Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

Block Block Block


1AcceptingAThiest1

Recommended Posts

But when every day news across the world events come true on a consistent and reliable basis that's more than coincidence.

 

 

You suffer from a delusion.

 

Today in the news about 700 people died in the Mediterranean when their ship was lost at sea.  The Bible didn't warn us about this or any other new story.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I lived with a god or stories of a god 4500 years ago and things that were similar happened and I automatically attributed all coincidence tosaid God that would be confirmation bias.

 

 

But when every day news across the world events come true on a consistent and reliable basis that's more than coincidence. Eventually coincidence becomes a weak argument

 

And what exactly are you referring to, 1A?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually...I didn't get your point about atheists being bigoted against Christian scientists. Elaborate more?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I lived with a god or stories of a god 4500 years ago and things that were similar happened and I automatically attributed all coincidence to said God that would be confirmation bias.

...

 

Most likely.

 

...

But when every day news across the world events come true on a consistent and reliable basis that's more than coincidence. Eventually coincidence becomes a weak argument

 

When you selectively choose certain world events and attribute them to your sky fairy, that's also confirmation bias.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off people have different standard of evidence so then who's evidence am I suppose to satisfy in the amongst of 15people here? Are y'all saying you all are Exactly the same? Of course not.

 

 

A1, you originally asked, "Why am I not an atheist?" So we are asking you for YOUR evidence. Don't mind whether we will accept it or not. We just want you to spell it out. Give concrete examples of these "coincidences" of world events that counts as evidence for god. Line out for us your justifications for your belief.

 

You've said you weren't taught Christianity growing up. You didn't accept the testimony of a church or preacher, or even the bible. So this is quite curious. What are your reasons for believing? Fear not, A1. Maybe your evidences will be so overwhelming you might gain a convert or two. Wouldn't that please the Lord?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

But when every day news across the world events come true on a consistent and reliable basis that's more than coincidence.

 

 

You suffer from a delusion.

 

Today in the news about 700 people died in the Mediterranean when their ship was lost at sea.  The Bible didn't warn us about this or any other new story.

 

 

But mm, surely you know that the bible predicted bad things would happen. This event is a bad thing, yes? Therefore, the bible is true and god is real. Apologetics is easy-peasy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again there is no evidence for can present to that you will count as evidence anyway due to your predisposition of the scientific method.

 

Anything outside of science will never be believe. Science does no allow any proof outside of itself to occur. Not because its trying to be a ball hog but because simply it is limited to itself. If its not natural science can't do Diddley squat for explaining what it is.

 

 

Let me ask u this......if ANYTHING is explained. Does that automatically make it natural.

 

Like if an alien that we could see feel and touch.... could stop bullets and use instant transmission and break many physical laws....is this Alien supernatural or natural??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again there is no evidence for can present to that you will count as evidence anyway due to your predisposition of the scientific method.

 

Anything outside of science will never be believe. Science does no allow any proof outside of itself to occur. Not because its trying to be a ball hog but because simply it is limited to itself. If its not natural science can't do Diddley squat for explaining what it is.

 

 

Let me ask u this......if ANYTHING is explained. Does that automatically make it natural.

 

Like if an alien that we could see feel and touch.... could stop bullets and use instant transmission and break many physical laws....is this Alien supernatural or natural??

 

You are trying to distract from the discussion by bringing up things that do not apply to the discussion at hand. But to play along: Kevlar can stop bullets. I can transmit communication to you at the speed of light. These are natural phenomena. No appeal to the supernatural (or to alien lifeforms) is necessary.

 

Why are you resisting giving an answer? If your evidence is so weak that you have no confidence whatever in its explanatory power, you might want to reconsider why you still believe in god. That's all I'm saying, A1.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again there is no evidence for can present to that you will count as evidence anyway due to your predisposition of the scientific method.

 

Anything outside of science will never be believe. Science does no allow any proof outside of itself to occur. Not because its trying to be a ball hog but because simply it is limited to itself. If its not natural science can't do Diddley squat for explaining what it is.

 

...

 

That quite a set of claims.

 

Let's back up a bit and try something more basic and mundane:

 

Please define "evidence".

 

Start with this, please.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator

Everything that exists is natural. Making up things that the natural world cannot detect is the theist's game; it posits a supernatural realm. "I know you can't see it or any effects necessarily caused by it, but I have faith that it exists!" As "evidence" you may point to someone who got over an illness after being prayed for, or the fact that Jesus helped you find your car keys, but this is the confirmation bias I referred to. Classic example: If God heals, why has he never healed an amputee? It's because regeneration of limbs doesn't ever happen to humans in the real world, but people can and do recover from diseases, go into remission, or get free from psychosomatic symptoms with the right encouragement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The standard of evidence that is acceptable is that which is true for all, not just true for you.

