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.
If they are christ followers and believe the Bible is authoritative, following Peter's instructions is reason enough.If they do have faith I don't see any reason why they should respond to your challenge.
It appears you are conflating reasonable with rational.If they are christ followers and believe the Bible is authoritative, following Peter's instructions is reason enough.
If they do, I would challenge them to do their own research and find a reason for THEIR faith.
The lady doth protest too much.What's with the "believe you don't believe" business? Can you not just accept that people genuinely don't believe. I don't "believe" I don't believe in your god any more, I know that I don't believe in it anymore.
Nope. The choice is to either believe God or believe human beings. And once the excuses are stripped away the truth comes out more often than not.A false dichotomy. There are other options, if you actually listened to these atheists you say you have conversations with, you'd realize that they genuinely don't believe.
They're not a problem at all.I choose neither, and your assumptions about me are your problem, not mine.
Worldviews alter how we interpret evidence, and on a Christian forum science board those worldview conflicts are relevant due to the hidden assumptions and the sleight of hand from the study of phenomena to ontology. Pretending that science is some idealized method free from bias and metaphysical issues does nothing but create a false privilege for a particular worldview. Or is how science is interpreted not relevant to a science board?So if it's about a conflict of worldviews then the issue is not relevant to this forum at all, any more than the issue of whether God exists or not.
Are you a theist?But that seems extremely disingenuous to me. To have an honest and forthright answer, and then be asked to go find a rational one instead, as if the honest answer wasn't good enough.
The first one seems like the truth, while the second one simply seems like an excuse, made up to save face, but not to actually convince anyone but the choir.
I don't have a problem with the bible asking believers to be ready to give an answer for their faith, I just wish that they'd have the integrity to give an honest answer, and not simply a nominally defensible excuse.
Are you a theist?
Do you know why you are agnostic?I wouldn't describe myself as such. As my profile indicates, I'm quite comfortable being classified with the agnostics. I find their company to be more to my liking. But I've been known to invoke theistic positions from time to time. So classify me however you like. As I'm prone to saying, you do you, and I'll do me.
Atheists don’t believe in gods. Why would we believe we are gods? That’s silly. Adding an extraneous entity into where it isn’t is not very parsimonious.And as far as I'm concerned, it's not an intellectual issue. It's a moral one, because the atheist wants to be his own god.
It is a phrase not to be taken literally. It means atheist find comfort believing that there is no accountability for their actions in the afterlife and unafraid of sinning against some invisible deity. They want to live their lives how they wish and control their own destiny as if they were their own personal God of their own little universe. Moral relativism is their standard for morality.Atheists don’t believe in gods. Why would we believe we are gods? That’s silly. Adding an extraneous entity into where it isn’t is not very parsimonious.
Obviously not.Yes. Remember my basement dragon? You demanded physical evidence, and I provided physical evidence. But that evidence wasn't enough.
Ifyou want to incorporate faith to make up for the uncertainty, then that's fine.For the theist, the evidence is everywhere and have come to a reasonable conclusion that God exists. But because they cannot know with absolute certainty, faith is required.
No, the faith is not based on evidence. If there's not enough evidence then it's not true. If you need faith to believe, if you need faith to get you over the line in addition to evidence then you must want to believe. That makes no sense to me whatsoever.But it is a reasonable faith grounded on evidence.
That's a contradiction. I can't examine some evidence, reject it and then claim it doesn't exist. Think about what you are writing.The atheist rejects the evidence and claim no evidence exists because evidence is subjective.
I have no evidence for God's non existence. Again, that makes no sense at all. What I have is the evidence that people like yourself present for His existence.But they have their own evidence and have reasonably concluded that there is no God.
As I have said, nothing is certain. All I can do, again as I have said, is state a position based on the evidence presented and I will hold to that position with a great deal of certainty until evidence is presented that will change that certainty. That will somehow slow that flywheel, somehow get it to eventually stop and then reverse its direction.But because they cannot know with absolute certainty, faith is required.
As psalm 14:1 says, the fool says there is no God. But don't confuse that with absolute certainty. If you ask me if God exists, I will say no. If you ask me if I'm 100% certain, then I'd say that I'm not 100% certain that someone didn't drop some acid in my beer at that party in 1975 and the last 50 years has been a fast forward hallucination.Again I emphasize that I am speaking of atheists who make the truth claim. This does not apply to agnostics.
I can't be unafraid of offending something I know doesn't exist.It means atheist find comfort believing that there is no accountability for their actions in the afterlife and unafraid of sinning against some invisible deity.
Well, that's true to an extent. But we all consider, or should consider others when we try to do that.They want to live their lives how they wish and control their own destiny as if they were their own personal God of their own little universe.
That makes no sense. Moral relativism isn't a standard. It means that what I think is is right or wrong will be different to what you think. The standards to which we all hold will vary from person to person.Moral relativism is their standard for morality.
Are you an agnostic agnostic, or a gnostic agnostic?See @Bradskii's preceding post.
You have explained nothing. You have made an unevidenced assertion. You are venting empty opinions and blithely ignoring, with an astounding level of arrogance, delusion and self deception, the repeated observations by individuals who have a far superior understanding of their owh character and motivation than your biased, rigid mindset could ever provide. Fortunately, I've found the off switch.Read the thread. I have already explained it. If you are making the truth claim, "there is no god," it is a faith based claim. Because the reality is that you do not know there is no god, you just have faith that their is not
I understand you're expressing frustration, and I apologize if my previous response didn't meet your expectations.You have explained nothing. You have made an unevidenced assertion. You are venting empty opinions and blithely ignoring, with an astounding level of arrogance, delusion and self deception, the repeated observations by individuals who have a far superior understanding of their owh character and motivation than your biased, rigid mindset could ever provide. Fortunately, I've found the off switch.
Seriously, why are you insist on insulting me. I don't believe in your god. Period. The end. Billions of people don't believe in your god. It's time to grow up an accept that.The lady doth protest too much.
These aren't "Excuses". From the evidence I've seen the choice about your god is to either believe the claims of the people who believe in it, or not. I don't have any direct contact with it.Nope. The choice is to either believe God or believe human beings. And once the excuses are stripped away the truth comes out more often than not.
Someday insistently and rudely telling people to their face false things about themselves may backfire on you. That is the problem you likely face. There is time to correct this problem behavior.They're not a problem at all.
The lady doth protest too much.Seriously, why are you insist on insulting me. I don't believe in your god. Period. The end. Billions of people don't believe in your god. It's time to grow up an accept that.
So you say.These aren't "Excuses". From the evidence I've seen the choice about your god is to either believe the claims of the people who believe in it, or not. I don't have any direct contact with it.
It's not on me that people can't handle being told their deeds are evil.Someday insistently and rudely telling people to their face false things about themselves may backfire on you. That is the problem you likely face. There is time to correct this problem behavior.
Not entirely true. Both moral absolutist and relativist recognize that people have different moral standards and principles. The difference is that the absolutist believes there is an absolut right and a wrong standard. The relativist doesn't think any standard is absolutely right or wrong. They just are.Moral relativism isn't a standard. It means that what I think is is right or wrong will be different to what you think. The standards to which we all hold will vary from person to person.
Then the fact that someone realises that morality varies depending on very many aspects of any given situation is not, in itself, the standard.Not entirely true. Both moral absolutist and relativist recognize that people have different moral standards and principles. The difference is that the absolutist believes there is an absolut right and a wrong standard. The relativist doesn't think any standard is absolutely right or wrong. They just are.
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?