To ALL Atheists
John 15:16
Blessings,
Adam
John 15:16
J. Thomas Ford wrote:
> John 15:16 wrote:
> >
> > Why do you not believe in God ?
>
> No reason to.
Are you saying there is no evidence for God ?
> Why are you cross-posting to so many groups?
Just 5. Is that alot?
Blessings,
Adam
John 15:16
lazarus wrote:
> Because he doesn't exist.
But, if a person asked you what kind of things you'd accept, within reason,
as evidence for God, what would you say? If you have nothing to offer, then
you haven't thought your position through... and if you haven't done that,
then can you honestly lay claim to the title 'atheist'?
> Why don't you believe in Santa Claus?
He doesn't and there is evidence he doesn't ! would you like to here it ?
> --
>
> lazarus
>
> I shave with Occam's Razor every morning.
>
> "Question with boldness even the existence of God;
> because if there be one, He must approve the homage
> of Reason rather than that of blindfolded Fear."
> Thomas Jefferson
Blessings,
Adam
John 15:16
maff91 wrote:
> There isn't any evidence god(s).
You can’t say that because you have not looked at all evidence in the
world. That isn’t possible.
> --
> "God was invented to explain mystery. God is always
> invented to explain those things that you do not
> understand. Now, when you finally discover how
> something works, you get some laws which you're
> taking away from God; you don't need him anymore.
> But you need him for the other mysteries. So
> therefore you leave him to create the universe
> because we haven't figured that out yet; you need
> him for understanding those things which you don't
> believe the laws will explain, such as consciousness,
> or why you only live to a certain length of time--
> life and death--stuff like that. God is always
> associated with those things that you do not
> understand. Therefore I don't think that the laws
> can be considered to be like God because they have
> been figured out".
>
> - Richard Feynman
> http://feynman.com/online/quotes.htm
Blessings,
Adam
John 15:16
Sylvan Korvus wrote:
> For the same reason you don't believe in the Easter Bunny, Zeus, Grey
> Aliens, Shiva, the thousand dollars you owe me, or the Invisible Pink
> Unicorn.
I am assuming because there is no evidence for them right ? I will ask
you the same question I have asked other's, what kind of things would you
accept, within reason, as evidence for God, what would you say? If you
have nothing to offer, then you haven’t thought your position through...
and if you haven’t done that, then can you honestly lay claim to the
title ‘atheist’?
> --
> Sylvan Korvus ~ designer ~ syl...@nospam.home.com
> Be seeing you.
Blessings,
Adam
John 15:16
lazarus wrote:
> Of course. Are you saying there is? (BTW, try actual evidence, not
> circular logic or tired arguments about design or ontology.)
Hey Laz. What kind of evidence would be acceptable? If you have not decided
what evidence would be sufficient and reasonable, then you cannot state that
there is no evidence for God.If you have decided what evidence is sufficient,
what is it?
John 15:16
maff91 wrote:
> There isn't any evidence god(s).
Since you cannot know all evidence, it is possible that evidence exists
that proves God's existence, or at least supports his existence.
Therefore, it is possible that God exists.
John 15:16
Michelle Malkin wrote:
> There is no evidence that such a creature exists or ever has
> existed. The Bible is not acceptable proof.
You can’t say that because you have not looked at all evidence in the world. That is
impossible.What kind of evidence do you think would be acceptable ?
> Michelle Malkin (Mickey)
> ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
> aa atheist/agnostic list #1 ULC #3 ~EAC list #1
> High Priestess Bastet of the Non-Church Temple of Si & Am
> EAC Bible Thumper Thumper BAAWA Knight Who Says SPONG!
> ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
> "I had dumped out the bathwater and there was no baby there."
> Losing Faith In Faith by Dan Barker, former fundamentalist
> preacher (about how he lost his faith in 'God')
> ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
Blessings,
Adam
John 15:16
John 15:16 wrote:
> maff91 wrote:
>
> > There isn't any evidence god(s).
>
> Since you cannot know all evidence, it is possible that evidence exists
> that proves God's existence, or at least supports his existence.
> Therefore, it is possible that God exists.
And if it is possible God exists, then you should be an agnostic (an
agnostic holds that God may exist but he is unknowable.)
John 15:16
Michelle Malkin wrote:
> No so. If we knew what we would accept as evidence for the
> existence of your god, then we would believe, too.
Why is it I know what I would except as evidence for the existance of lets say a
unicorn, and still don't believe in them ?
> Also, since you don't know our individual reasons for being
> atheists, you can't claim to know if we are atheists or not.
> You'll just have to take our words for it, just as we have
> to take your word for it that you are a Christian.
You just said why ! ! you said you were atheists because and I quote "We have not
found or read anything that has convinced us."
> >
> snip
John 15:16
Cabrutus wrote:
> Because (1) there's not enough reason to
So there is a reason to believe in Him, right ? just not enough to
believe in Him ? what would account as enough reason to believe in Him ?
> and (2) God probably doesn't
> exist.
So what your saying is you don't know ? your an agnostic ?
> --
> Cabrutus
> locratz @ geocities . com | Ubi dubium ibi libertas.
> 24.6.208.162/cabrutus/ | DALnet: #atheology
Blessings,
Adam
John 15:16
Sylvan Korvus wrote:
> That, among other things such as logical inconsistencies and absurdities.
Such as ?
> If your god exists, then he knows precisely what will convince me,
> without me thinking it might be hallucination, self-delusion, or the
> work of a powerful, technologically advanced alien.
Is it possible that your criteria for evidence is not reasonable? Does your
criteria put a requirement upon God (if He exists) that is not realistic? For
example do you want Him to appear before you in blazing glory? Even if that
did happen, would you believe he existed or would youconsider it a
hallucination of some sort or a trick played on you? How would you know? Does
your criteria put a requirement on logic that is not realistic? Do you want
him to make square circles, or some other self-contradictory phenomena or
make a rock so big He cannot pick it up?
If God exists, He has created the laws of logic. He, then, cannot violate
those laws.
> Have a great New Year's.
You too !
John 15:16
Michelle Malkin wrote:
> This is truly one of the stupider questions we get from
> theists all the time. If we knew what it would take to
> convince us that a god existed, we would BE theists!
Allright, why is it that I know what I would except as evidence for a unicorn ? ? ?
even though I know what I would except, doesn't mean I believe in them ! same for
atheists, like I said you have not thought your position through, and do not deserve
to be called an atheist !
> If you think you have that evidence,please present it.
John 15:16
Michelle Malkin wrote:
> >You can’t say that because you have not looked at all evidence in the
> >world. That isn’t possible.
> >
> Neither have you.
Which just goes to show that the statement that there is "no evidence" for God is
false.
John 15:16
Michelle Malkin wrote:
> The same for you.
But this cannot be stated absolutely, since all evidence would need to be known to
show there is no evidence. Therefore, since all evidence cannot be known by any one
person, it is possible that evidence exists that supports theism.
> You haven't been all over the Universe, so
> you can't be positive that your god does exist.
See above.
> And, as I've
> said in other posts, if atheists knew what evidence would
> convince us that your or any god exists, we'd already be
> theists.
And I disagree. Keep thinking about the question.
J. Thomas Ford
>
> Why do you not believe in God ?
No reason to.
Why are you cross-posting to so many groups?
lazarus
question?
John 15:16 <theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote in message
news:386AE04A...@biblelight.faithweb.com...
> Why do you not believe in God ?
>
> Blessings,
> Adam
>
>
Because he doesn't exist. Why don't you believe in Santa Claus?
maff91
<theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote:
>Why do you not believe in God ?
There isn't any evidence god(s).
>
>Blessings,
>Adam
Pastor Stevo Levitson & His Lovely Wife Dottie
John 15:16 wrote:
> J. Thomas Ford wrote:
>
> > John 15:16 wrote:
> > >
> > > Why do you not believe in God ?
> >
> > No reason to.
>
> Are you saying there is no evidence for God ?
>
> > Why are you cross-posting to so many groups?
>
> Just 5. Is that alot?
>
> Blessings,
> Adam
Two is the max.
lazarus
John 15:16 <theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote in message
news:386AEA16...@biblelight.faithweb.com...
>
>
> J. Thomas Ford wrote:
>
> > John 15:16 wrote:
> > >
> > > Why do you not believe in God ?
> >
> > No reason to.
>
> Are you saying there is no evidence for God ?
>
Of course. Are you saying there is? (BTW, try actual evidence, not
circular logic or tired arguments about design or ontology.)
Sylvan Korvus
>Why do you not believe in God ?
For the same reason you don't believe in the Easter Bunny, Zeus, Grey
Aliens, Shiva, the thousand dollars you owe me, or the Invisible Pink
Unicorn.
--
Pastor Stevo Levitson & His Lovely Wife Dottie
John 15:16 wrote:
> lazarus wrote:
>
> > Because he doesn't exist.
>
> But, if a person asked you what kind of things you'd accept, within reason,
> as evidence for God, what would you say?
Well, start would be agreement on the part of his believers on the important
stuff like what He wants from us, etc.
It's hilarious watching all the xians fight tooth and nail here over whose a
heretic doomed to hell.
Stevo
Pastor Stevo Levitson & His Lovely Wife Dottie
John 15:16 wrote:
> maff91 wrote:
>
> > There isn't any evidence god(s).
>
> You can’t say that because you have not looked at all evidence in the
> world. That isn’t possible.
>
>
Why do you not believe in Binky the 900 Ft Carrot God?
All the universe points to him as its Creator?
Stevo
Michelle Malkin
<theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote:
>Why do you not believe in God ?
>
>Blessings,
>Adam
>
There is no evidence that such a creature exists or ever has
existed. The Bible is not acceptable proof.
Michelle Malkin
<theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote:
>
>
>J. Thomas Ford wrote:
>
>> John 15:16 wrote:
>> >
>> > Why do you not believe in God ?
>>
>> No reason to.
>
>Are you saying there is no evidence for God ?
>
>> Why are you cross-posting to so many groups?
>
>Just 5. Is that alot?
>
>Blessings,
>Adam
>
Up to five newsgroups is acceptable according to
nettiquette, as long as they apply to the topic being
discussed. These do.