 

Therefore this evidence cannot rely on any kind of religious faith, because the faith of a Muslim differs from the faith of a Hindu or a Jew or a Christian.

 

What's needed is evidence that works for anyone, at any location.

 

Science works the same for all people at any location.  

That's why the same machines work the same way in Jamaica and in China and in Australia, regardless of the religious faith of the people using them.  That's why machines designed on Earth work in orbit, on the Moon and far beyond the edge of the solar system.

 

That's why physical phenomenon like light, infra red, ultra violet and x-rays are the same here as they are on Mars and on the other side of the universe.  Science is universal and works the same regardless of the religious beliefs of the people using it.

 

That is why scientific evidence is the only standard that is acceptable.

 

If you cannot meet that standard A1, that's your problem - not ours.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeff

 

again I'm not the magic Christian all my evidence is what u already heard before and it does not qualify for evidence according to 99% of the atheist here and most likely the scientific so why even ask. Lol

 

Here I help u...

 

Choosing from the random stock generator of Christian evidence. Beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep.....beep....beep...beeeeeeeeeppp.

 

Generated lack of evidence for God #345

Logical absolutes

 

 

Atheist.... Dude why are u so ignorant thats not evidence for a God u suck. How does logical absolutes bhave ANYTHING to do with God????? Its non sequitur.

 

A1...:See bro...I already u already heard them all. Your wasting ur time. Asking me what my evidence is.

Alllll NY responses WILL NOT BEbSEEN as evidence... Please get that thru your scientific predisposition... Oh wait u can't because science has a standard of evidence that limited by itself and can't test anything outside of itself.

 

Aw poor science.

 

 

Another thing.....before u can say that something is not evidence for God...you yourself must first what a God IS to say it isn't the cause if it.

You can't say what something isn't if you Dont know what it is.

 

 

 

Sdelsoray

Evidence I define it as a standard dictionary defines it.

 

the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

 

 

 

Also...jeff

 

Lol when I say stop bullets I'm talking about in mid air without anyone touching it. Stopping it with their MIND alone.

 

And i meant That can instant transmit its body from one side of the world to the next in a second.

 

If this Alien exists and is seen by everyone visually plain as day that can break those natural laws....is it natural or supernatural?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The standard of evidence that is acceptable is that which is true for all, not just true for you.

 

Therefore this evidence cannot rely on any kind of religious faith, because the faith of a Muslim differs from the faith of a Hindu or a Jew or a Christian.

 

What's needed is evidence that works for anyone, at any location.

 

Science works the same for all people at any location.

That's why the same machines work the same way in Jamaica and in China and in Australia, regardless of the religious faith of the people using them. That's why machines designed on Earth work in orbit, on the Moon and far beyond the edge of the solar system.

 

That's why physical phenomenon like light, infra red, ultra violet and x-rays are the same here as they are on Mars and on the other side of the universe. Science is universal and works the same regardless of the religious beliefs of the people using it.

 

That is why scientific evidence is the only standard that is acceptable.

 

If you cannot meet that standard A1, that's your problem - not ours.

 

Then tell me why in a court of law the exact same evidence has different results and conclusions from a presecutor and defense attorney.

 

If the evidence I suppose to lead to truth?

 

 

Why is it that Christians that sre scientists and biologists and archeologist have access to the same equipment ad the non religious ones

 

Same access to same data

Same access to same materials

Same access to same environment

 

But yet...... Get different conclusions and results?

 

Anyone wants to say that all non religious scientists biologists and archeologist are delusional and playing confirmation bias...like all of them?... Every... Last one?

 

Not accusing just asking.

 

If not I Dont see how they got same stuff and get different results and conclusions if they honest and genuine

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

Sdelsoray

Evidence I define it as a standard dictionary defines it.

 

the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.

...

Now please define "facts" and please define "information", each of which is contained in your definition.  And, before you do that, read BAA's most recent post in this thread.  Are the "facts" and "information" you rely upon available to everyone equally?  Are these "facts" and "information" true regardless of who observes them?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The standard of evidence that is acceptable is that which is true for all, not just true for you.

 

Therefore this evidence cannot rely on any kind of religious faith, because the faith of a Muslim differs from the faith of a Hindu or a Jew or a Christian.

 

What's needed is evidence that works for anyone, at any location.

 

Science works the same for all people at any location.

