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.
Well, that scratches Catholic. But we do believe that you have a conscience and know what's right and wrong. Nobody goes to hell for things beyond one's control.Any theology where one is held accountable for things beyond ones control, such as what one believes.
In #229, did you not say: "Yes, you will be held accountable for your beliefs."?Well, that scratches Catholic. But we do believe that you have a conscience and know what's right and wrong. Nobody goes to hell for things beyond one's control.
Without God, there is no science. Most scientists are humble enough to know what they know, what they can know, and what they won't ever know. That's not ignorance, that's intelligence.
The First Cause is just that...first.
The simple fact that you don't believe is insufficient evidence that He does not exist. God has been shown to exist untold times on this forum; your personal disbelief changes none of that.....Why dont you back up a bit and first demonstrate, there is a god?
I'm trying, but you guys just want to put everyone in categories, or declare that you already know the argument, or whatever other excuse to not engage. I should ask you to prove there's not a God...in fact, there's your tossup:Why dont you back up a bit and first demonstrate, there is a god?
I tried to quit smoking, consciously tried, and failed numerous times. That didn't mean I couldn't quit smoking.I have tried to consciously change my beliefs, but have been unable to do so.
Neither does "faith".But this is not about me, it is about the evasion and obfuscation that results when you are challenged on this, such as:
I make no excuse for my beliefs. "I am not convinced" needs no excuse.
We already have an accurate description of reality...I can only take responsibility for them as far as educating myself about the world around me, discussing with others, in an attempt to form an accurate description of reality.
If one could produce their actual God, that means it ain't God. Just ask Thor.Where have I done so?
I do not think that the religionist can wave the "strawman" card with any authority, since it simply puts them in the position of having to produce their actual god, or gods, as a means of demonstrating any alleged misrepresentation.
I think this is outside the scope of the OP. This is not about proving the existence of God because the question in the OP was asked with the assumption that God does exist...although it does not specifically say which God.I'm trying, but you guys just want to put everyone in categories, or declare that you already know the argument, or whatever other excuse to not engage. I should ask you to prove there's not a God...in fact, there's your tossup:
Prove there is no God.
But we Christians do not leave it at that. Exactly my point.So?
To use your phrase...DUDE...you do realize that a great many of the scientists that discovered the stuff we know today were Christian? But the fact is that the very existence of everything requires a cause.
I do not recall where I might have suggested that my beliefs were unchangeable.I tried to quit smoking, consciously tried, and failed numerous times. That didn't mean I couldn't quit smoking.
...until what you have faith in is asserted as an accurate description of reality.Neither does "faith".
Who is this "we" that you speak for in that instance?We already have an accurate description of reality...
Then you would agree on the inappropriateness of the religionists' use of the strawman rebuke.If one could produce their actual God, that means it ain't God. Just ask Thor.
As that is your excuse not to engage.I'm trying, but you guys just want to put everyone in categories, or declare that you already know the argument, or whatever other excuse to not engage.
I do find the asking of someone to prove a negative to be intellectually bankrupt, and would agree with Jason that this strays from the OP.I should ask you to prove there's not a God...in fact, there's your tossup:
Prove there is no God.
As much as religionists like to use them....
Atheologians, as I like to call them, dislike logical fallacies and dishonest debating attacks,
There is the difficulty in the playing of the strawman card by the religionist when the religion they speak of is subject to interpretation by every one of its (in this case) millions of adherents.but they continually strawmanize the Christian faith
That may be; personally, I am not concerned about the religious beliefs of others, until those that have access to our government, education system, and my children, begin to present such beliefs as fact.by attacking only the beliefs of the poorly catechized evangelical fundamentalists;
Can this theology be presented in a manner that is testable and falsifiable, and even if were falsified, would anyone care?I have yet to encounter any atheist who tackled in a systematic way the theology of the early church Fathers (other than St. Augustine, who is the only Patristic figure most people in the West seem to care about), and frankly I don't think they can.
Sure, but it is only evidence of how tightly one can cling to ones beliefs and a fallacious appeal to popularity. It is not an indication of their veracity.The USSR's spectacular failure to wipe out the Russian Orthodox Church testifies to that (I think Russian Orthodoxy today is healthier than at any point since the Nikonian Schism).
I'm trying, but you guys just want to put everyone in categories, or declare that you already know the argument, or whatever other excuse to not engage. I should ask you to prove there's not a God...in fact, there's your tossup:
Prove there is no God.
The simple fact that you don't believe is insufficient evidence that He does not exist. God has been shown to exist untold times on this forum; your personal disbelief changes none of that.....
Willing to accept theological and biblical evidence? If not, we are just wasting time.I didn't say a God didn't exist, did I. For me personally, I just don't see any reason to believe one exists, but I may be wrong.
Now, please point to where God has been shown to exist untold times on this forum.
I asked a question; please don't answer with a question....What does theological and biblical proof look like and how does it relate to well evidenced reality?
I asked a question; please don't answer with a question....
If we talk chemistry we listen to chemists and chemistry books....I can't answer your question, because I don't know what you mean by; theological and biblical proof. Is this proof you mention, different than what we look to support non theological arguments? If so, why?
If you have an argument, present it and support it with evidence and I will comment as to whether it is something I would believe or not.
If we talk chemistry we listen to chemists and chemistry books....
If physics then physicists and physics books....
cosmology then cosmologists and cosmology books....
But for atheists when it comes to theology....Christianity....theologians and the Bible are not trustworthy.....
We have no common point of reference unless you are willing to accept the Bible and theologians as acceptable sources of information and reference.
And how many different variations of the sciences are there? How many points, counter-points and counter-counter-points are there.....yet you accept the general premise with little (no) argument. Yet Christianity seems to raise the hackles of atheists (and you) and their only defense of that position is "God does not exist" or some variant of that thought.Physics, cosmology and the like (science), involve objective evidence to support it. I have yet to see, anyone present independent verifiable objective evidence to support a God, or a specific theology.
Of course you care otherwise you would simply be wasting your time here attacking christianity and I don't believe you think you are wasting your time. May I ask you how much time you spend on Muslim, Buddhist, Confuciionist, etc sites attacking their beliefs? My bet is it is almost none. Why is that? Would they even allow you to attack their beliefs? Is that the primary reason for being here, that your atheistic beliefs are tolerated rather than them (and you) being tossed out? Why is attacking christianity so important to you and your fellow atheists? Do you fear us that much?You see, I don't care so much what someone believes and I fully expect people to have a variety of theological beliefs, which include 2/3 of the worlds population having different theological beliefs than Christians or no theological beliefs at all.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?