Michelle Malkin
<theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote:
>
>
>lazarus wrote:
>
>> Because he doesn't exist.
>
>But, if a person asked you what kind of things you'd accept, within reason,
>as evidence for God, what would you say? If you have nothing to offer, then
>you haven't thought your position through... and if you haven't done that,
>then can you honestly lay claim to the title 'atheist'?
No so. If we knew what we would accept as evidence for the
existence of your god, then we would believe, too. We have
not found or read anything that has convinced us. Of course,
if you want to try...
Also, since you don't know our individual reasons for being
atheists, you can't claim to know if we are atheists or not.
You'll just have to take our words for it, just as we have
to take your word for it that you are a Christian.
>
snip
Cabrutus
John 15:16 wrote:
> Why do you not believe in God ?
>
> Blessings,
> Adam
Because (1) there's not enough reason to and (2) God probably doesn't
exist. Easy.
Sylvan Korvus
>> For the same reason you don't believe in the Easter Bunny, Zeus, Grey
>> Aliens, Shiva, the thousand dollars you owe me, or the Invisible Pink
>> Unicorn.
>
That, among other things such as logical inconsistencies and absurdities.
> I will ask you the same question I have asked other's, what kind of
> things would you accept, within reason, as evidence for God, what
> would you say?
If your god exists, then he knows precisely what will convince me,
without me thinking it might be hallucination, self-delusion, or the
work of a powerful, technologically advanced alien.
Ask him and see if he tells you.
>If you have nothing to offer, then you haven’t thought your position
>through... and if you haven’t done that, then can you honestly lay
>claim to the title ‘atheist’?
This is always really funny to see, a theist who believes atheists just
haven't thought the matter over carefully enough, and when prodded will
suddenly "see the light". Sorry kid, you're living in the mythology of
just another middle-eastern tribe that has no basis in reality, no more
so than any of the other god-characters I mentioned above. Since I don't
believe in any of them, I am an atheist.
I would dearly love for certain mythologies to be real; I would love to
see mermaids in the ocean, dragons in the sky, and a succubus waiting in
my bed. I'd love to see Apollo proudly pulling the sun across the sky,
and leprechauns guarding pots of gold at the end of the rainbow.
Unfortunately, wishful thinking has no effect on reality. The universe
is a beautiful place, but life isn't always pleasant, and we don't need
to invent gods or demons to make sense of it.
Have a great New Year's.
--
Michelle Malkin
<theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote:
>
>
>maff91 wrote:
>
>> There isn't any evidence god(s).
>
>You can’t say that because you have not looked at all evidence in the
>world. That isn’t possible.
>
Neither have you.
>> --
>> "God was invented to explain mystery. God is always
>> invented to explain those things that you do not
>> understand. Now, when you finally discover how
>> something works, you get some laws which you're
>> taking away from God; you don't need him anymore.
>> But you need him for the other mysteries. So
>> therefore you leave him to create the universe
>> because we haven't figured that out yet; you need
>> him for understanding those things which you don't
>> believe the laws will explain, such as consciousness,
>> or why you only live to a certain length of time--
>> life and death--stuff like that. God is always
>> associated with those things that you do not
>> understand. Therefore I don't think that the laws
>> can be considered to be like God because they have
>> been figured out".
>>
>> - Richard Feynman
>> http://feynman.com/online/quotes.htm
>
>
>Blessings,
>Adam
Michelle Malkin
<theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote:
>
>
>lazarus wrote:
>
>> Of course. Are you saying there is? (BTW, try actual evidence, not
>> circular logic or tired arguments about design or ontology.)
>
>Hey Laz. What kind of evidence would be acceptable? If you have not decided
>what evidence would be sufficient and reasonable, then you cannot state that
>there is no evidence for God.If you have decided what evidence is sufficient,
>what is it?
This is truly one of the stupider questions we get from
theists all the time. If we knew what it would take to
convince us that a god existed, we would BE theists!
If you think you have that evidence,please present it.
Michelle Malkin
<theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote:
>
>
>maff91 wrote:
>
>> There isn't any evidence god(s).
>
>Since you cannot know all evidence, it is possible that evidence exists
>that proves God's existence, or at least supports his existence.
>Therefore, it is possible that God exists.
>
Your argument also allows that your god possibly doesn't
exist. Please provide evidence that it does.
Michelle Malkin
<theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote:
>
>
>Michelle Malkin wrote:
>
>> There is no evidence that such a creature exists or ever has
>> existed. The Bible is not acceptable proof.
>
>You can’t say that because you have not looked at all evidence
> in the world. That is impossible.What kind of evidence do you
>think would be acceptable ?
The same for you. You haven't been all over the Universe, so
you can't be positive that your god does exist. And, as I've
said in other posts, if atheists knew what evidence would
convince us that your or any god exists, we'd already be
theists.
Michelle Malkin (Mickey)
Michelle Malkin
<theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote:
>
>
>Michelle Malkin wrote:
>
>> No so. If we knew what we would accept as evidence for the
>> existence of your god, then we would believe, too.
>
>Why is it I know what I would except as evidence for the existance
>of lets say a unicorn, and still don't believe in them ?
>
That's a shame, since someone created a unicorn through
genetic manipulation. Cute little bugger. I saw it on tv.
Can't say that I've ever seen or heard your god anywhere.
Every idea I've ever seen posted or mentioned by a theist as
evidence for the exxistence of their god has not held up for
me. If someone came up with evidence that I could find
acceptable, I'd know then. What that evidence could be, I
have no idea. But, go ahead and try. I'm curious to see if
you can come up with anything new.
Why do you believe? Faith and the Bible are not acceptable
answers.
>> Also, since you don't know our individual reasons for being
>> atheists, you can't claim to know if we are atheists or not.
>> You'll just have to take our words for it, just as we have
>> to take your word for it that you are a Christian.
>
>You just said why ! ! you said you were atheists because and I quote "We have not
>found or read anything that has convinced us."
>
>> >
>> snip
>>
>> Michelle Malkin (Mickey)
>> ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
>> aa atheist/agnostic list #1 ULC #3 ~EAC list #1
>> High Priestess Bastet of the Non-Church Temple of Si & Am
>> EAC Bible Thumper Thumper BAAWA Knight Who Says SPONG!
>> ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
>> "I had dumped out the bathwater and there was no baby there."
>> Losing Faith In Faith by Dan Barker, former fundamentalist
>> preacher (about how he lost his faith in 'God')
>> ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^ ^^
>
>
>Blessings,
>Adam
Michelle Malkin
I missed this part. I am an atheist because I have have
never been presented with evidence that a god or gods exist.
I see no need for there to be any gods or a creator of the
Universe. Since the Universe could just as easily have
always existed as a creator, there would be no reason for it
to need a creator. I do not speak for other atheists, since
there are more reasons than one for a person to be an
atheist. The others can speak for themselves.
Michelle Malkin
<theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote:
>
>
>Michelle Malkin wrote:
>
>> >You can’t say that because you have not looked at all evidence in the
>> >world. That isn’t possible.
>> >
>> Neither have you.
>
>Which just goes to show that the statement that there is "no evidence" for God is
>false.
I've seen none. If evidence exists, please provide it.
Dave Holloway
<theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote:
> Why do you not believe in God ?
It's an honest question, and it deserves an honest answer. I just hope
you'll read it with an open mind and an open heart.
Did you ever stop, Adam, and look at the world around you? I mean, really
LOOK at it? Do you sometimes feel overwhelmed? Do you ever feel -- maybe
not consciously, but at the back of your mind where it's buried deep and a
part of you hopes you'll never have to face it -- that something is WRONG
here? Do you ever feel like some things just don't make sense?
Consider the link between mind and body. It has been shown that the
personality is directly linked to the state of the physical mind. If the
brain is damaged, the personality changes. For instance, if the part of
your brain that stores the memories of your childhood is removed, you can
no longer remember your childhood. If the "compassion center" of your
brain is damaged, then you are no longer the compassionate person you once
were. And when the brain dies, the personality ceases. And so on. This is
not what you would expect if God exists and we all have "souls" that
define our personalities -- but it is what you would expect if God does
not exist and everything in the universe, including our brains, has a
natural cause and a natural existence.
Consider the existence of evil. Suffering and premature death happens
every day in the world, to good people as well as to bad, to Christians as
well as to non-Christians, with no indication of bias for any group of
believers, and certainly no sign that the suffering is going to stop
except through the intervention of mankind. Earthquakes, volcanoes,
mudslides, storms, hurricanes, disease, famine, plague, and people hurting
other people because they don't know better . . . why is there so much of
it? This is not what you would expect if God exists and loves us all
infinitely, without limits or bounds -- but it is what you would expect if
God does not exist and the universe simply operates according to the cold
laws of probability.
Consider the existence of nonbelief. Well over two-thirds of the world's
population are not Christian -- a tenth or more are not religious at all.
Much of the world's population have not even HEARD of Christianity, due to
geographical or cultural factors beyond their control. If Christianity is
such a positive force for mankind, and if God wants all people to be saved
and to come to a knowledge of the truth (1 Tim. 2:4), then why do most of
the world's population ignore it? This is not what you would expect if God
exists and wants all people all over the world to have knowledge of his
son Jesus Christ -- but it is what you would expect if God does not exist
and the world's religions are man-made constructs to provide a sense of
order and meaning to primitive cultures.
Consider the universe itself. It is a huge universe, and it is complex --
but it is also indifferent. It operates like clockwork, undeviating from
its everyday routine. It operates according to a set of natural
regularities, and there has never been any indication of these
regularities being deviated from. And simply the fact that the universe is
so large is bewildering to a seemingly isolated race, stuck in a tiny,
tiny little corner of an insignificant little galaxy somewhere at the edge
of the universe. There's so much space out there, and we could not
possibly cover it all within the lifetime of our species! And all but our
tiny little bubble of habitability is hostile and incapable of sustaining
life -- the vast, vast majority of Creation is closed to us. This is not
what you would expect if God exists, created the universe expressly for
mankind and interacts with it regularly -- but it is what you would expect
if God does not exist and the universe's natural regularities are simply
necessary components of existence itself.
