- May 22, 2015
- 5,895
- 569
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
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.
You do realise that we are in different time zones?
Careful, bud. You seem to be posting from a glass house.Serious question: Do you post this to get laughs or are you actually being serious? Because every time you post this I lol at it, so I'm sorry if you're actually being serious.
Assuming that by God you mean the Abrahamic God, no, I don't think it's reasonable, since there are reasonable people who claim personal evidence of numerous other gods and belief systems and have given sound reasons for their beliefs. Many of these accounts contradict each other. In order to accept one testimony, you have to say that the ones in favor of all other deities are wrong. So I would ask why you are calling this unreasonable when you yourself do this all the time.Or is it more reasonable to believe in God because reasonable people claim personal evidence and can actually give sound reasons for there beliefs?
That's not the approach you talked about earlier. You implied it was reasonable to believe in things which other reasonable people gave personal testimony for. Why are you changing your story?
No it doesn't. Atheism is simply a lack of belief in gods. It says nothing about the ontological views of the person lacking belief.
If god had wanted to save me and prove he exists. He would of saved me before the Chemo and Radiation.Well I don't actually think God has saved you yet, but that's why time exists and that's why your still alive to experience time because God is gracious and has given you more time to come to know him, so I guess in essence he did spare you from death through cancer, but only because he's not done with you yet. Your either being used for God's glory and you know it, or your being used for God's glory without knowing it, either way God will be glorified and its best for you if you accept His gift. This is all I have for you until I learn more.
What do you mean that you get off "scotch free"? You aren't getting off at all: people are asking to provide evidence; you're being held accountable for your claims.In the end all atheism alludes to is the lack of belief in God or gods and nothing else. It is interesting that the only thing atheist worry about not believing in is God. Does this mean there is no God, or does this mean God is actually a very interesting concept that some even refuse to believe in even though it can't be proven false. All I'm saying is the evidence of God hasn't been presented to atheists yet, but in time it will be.
Now obviously none of us can see into the future, so if there comes a time when evidence is presented that God does not exist, you guys can do whatever you want with me, call me a liar or whatever. Except if evidence that proves God does not exist was found then me being a liar wouldn't really matter because after I die I wouldn't be punished for such a grievous lie, instead I'd get off scotch free into nothingness. Hmmm that doesn't seem fair does it? How do you resolve this issue atheists?
Makes sense of what? You have to actually show that it makes sense of something (i.e., that it can account for some phenomenon). At the moment, you are merely asserting that it "makes sense," as though that claim were not in need of further justification.It comes down to reasoning because neither unicorns nor God can be proven by man. So is it more reasonable to believe in unicorns when there's absolutly no one in there right mind claiming they exist? Or is it more reasonable to believe in God because reasonable people claim personal evidence and can actually give sound reasons for there beliefs? It comes down to whether or not your going to believe something that actually makes sense or if your going to reject what makes sense, rendering yourself unreasonable.
If someone has a truth claim I dont emediatly assume they must be wrong, instead I ask honest intelligent questions and if their answers make sense and can't be proven wrong, I'm reasonable to believe them, until the truth claim is proven wrong. Once it's proven wrong I then realize I was believing a lie. But what meaning does a lie have if truth has no meaning in the end, which is what atheism alludes to?
I suggest you just start giving sound reasons for your beliefs and thereby help identitfying you as a reasonable person - until then this false dichotomy of yours remains just entirely hypothetical.It comes down to reasoning because neither unicorns nor God can be proven by man. So is it more reasonable to believe in unicorns when there's absolutly no one in there right mind claiming they exist? Or is it more reasonable to believe in God because reasonable people claim personal evidence and can actually give sound reasons for there beliefs?
What do you mean that you get off "scotch free"? You aren't getting off at all: people are asking to provide evidence; you're being held accountable for your claims.
When should atheists change their beliefs...
The subject of the OP ties into the question above.
Each person determines what it would take to change their own beliefs.
I think that's the answer.
When should atheists change their beliefs...
The subject of the OP ties into the question above.
Each person determines what it would take to change their own beliefs.
I think that's the answer.
It's interesting how you worded the question to exclude theists. When should theists change their beliefs?When should atheists change their beliefs...
The subject of the OP ties into the question above.
Each person determines what it would take to change their own beliefs.
I think that's the answer.
before death.It's interesting how you worded the question to exclude theists. When should theists change their beliefs?
It's interesting how you worded the question to exclude theists. When should theists change their beliefs?
Simple. When evidence that proves God does not exist is presented, except its impossible for a finite being that is not God to prove God, obviously only God can prove God.
Lets make it even simpler. How about acquiring knowledge that leads one to believe a certain theological story is likely not true?
If you want to believe that something is likely not true, then thats your choice. I'll believe what is true.
It really isn't a conscious choice of what we believe or don't believe. Rather, it is a culmination of acquiring and acknowledging information and evidence we deem credible and then letting the chips fall where our individual psyche will bring them to rest.
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?