That's why the same machines work the same way in Jamaica and in China and in Australia, regardless of the religious faith of the people using them. That's why machines designed on Earth work in orbit, on the Moon and far beyond the edge of the solar system.

 

That's why physical phenomenon like light, infra red, ultra violet and x-rays are the same here as they are on Mars and on the other side of the universe. Science is universal and works the same regardless of the religious beliefs of the people using it.

 

That is why scientific evidence is the only standard that is acceptable.

 

If you cannot meet that standard A1, that's your problem - not ours.

Then tell me why in a court of law the exact same evidence has different results and conclusions from a presecutor and defense attorney.

 

It doesn't matter what the prosecutor and the defense are doing with the evidence A1, it's the same evidence.

 

If the evidence I suppose to lead to truth?

 

No.  In a court of law the evidence is used by both sides to achieve a desired result - either guilty or innocent.

 

But the evidence itself stays the same.

 

Why is it that Christians that sre scientists and biologists and archeologist have access to the same equipment ad the non religious ones

 

Same access to same data

Same access to same materials

Same access to same environment

 

But yet...... Get different conclusions and results?

 

Because all scientists are supposed to check their religious beliefs in at the door of the lab and conduct their work without any religious bias.

 

Anyone wants to say that all non religious scientists biologists and archeologist are delusional and playing confirmation bias...like all of them?... Every... Last one?

 

No.  Only those acting unprofessionally by mixing their religious faith with their scientific work.

 

Not accusing just asking.

 

If not I Dont see how they got same stuff and get different results and conclusions if they honest and genuine

 

 

They may genuinely and honestly believe that they can mix science and religion - but actually, they can't.

 

See it now?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator
 
If this Alien exists and is seen by everyone visually plain as day that can break those natural laws....is it natural or supernatural? 
 

 

If an entity can be seen by everyone, obviously it is part of the natural world. In our entire history, the laws of physics have not been sidestepped; that's why they have come to be known as "laws." Why do you put forth an alien themed absurdity for this discussion? You say you have evidence for the supernatural that we won't accept as evidence, so please present it in detail and maybe we can explain on a case by case basis why it's not evidence to us. If you consider a dream as evidence, if you consider a warm fuzzy feeling as evidence, if you think a natural disaster is a divine judgment, then we can just stop right here and now.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeff

 

again I'm not the magic Christian all my evidence is what u already heard before and it does not qualify for evidence according to 99% of the atheist here and most likely the scientific so why even ask. Lol

 

Here I help u...

 

Choosing from the random stock generator of Christian evidence. Beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep beep.....beep....beep...beeeeeeeeeppp.

 

Generated lack of evidence for God #345

Logical absolutes

 

 

Atheist.... Dude why are u so ignorant thats not evidence for a God u suck. How does logical absolutes bhave ANYTHING to do with God????? Its non sequitur.

 

A1...:See bro...I already u already heard them all. Your wasting ur time. Asking me what my evidence is.

Alllll NY responses WILL NOT BEbSEEN as evidence... Please get that thru your scientific predisposition... Oh wait u can't because science has a standard of evidence that limited by itself and can't test anything outside of itself.

 

Aw poor science.

 

 

Another thing.....before u can say that something is not evidence for God...you yourself must first what a God IS to say it isn't the cause if it.

You can't say what something isn't if you Dont know what it is.

 

Also...jeff

 

Lol when I say stop bullets I'm talking about in mid air without anyone touching it. Stopping it with their MIND alone.

 

And i meant That can instant transmit its body from one side of the world to the next in a second.

 

If this Alien exists and is seen by everyone visually plain as day that can break those natural laws....is it natural or supernatural?

 

Ok, so logical absolutes. You're right, I don't think this argument for god is very convincing. I would just mention that this kind of Transcendental Argument for God makes all kinds of assumptions that can be (and have been) answered on philosophical grounds as well as scientific grounds. It seems odd that believers have to resort to such an airy argument to prove something that is supposedly as important and Real as god.

 

Further, just because logic is non-physical doesn't make it transcendent. Logic exists within our natural universe, which makes it, by definition, natural, not supernatural. Naturalism isn't equivalent to physicalism.

 

But here, you're right, we are getting into well-worn tracks. This has all been done before. But if I'm wasting my time, as you suggest, it's because you are avoiding the question.

