Archaeopteryx
Wanderer
So you concede that your original claim - that atheism is fallacious because we cannot disprove God - is wrong?
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.
So you concede that your original claim - that atheism is fallacious because we cannot disprove God - is wrong?Of coarse not, but proofs aren't even enough. Jesus would perform some amazing act of healing and the "deniers" would propose that his power came from Satan not God. So even miracles were ineffective against the pigheaded.
Would you accept this claim from an atheist? If not, why not?Yes, they could, but when we speak about spiritual truth the appeal is to the heart, take it or leave it. We don't presuppose that living truth is a material fact that can be proven in the math lab.
Yet when asked whether we should believe everything that cannot be definitively disproven, you said "of course not." So it follows that you were wrong to claim that atheism is inherently fallacious because atheists cannot definitively disprove the existence of God.No, I pointed out that atheist approach the subject as if they can disprove God which you can't.
So you wouldn't accept such an argument as sufficient when posed to you by an atheist? Great. So why should an atheist accept such an argument when posed to him by a theist?I don't doubt the sincerity of Atheist, I do accept the doctrines of doubt as an unproven faith in a Godless universe in the same way that my faith in God is unprovable.
To one who knows God faith is entirely logical. What rules do you use to claim that those who know God in their hearts do not know God? How do you claim to know that they do not Know?
Outside of biblical myths, where are the accounts of this purported 'slaughter of the innocents'?
Gone back to the periodic table?
No, you have nothing.As I thought, you have nothing.
Because plenty of people of plenty of different, mutually exclusive, religions make such claims and they can't all be right. But they can all be wrong.
Coupling that with everything we know about psychology and psychiatry - from full blown hallucinations to the common and less impactfull "imaginary friends" - and the knowledge of how people are easily fooled, easily make mistakes, easily misinterpret things that happened to them, how easily humans see patterns where there are none, how narcistic they are, etc.....
It becomes almost impossible to take people's word for it when they make such claims.
When we have such a myriad of not only possible, but plausible, explanations about their "experiences" and "beliefs" that they can't demonstrate in any possible way.....
It's a LOT more rational to assume they are delusional / mistaken then to assume that the most implausible, most illogical and most unsupportable option of "god" is actually correct.
And even IF we would assume that it the god bit is indeed correct, we are still left wondering "which god?". Because as I've said, they can't ALL be right (but they CAN all be wrong).
How can we go about deciding if the claim of the muslim is correct as opposed to the claim of the christian, the jew, the hindu,...?
We can't. So even IF we would go with the least likely and the most implausible, we still have no way of differentiating between all those thousands of different claims. And we will be left with having to arbitrarily choose one of them.
None of that makes sense. None of that is rational.
Going with the most plausible explanation is what is irational.
And that explanation is that all those theistic claims are mistaken.
He should have let crazy people be crazy. You dont kill peopleOkay.
Herod killed lots and lots of kids.
Now what?
Do you think he should have mandated abortion or something two years earlier?
That way, he could have jusitfied his actions both scientifically and politically.
Both scientist and the religious are confined to their respective realms. Yes, the religious don't have the right to go into science and shut them down based on beliefs about creationism.
When engaged by the promotion of the Atheist faith I will respond.
Every once in awhile though, they will ask a question that is clearly answered from the Scriptures.Atheist are carful to ask questions that can't be answered.
Because there is one Infinite God and many finite minds left to conceptualize God on our evolutionary world.
The spirit of worship drives mankind in the quest of our creator. The multiplicity of imperfect concepts and religions around the idea of God or Gods does not prevent you from seeking Gid on your own, rather it's just an excuse for avoiding the question.
No faith is required to reject unsupported claims.When engaged by the promotion of the Atheist faith I will respond.
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?