1AcceptingAThiest1 Posted August 20, 2014 Author Share Posted August 20, 2014 thanks i just will never understand why people asked for evidence when based on the reponses above unless the bibel changes its text, evidence would never work anyway, but people keep asking for it. that part...i will never get Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disillusioned Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 thanks i just will never understand why people asked for evidence when based on the reponses above unless the bibel changes its text, evidence would never work anyway, but people keep asking for it. that part...i will never get There is no evidence. We ask for it to illustrate this fact. That there is no evidence implies that there is no reason to believe. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1AcceptingAThiest1 Posted August 20, 2014 Author Share Posted August 20, 2014 lol So you ask questiosn you already know the answer to? im sure people actually WANT to see evidence right? and if so WHAT kind of evidence would people accept or need to be presented that will unwrite what the bible has written so that it will FIT this SAID evidence? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 1AAT1 you have it backwards. Objective evidence is great. It is the Bible that is a pile of crap. It's not that we would reject any kind of evidence. We love evidence. Rather it is the idea that "the Bible is the word of God" that is a lie. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disillusioned Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 lol So you ask questiosn you already know the answer to? im sure people actually WANT to see evidence right? and if so WHAT kind of evidence would people accept or need to be presented that will unwrite what the bible has written so that it will FIT this SAID evidence? If we are speaking of the veracity of the Bible, then yes, I already know the answer to the question of whether or not there is evidence to show that it is 100% true. So do you. There is no such evidence. You are correct that there are some people who really want to see this evidence. So much so that they are able to convince themselves that either they have seen it or that they don't need to see it to believe in it. We call these people "Christians". 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neverlandrut Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 lol So you ask questiosn you already know the answer to? im sure people actually WANT to see evidence right? and if so WHAT kind of evidence would people accept or need to be presented that will unwrite what the bible has written so that it will FIT this SAID evidence? If we are speaking of the veracity of the Bible, then yes, I already know the answer to the question of whether or not there is evidence to show that it is 100% true. So do you. There is no such evidence. You are correct that there are some people who really want to see this evidence. So much so that they are able to convince themselves that either they have seen it or that they don't need to see it to believe in it. We call these people "Christians". Absolutely! We are pattern seeking creatures. One of the greatest testaments to our intelligence is our ability to recognize patterns. But we have developed such a propensity to search for patterns that we often see patterns that aren't really there. Constellations are an example. They are patterns our minds discern and are helpful in navigation, but we all know that Orion is not really a picture of the ancient hunter. When you really want something to be true, your mind can easily put pieces of information together to create a false pattern that seems to support your belief. This is called confirmation bias. There is a way to avoid this problem in our inquiries about the universe. It is called science. Science, so far, has been the only reliable method by which we can accurately distinguish what is true from what we think to be true. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1AcceptingAThiest1 Posted August 20, 2014 Author Share Posted August 20, 2014 So tell me what does an honest Christian looks like? Other than these 3 below How would YOU describe an honest christian? someone who says yea there is no evidence but i still believe someone who says there is evidence but cant prove it, someone who says i dont know if there is any evidence but i will still believe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 someone who says yea there is no evidence but i still believe There is nothing wrong with that. It's somebody who takes their religion on faith and freely admits that it is all faith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moanareina Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 lol So you ask questiosn you already know the answer to? im sure people actually WANT to see evidence right? and if so WHAT kind of evidence would people accept or need to be presented that will unwrite what the bible has written so that it will FIT this SAID evidence? You can't be as stupid as that, can you? Really, when reading some of your statements I never know if you are joking around or if this really is the way of your thinking. What did you think we would ask you for evidence? You really believed we thought you had evidence for the bible to be true? Really? Have you ever heard of rhetorical questions? And yes of course we would want to see evidence...if there was...but there is none. So far. And we know that. And now you know that too. That was the point of those questions. Also what is this talk about evidence you bring up all the time about. What about evidence do you not understand? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moanareina Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 So tell me what does an honest Christian looks like? Other than these 3 below How would YOU describe an honest christian? someone who says yea there is no evidence but i still believe someone who says there is evidence but cant prove it, someone who says i dont know if there is any evidence but i will still believe The most honest of those options to me would be: Someone who says there is no evidence but I still believe. Though to be honest, the honest Christian for me does not exist. That does not mean that I think Christians are not honest people as sincere in their views and actions. But a truly honest introspection of ones believe will ultimately lead them away from their believes. But choosing to believe something is totally up to you. Just don't assume you can convince anyone with it without having any evidence for your claims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1AcceptingAThiest1 Posted August 20, 2014 Author Share Posted August 20, 2014 someone who believes something with no evidence is thought to be dishonest, its like a guy saying my anatomy is big but then people say where is your evidence, he says i dont have any evidence but i believe it is true, most people would deem this as dishonest but I agree i wouldnt be but Roz here accused me of being dishonest just because i said i dont know after 1 of the 1,000 questions i been asked as if im not allowed to say i dont know and he called me dishonest i thought it was hilarious really because its unfathomable that i dont know translates as dishonest, i can see if i said it after every question but that wasnt the case Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neverlandrut Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 Hypothetical If I found out breathing under water without any gear will kill you based on irrefutable evidence, would it be proper for me to conform my actions and belief based on this information if i formerly believe that breathing under water will NOT kill you, would i or would i NOT choose to change everything i believed beforehand? Translation IF you found out the Jesus/Bible/God/christianity is True and real based on irrefutable evidence that God was GOOD in all possible aspects, would it proper for you to Love God and trust that all the supposed bad things and contradictions were not as you thought it was because true and real would mean that he actually is loving and deserving of worship based on what is said about his character? the Conclusion Many Atheist i know would change their mind if evidence for God was presented that he was real....but name one Atheist that would love and worship him?....If the answer is none, then what is the point of evidence then?.If the bible is true that would mean instead of saying i wouldnt worship a vengeful, hateful, evil God, That means you never truly believed the irrefutable evidence that God was GOOD in all possible aspects. I hear Atheist say they will change their mind and believe he exist but they convenitly leave it there, the question would be would you love and worship him IF he was proven to be GOOD in all possible aspects and all the bad things was not what you thought it was? This is a pointless question. They "conveniently leave it there" because the question of god's existence and the question of god's goodness are two separate questions. If bible god is real, the he is vengeful, hateful, and evil. There is no context in which killing entire people groups and infants is morally good, especially for an all-powerful, supposedly loving deity. If I am wrong about that, and there is such a way that those acts were morally good, then my natural concept of morality is flawed. If my natural concept of morality is flawed, then I have absolutely no basis to know or trust that god is good, because god's "goodness" contradicts what I know as good. If my concept of "good" is untrustworthy, then it is impossible to know or trust that god is good, because in order for me to know and trust that god is good, I have to use my moral judgment which is apparently not trust worthy. Simply asserting that god is good by some definition of "good" that we cannot understand is completely meaningless and unhelpful. Deal in the hypothetical all you want, but at the end of the day... no evidence = no rational reason to accept it as true. A point, then a question: The only way to attain knowledge is by examining evidence and coming to conclusions that are consistent with reality. This is not absolute knowledge, granted. But there is no such thing as absolute knowledge in the epistomological sense. It is a red herring. Evidence is the foundation of knowledge. Something being merely possible is no indicator, what so ever, of how likely it is to be true. My question to you is this. What evidence are you offering that God exists? I will not accept faith, but I think you are smarter than that. I think you know that wishful thinking is no indicator of truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moanareina Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 someone who believes something with no evidence is thought to be dishonest, its like a guy saying my anatomy is big but then people say where is your evidence, he says i dont have any evidence but i believe it is true, most people would deem this as dishonest but I agree i wouldnt be but Roz here accused me of being dishonest just because i said i dont know after 1 of the 1,000 questions i been asked as if im not allowed to say i dont know and he called me dishonest i thought it was hilarious really because its unfathomable that i dont know translates as dishonest, i can see if i said it after every question but that wasnt the case I am pretty sure that this is some kind of misunderstanding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
disillusioned Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 someone who believes something with no evidence is thought to be dishonest, its like a guy saying my anatomy is big but then people say where is your evidence, he says i dont have any evidence but i believe it is true, most people would deem this as dishonest but I agree i wouldnt be but Roz here accused me of being dishonest just because i said i dont know after 1 of the 1,000 questions i been asked as if im not allowed to say i dont know and he called me dishonest i thought it was hilarious really because its unfathomable that i dont know translates as dishonest, i can see if i said it after every question but that wasnt the case Someone who believes something with no evidence, and admits that this is the case, ought not to be labeled as dishonest. Such a person may be called credulous, blind, simple or deluded, but as long as they willingly admit that their belief is based faith alone, they are not dishonest. Issues may arise when people such as this attempt to practice apologetics. You either believe because of faith, or you believe because of reason. You don't get to have it both ways. If your position requires a leap of faith, then dispense with the arguments. They will not help you. Faith is not a good reason to believe anything. But, in and of itself, it isn't dishonest. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neverlandrut Posted August 20, 2014 Share Posted August 20, 2014 To pose another answer to your question: What would convince me that god is real and Christianity is true, etc? I have no idea! But an all-knowing, all-powerful god who wants me to believe would know exactly how to convince me and would be willing to do what it would take to convince me, and would actually do what it would take to convince me, especially if he loves me and is so desperate for me to believe that he sent his son to die for me. The fact that this has not happened is evidence to me that such a being does not exist. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1AcceptingAThiest1 Posted August 20, 2014 Author Share Posted August 20, 2014 i have no evidence that is acepted by the scientific community sorry Neverland :/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
◊ crazyguy123 ◊ Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 I've got some questions and I'm curious to see how you will answer those questions. 1) If I remember correctly, you stated that you believe that Yahweh is omniscient and that he knows everything that will happen in the future. If it is true that he knows everything that will happen in the future, then he knows who will go to Hell before they are even born. How can you consider your god to be just if he willingly allows people to be born that he knows beforehand are going to Hell after they die? 2) I was going to quote something that you said earlier on, but now I can't seem to find it. Anyway, you were saying that there is a difference between murder and killing, while making an attempt to justify the genocides in the Old Testament. My question to you is this: When Yahweh ordered the deaths of innocent children and babies in the OT, do you think that killing those children was murder or not? If you do not think that was murder, then explain why. Also, if it is acceptable for your god to kill innocent children and babies, then explain why it would be wrong for me to do it without his instruction. 3) I've noticed that you believe in Hell, but I do not know what you believe about it. What do you believe happens in Hell? Is it merely "separation from God" or is it a lake of fire where the damned souls are tormented? If you believe that it is a lake of fire where damned souls are tormented, is the torment eternal or temporary? IF you found out the Jesus/Bible/God/christianity is True and real based on irrefutable evidence that God was GOOD in all possible aspects, would it proper for you to Love God and trust that all the supposed bad things and contradictions were not as you thought it was because true and real would mean that he actually is loving and deserving of worship based on what is said about his character? To answer your question, in order for your god to be proven to be good in all possible aspects, the vast majority of the Bible would need to be bullshit. I don't know how he could possibly be good "in all possible aspects" given all of the horrible things he does in the Bible. Sure, it may say that he is good, in the Bible, but a human claiming such a thing does not make it true. If I were to say that Adolf Hitler was a good man in all possible aspects and that the Holocaust was justified somehow, would you believe me? If not, what evidence would it take for me to convince you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1AcceptingAThiest1 Posted August 21, 2014 Author Share Posted August 21, 2014 If I remember correctly, you stated that you believe that Yahweh is omniscient and that he knows everything that will happen in the future. If it is true that he knows everything that will happen in the future, then he knows who will go to Hell before they are even born. How can you consider your god to be just if he willingly allows people to be born that he knows beforehand are going to Hell after they die? Good question i asked this myself before my conversion, so i do not have the answer that will give you full satisfaction, im just simply responding with my thought is that acceptable?Here my take on it...Yes God knows whats going to happen but this is different from MAKING things happen. IF he created us to where our brain chemicals are altered so much to the point to where we blindly love him without a reason we would be robots then that wouldnt be JUST, whats JUST is him allowing us to do what we want, and then we having the opportunity to choose him out of personal desire and not fear, deception, or manipulation or force. Would you prefer he create us immortal and incapable of thinking on our own? ) I was going to quote something that you said earlier on, but now I can't seem to find it. Anyway, you were saying that there is a difference between murder and killing, while making an attempt to justify the genocides in the Old Testament. My question to you is this: When Yahweh ordered the deaths of innocent children and babies in the OT, do you think that killing those children was murder or not? If you do not think that was murder, then explain why. Also, if it is acceptable for your god to kill innocent children and babies, then explain why it would be wrong for me to do it without his instruction. yea i think you are referring to the two terms murder and kill i talked about in my Class i taught in my college class back in 2010, my students doing well in class they have an exam coming up pretty soon, things got delayed when some redhead student kept hitting on me trying to distract me, she tried to Kill me if you will; with her looks, i almost fell for it...almost.eh Anyhow murder and kill are literally different terms even a dictioanry can tell you, or you can ask a cop or any law enforcement, or coroner. Dont need my opinionBut so that we dont play semantics of the terms i think your just simply referring to an unjust death of babies, well i spoke with Roz about this, Im not saying I get off on babies getting killed, im not saying it feels good to hear it happened, im simply saying in certain instances in the bible towns were killed because of the adults and people were doing things unthinkable sacrificing babies and women and other off the way twisted behaviors and other sick stuff, so if God killed all the adults and left the babies, what are they going to do, drink their tears and eat their poop until they become full grown to take care of themself they cant even walk. So yea they would have died if all adults that commited the unthinkable were wiped out and the babies just laying their crying no one to hold feed or take care of them. God took them to stop their suffering and they go to heaven anyway got many verses to support that if you asked. 