 

You have said that you aren't a believer because of any church, preacher, bible, or anything. I'm just guessing here, but I would assume that you also aren't a believer because of the Transcendental Argument for God or any other philosophical hooey. So I ask again: Why aren't you an atheist? Why do YOU believe? Give YOUR evidence, not some warmed-over thought you read on CARM or whatever apologetic site you're frequenting. You claimed you didn't need anything but your own thought to become a Christian, but now you are trying to rely on other people's thought to justify your belief. I am sincerely curious how you came to believe and justify this belief.

 

(And let's leave your Superman Alien out of the question, for now. It seems obvious enough that an alien would still be part of our universe, and therefore natural. And, being natural, would be subject to the limitations inherent in our universe. You have your hands full already trying to explain why you believe in god without bringing in Super-Alien.)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again there is no evidence for can present to that you will count as evidence anyway due to your predisposition of the scientific method.

 

Anything outside of science will never be believe. Science does no allow any proof outside of itself to occur. Not because its trying to be a ball hog but because simply it is limited to itself. If its not natural science can't do Diddley squat for explaining what it is.

 

 

Let me ask u this......if ANYTHING is explained. Does that automatically make it natural.

 

Like if an alien that we could see feel and touch.... could stop bullets and use instant transmission and break many physical laws....is this Alien supernatural or natural??

 

 

A1 you are using a computer (created by science) to message on the internet (created by science).  Religion doesn't give us jack sh*t.

 

I don't understand your question but the reason you can't provide empirical evidence for God is because God is imaginary.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A1 you are using a computer (created by science) to message on the internet (created by science).  Religion doesn't give us jack sh*t.

 

I don't understand your question but the reason you can't provide empirical evidence for God is because God is imaginary.

 

There is substantial empirical evidence demonstrating this particular god exists in the imaginations of believers.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i was in kathmandu in 1991 (while i was still a christian) and recently 2015 (after deconversion)

 

Same beauty, same mountains, same evidence,,,,,

 

but in 1991, these evidence pointed to god,

in 2015, accidental beauties through a series of natural occurence,,,,

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Logic is not a 'natural' thing. It's a construct, sometimes based on mathematics - which is also a construct (and a language). They are descriptions of processes. WE MADE IT UP to help us describe things… it does not exist outside of humanity. it is relational to humans and our need to categorize and find systems to comprehend the universe and our relationship in it.

 

It isn't up there with.. oh, gravity, or the strong nuclear force, for example, which exist on their own regardless of humanity. 

 

There are really no 'logical absolutes' except in philosophy (scientific philosophy?). Philosophy - though useful and interesting - and maybe necessary in our social and evolutionary development, is not science… nor evidence. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Logic is not a 'natural' thing. It's a construct, sometimes based on mathematics - which is also a construct (and a language). They are descriptions of processes. WE MADE IT UP to help us describe things… it does not exist outside of humanity. it is relational to humans and our need to categorize and find systems to comprehend the universe and our relationship in it.

 

It isn't up there with.. oh, gravity, or the strong nuclear force, for example, which exist on their own regardless of humanity. 

 

There are really no 'logical absolutes' except in philosophy (scientific philosophy?). Philosophy - though useful and interesting - and maybe necessary in our social and evolutionary development, is not science… nor evidence. 

 

Hi Ravenstar,

 

Great points. I would just mention that we're using the word "natural" in two different ways, which may be confusing to A1. Even if logic is a construct that exists only in our brains, it's still "natural," as opposed to "supernatural." It's a part of this universe of matter and energy and the relations between them, needing no explanation outside of the natural world to justify its existence. Every human construct--math, language, "artificial" limbs, god--is "natural" in this more foundational sense of the word. Would you agree?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just Dont get I tho....why do u want my reasons for believing only to debunk it to the ground like u did everything else?

 

1000 of years. No reason has EVER been sufficient

 

I dont see how it would be productive.

 

Unless u take me reasons and not debunk them or criticize them or do judge them and just see me reasons as a documentary or biography of my life.

 

Will everyone else adhere to this.

 

If so I just may do it.

 

It would create a separate topic because its very through read. Seeing how I would be posting nonbilical and biblical sources and reason for every sentence I say to show it wasn't feeling or that I made it up.

 

It would also take me 2weeks to assemble it. It would be broken into parts in a very simple layout but with thorough non christian sources and Christian sources together best of both worlds

 

It would be the most detailed I have ever answered someone for the reason I believe. There somethings u just can't say in one sentence. My many reasons for believing is so in depth it would make my head explode if I try to put it in a few senttences.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Super Moderator
My many reasons for believing is so in depth it would make my head explode if I try to put it in a few senttences. 

 

By all means, take your time and do it properly. I'm always curious why people believe what they do because so many admit that they simply choose to believe. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.