Consider the human body. It is a marvelous piece of equipment, but it has
a shelf life of almost nothing on a geological time scale. Most bodies
wear out after less than a hundred revolutions around the sun. Also, the
"design" of all life forms on earth show signs of imperfection -- the
notorious panda's thumb, the pelvic bone of a whale, the utterly useless
appendix found in every human being, and so on. And look how fragile we
are! One well-placed projectile would do us in, as would a determined
microscopic organism! This is not what you would expect if God exists and
created us all lovingly with infinite wisdom and infinite mercy -- but it
is what you would expect if God does not exist and life on earth occured
and evolved naturally, imperfections and all.
Consider Christianity itself. It is divided into literally hundreds of
denominations and sects, each having its own interpretation of the Bible
and other scriptures, each claiming to have the One and Only Truth.
Countless atrocities have been committed in the name of God; the Crusades,
the Inquisitions, the Witch Hunts, to name but a few. The Bible itself is
full of absurdities, errors and contradictions, which serve to confuse
people. Even Christians who would deny the existence of these things are
confused by them. Even more confusing is that Christianity has no
solutions for the problems I've listed above. The best they can do is
guess: "Perhaps God had this in mind," or "Perhaps it's just not meant for
us to know," but the fact is that theologians don't know. They are as
confused as the rest of us; they are desperately trying to reconcile a
cold, indifferent world with their faith because they can't imagine a life
without their faith.
I did believe in God once, Adam, just as you do now.
And the day I stopped believing, the world finally started to make sense.
Dave
--
From the warped mind of Dave Holloway, alt.atheism Quotemeister, #1184
Director of Defense and Sabotage (DDS), EAC Mars Division
lazarus
John 15:16 <theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote in message
news:386AEF3D...@biblelight.faithweb.com...
>
>
> lazarus wrote:
>
> > Because he doesn't exist.
>
reason,
> as evidence for God, what would you say? If you have nothing to offer,
then
> you haven't thought your position through... and if you haven't done that,
> then can you honestly lay claim to the title 'atheist'?
>
The same evidence I would need to accept any extraordinary claim as valid.
Something concrete, internally consistent, and that fits the laws of the
universe.
> > Why don't you believe in Santa Claus?
>
> He doesn't and there is evidence he doesn't ! would you like to here it ?
Actually, I have more evidence of the existence of Santa than I do
concerning the existence of god. After all, *somebody* left those presents
every Clausmas morning. *Somebody* ate the cookies and drank the milk I
left out. I usually got the presents I had asked Santa for when I actually
sat in his lap. Since I saw him, and felt him, and had evidence that he did
all the things which were attributed to him, why shouldn't I believe in him?
Then there's god, who doesn't manifest in physical form, and whose record of
answering prayer is indistinguishable from pure chance. Why again should I
believe in him/her/it?
Gilgamesh
to God, and God alone were answered every time(even if it was just God
appearing before you and explaining why he wasn't going to grant that
particular wish or such), while prayers to other gods were never answered,
if God were to walk around, and talk to people, his luminous presense seen
by all under any circumstances(meaning you don't have to take the special
hallucinogens to see him, and he isn't visible only to crazy people, or
people on drugs, or such), for him to speak to me, to be able to answer any
and all questions I gave him correctly(meaning he doesn't give me bogus
answers like: "I dunno" or when asked "What is the value of pi? Is it an
infinite thing, or does it go down to a certain decimal point? If it goes
forever, can you tell me what it is down to the quintillionth digit?" he
respondends "I could answer that, but I won't."), then I would believe.
Surely your god would have no trouble doing that. If he really wanted us to
know about him, surely he would not be adverse to that. What sort of god
wants us to know about him, but then hides himself, leaving no evidence for
his existence, only a book that makes claims of his existence, and a
mechanism called faith which supports all beliefs equally? If real, then
your god is either stupid, insane, or he is a myth, one constructed to avoid
having to pass the test of evidence. How else are we to know if a truly
all-powerful god exists, and not some merely really-powerful alien
charlatan?
John 15:16 <theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote in message
news:386AF449...@biblelight.faithweb.com...
>
>
> Sylvan Korvus wrote:
>
> > For the same reason you don't believe in the Easter Bunny, Zeus, Grey
> > Aliens, Shiva, the thousand dollars you owe me, or the Invisible Pink
> > Unicorn.
>
> I am assuming because there is no evidence for them right ? I will ask
> you the same question I have asked other's, what kind of things would you
> accept, within reason, as evidence for God, what would you say? If you
> have nothing to offer, then you haven't thought your position through...
> and if you haven't done that, then can you honestly lay claim to the
> title 'atheist'?
>
> > --
> > Sylvan Korvus ~ designer ~ syl...@nospam.home.com
> > Be seeing you.
>
>
> Blessings,
> Adam
>
>
Dave Holloway
<theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote:
> lazarus wrote:
>
> > Because he doesn't exist.
>
> But, if a person asked you what kind of things you'd accept, within reason,
> as evidence for God, what would you say? If you have nothing to offer, then
> you haven't thought your position through... and if you haven't done that,
> then can you honestly lay claim to the title 'atheist'?
Yes, he can. An atheist is any person who does not believe in any gods. If
to the question "Do you believe in the existence of a god or gods" you
answer no, for whatever reason, you are an atheist. Consider the millions
upon millions of Christians who go to church weekly, who take communion,
who pray daily and who lead good Christian lives, but who haven't the
faintest clue what rational support, if any, exists for Christianity.
Would you dispute their right to lay claim to the title "Christian?" Of
course you wouldn't.
Also, if you're going to get on our backs about rationality and such, you
may want to consider the differences between atheism and Christianity in
that area. In this country very few people are born into an atheist
family, and people who become atheists are going against the grain of an
enduring common culture. Christians like to say that this is a Christian
country, which is completely false, but there is no denying that there is
a strong Christian predominance here. Therefore if you are an atheist, you
are almost REQUIRED to be an independent thinker and to be at least
somewhat educated on philosophy of religion. Christians, on the other
hand, are not required to be either independently-minded nor educated on
the topic; they have the status quo on their side. So if you're going to
launch into some evangelizing here, you may want to keep in mind that most
atheists in here know exactly what we're talking about in such discussions
. . . and if your faith is solidly based on rational grounds at the
moment, it will most likely not survive (whereas if it's based on
irrational grounds, well then no amount of discussion will talk you out of
it). Fair warning.
One more thing . . . "atheist" is an description, not a title. Like "male."
Sylvan Korvus
>> That, among other things such as logical inconsistencies and
>> absurdities.
>
A bunny that goes around hiding painted eggs for some altruistic reason
is absurd on the face of it. I have no reason to consider the existence
of such a being short of being handed ummistakeable evidence for it.
In the case of the xian god, an all-loving creator being that gets
pissed off at all the people it created after only a few hundred years
and so drowns them all is absurd, whether you want to take it literally
or metaphorically. Likewise, creating a physical manifestation of
itself, going around teaching a new morality that is quite radically
different from the old proscribed morality, then "dying" for the "sins"
of us poor mortals; why should a deity need to sacrifice itself, to
itself, in order to gain some sort of satisfaction and then forgive us
humans? Again, absurd. Xianity would be way better off if its bible
wasn't full of nonsense.
>> If your god exists, then he knows precisely what will convince me,
>> without me thinking it might be hallucination, self-delusion, or the
>> work of a powerful, technologically advanced alien.
>
>Is it possible that your criteria for evidence is not reasonable?
Why should any criteria be unreasonable, if any act regardless of scope
would be trival for an all-powerful being? It's like Superman agreeing
to prove he's Superman by lifting a Volkswagon, but declining to lift
the great pyramid.
>Does your criteria put a requirement upon God (if He exists) that is
>not realistic? For example do you want Him to appear before you in
>blazing glory? Even if that did happen, would you believe he existed
>or would youconsider it a hallucination of some sort or a trick played
>on you?
Since David Copperfield could appear before me in blazing glory, yes,
that would insufficient. Someone could likewise slip LSD into my tea.
>How would you know? Does your criteria put a requirement on logic that
>is not realistic? Do you want him to make square circles, or some
>other self-contradictory phenomena or make a rock so big He cannot
>pick it up?
As I said before, if your god exists he knows what would convince me,
even if I don't know myself what would.
>If God exists, He has created the laws of logic. He, then,
>cannot violate those laws.
You just said something VERY silly. I was going to nominate this as a
Theist Quote of the Month, but I'm trying to go easy on you. I'm sure
someone else will anyways.
If, as you assert, logic derives from this god-thing, then surely it can
remake the fundamentals of logic, or unmake them, whenever it is
convenient. However, if you say that logic comes from god, then logic
doesn't need apply to god; in which case we can just say god is
illogical and isn't subject to things such as "evidence", "reason", or
"sense".
If however, basic logical principles are fundamental to all existence,
even dieties, then no, he can't do anything anything that is "not
realistic". He could still presumably do something like (not that these
would necessarily be sufficient, but they're decent examples) transfer
my consciousness into a star, or cause me to understand the fundamental
nature of the cosmos, or instantly end all suffering on earth, with as
little effort as he might make a statue bleed or manna rain on the
desert. Since he hasn't, then if he exists, he doesn't -want- me to
believe he does, or is incapable of convincing me.
As a final note, even if there were some incontrovertible proof that -a-
god exists, that doesn't mean it would have any relation to the god of
your bible, the muslim god, the hindu god, or that of any other religion.
Bateau
people like John 15:16 <theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> would
proclaim....
>maff91 wrote:
>
>> There isn't any evidence god(s).
>
>world. That isn't possible.
Now THERE'S a good reason to believe! I suppose because you believe you
HAVE seen this evidence. Mind showing us? I'm sure you'd find it silly
for us to believe because of this evidence when we don't know what it
is.
--
.. "Man, once surrendering his reason, has no remaining guard ..
''. against absurdities the most monstrous, and like a ship ..''
..' without a rudder, is the sport of every wind. With such ''..
persons, gullibility, which they call faith, takes the helm of
.. reason, and the mind becomes a wreck." - Thomas Jefferson '..
ICQ UIN:11367619 Atheist list #1660 Email:smeggus at hotmail.com
Bateau
people like Pastor Stevo Levitson & His Lovely Wife Dottie
<*st...@nospam.com> would proclaim....
>John 15:16 wrote:
>> maff91 wrote:
>> > There isn't any evidence god(s).
>>
>> You can't say that because you have not looked at all evidence in the
>> world. That isn't possible.
>
>
>All the universe points to him as its Creator?
I don't think he's said he believes in the Christian God, and from this
guy's logic I'd say he probably is a Binkian.
Bateau
people like John 15:16 <theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> would
proclaim....
>John 15:16 wrote:
>
>> maff91 wrote:
>>
>> > There isn't any evidence god(s).
>>
>> that proves God's existence, or at least supports his existence.
>> Therefore, it is possible that God exists.
>
>agnostic holds that God may exist but he is unknowable.)
I think there is some evidence against the existence of the Christian
God (pretty much the only one you'll ever get someone to define to you),
so with the evidence against him it's not unreasonable to say he doesn't
exist. We say boogey men don't exist but have we checked under ALL the
beds in the world?
BTW, are you Christian or agnostic?
yang hu
<Its...@Not-A-Real-Address.com> wrote:
>Remember the good ol' days back in Thu, 30 Dec 1999 00:42:30 -0800 when
>people like Pastor Stevo Levitson & His Lovely Wife Dottie
><*st...@nospam.com> would proclaim....
>>John 15:16 wrote:
>>> maff91 wrote:
>>> > There isn't any evidence god(s).
>>>
>>> You can't say that because you have not looked at all evidence in the
>>> world. That isn't possible.
>>
>>Why do you not believe in Binky the 900 Ft Carrot God?
>>
>>All the universe points to him as its Creator?
>
>I don't think he's said he believes in the Christian God, and from this
>guy's logic I'd say he probably is a Binkian.
Hey, At least the Binkans don't harrass you on saturday mornings.
Yang
a.a.#28
EAC mole and other furry creatures
rev #-273.15, high priest of the most frigid church of Kelvin
"A few highly respected monotheists would have told me quietly and firmly that God did not really exist - and yet that "he" was the most important reality in the world."
-Karen Armstrong, "A History of God"
Kalle Helenius
John 15:16 <theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote in message
news:386AF63E...@biblelight.faithweb.com...
>
>
> John 15:16 wrote:
>
> > maff91 wrote:
> >
> > > There isn't any evidence god(s).
> >
evidence exists
> > that proves God's existence, or at least supports his
existence.
> > Therefore, it is possible that God exists.
>
> And if it is possible God exists, then you should be an agnostic
(an
> agnostic holds that God may exist but he is unknowable.)
Are you agnostic towards leprechauns, elfs, gnomes and pixies?
There exists absolutely no reason whatsoever to believe in a god,
or multiple gods. Lack of evidence is evidence of lack. RTFFAQ.
--
Damnant quod non intelligunt.
Aut disce aut discede.
kalle.h...@907.aldata.fi , EAC Comfy chair and fluffy pillows
administrator.
remove a.a# to reply...BAAWA!
brian_...@my-deja.com
John 15:16 <theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote:
> Why do you not believe in God ?
>
> Blessings,
> Adam
Specifically your God?
#1 reason, the Bible. The violent genocide of Joshua. The horrible
plagues in Egypt which supposedly killed tens of thousands of innocent
babies. The mass slavery under Solomon. The blatant myths of Genesis.
The contradictory accounts. The injustice of "original sin" and the
fact that if it was true, billions of souls would be sent to hell for
not being "saved", despite never having heard the name of Jesus because
they were born in the wrong part of the world or at the wrong time in
history. The fact that millions have the "faith of a mustard seed" but
no mountains ever move. The fact that Jesus swore he'd be back "before
the end of THIS generation" and the fact that his followers are all now
long dead. The fact that no source outside of the gospels exists that
mentions Jesus or any of his miracles directly (some speak of Jesus as
the "leader of the Christians" or "founder of Christianity" but none
speak of him directly). The fact that the miracles after the
crucifixion (hours of darkness, earthquakes, zombies, etc) passed by
several historians' collective notice unmentioned. The fact that no
religion on earth in history has managed to produce one verifyable
miracle or supernatural event. The fact that the gospels cannot agree
on chronological, geographic, or envoronmental factors in their
overlapping stories. The fact that Jesus was "tried" for heresy but
wasn't stoned (the punnishment for heresy). The fact that Herod died
before Jesus was supposedly born. The fact that those same historians
failed to mention Herod's slaughter of babies.
Shall I continue?
Tirdun
tirdun at yahoo dot com
KoX EAC
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Kalle Helenius
John 15:16 <theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote in message
news:386B0390...@biblelight.faithweb.com...
>
>
> Michelle Malkin wrote:
>
> > This is truly one of the stupider questions we get from
> > theists all the time. If we knew what it would take to
> > convince us that a god existed, we would BE theists!
>
for a unicorn ? ? ?
> even though I know what I would except, doesn't mean I believe
in them ! same for
> atheists, like I said you have not thought your position
through, and do not deserve
> to be called an atheist !
Ok. Define the god you postulate that exists, and show evidence of
his existence. That should do nicely to start.
Before you start, you should remember to make your definition of
god to be internally consistent, and the evidence testable. So far
in recorded history noone has ever accomplished this.
Have fun.
Kalle Helenius
>
>
> Michelle Malkin wrote:
>
> > The same for you.
>
> But this cannot be stated absolutely, since all evidence would
need to be known to
> show there is no evidence. Therefore, since all evidence cannot
be known by any one
> person, it is possible that evidence exists that supports
theism.
As evidence goes, it would take at least one piece of evidence to
support your stance. I suppose you have such evidence? Trot it
out.
> > You haven't been all over the Universe, so
> > you can't be positive that your god does exist.
>
> See above.
>
> > And, as I've
> > said in other posts, if atheists knew what evidence would
> > convince us that your or any god exists, we'd already be
> > theists.
>
> And I disagree. Keep thinking about the question.
*yawn*
maff91
<theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote:
>
>
>maff91 wrote:
>
>> There isn't any evidence god(s).
>
>You can’t say that because you have not looked at all evidence in the
>world. That isn’t possible.
Have you looked everywhere? If not, are you going to dismantle your
cult?
>
>> --
>> "God was invented to explain mystery. God is always
>> invented to explain those things that you do not
>> understand. Now, when you finally discover how
>> something works, you get some laws which you're
>> taking away from God; you don't need him anymore.
>> But you need him for the other mysteries. So
>> therefore you leave him to create the universe
>> because we haven't figured that out yet; you need
>> him for understanding those things which you don't
>> believe the laws will explain, such as consciousness,
>> or why you only live to a certain length of time--
>> life and death--stuff like that. God is always
>> associated with those things that you do not
>> understand. Therefore I don't think that the laws
>> can be considered to be like God because they have
>> been figured out".
>>
>> - Richard Feynman
>> http://feynman.com/online/quotes.htm
>
>
>Blessings,
>Adam
>
*****************************************************
Unforgettable Thomas Paine:
"Society in every state is a blessing, but
government, even in its best state, is but a
necessary evil, in its worst state
an intolerable one."
"Of all the tyrannies that affect mankind,
tyranny in religion is the Worst"
"All national institutions of churches, whether
Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no
other than human inventions, set up to terrify
and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and
profit."
"He that would make his own liberty secure,
must guard even his enemy from oppression;
for if he violates this duty, he establishes
a precedent that will reach to himself"
"A bad cause will ever be supported by
bad means and bad men."
"Moderation in temper is always a virtue;
but moderation in principle is always a
vice."
"War involves in its progress such a train
of unforeseen and unsupposed circumstances
that no human wisdom can calculate its end.
It has but one thing certain and that is to
increase taxes."
"My country is the world"
http://www.infidels.org/library/historical/thomas_paine/age_of_reason/intro.html
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/3.05/paine.html
*****************************************************
Dave Haas
> Why do you not believe in God ?
>
But I do. He exists as a spirit, a ghost, an honest politician, a fairy, a
witch, superman, Santa, and Donald Duck. He exists in the mind with a lot of
other imaginary baggage. The human mind is weird.
D. Haas
Abner Mintz
reason,
> as evidence for God, what would you say?
"I'll give you an example of a minor evidence, and of
a major evidence. If Christians, and only Christians,
had a higher level of spontaneous remissions from
cancer than people of other religions (and atheists),
I would consider that a minor evidence for God. It
would take a number of such evidences to convince
me that such a being existed."
"What would it take to convince me in one shot?
Every Christian on earth disappearing, all the dead
coming back from the grave and proclaiming that God
had brought them back, supernovae spelling out 'I
am the Lord thy God' in Hebrew across the sky ... that
kind of thing."
"Basically, a bunch of small miracles, or one big one,
that I can see for myself."
Abner Mintz
"I've never seen any evidence that supported such a
being existing."
Abner Mintz
> agnostic holds that God may exist but he is unknowable.)
"The words 'atheist' and 'agnostic' have multiple definitions.
I will note that the definitions in common use among
Christians are not the same as the ones in common use
among self-labelled atheists and agnostics."
"The word 'agnostic' was first coined (to the best of my
knowledge) by the philosopher Thomas Huxley, who
used it to mean a person who didn't believe that anything
was truly knowable. Many Christians noted that that
meant he didn't think the existance of their God was
knowable, and got quite upset - resulting in that becoming
an alternate definition of 'agnostic'. But the first, and
IMO primary, definition of the word was someone that
didn't think that *anything* was knowable - not just
God or other gods."
"The word 'atheist' has a similar bifurcuraton, with
most atheists saying that it means 'someone who
does not believe in any gods', *not* meaning
'someone who believes that God does not exist', the
common definition among Christians. This means
that when many atheists tell Christians that they
are atheists (but mean that they don't believe in
any gods, not that they believe that no gods exist)
they tend to be misunderstood by Christians who
think that they are using the second definition.
Note that there *are* atheists who believe that no
gods exist - but they are a subclass of atheist, not
all atheists, adding to the confusion."
"I hope that helped."
Vincent Fugate
J. Thomas Ford wrote in message <386B0FF1...@charybdis1.net>...
>John 15:16 wrote:
>>
>> Why do you not believe in God ?
I don't believe in the following:
Santa
Elves
Monsters from outer space
Superman
Batman
The boogey man
Zoras
Ishtar
Orisis
Ra
Zeus
Horus….. ETC.
Not all in the above list involve a religion, but those that do have
religious writings. There are many people in the world that believe in many
different mythologies. The Christian Bible has many errors and fallacies,
as do most religious writings I've researched. The Bible has many
historical and scientific errors. There are many people who make claims of
healing, visions, and other various religious claims. However, just as in
any other religion Christians have failed to show any credible and valid
evidence to their supernatural claims.
When I was a kid I believe in Santa, and the Boogey man. I had nightmares
about the Boogey man, and in my mind he seemed real. Sometime I thought I
could hear him in the basement, and sometimes I thought I could see him.
When I became older I soon realized that there was no such thing as a Boogey
man, and then I was able to deal with the reason why I had such a fear. I
used to wonder if there was a secret world of elves and dragons, but when I
got older and had a better understanding of reality I soon realized that
there is no valid evidence.
I used to believe in your God, and I used to believe in the Christian
Bible. I was very committed believer, had no problem with witnessing to
people on the streets. However, I always struggled with the fact that it
was never religion that made a difference in my life. It was not God that
got me a job, paid my bill, or met my needs. Prayers of healing of others
never worked. The more I learned about the Bible, and the more I memorized
I started to noticed that the Bible did contradict it's self. Then I read
the book titled "The Case for Christ" which was a major turning point in my
faith. Whenever I read something I try my best to study, and verify the
information. What I fount in the Case for Christ was that the authors
historical claims were false.
I know if you’re a Catholic that the above does not matter because your
Pope is the one who tells you what to think, and believe when it comes to
your religion. However, the fact that the Bible is in error, and that
Christians track record in spiritual claims are no better than any other
religion makes your religion no better than any body else's. I also know
that anyone can justify, and rationalize their holy writings. Anybody can
take a verse in context or out of context and make a doctrine out of it.
Each person will truly believe they are right, and will make claims to
having proof to support their beliefs.
Your question really should be, "Why don't I believe in the Christian God?"
"religion is without reason--it's emotion"
Elfish Chimera
John 15:16 wrote in message <386AE04A...@biblelight.faithweb.com>...
:Why do you not believe in God ?
:
:
Define "believe in".
Define "god".
Ciao!
Elfish Chimera
Jim Cowling
>
>
>J. Thomas Ford wrote:
>
>> John 15:16 wrote:
>> >
>> > Why do you not believe in God ?
>>
>
>Are you saying there is no evidence for God ?
Yes, but that's not the only reason.
Assuming there is a god, which religion is right? Assuming one religion is
right, what makes him worthy of acknowledgement, much less worship; IMHO, the
Christian god would be worthy only of contempt if I believed in its existence.
But, inna final analysis, there's no evidence, so there's no point in wasting
my time believing or worshipping.
-------
Jim Cowling, Unaligned Merchant of Menace/Writer/Atheist/Geek
The Plains of Amaterasu: more original Clan War stuff than you could ever use at
http://members.home.com/scowling -- scow...@home.com
-------
Peter Walker
<theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote:
>maff91 wrote:
>
>> There isn't any evidence god(s).
>
>Since you cannot know all evidence, it is possible that evidence exists
>that proves God's existence, or at least supports his existence.
>Therefore, it is possible that God exists.
It's possible that invisible pink unicorns exist, by your same
standards.
That doesn't mean we should take the proposition seriously.
--
Peter Wykoff Walker II | WWW: http://spacsun.rice.edu/~pww
BAAWA Squire-in-training | alt.atheist #3 (Oldtimer Division)
--------- QUI NOS RODUNT CONFUNDANTUR ET CUM IUSTIS NON SCRIBANTUR ---------
Jim Cowling
>
>
>maff91 wrote:
>
>> There isn't any evidence god(s).
>
>world. That isn’t possible.
There has been no evidence presented in a public forum that I have accessed.
It is a fallacy to assume that one can only make a decision with all the
information conceivable. My TV works. I don't have to know how it works to
know that it works.
There is no evidence of gods. I don't need to examine every corner of the
universe to know this. If the evidence is hidden, it's not evidence yet; it's
potential data, but irrelevant to our concerns.
Do you have any such evidence? Make sure that it's falsifiable, verificable,
and repeatable, and that your argument is not circular (such as referring to
a bible).
Peter Walker
<theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote:
>Why do you not believe in God ?
Because there's no evidence for such a thing (not to mention the
specific one you refert to by the capitilization) - and that all the
evidence-free arguments advanced in the favor of gods are hopelessly
flawed.
As such, lacking both evidence and good argument, it is only reasonable
to reject this proposition.
It's that simple.
Jim Cowling
>
>
>Michelle Malkin wrote:
>
>> >You can’t say that because you have not looked at all evidence in the
>> >world. That isn’t possible.
>> >
>
>Which just goes to show that the statement that there is "no evidence" for God
> is
>false.
Not in the least.
cz...@ecn.ab.ca
: Sylvan Korvus wrote:
: > That, among other things such as logical inconsistencies and absurdities.
: Such as ?
First, don't you think we should define our terms?
What, exactly, do you mean by "god"?
(And no, I'm not trying to be a smart-ass.)
--
*************************************************************
In science, "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a
degree that it would be perverse to withold provisional
assent." I suppose that apples might start to rise
tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time
in physics classrooms.
-Stephen Jay Gould
*************************************************************
cz...@ecn.ab.ca
: > John 15:16 wrote:
: > >
: > > Why do you not believe in God ?
: > No reason to.
: Are you saying there is no evidence for God ?
If he's not saying it, I am.
cz...@ecn.ab.ca
: > Of course. Are you saying there is? (BTW, try actual evidence, not
: > circular logic or tired arguments about design or ontology.)
: Hey Laz. What kind of evidence would be acceptable?
Well, I can't speak for ol' Laz, but on my more mellow days I'd be willing
to accept evidence that would stand up in a court of law. Most of the
time, though, I'd want that which could stand up to the full scrutiny of
the scientific method.
Stephen Knight
<theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote:
>Since you cannot know all evidence, it is possible that evidence exists
>that proves God's existence, or at least supports his existence.
>Therefore, it is possible that God exists.
Then it is possible that a 300 foot Carrot is really God. By your
logic, "anything" can exist.
It isn't up to me to decide if a god(s) exist. It's up to your
magic friend to prove it. I want it to DO something. Don't you think
the world would be a different place if it did? I want all the
christians in the world to pray, en masse, for one person to grow one
limb back. You know and I know, nothing will happen.
Steve Knight #855
Knight of BAAWA
J. Thomas Ford
>
> J. Thomas Ford wrote:
>
> > John 15:16 wrote:
> > >
> > > Why do you not believe in God ?
> >
> > No reason to.
>
> Are you saying there is no evidence for God ?
Are you saying there is?
> > Why are you cross-posting to so many groups?
>
> Just 5. Is that alot?
Yes, especially when the mix includes essentially diametrically opposed
groups.
You wouldn't be trolling, would you?
J. Thomas Ford
>
> lazarus wrote:
>
> > Of course. Are you saying there is? (BTW, try actual evidence, not
> > circular logic or tired arguments about design or ontology.)
>
> Hey Laz. What kind of evidence would be acceptable?
Objective, verifiable evidence. The kind that any useful system operates
on.
> If you have not decided
> what evidence would be sufficient and reasonable, then you cannot state that
> there is no evidence for God.
Dreck. I smell an attempt to shift the burden of evidence. Do your own
homework, junior.
>If you have decided what evidence is sufficient,
> what is it?
Don Kresch
>Why do you not believe in God ?
Because there is no god.
Don
aa #51, Knight of BAAWA, DNRC o-, EAC Decryption squad
Atheist Minister for St. Dogbert.
"No being is so important that he can usurp the rights of another"
Picard to Data/Graves "The Schizoid Man"
S Johnson
<theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote:
>maff91 wrote:
>
>> There isn't any evidence god(s).
>
>You can▓t say that because you have not looked at all evidence in the
>world. That isn▓t possible.
I have an open mind-if I ever encounter evidence that your magical
fairy puppet exists I'll change it.
-Scott Johnson
a.a #1548
greg and kim
Greg in Embarrass
John 15:16 wrote:
>
> Why do you not believe in God ?
>
> Blessings,
> Adam
tim kelley
>
> lazarus wrote:
>
> > Of course. Are you saying there is? (BTW, try actual evidence, not
> > circular logic or tired arguments about design or ontology.)
>
> what evidence would be sufficient and reasonable, then you cannot state that
> what is it?
<sigh> Trying to attempt a bit of sophistry or what? Are we
bored today?
The point is not about evidence or experience. The point is that
the question of god's existence/non-existence is POINTLESS,
MEANINGLESS, and has NO PLACE in any discussion of ethics,
ontology or epistemology. NONE. No scientific inquiry starts
with fantasy, and that is precisely what theism is.
That, preacher, is atheism.
Now, religion is another matter entirely. Religion is worse than
theism (defined as the simple belief in a god). Religion,
especially organized religion, is absurd. It is an intellectual
crime and a social disaster. I can't think of anything more
ruinous to the human condition than religion, other than perhaps
governments.
Pastor Stevo Levitson & His Lovely Wife Dottie
greg and kim wrote:
Didn't know you were a Calvinist.
So your buybull gawd hardwires some (most) people so that they cannot
believe in him.
Then he says, "Since you do not believe in me I will roast you in hell
for eternity as a punishment!"
If you ever wonder why most people think hardcore xians like you are
nuts, this is it.
Think about what you believe in.
Steve
Terry
>Why do you not believe in God ?
>
>Blessings,
>Adam
Adam be prepared you are going to get some really really short anwers from
atheists. The Million Dollar question.
I've talked to many atheists over the last twenty years they share much in
common. most are educated and intelligent. Throughout history Great
philosophers have bounced their heads on these questions. What are the
beginnings of atheism? I don't know. But doubt can be traced to several areas.
Many revolted against such notions that our imagination has conjured up: the
illustrations of a bearded old man are still in our minds somewhere lurking and
unfortunately acting. You know the one, He looks sort of like a cross mix of an
angry Santa, Karl Marx, and Albert Einstein. The moment many intelligent people
begin to think of God as a person they stop there. Many intelligent people stop
at once saying "what's the point, how can know a something so far beyond human
comprehension?" "stupid people believe in this bearded old man!" Some have said
that "God is dead!" I don't believe they are revolting against the
philosophical concept of personality as it is applied to God, I again submit
that they can not imagine an infinite being, an are simply seeing instead that
bearded old white man with an angry face.
This is where doubt can set in. the atheist, like theists read books, watch
TV, and talk to people that largely support their positions. In short, they
gravitate to what they are comfortable with. They fill their minds with
propaganda and soon few minds are open from this point forward. We call this
"Hardening our Hearts" in-fact it is our hearts and minds that are being
closed.
When talking to Atheists or weak theists you have got to be concerned about
what people believe about God. America is a religious society on that there is
not much doubt. There is a modern tendency in society today to treat God in two
ways. I am not speaking for atheists, but theists. A Catholic Theologian (Frank
Sheed/Theology and Sanity) put it very well and I'll sum it up for you. Many
semi-religiouspeople like to start by Treating God as an equal. The common
form of it is that God is not making a very good job of the universe and that
one could give Him a few pointers. It is not a tough jump from here to stop
believing that one can offend God ( sin) , or that hell, or anything else
believed by mainstream christainity believes. You certainly will not be able to
explain the Trinity to such a person, or the meaning of salavtion.
The second tendency is to treat God like an extra and this is much more wide
spread today. Sheed explains it further as "Religion, it might be better if we
all did a little bit more of it; but it has no place in the practical business
of man's life." And " what a man believes about God is a private affair": in
other words "it does not effect him in a way that matters to anyone else".
This, to me is very dangerous as it should be to all proffessed Christians.
History echoes with denial the above statement. What men have believed about
God can be traced with millions of tons of blood from all the wars and
sacrifices.. and now it is simple a "private affair". This sort of thinking
should scare almost anyone including atheists. Sheed talks about the people
whose god was Moloch. They believed throwing children into a furnace must
placate him. The god Kali required men to be strangled in her honor. The
victims of such beliefs certainly did not consider it one person's private
affair. But to be wrong about an Infinite God, how much more could the effects
be? If we are wrong about God, what can we be right about. We are simple wrong
about reality in general. This is why Catholics understand that faith and its
practice are not to be given wholly to ones interpretation of the Bible. I
could say more on that here, but It will have to wait.
Regarding Atheism and its effects : If we want to go on an discuss the private
affair and when it becomes public, Sheed does a good job of it. " Suppose a man
refuses to believe in the existence of the sun. He will, of course, be ready to
with a theory to account for the widely held view that the sun exists." He
will say anyone of the following: " a collective hallucination, a large fire
ball fifty miles in the air, a result of wishful thinking, a visual effect
caused by spots on the liver, a relic or tribal superstition, or a piece of
sexual symbolism, or even a purely mental compensation for an unjust economic
system. The point is however ingenious his theory is it would still be wrong.
If this person goes out and tries to convince many others that the sun does not
exist then we have a real public problem (could you imagine if he was a cruise
ship Pilot?). To be wrong about the sun we are wrong about weather, stars, moon
and so much more. You could not discuss astronomy and navigation with this
person Sheed argues?. However much a person has his own private opinion that
the sun does not exist , the fact is that the sun does exist. Similarly, you
can not discuss with a man (Atheist) that does not believe in God the purpose
of Life. You could not profoundly collaborate in human affairs like sociology,
science and education. You can not simply take God from the equation for the
sake of argument, anymore than you could take the sun from discussing
navigation(among other things), God is a fact an essential to everything.
Human reason can prove god exists. You or I will not convince an atheists to
believe in Him. Many atheists will tell you that they have looked at reason and
have found nothing to prove His existence. Aristotle 376 BC did very well with
it. The Five proofs that God Exists provided by St. Thomas Aquinas also are a
solid testament to His existence as one would go. His proof of "Contingency"
not only gives proof of God , but also reveals God's Nature to us. But men have
hardened their hearts and minds. Very few atheists have even read these works.
As believers we need only read Romans .1.20 and we get a familiar
understanding. To know God exists through reason is improtant, but to know him
more personally we need his revelation. It is more improtant to love God then
to know Him, but to know Him is to love Him.
God Bless
Terry
John Hattan
>Why do you not believe in God ?
For the same reason you don't believe in Zeus.
---
John Hattan Grand High UberPope - First Church of Shatnerology
john-...@home.com http://www.freespeech.org/shatner
John Hattan
>lazarus wrote:
>
>> Of course. Are you saying there is? (BTW, try actual evidence, not
>> circular logic or tired arguments about design or ontology.)
>
>Hey Laz. What kind of evidence would be acceptable? If you have not decided
>what evidence would be sufficient and reasonable, then you cannot state that
>there is no evidence for God.If you have decided what evidence is sufficient,
>what is it?
Dunno about Laz, but I'll accept any or all of the tests that the
Judeo-Christian god outlines for himself in Mark 16:18, Matt 17:20, and
1 Kings 18.
Specifically if you, as a follower of Jesus, can successfully digest two
ounces of potassium cyanide, cause a mountain or similar large mass to
throw itself into the sea solely by the power of your faith, or can
cause your god to burn a pile of wet meat to ash simply by asking him,
then I'll consider that sufficient for me.
Until then, I can only assume that either your god is not powerful
enough to pass the tests that he has outlined for himself and claims he
can pass. . .or he simply doesn't exist.
Denis Loubet
John 15:16 <theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote in message
news:386B047D...@biblelight.faithweb.com...
>
>
> Michelle Malkin wrote:
>
> > >You can't say that because you have not looked at all evidence in the
> > >world. That isn't possible.
> > >
>
> Which just goes to show that the statement that there is "no evidence" for
God is
> false.
Nope, it is currently true.
Is something that is not presented, evidence?
No.
Denis Loubet
dlo...@io.com
http:www.io.com/~dloubet
chibiabos
<dcho...@cord.edu> wrote:
> In article <386AE04A...@biblelight.faithweb.com>, John 15:16
> <theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote:
>
> > Why do you not believe in God ?
>
> It's an honest question, and it deserves an honest answer. I just hope
> you'll read it with an open mind and an open heart.
>
>
> Did you ever stop, Adam, and look at the world around you? I mean, really
> LOOK at it? Do you sometimes feel overwhelmed? Do you ever feel -- maybe
> not consciously, but at the back of your mind where it's buried deep and a
> part of you hopes you'll never have to face it -- that something is WRONG
> here? Do you ever feel like some things just don't make sense?
>
> Consider the link between mind and body. It has been shown that the
> personality is directly linked to the state of the physical mind. If the
> brain is damaged, the personality changes. For instance, if the part of
> your brain that stores the memories of your childhood is removed, you can
> no longer remember your childhood. If the "compassion center" of your
> brain is damaged, then you are no longer the compassionate person you once
> were. And when the brain dies, the personality ceases. And so on. This is
> not what you would expect if God exists and we all have "souls" that
> define our personalities -- but it is what you would expect if God does
> not exist and everything in the universe, including our brains, has a
> natural cause and a natural existence.
>
> Consider the existence of evil. Suffering and premature death happens
> every day in the world, to good people as well as to bad, to Christians as
> well as to non-Christians, with no indication of bias for any group of
> believers, and certainly no sign that the suffering is going to stop
> except through the intervention of mankind. Earthquakes, volcanoes,
> mudslides, storms, hurricanes, disease, famine, plague, and people hurting
> other people because they don't know better . . . why is there so much of
> it? This is not what you would expect if God exists and loves us all
> infinitely, without limits or bounds -- but it is what you would expect if
> God does not exist and the universe simply operates according to the cold
> laws of probability.
>
> Consider the existence of nonbelief. Well over two-thirds of the world's
> population are not Christian -- a tenth or more are not religious at all.
> Much of the world's population have not even HEARD of Christianity, due to
> geographical or cultural factors beyond their control. If Christianity is
> such a positive force for mankind, and if God wants all people to be saved
> and to come to a knowledge of the truth (1 Tim. 2:4), then why do most of
> the world's population ignore it? This is not what you would expect if God
> exists and wants all people all over the world to have knowledge of his
> son Jesus Christ -- but it is what you would expect if God does not exist
> and the world's religions are man-made constructs to provide a sense of
> order and meaning to primitive cultures.
>
> Consider the universe itself. It is a huge universe, and it is complex --
> but it is also indifferent. It operates like clockwork, undeviating from
> its everyday routine. It operates according to a set of natural
> regularities, and there has never been any indication of these
> regularities being deviated from. And simply the fact that the universe is
> so large is bewildering to a seemingly isolated race, stuck in a tiny,
> tiny little corner of an insignificant little galaxy somewhere at the edge
> of the universe. There's so much space out there, and we could not
> possibly cover it all within the lifetime of our species! And all but our
> tiny little bubble of habitability is hostile and incapable of sustaining
> life -- the vast, vast majority of Creation is closed to us. This is not
> what you would expect if God exists, created the universe expressly for
> mankind and interacts with it regularly -- but it is what you would expect
> if God does not exist and the universe's natural regularities are simply
> necessary components of existence itself.
>
> Consider the human body. It is a marvelous piece of equipment, but it has
> a shelf life of almost nothing on a geological time scale. Most bodies
> wear out after less than a hundred revolutions around the sun. Also, the
> "design" of all life forms on earth show signs of imperfection -- the
> notorious panda's thumb, the pelvic bone of a whale, the utterly useless
> appendix found in every human being, and so on. And look how fragile we
> are! One well-placed projectile would do us in, as would a determined
> microscopic organism! This is not what you would expect if God exists and
> created us all lovingly with infinite wisdom and infinite mercy -- but it
> is what you would expect if God does not exist and life on earth occured
> and evolved naturally, imperfections and all.
>
> Consider Christianity itself. It is divided into literally hundreds
> of denominations and sects, each having its own interpretation of the
> Bible and other scriptures, each claiming to have the One and Only
> Truth. Countless atrocities have been committed in the name of God;
> the Crusades, the Inquisitions, the Witch Hunts, to name but a few.
> The Bible itself is full of absurdities, errors and contradictions,
> which serve to confuse people. Even Christians who would deny the
> existence of these things are confused by them. Even more confusing
> is that Christianity has no solutions for the problems I've listed
> above. The best they can do is guess: "Perhaps God had this in mind,"
> or "Perhaps it's just not meant for us to know," but the fact is that
> theologians don't know. They are as confused as the rest of us; they
> are desperately trying to reconcile a cold, indifferent world with
> their faith because they can't imagine a life without their faith.
>
> I did believe in God once, Adam, just as you do now.
>
> And the day I stopped believing, the world finally started to make
> sense.
>
>
>
> Dave
Wow, Dave. Fucking awesome. Saved to disk.
-chib
--
wild(at our first)beasts uttered human words
--our second coming made stones sing like birds--
but o the starhushed silence which our third's
--e.e. cummings
Herk
> Michelle Malkin wrote:
>
> > This is truly one of the stupider questions we get from
> > theists all the time. If we knew what it would take to
> > convince us that a god existed, we would BE theists!
>
> Allright, why is it that I know what I would except as evidence for a unicorn ? ? ?
> even though I know what I would except, doesn't mean I believe in them ! same for
> atheists, like I said you have not thought your position through, and do not deserve
> to be called an atheist !
>
> > If you think you have that evidence,please present it.
> >
> > Michelle Malkin (Mickey)
Gee, Adam. I've seen pictures of unicorns. They really exist. They're a particular
breed of sheep. Kinda like you.
So you know what evidence you would accept for a unicorn. Aren't you special?
I'm more interested to know what "evidence" led you to believe in your god. Just
how critical are you? When you decided to believe in God, what evidence was enough for
you to take such a bold step?
Herk
Atheist #1627
from the Foxhole
John Hattan
>Michelle Malkin wrote:
>
>> The same for you.
>
>But this cannot be stated absolutely, since all evidence would need to be known to
>show there is no evidence. Therefore, since all evidence cannot be known by any one
>person, it is possible that evidence exists that supports theism.
Don't you think that if somebody had such evidence that they would've
posted it to the newsgroup by now? So far, all we've got is "there is
evidence" followed by a lot of obfuscation when asked to present it.
A tradition that, I must mention, you're proudly keeping alive.
John Hattan
>On Thu, 30 Dec 1999 19:00:49 +0800, Bateau
><Its...@Not-A-Real-Address.com> wrote:
>>Remember the good ol' days back in Thu, 30 Dec 1999 00:42:30 -0800 when
>>people like Pastor Stevo Levitson & His Lovely Wife Dottie
>><*st...@nospam.com> would proclaim....
>>>John 15:16 wrote:
>>>> maff91 wrote:
>>>> > There isn't any evidence god(s).
>>>>
>>>> You can't say that because you have not looked at all evidence in the
>>>> world. That isn't possible.
>>>
>>>Why do you not believe in Binky the 900 Ft Carrot God?
>>>
>>>All the universe points to him as its Creator?
>>
>>I don't think he's said he believes in the Christian God, and from this
>>guy's logic I'd say he probably is a Binkian.
>
>Hey, At least the Binkans don't harrass you on saturday mornings.
Evangelical Binkans do. Had one knocking on my door the other day. Gave
me a tract and a copy of "Evidence for Binky that Demands a Verdict".
Thing was full of logical fallacies that pointed to Binky as the supreme
ruler of the universe.
Denis Loubet
John 15:16 <theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote in message
news:386AF449...@biblelight.faithweb.com...
>
>
> Sylvan Korvus wrote:
>
> > For the same reason you don't believe in the Easter Bunny, Zeus, Grey
> > Aliens, Shiva, the thousand dollars you owe me, or the Invisible Pink
> > Unicorn.
>
> I am assuming because there is no evidence for them right ? I will ask
> you the same question I have asked other's, what kind of things would you
> accept, within reason, as evidence for God, what would you say? If you
> have nothing to offer, then you haven't thought your position through...
> and if you haven't done that, then can you honestly lay claim to the
> title 'atheist'?
Ooh. Here's a clear example of the dishonesty that is John 15:16.
Sylvan Korvus answered your trolling question in such a way that you either
had to honestly address why you don't believe in all the things mentioned,
or dishonestly change the subject and address a strawman assumption. Why are
we not surprised at the choice you made.
So, why do you not believe in the Invisible Pink Unicorn? I am assuming
because there is no evidence for her right ? What kind of things would you
accept, within reason, as evidence for the IPU? If you have nothing to
offer, then you haven't thought your position through... and if you haven't
done that, then can you honestly lay claim to the title 'aIPUist'?
Recognize your own "argument" there?
Good luck.
erikc
John 15:16 <theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote:
-- origin: alt.atheism:
>|Why do you not believe in God ?
Simple: When you put up some proof or even _evidence_ for this god
thingy's existance, we will consider talking. Otherwise, stick your
head back up your ass and continue contemplating your navel from the
inside.
--
Erikc (alt.atheist #002) | "An Fhirinne in aghaidh an tSaoil."
BAAWA Knight | "The Truth against the World."
ICQ 26776011 | -- Bardic Motto
If we don't believe in freedom of expression for
people we despise, we don't believe in it at all.
---- Noam Chomsky
Christianity summarised: "Kiss god's ass or he will burn yours"...
Remove "21" to respond.
xo...@my-deja.com
> Adam
>
>
Why do you care? Are you looking for validation for your beliefs among
atheists? Are you looking for coverts? Are you trying to understand
atheist nonbelief or your own belief?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
G & G
John 15:16 wrote in message <386AF449...@biblelight.faithweb.com>...
>
>
>Sylvan Korvus wrote:
>
>> For the same reason you don't believe in the Easter Bunny, Zeus, Grey
>> Aliens, Shiva, the thousand dollars you owe me, or the Invisible Pink
>> Unicorn.
>
>I am assuming because there is no evidence for them right ? I will ask
>you the same question I have asked other's, what kind of things would you
>accept, within reason, as evidence for God, what would you say? If you
>have nothing to offer, then you haven’t thought your position through...
>and if you haven’t done that, then can you honestly lay claim to the
>title ‘atheist’?
You are being obnoxious and disingenuous here. Many folks have stated quite
specifically what evidence of god's existence would be acceptable to them
yet you have simply ignored them. You have said that there is evidence of
god's existence but you haven't presented it in spite of all the requests to
do so. Are you going to continue this immature behavior? Or, are you going
to start addressing the issue that you brought up to begin this thread? By
being so intellectually dishonest then "can you honestly lay claim to the
title" 'christian'?
G & G
John 15:16 wrote in message <386B017E...@biblelight.faithweb.com>...
>
>
>Sylvan Korvus wrote:
>
>> That, among other things such as logical inconsistencies and absurdities.
>
>Such as ?
>
>> without me thinking it might be hallucination, self-delusion, or the
>> work of a powerful, technologically advanced alien.
>
>Is it possible that your criteria for evidence is not reasonable? Does your
>criteria put a requirement upon God (if He exists) that is not realistic?
For
>example do you want Him to appear before you in blazing glory? Even if that
>did happen, would you believe he existed or would youconsider it a
>hallucination of some sort or a trick played on you? How would you know?
Does
>your criteria put a requirement on logic that is not realistic? Do you want
>him to make square circles, or some other self-contradictory phenomena or
>make a rock so big He cannot pick it up?
>If God exists, He has created the laws of logic. He, then, cannot violate
>those laws.
>
OK! That's the last straw. PLONK
G & G
John 15:16 wrote in message <386AF5D2...@biblelight.faithweb.com>...
>
>
>maff91 wrote:
>
>> There isn't any evidence god(s).
>
>that proves God's existence, or at least supports his existence.
>Therefore, it is possible that God exists.
>
OK, I'll bite. You have said over and over that we can't possibly deny
god's existence because we have not seen all the evidence. What you haven't
said, however, is exactly what evidence you are referring to that we are not
aware of. So, now, if it wouldn't be too much trouble for you, please quite
quibbling on unimportant drivel and tell us what evidence you have that god
exists. You're the one who started this thread but you seem quite unwilling
to present any argument for your theist position. Instead, you just keep
throwing unimportant thoughts here and there, changing the original subject,
and deflecting direct questions. Are you a politician?
<snip>
G & G
Dave Holloway wrote in message ...
>In article <386AE04A...@biblelight.faithweb.com>, John 15:16
><theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote:
>
>> Why do you not believe in God ?
>
Bravo! Dave. You preach it brother, I'll turn the pages! Extremely well
written.
>
>--
>From the warped mind of Dave Holloway, alt.atheism Quotemeister, #1184
>Director of Defense and Sabotage (DDS), EAC Mars Division
>
>http://welcome.to/thinking
Dr. Necrophage
John 15:16 <theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote:
> Why do you not believe in God ?
What exactly is *your* precise definition for the word 'god' and what
unequivical empirical evidence I can put to test in a laboratory do *you
have* that your proposed 'god' thingy actually exists?
--
Dr. Necrophage
Cthulhu! The only clear choice to put an end to the Millenium.
- Brought to you by the Elder Party Cthulhu for President Campaign.
ath...@home.com
wrote:
>In article <386AE04A...@biblelight.faithweb.com>, John 15:16
><theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote:
>
>> Why do you not believe in God ?
>
>It's an honest question, and it deserves an honest answer. I just hope
>you'll read it with an open mind and an open heart.
>
< Hesitently snipped for brevity>
Very well done.
ath...@home.com#1554
>
>Dave
Graham Wanless
news:386AE04A...@biblelight.faithweb.com...
> Why do you not believe in God ?
I have seen no irrefutable evidence of god(s). If you have such evidence,
please show it to me.
--
Graham Wanless
graham...@home.com.god <-- get rid of god to email me
http://members.home.net/grahamwanless
===========================
"The power of accurate observation is called cynicism by those who
have not got it."
-- G. B. Shaw
"If the Bible and my brain are both the work of the same Infinite God,
whose fault is it that the book and my brain do not agree?"
--Robert G. Ingersoll
===========================
Mark Ginsberg
>
> lazarus wrote:
>
> > Because he doesn't exist.
>
> But, if a person asked you what kind of things you'd accept, within
reason,
> as evidence for God, what would you say? If you have nothing to offer,
then
> you haven't thought your position through... and if you haven't done that,
> then can you honestly lay claim to the title 'atheist'?
I have a test that I perform every once in a while. I put a small piece of
thread on my night stand under a glass before I go to bed. If the thread is
rotated 90 degrees when I get up I'll become a believer. So far the thread
has never moved. You would think God would be able to move a thread to help
me save my soul wouldn't you?
Any believers willing to stake their belief on my test?
Cabrutus
John 15:16 wrote:
> Cabrutus wrote:
>
> > Because (1) there's not enough reason to
>
> So there is a reason to believe in Him, right ? just not enough to
> believe in Him ? what would account as enough reason to believe in Him ?
Depends on what you mean by "reason." A sound deductive argument or a
strong inductive argument for His existence would be enough reason.
>
>
> > and (2) God probably doesn't
> > exist.
>
> So what your saying is you don't know ? your an agnostic ?
No. Atheism is about belief, and agnosticism is about knowledge. Most of
the atheists whose opinion I know prefer to define atheism as "the lack of
theism" or "the lack of belief in any gods" or something equivalent.
Because I know that God probably does not exist (and most versions of God
seem to be logically impossible), I cannot call myself an agnostic.
>
>
> > --
> > Cabrutus
> > locratz @ geocities . com | Ubi dubium ibi libertas.
> > 24.6.208.162/cabrutus/ | DALnet: #atheology
>
> Blessings,
> Adam
--
Cabrutus
locratz @ geocities . com | Ubi dubium ibi libertas.
24.6.208.162/cabrutus/ | DALnet: #atheology
Rachael Munns
> Why do you not believe in God ?
Wrong question. Why do you believe, Mr 15:16?
[Followups to atheism groups only]
--
Rachael
Rachael Munns
> But, if a person asked you what kind of things you'd accept, within reason,
> as evidence for God, what would you say?
You haven't defined "God". Until you do that, your question is
meaningless -- as meaningless as quoting bible verses at people
to whom the bible means no more than the Iliad.
--
Rachael
unig...@io.com
>
> I will ask
> you the same question I have asked other's, what kind of things would you
And I'll give you the same answer I give to every
theist who asks me that: Anything worth calling a
"god" could change me into a believer just by
wishing it to be so! I wouldn't have to see any
evidence. A god could reach into my brain and make
me believe anything it wanted me to.
And never mind the old excuse that "god won't do that
because it would violate our free will". Since I want
to believe things that are true, if a god exists then
I freely grant him permission to change me into a
believer.
...
Well? I'm waiting!
-Jeff Dee
--
"It is as morally bad not to care whether a thing is true
or not, so long as it makes you feel good, as it is not to
care how you got your money as long as you have got it."
-Edmund Way Teale, "Circle of the Seasons", 1950
unig...@io.com * http://www.io.com/unigames/index.html
* * * Knight of the BAAWA since 10/26/99 * * *
Terry
>>Why do you not believe in God ?
>"God was invented to explain mystery.
Really, what are God's origins. Somebody must have "invented" them. Myths you
say? This violates reason. Many atheists will tell you that they have looked
at reason and have found nothing to prove His existence. Aristotle 376 BC did
very well with it. The Five proofs that God Exists provided by St. Thomas
Aquinas also are a solid testament to His existence as one would go.
Aristotle's proof of "Contingency" not only gives proof of God , but also
reveals God's Nature to us The concept for a Infinite God I mean? "The
Imagination" has nothing to say about weather an Infinite God exists or not. As
the imigination has no physical reference to develop its "Picture". Intellect
does have something to say about weather God can exist. The intellect tests
things to see if something is possible or not. If it is not possible it is
considered impossible (not to be confused with incomprehensible)..that is it
means nothing like a five sided square. By definition a five sided square does
not exist. A less trained atheist would ask "Is there anything so heavy that
God created that He Himself can not lift it", in the happy belief that, what
ever answer we give that we shall admit that God we have found something that
God can not do. but the question itself is meaningless: a weight that an
omnipotent Being can not lift is a complete contradiction in terms, as is the 5
sided square. in either case the words are in fact real english words, but used
together they cancel each other out! a contridiction in terms are not just
impossible, inconceivable, and unimaginable, but they are in fact nothing (do
not exist). The intellectual and Religious Irony that is truth isa that God
created everything (existance) out of nothingness (non-existance). The trouble
with atheists is that they really don't want to know the truth. We do not fear
truth as God is Truth Itself!
God is always
>invented to explain those things that you do not
>understand. Now, when you finally discover how
>something works, you get some laws which you're
>taking away from God; you don't need him anymore.
>But you need him for the other mysteries. So
>therefore you leave him to create the universe
>because we haven't figured that out yet; you need
>him for understanding those things which you don't
>believe the laws will explain, such as consciousness,
>or why you only live to a certain length of time--
>life and death--stuff like that. God is always
>associated with those things that you do not
>understand. Therefore I don't think that the laws
>can be considered to be like God because they have
>been figured out".
>
>- Richard Feynman
>http://feynman.com/online/quotes.htm
Where to begin with the above. If I only had time. People like Richard, can
provide no real answers to reality. They see everything in terms of
probability and random order. They account for our life on this planet as a
cosmic accident. The dismiss everything for natural selection and various
selction processes. Theory after theory.."we simple live in a somewhat
sophisticated animal society and religion is all bunk to explain what is
unknown..as of yet?" conjecture and healthy leaps of faith. Their imagination
works good and hard. Truly they lose the forrest through the trees.
God Bless
Terry
lynx
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 29 Dec 1999 22:53:52 -0800, John 15:16
<theEv...@biblelight.faithweb.com> wrote:
>Sylvan Korvus wrote:
>>That, among other things such as logical inconsistencies and absurdities.
>Such as ?
i can't speak for mr. Korvus, but i'd say the book of genesis is absurd.
omniattributes are logically inconsistent. the notion of worship doesn't
make much sense to me, either - from the god's point of view, what's the
point of it?
>>If your god exists, then he knows precisely what will convince me,
>>without me thinking it might be hallucination, self-delusion, or the
>>work of a powerful, technologically advanced alien.
>Is it possible that your criteria for evidence is not reasonable?
maybe, but i doubt it. deities are an unusually extraordinary claim;
evidence to be presented for it should be very extraordinary also.
>Does your
>criteria put a requirement upon God (if He exists) that is not realistic?
god, if extant, should be omnipotent and omniscient - so his believers
keep telling me, anyway. no demand of him could possibly be unrealistic.
>For example do you want Him to appear before you in blazing glory?
it *would* be nice, yes. and why not? would it really be all that hard
on him?
- --
PGP/GnuPG key (ID 1024D/BFE0D6D0) available from keyservers everywhere
"I've lived too long with pain. I won't know who I am without it."
-- _Ender's Game_, Orson Scott Card
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.0 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE4a5psNfZCE7/g1tARAlb4AJ9qmpspmWRyUG6Vb6yMtfeALh3E8wCgrE+H
FobqJm1CpPvTsNi272EHzt0=
=vKB6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Sylvan Korvus
>Since you cannot know all evidence, it is possible that evidence exists
>that proves God's existence, or at least supports his existence.
>Therefore, it is possible that God exists.
Essentially, you are saying the following:
"For any hypothetical entity X, it is impossible to perform an
exhaustive empirical search disproving the existence of X. Therefore,
the existence of X should be considered possible."
By this logic however, all X's are equally possible, and your god is
just one of an infinite set of entities for which there is a
"possibility" of existence. Fortunately, we don't have to live our lives
worried about every possible X, or any of them; the burden of proof lies
on the person suggesting that an X exists. Until evidence for an X is
forthcoming, we can rightfully and reasonably assume that the case for X
is not made, and so X is either meaningless, or nonexistent.
Essentially what you're doing is misinterpreting Sagan's quote "absense
of evidence is not evidence of absense". There is no reason to even
consider the existence of something until evidence for it is found.
--
Sylvan Korvus ~ designer ~ syl...@nospam.home.com
Be seeing you.
Elf Sternberg
>Even if that did happen, would you believe he existed or would
>youconsider it a hallucination of some sort or a trick played on you?
>How would you know?
That is precisely the argument we put to you, John. How do
you continue to maintain that "god exists" when you cannot, even to
yourself, prove that any experiences you have had that confirm you
belief are anything but a hallucination of trick of psychology?
Elf
--
Elf M. Sternberg, rational romantic mystic cynical idealist
MST3K - Help save the saving grace of television.
A.A 1493 http://www.halcyon.com/elf/
Elf Sternberg
>> Why don't you believe in Santa Claus?
>He doesn't and there is evidence he doesn't ! would you like to here it ?
Sure. I'd love to see what evidence you have that Santa
doesn't exist.
Elf Sternberg
>Why do you not believe in God ?
First, because the universe I inhabit seems to run in an
orderly fashion without the need for outside interference. If there
is no need for supervision, there seem to be no reason to suspect
supervision was ever necessary.
Second, because the popular assesment of "God" is one of
omnipotence, omniscience, and moral perfection. To me, these for an
incoherent set of qualities when viewed against the immoral backdrop
of the world in which we live.
Third, because there exist believers with wildly differing and
mutually exclusive establishments of what "God" means. each is
limited by geographic locale; no supernatural overlap exists between
faiths, and the cross-cultural similarities are wholly the work of
secular interaction rather than divine influence. With so many
contentious establishments, each claiming that all of the others are
somehow wrong, the safest bet is that you are *all* wrong.