Accountable for our beliefs

[levi501]

I have seen no evidence in unicorns because there is none.

same argument can be made for god.

Atheists have denied they see evidence of God and refused to see evidence of God, but I suspect they all have seen God working in their lives or in the lives of others.

How very smug and accusatory of you! You suspect wrong. Many nonbelievers would like nothing more then to believe there's an all-knowing all-loving God that wants them to spend eternity with them but much like with anything else they can't force themselves to believe in something with out evidence.

Regardless no one can demonstrate evidence of a God or much less anything of the divine or supernatural.

If you disagree then offer up the evidence you accuse atheists of denying.

Belief is a word that means one thing in the way you say it and use it, and another in the way most Christians and Jesus said it.

unsupported ad hominem.

You are talking about intelectual assent. We are talking about a mind set that produces action. I suspect you have heard this before.

you kidding me?
The existance of god is not contingent on your mind set.

 

[elman]

Originally Posted by: elman

I have seen no evidence in unicorns because there is none.

same argument can be made for god.

No it cannot because I have seen evidence of a Creator.

Originally Posted by: elman

Atheists have denied they see evidence of God and refused to see evidence of God, but I suspect they all have seen God working in their lives or in the lives of others.

How very smug and accusatory of you! You suspect wrong. Many nonbelievers would like nothing more then to believe there's an all-knowing all-loving God that wants them to spend eternity with them but much like with anything else they can't force themselves to believe in something with out evidence.

When I said suspect, I suggested the possibility of being wrong. Your statment that I am wrong is smug and does not reflect the possiblity of your being in error. I have already told you it is not about forcing mental assent. It is about forcing physical action in an effort to benefit others.

Regardless no one can demonstrate evidence of a God or much less anything of the divine or supernatural.

The physical realm is observable. The spiritual realm is not. The evidence of the spiritual is not found by others demostrating it. It is found by you seeking it.

If you disagree then offer up the evidence you accuse atheists of denying.

My evidence is what I have found. You must find your own.

Originally Posted by: elman

Belief is a word that means one thing in the way you say it and use it, and another in the way most Christians and Jesus said it.

unsupported ad hominem.

Meaningless non response.

Originally Posted by: elman

You are talking about intelectual assent. We are talking about a mind set that produces action. I suspect you have heard this before.

you kidding me?
The existance of god is not contingent on your mind set.

No and it is not contingent on your definition of the word believe which is what we were discussing.

 

[levi501]

No it cannot because I have seen evidence of a Creator.

Exactly my point. You've seen evidence. That's why you believe. Atheists haven't. You suggest it's their fault they haven't found evidence yet you offer no plausible motivation they'd have for doing this. What reason do they have to deny this when the idea of an all-loving God and an after life is comforting?

The physical realm is observable. The spiritual realm is not. The evidence of the spiritual is not found by others demostrating it. It is found by you seeking it.

how?

Meaningless non response.

make recourse to a dictionary.

 

[elman]

Originally Posted by: elman

No it cannot because I have seen evidence of a Creator.

Exactly my point. You've seen evidence. That's why you believe. Atheists haven't. You suggest it's their fault they haven't found evidence yet you offer no plausible motivation they'd have for doing this. What reason do they have to deny this when the idea of an all-loving God and an after life is comforting?

I don't know the answer to that one. It seems to me if we are going to assume facts not in evidence it would be smarter to assume the facts that gives us a destiny of life than to assume the facts that leave us in a destiny of death.

Originally Posted by: elman

The physical realm is observable. The spiritual realm is not. The evidence of the spiritual is not found by others demonstrating it. It is found by you seeking it.

how?

By loving your neighbor and observing the results.

Originally Posted by: elman

Meaningless non response.

make recourse to a dictionary.

A dictionary will not change it into a response that communicates any ideas.

 

[levi501]

I don't know the answer to that one. It seems to me if we are going to assume facts not in evidence it would be smarter to assume the facts that gives us a destiny of life than to assume the facts that leave us in a destiny of death.

non sequitir.
Also, you've offered no reason as to doubt an atheists reason for not believing in god other then lack of evidence.

I'm starting to see no matter how much I beat this point in you lack the capacity to understand. Either that or your simply being intellectually dishonest. Perhaps it's a mixture of the two.

By loving your neighbor and observing the results.

and then? when does the spiritual come in to play?

A dictionary will not change it into a response that communicates any ideas.

Your failure at reading comprehension isn't my concern.
Note you assert it's a nonsense response while not explaining why it is. Ironic, hypocritical and sad.

 

[icbeckyc]

Ok guys, reading your posts was alot like listening to my daughters bicker this morning. Don't make me bring out the Mommy Voice. lol

The first thing we have to remember about beliefs are they are different for different people. They are based on things that we have seen, heard, touched, and where we are in our lives. Like a child can believe in unicorns because they are read books and have seen the pictures. Where as adults we have learned since childhood they are pretend. (Now don't go take this as why you don't believe in God and why I shouldn't either, it's just an example) hang on....

We believe in God as a child cause Mom tells us there is one. Then as we grown into adults we begin to question and look and study and we find proof that God does exist. We can see it in his creation, how he touches our life, and by reading the Bible and seeing proof that different things in the Bible have occured and are proven in history.

I am not speaking of you but the couple of Aethist I have known, have had something in their life happen and due to that decided God wouldn't let that happen so I now believe there is no God. Which is a shame, even though Christians don't have perfect lives, there is a peace to know that God is there and he will lead me through this I just have to be patient and willing to allow him to lead me. Which I would guess would have to be hard if you don't already have that belief. If you are interested in a book to read, try The Case for Christ, by Lee Strobel. He was an Aethist and started this writing to actually disprove God, due to the fact that his wife became a Christian, and ended up with something entirely different. He approached it as a lawyer and a investivgative reporter.

To go from not believing in something you do have to take the step to allow yourself enough room to say maybe and now lets go see.

Anyways, that's my opinion.

 

[Silvertongue]

Reaching back a bit, but:

Jesus taught love your neighbor, demonstrated what He meant in the parable of the good Samaritan and said at the last judgment the division of the sheep and the goats is not on intellectual decisions but on the decisions to help people in need. Matt 25:31 and following. All of first John is about God being love and us not being His children if we do not love-an action verb.

I completely agree with this, actually. As I put forth earlier, belief in any particular deity is not something I can conjure up out of thin air...I have not "chosen to believe/disbelieve" anything concerning deities. I have gone where my experiences and the convictions born from them have led me. I can indeed, however, choose to be helpful, kind, loving, and all those other things, and I make a conscious effort to exhibit those qualities.

It seems to me if we are going to assume facts not in evidence it would be smarter to assume the facts that gives us a destiny of life than to assume the facts that leave us in a destiny of death.

This I don't agree with so much...it's the very definition of wishful thinking, and smacks of Pascal's Wager also, which is probably one of the poorest arguments for theism ever created. I do not need the promises of a happy afterlife in order to be kind...it's superfluous in that respect. If there is a "destiny of life" awaiting me, I'll get there in due time. In the mean time, "...we shouldn't live as if the Kingdom of Heaven mattered more than life in this world, because where we are is always the most important place."

We believe in God as a child cause Mom tells us there is one. Then as we grown into adults we begin to question and look and study and we find proof that God does exist. We can see it in his creation, how he touches our life, and by reading the Bible and seeing proof that different things in the Bible have occured and are proven in history.

Respectfully, I don't see those things as proof of any deity, much less a specific one such as Christianity's. Creation is a giant "?" for me, I've never experienced anything in my life that couldn't be explained by natural causes, and as far as the Bible is concerned, just because it has quite a bit of verifiable secular history in its pages doesn't give it a free pass on the supernatural stuff.

I feel I'm more than open to the idea of God, considering how much I go to different churches...but if I must I can life without it too. I've read Lee Strobel's books too, and found them less than convincing, particularly his anti-evolution nonsense.

 

[levi501]

To go from not believing in something you do have to take the step to allow yourself enough room to say maybe and now lets go see.

Why do some christians assume that a nonbeliever doesn't believe because they don't want to or haven't tried? I wish those that think this would really ponder what motive a nonbeliever would have for doing this.

 

[icbeckyc]

Why do some christians assume that a nonbeliever doesn't believe because they don't want to or haven't tried? I wish those that think this would really ponder what motive a nonbeliever would have for doing this.

I was just trying to say that to change a point of view or a belief isn't easy. I never said you didn't, I was trying to be general and not picking on you. I see though I didn't exactly word it this way. Sorry

 

[levi501]

I was just trying to say that to change a point of view or a belief isn't easy. I never said you didn't, I was trying to be general and not picking on you. I see though I didn't exactly word it this way. Sorry

I'm not talking about myself.

 

[Brimshack]

Since belief is not in our control how can we be held accountable for it?

Do you choose to believe that there is a compter in front of you as you type?

 

[elman]

Reaching back a bit, but:

This I don't agree with so much...it's the very definition of wishful thinking, and smacks of Pascal's Wager also, which is probably one of the poorest arguments for theism ever created. I do not need the promises of a happy afterlife in order to be kind...it's superfluous in that respect. If there is a "destiny of life" awaiting me, I'll get there in due time. In the mean time, "...we shouldn't live as if the Kingdom of Heaven mattered more than life in this world, because where we are is always the most important place."

I never at any time said I need the promise of a happy afterlife in order to be kind. I did say there is no purpose to our existence that transcends the grave if there is no afterlife.

Respectfully, I don't see those things as proof of any deity, much less a specific one such as Christianity's. Creation is a giant "?" for me, I've never experienced anything in my life that couldn't be explained by natural causes, and as far as the Bible is concerned, just because it has quite a bit of verifiable secular history in its pages doesn't give it a free pass on the supernatural stuff.

I feel I'm more than open to the idea of God, considering how much I go to different churches...but if I must I can life without it too. I've read Lee Strobel's books too, and found them less than convincing, particularly his anti-evolution nonsense.

While I agree with the anti evolution being nonsense, I don't see evolution explaining to me in any rational sense how we came to exist in all our complexity. Beyond that I don't believe an intellectual assent to the existence of God or an afterlife is necessary to be a loving person and I think the most important thing is being a loving person. I do think a lot of comfort and hope is lost with the denial of God and an afterlife.

 

[variant]

This is always a fun discussion.

I am an agnostic, which means I simply leave the questions I can not answer or verify to in a reasonable manner myself undecided.

But here is the thought exercise that I use for Christians when I meet them and they ask me why I am an agnostic.

If you lived in ancient Greece, and everyone around you were believers in Zeus what do you think you would believe in?

In this scenario you don't have the option of your current faith since it had not been "inspired" yet. Would you favor the ancient Zeus because of your cultural inclinations or would you feel that the stories of Zeus are fanciful and strange, and that if there were a God, it would be different than Zeus.

If you felt the second, would that be a choice? Would you believe you had the choice to have faith in Zeus or not? Do you really believe you could convince yourself as a skeptic of Zeus to devote yourself to a belief in Zeus based on faith you don't already possess?

Personally the answer is easy for me, I would not believe in Zeus any more than I believe in Christianity. I don't feel I have a choice in the manner, as having tried my best to have "faith" in Christian doctrine, the whole of it doesn’t work for me.

I realized several years ago that I can't will myself to believe no matter how much I would wish to.

 

[variant]

Atheists have denied they see evidence of God and refused to see evidence of God, but I suspect they all have seen God working in their lives or in the lives of others.

Let’s turn this one 180 degrees and see if YOU think it is a fair argument.

Christians have accepted evidence of God, and strain to see evidence of God, but I suspect they have all seen and misinterpreted normal circumstances in their lives and the lives of others as evidence for their preconceived notions.

Or to remove bias further

Some ancient Hellenistic peoples have accepted evidence of Zeus, and strained to see evidences for Zeus, but I suspect they had all seen and misinterpreted normal circumstances in their lives and the lives of others for their preconceived notions.

Sorry, having fun here.

 

[Lilly of the Valley]

christians don't strain to see evidence of God, I know I don't. I don't even have to look for it and I still find it.

 

[variant]

christians don't strain to see evidence of God, I know I don't. I don't even have to look for it and I still find it.

How about some examples?

And second of all I was simply reverseing the argument I was seeing to show someone how unfair they are being.

 

[Blackguard_]

christians don't strain to see evidence of God, I know I don't. I don't even have to look for it and I still find it.

Seeing/experiencing God is not the same as having evidence of God.

 

[Lilly of the Valley]

If you see the sun...is that not evidence of the sun? If you see/experience something that is evidence of it being real. Scientists know something is real by sight, sound, touch, etc....if you have none of these...then there is no evidence.

 

[variant]

If you see the sun...is that not evidence of the sun? If you see/experience something that is evidence of it being real. Scientists know something is real by sight, sound, touch, etc....if you have none of these...then there is no evidence.

If only God were the same kind of thing as the sun your analogy would work. But as it stands, you’re comparing apples to Jupiter.

If God was as self evident as the existence of the sun I doubt there would be many if any disbelief.

The way YOU see God is by interpreting what it is you actually see, and assessing it as evidence for God.

Saying it is self evident and requires no such interpretation is making a strange claim in my opinion.


Few things of a spiritual nature are self evident.

 

[Lilly of the Valley]

If only God were the same kind of thing as the sun your analogy would work. But as it stands, you’re comparing apples to Jupiter.

If God was as self evident as the existence of the sun I doubt there would be many if any disbelief.

The way YOU see God is by interpreting what it is you actually see, and assessing it as evidence for God.

Saying it is self evident and requires no such interpretation is making a strange claim in my opinion.


Few things of a spiritual nature are self evident.

The problem is that all are w/o excuse, however....the bible clearly says that. Because of that, no one will be able to go up to God on judgement day and say they couldn't see Him...