3) I've noticed that you believe in Hell, but I do not know what you believe about it. What do you believe happens in Hell? Is it merely "separation from God" or is it a lake of fire where the damned souls are tormented? If you believe that it is a lake of fire where damned souls are tormented, is the torment eternal or temporary?pretty much the traditional it is torture bible says that people will really feel it and there will be gnashing of teeth and yes i beleive it is eternal. I know some believe its temporary and try to use that as a deterence against traditional eternal hell and use it to win atheists over by saying it is temporary but that is silly because atheists not only dont believe in hell althogether they dont even beleive in the religions that dont even HAVE a hell anyway. So hell is really the heart of the issue at all none whatsover very rarely will i see an Atheists BE an atheists because he thinks if hell didnt exist then he wouldnt automatically believe. no there are many factors why Atheists are the way they are and i can guarantee Hell isnt the main reason Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1AcceptingAThiest1 Posted August 21, 2014 Author Share Posted August 21, 2014 If I were to say that Adolf Hitler was a good man in all possible aspects and that the Holocaust was justified somehow, would you believe me? If not, what evidence would it take for me to convince you? That is exactly my point......Even if evidence presented itself unless the bible is rewritten it would not change peoples perception of it, so no point in asking for evidence in the first place yet that is all atheists do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1AcceptingAThiest1 Posted August 21, 2014 Author Share Posted August 21, 2014 crazy guy thanks for the questions man i actually aprpeciate thsoe kind of questions even if i dont make sense, its like ROz said i may not haev brains but i have guts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
◊ crazyguy123 ◊ Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 If I remember correctly, you stated that you believe that Yahweh is omniscient and that he knows everything that will happen in the future. If it is true that he knows everything that will happen in the future, then he knows who will go to Hell before they are even born. How can you consider your god to be just if he willingly allows people to be born that he knows beforehand are going to Hell after they die? Good question i asked this myself before my conversion, so i do not have the answer that will give you full satisfaction, im just simply responding with my thought is that acceptable? Here my take on it...Yes God knows whats going to happen but this is different from MAKING things happen. IF he created us to where our brain chemicals are altered so much to the point to where we blindly love him without a reason we would be robots then that wouldnt be JUST, whats JUST is him allowing us to do what we want, and then we having the opportunity to choose him out of personal desire and not fear, deception, or manipulation or force. Would you prefer he create us immortal and incapable of thinking on our own? How exactly is it any different than making it happen? If he already knows beforehand that someone is going to Hell before they're born, then by creating them, he most certainly is making it happen. By creating them, he is willingly subjecting them to torture. Also, if he is omniscient, those that he already knows are going to Hell can't surprise him by suddenly choosing to serve him and going to Heaven. If that can't happen, then they are still robots, programmed to do all the wrong things and believe the wrong things so that they end up in Hell. The only way he could know all of this, without making it happen, is if he was powerless to change the future or if he had no choice of who to create. If this were the case, he'd have no will of his own and he would not be omnipotent, which would mean he can't be called God. I was going to quote something that you said earlier on, but now I can't seem to find it. Anyway, you were saying that there is a difference between murder and killing, while making an attempt to justify the genocides in the Old Testament. My question to you is this: When Yahweh ordered the deaths of innocent children and babies in the OT, do you think that killing those children was murder or not? If you do not think that was murder, then explain why. Also, if it is acceptable for your god to kill innocent children and babies, then explain why it would be wrong for me to do it without his instruction. yea i think you are referring to the two terms murder and kill i talked about in my Class i taught in my college class back in 2010, my students doing well in class they have an exam coming up pretty soon, things got delayed when some redhead student kept hitting on me trying to distract me, she tried to Kill me if you will; with her looks, i almost fell for it...almost. eh Anyhow murder and kill are literally different terms even a dictioanry can tell you, or you can ask a cop or any law enforcement, or coroner. Dont need my opinion But so that we dont play semantics of the terms i think your just simply referring to an unjust death of babies, well i spoke with Roz about this, Im not saying I get off on babies getting killed, im not saying it feels good to hear it happened, im simply saying in certain instances in the bible towns were killed because of the adults and people were doing things unthinkable sacrificing babies and women and other off the way twisted behaviors and other sick stuff, so if God killed all the adults and left the babies, what are they going to do, drink