

Christians, Jews, and Muslims (and for that matter Hindus, Buddhists, Deists, and Zoroastrians) propose radically different Gods and Doctrines.

So?

That might matter to a Christian.

That might matter to a Jew.

That might matter to a Muslim.

That might even matter to an agnostic.

But to an atheist???

I don't see how.

Each must be evaluated on their own merits - it is not simply enough to show that a God must exist, you must show that this particular god exists, and that the proposed doctrines are what that God wants.

Then how about I deny how we got our moon until scientists unanimously agree as to how we got our moon?

 

[AV1611VET]

Silly beliefs that you have no reasonable evidence for a not considered "being wrong", it is merely a foolish belief on your part.

I see.

So you differentiate between "silly beliefs" and "being wrong" in order to tell me I'm wrong in almost everything I say, despite the fact that I'm a strong expositor of basic doctrine.

I could be wrong, but it sounds like you have a personal problem with me.

 

[Jay Follett]

I could be wrong, but it sounds like you have a personal problem with me.

Not you your beliefs, it's exactly the same problem we have with Muslims when they tell us that Mohammad flew to heaven on a winged horse.
They knew if they wanted to travel long distances they needed a horse, but they had a problem, Allah lived up in the sky so how could Mohammad travel to reach him??? of course the answer was simple, fit the horse with wings and let him fly up to heaven, the rest is history.

 

[The Cadet]

Just as we can know gravity exists by observing its effects; you should realize that we can know God exists by observing His effects ... which are everywhere.

Look out your window.

I've been looking out my window for a good three minutes now and I don't see a god. I see plenty of matter attracting other matter (a phenomenon we have labeled "gravity" and described in the most simple, reductive terms to avoid confusing an observed phenomenon with other, unobserved phenomena), but I honestly haven't even the slightest clue what I'm looking for. If you tell me to look for a Tiger, I'll know to look for a large feline quadruped with orange and black stripes. If you tell me to look for gravity, I'll look for mass attracting other mass, and easily find it when I drop a pen on the floor. What does the effect of "god" look like, and how do we determine it? And above all, how would we tell if that's not what we're observing? And how do we go from "we observe effect X" to "the cause of this effect also necessarily caused Y, Z, and Q, and also has attributes A, B, and C"? Or are you simply proposing an attributes-free deistic god? Doesn't really resolve the first problem, though...

There's just so much wrong with this comparison.

But to an atheist???

It matters because it shreds your argument that there's some global consensus on the "god" issue. No one god belief has a majority of the world's population convinced, let alone an overwhelming majority.

 

[AV1611VET]

Not you your beliefs, it's exactly the same problem we have with Muslims when they tell us that Mohammad flew to heaven on a winged horse.

Basic doctrine poses problems for everyone else except its user.

You're an unbeliever.

You're supposed to see us as "problematic."

I have a pastor who would throw the podium at us if he could; and believe me, one of the things he snorts and yells is:

WHY AREN'T WE STANDING OUT AS "DIFFERENT" IN A CROWD!!!

WHY DO WE HAVE TO DRESS AND ACT LIKE THE WORLD!!!???

WHY DO YOU THINK THESE MEGACHURCHES ARE SO POPULAR!!!???

 

[AV1611VET]

I've been looking out my window for a good three minutes now and I don't see a god.

God is invisible ... just like gravity.

For the record, how many Bibles did you walk past on your way to the window?

Did any cars go by with bumper stickers or Christian iconography?

Have you been eating from the "Easter basket" lately?

I'd advise you to try the TV, but if you can't see the effects of God outside your window or in your house, I guess you're not going to see them on the TV either.

 

[Jay Follett]

So you differentiate between "silly beliefs" and "being wrong" in order to tell me I'm wrong in almost everything I say, despite the fact that I'm a strong expositor of basic doctrine.

AV1611VET you are a believer because you want to be a believer and not because it's true, you don't care if it's true or not just as long as you can make yourself believe it, everything except your belief can take a hike.

 

[The Cadet]

God is invisible ... just like gravity.

But gravity is directly observable. We constantly experience our matter attracting and being attracted to the matter of the earth. We have observed a phenomenon, we call that phenomenon gravity. We have not attributed any additional things to it, we simply refer to the attraction of matter through the curving of spacetime as gravity. What phenomenon demonstrates God? How is God even defined in this context?

 

[PsychoSarah]

Then I would like to see this evidence.

Look, the fact of the matter is that a billion people can easily believe in false things for bad reasons. You want to know how I know this? Because the God of the Christians and the God of the Muslims are not the same entity. One of those two religions must necessarily be completely wrong about the nature of God and what God wants. The adherents to one of those two religions has bad reasons for believing what they believe, and are wrong in their beliefs. And don't even get me started on the billion-plus Hindus, whose beliefs about God are, according to you, super turbo wrong. Do they all have "evidence"?

Actually, the deity Jews, Muslims, and Christians worship is essentially the same, with the only major difference being that many denominations of Christians view Jesus as god in human form, while Jews and Muslims do not. They even use the same texts, give or take some depending on which religion you are talking about. That's why Muslims read the bible as well as the Koran. Same deity, different interpretations.

 

[AV1611VET]

AV1611VET you are a believer because you want to be a believer and not because it's true, you don't care if it's true or not just as long as you can make yourself believe it, everything except your belief can take a hike.

Well, Otto Rank, I submit further observation is necessary.

 

[AV1611VET]

But gravity is directly observable.

No, it's not.

It's effects can be observed, and it can be tested.

That's all ... period.

 

[florida2]

I would say YES, since I believe the Norse gods were real in the first place.

QV Genesis 6

I'm sorry, I must have missed the verse talking about Thor and Woden.

Why the Norse gods and not the gods of any of the thousands of other cultures around the world?

 

[AV1611VET]

I'm sorry, I must have missed the verse talking about Thor and Woden.

That's okay.

I flunked fill-in-the-blanks myself.

Genesis 6:4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

None of those "men of renown" had names, did they?

Why the Norse gods and not the gods of any of the thousands of other cultures around the world?

Just how many days of the week are there!?

 

[PsychoSarah]

Basic doctrine poses problems for everyone else except its user.

Actually, I would say it is more of the opposite, given that believers on these debates have to defend the doctrine. Thus, if nonbelievers such as myself find flaws in it, it is people like you that have to try to come up with a defense.

You're supposed to see us as "problematic."

I don't view Christians or any other religious people as inherently problematic. Just those that would harm myself and others for not believing, which isn't even a conscious choice (especially on my part, since I actively seek belief).

I have a pastor who would throw the podium at us if he could; and believe me, one of the things he snorts and yells is:

WHY AREN'T WE STANDING OUT AS "DIFFERENT" IN A CROWD!!!

I always find it funny when people complain about not seeming unique enough in a world that deems those that are too far from the norm disordered. Being different is not inherently good, nor is being similar or the same inherently bad. Being different isn't even necessarily more interesting even. I kid you not, there is a disorder in which the people that have it have pretty much no emotional investment in anything and basically have the personality of furniture, which is to say, so bland that they have no distinguishable personality.

WHY DO WE HAVE TO DRESS AND ACT LIKE THE WORLD!!!???

The world has no uniformity on clothing... not even on having it be a requirement. This also implies that your pastor has some sort of problem with the clothing being worn in church, and yet I am sure his clothes are either very traditional, or likely very conservative (not that those are mutually exclusive, by any means). Although, I did get a funny image of a bunch of people walking into a church wearing the various outfits of Lady Gaga, and I have to admit, that would be very interesting.

WHY DO YOU THINK THESE MEGACHURCHES ARE SO POPULAR!!!???

I don't know your pastor personally, but I find it likely that he would gladly run such a megachurch if given the opportunity.

 

[florida2]

That's okay.

I flunked fill-in-the-blanks myself.

Genesis 6:4 There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bare children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown.

None of those "men of renown" had names, did they?

Just how many days of the week are there!?

Why are only the Norse gods real and not those of other cultures? What about the Greek and Roman gods?

Surely the fact that we name many of our days of the week after Norse gods is due to the cultural influence of the Vikings on the English language rather than the gods actually being real? The same way that the AD BC system is used in most places due to the rise of Christianity in Europe followed by Europeans colonising other parts of the world.

The ancient olympics were held in honour of Zeus. Does the existence of the olympics now mean the Greek gods were real? Of course not.