their tears and eat their poop until they become full grown to take care of themself they cant even walk. So yea they would have died if all adults that commited the unthinkable were wiped out and the babies just laying their crying no one to hold feed or take care of them. God took them to stop their suffering and they go to heaven anyway got many verses to support that if you asked. If I go out and kill a bunch of innocent children and babies because their parents committed a crime, that would be murder, but if your god does it, it's not. That makes no sense. If your god killed the adults, but not the children and babies, he could have simply given instructions to adopt them and raise them, or, he could have simply not allowed them to exist in the first place. If, he is indeed omniscient and omnipotent, as we have established earlier, then he created those children and babies that were killed in the OT, knowing ahead of time what would happen. Basically, he willingly created them just to have them killed. If I were to become a parent, just so that I could kill my children later on, that would make me a monster, correct? Why would it not do the same for Yahweh? 3) I've noticed that you believe in Hell, but I do not know what you believe about it. What do you believe happens in Hell? Is it merely "separation from God" or is it a lake of fire where the damned souls are tormented? If you believe that it is a lake of fire where damned souls are tormented, is the torment eternal or temporary? pretty much the traditional it is torture bible says that people will really feel it and there will be gnashing of teeth and yes i beleive it is eternal. I know some believe its temporary and try to use that as a deterence against traditional eternal hell and use it to win atheists over by saying it is temporary but that is silly because atheists not only dont believe in hell althogether they dont even beleive in the religions that dont even HAVE a hell anyway. So hell is really the heart of the issue at all none whatsover very rarely will i see an Atheists BE an atheists because he thinks if hell didnt exist then he wouldnt automatically believe. no there are many factors why Atheists are the way they are and i can guarantee Hell isnt the main reason The one and only reason that people are atheists is because they're not convinced that gods exist. The reason that some can be aggressive is because they are convinced that religion is poison (and rightfully so, as I am convinced of that very thing). By the way, I suggest that when quoting people, you use the quote button at the bottom of their post. If, for some reason, the quote button does not work for you, try putting "[ quote ]" at the beginning of the text you're quoting and "[ / quote ]" at the end. Just make sure to take out the spaces and the " " when you do it. That might make your responses easier to understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
◊ crazyguy123 ◊ Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 If I were to say that Adolf Hitler was a good man in all possible aspects and that the Holocaust was justified somehow, would you believe me? If not, what evidence would it take for me to convince you? That is exactly my point......Even if evidence presented itself unless the bible is rewritten it would not change peoples perception of it, so no point in asking for evidence in the first place yet that is all atheists do The point that I'm trying to make is that there is no amount of evidence that can prove that two contradictory statements are both true. One cannot both be good in all aspects and be a homicidal maniac at the same time. It's not possible (unless you define "good" as being a homicidal maniac, but to do so would be playing word games). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mymistake Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 If I were to say that Adolf Hitler was a good man in all possible aspects and that the Holocaust was justified somehow, would you believe me? If not, what evidence would it take for me to convince you? That is exactly my point......Even if evidence presented itself unless the bible is rewritten it would not change peoples perception of it, so no point in asking for evidence in the first place yet that is all atheists do You still have it bass ackwards. Your Hitler analogy is based on the well documented fact that Hitler did many things that people find dreadful. This documentation is evidence. Likewise the pages of the Bible are evidence that the Bible portrays God as simply dreadful. We want Christians to look at the evidence because the evidence indicates the Bible is wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
◊ crazyguy123 ◊ Posted August 21, 2014 Share Posted August 21, 2014 If I were to say that Adolf Hitler was a good man in all possible aspects and that the Holocaust was justified somehow, would you believe me? If not, what evidence would it take for me to convince you? That is exactly my point......Even if evidence presented itself unless the bible is rewritten it would not change peoples perception of it, so no point in asking for evidence in the first place yet that is all atheists do You still have it bass ackwards. Your Hitler analogy is based on the well documented fact that Hitler did many things that people find dreadful. This documentation is evidence. Likewise the pages of the Bible are evidence that the Bible portrays God as simply dreadful. We want Christians to look at the evidence because the evidence indicates the Bible is wrong. Lol, Hitler didn't come into it until I brought him up. "If I were to say that Adolf Hitler was a good man in all possible aspects and that the Holocaust was justified somehow, would you believe me? If not, what evidence would it take for me to convince you?" This part in the quotations was all me, but A1 didn't quote it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1AcceptingAThiest1 Posted August 21, 2014 Author Share Posted August 21, 2014 lol bible is wrong God doesnt exist ok sure but based on what kind of evidence could go back in time rewrite the bible that will fit the evidence you are looking for? if none then not only there is no evidence but there wont EVER BE any evidence if that is everyones line of logic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts