I have been gone for awhile from here, but I am back. I would like to see any thiest in here try to prove their religion to me. I am an athiest, but if you prove me wrong, I will convert. I wish I could expect the same in return although I doubt it. If you can't prove yourself to me, I do not understand how you could hold these beliefs.
I was going to post a sarcastic reply raising one of the more illustrious posters here at sciforums to deityhood, I decided this would be infantile and pointless and reflect badly on me. I did it anyway... I have recently turned over a new leaf. I once was an athiest like yourself. Now I have come to know the truth. Xev is the Goddess incarnate on earth. No mortal being could contain such intelligence, wit, and sarcasm in one vessel without imploding. Because Xev exists there is a Goddess, I worship Xev.
"I would like to see any thiest in here try to prove their religion to me." ------------------------------------ I cannot speak for other religions, however, Christianity has a bevy of evidence supporting it. Eyewitness testimonies (corroborated by New Testament writers) that is historically accurate and archeologically consistent, fulfilled prophecies, etc. would be a couple of examples. If you say that this is not valid evidence, then why is it not valid? Perhaps, we would need to discuss what would constitute sufficient evidence for you and then proceed to see if your criteria are reasonable and your methodology of examination is objective. "I am an athiest, but if you prove me wrong, I will convert." -------------------------------------- No, you won't. Your presuppositions will not allow you to accurately and objectively examine the evidences supporting the existence of God. "If you can't prove yourself to me, I do not understand how you could hold these beliefs." --------------------------------------- Christians do not have to prove anything to you, or anyone else. You are correct about one thing, though: as long as you hold onto your presuppositions that there is no God, you CANNOT understand the gospel of Jesus Christ. The Bible tells you that God does not inhabit unholy vessels. ><>
Stu, I disbelieve in the existence of gods. What more proof can there be? You realize your question is as meaningless as asking someone to prove that they don’t like peanut butter. I think what you really mean is that you’d like to see someone prove that god(s) do not exist. But why would anyone want to do that? People just do not go around trying to prove things do not exist. Imagine the chaos of everyone trying to disprove all the fictional characters that people have imagined over time. Non-belief or disbelief in gods is simply a statement that theist CLAIMS for a god are unconvincing. And until theists can show that such claims are something more than imaginative fiction then there is no reason for anyone to believe them. It is the theists who have made claims for a god and the onus is always on those making a claim to prove it if they want anyone to believe them. There is never any onus on anyone to disprove the claims made by others. Your complete inability to show that a god exists is more than adequate proof of why everyone should not believe your claims.
Who is Jesus Christ? After reading inspector's last post, I request the following information: Christians: I would like to know your views on who Jesus Christ is, and why it is different from that of the Jews. More importantly, explain why you worship Jesus Christ, and how this should not be considered worshipping more than one God. Jews: Please express why your religion does not accept Jesus Christ as a God (or any more the son of God than the rest of us.). Explain the main differences between Christianity and Judaism (anyone may explain this if they know). Atheists/Agnostics: Explain why you do not believe Jesus Christ was sent by God to pay for man's sins, etc. Explain why you do not believe in God, for that matter. For clarification, I fall into the latter group. Any input would be appreciated.
Stu, Why? Any scientist would certainly laugh if they were asked to believe something without seeing support for a claim. Disbelievers are not making claims, but theists do.
Stu: Actually, I think it makes a lot of sense, Stu. You want to convert to Atheism/Agnosticism? It's easy. If you do not know if God exists or not, and you seek proof (or you aren't convinced enough to believe), you would fall into the agnostic category. If you do not believe in your God (or any God/s, for that matter), and do not care to find out (or will not believe in a God no matter what), you would fall into the atheist category. How can I prove to you that I DON'T believe that the evidence supports a God? I guess I could prove it to you by telling you that I don't pray to God. I don't have a big book to read to tell me not to believe. I have my brain, that tells me that there is no unmistakable proof that a God exists. I could tell you that I read passages from the Bible, and it does not prove to me that a God exists. My mind (or conscience, or common sense) tells me that the Bible is a book that was written by men. According to the Bible, men are not perfect, and routinely do things that God does not want them to. In the Bible, God created man. In the Bible, man is not perfect. Therefore, God created man to be imperfect (or He screwed up). So, my mind again tells me that if man says God created man, and man is not perfect, yet God lets man speak God's word, chances are man messed up God's word. And, God hasn't spoken to me, or given me signs that prove He exists. He doesn't have to speak to me personally. Perfroming miracles in malls would be a good idea. Reach a lot of people at once. I ocassionally go to malls. If there is a God, I'm sure He knows this...
As an athiest, I'm not gonna bother answering any of the question given to athiests, there's no point
Sorry Thor, you are right. It's obvious why atheists/agnostics do not believe in God. Bottom line they either need proof, or don't care at all. My questions should be more focused towards Christians and Jews.
Inspector, None of this claimed evidence has passed the tests specified by using the scientific method. If you believe I am wrong then please show such documented results. Science has proven itself repeatedly as a reliable method for the establishment of knowledge. Religions usually reject the scientific approach because it never proves what they want to hear. Construct an experiment under strict scientific conditions that can show that a god exists. No that is false. There are instances where atheists have become religious and religionists have become atheistic. You cannot claim that someone will definitely not be convinced by convincing evidence. This is again empty tactics that indicate you don’t have any convincing evidence. Yes they do if they want non-believers to believe them. It is the evangelical nature of Christianity to attempt to convince others of their claims. The fact that you can’t convince anyone who presents you with hard questions is a strong indication of the weakness of your case. This is ludicrous. Your claim is that one has to feel convinced first before they can be convinced. This is irrational gibberish in an attempt to overcome your problem that you can’t convince people by any means other than asking them to believe you anyway.
WOOHOO!! I got something right!! In yer face Partay!!Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Rock On Thor
Christopher argues for the sake of hearing himself/herself/itself argue. He/She/It has no foundation of knowledge regarding Christianity and, therefore, is not qualified to comment on a professional level on it's contents. "In the Bible, God created man. In the Bible, man is not perfect. Therefore, God created man to be imperfect (or He screwed up)." ------------------------------------------------------ You have much to learn, grasshopper. For the record, In the Bible, God created man PERFECT. In the Bible, man became imperfect after the introduction of SIN. Therefore, God sent his Son to REDEEM man's sinful nature. The interesting thing about atheism is that most atheists are ignorant regarding the Bible and it's contents. Most have never read even the New Testament, let alone the entire book. Yet, they attempt to refute the Bible without having any appertaining knowledge. Learning atheism is simple because it is the same parrot talk time after time after time............. ><>
There's nothing simple about being an athiest, not in my experience. Shunned by the elitist Christians Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! About the Parrot talk, I think its the over way Erm...there's a reason for that you know
Vakemp, That is an atheist. Well that is one form of atheism but not the most typical, and involves a whole stack of variations. There are only two conditions, either someone believes in a god or one does not. One is either an atheist or one is a theist, there is no middle ground. If one has doubts then clearly they do not believe and are therefore atheistic. Atheism is a lack of belief in a god or gods and is known more precisely as weak atheism. Those who hold a definite belief that a god or gods do not exist are more precisely known as strong atheists. A weak atheist may indeed be looking for a god or is not convinced that a god exists, but all the time they are not convinced then they are not theistic and must therefore be an atheist.
Inspector, It looks like this person you are referring to has really given you a challenge that is beyond your ability to respond in a respectful manner such that you must resort to attempts at ridiculing them. I believe this is a well known political tactic. Attempt to discredit an opponent because you have no valid arguments of your own.
Cris, No, it's agnostic. Courtesy, Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary: http://www.m-w.com/home.htm Agnostic- Main Entry: 1ag·nos·tic Pronunciation: ag-'näs-tik, &g- Function: noun Etymology: Greek agnOstos unknown, unknowable, from a- + gnOstos known, from gignOskein to know -- more at KNOW Date: 1869 : a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown and prob. unknowable; broadly : one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god. I really didn't want to define the word verbatim like I did in the other post, but oh well...
"None of this claimed evidence has passed the tests specified by using the scientific method. If you believe I am wrong then please show such documented results." -------------------------------------- 'Evidence' does not have to pass scientific tests to be concluded as 'evidence'. Are eyewitness testimonies admitted in a court of law as 'evidence'? "Construct an experiment under strict scientific conditions that can show that a god exists." ---------------------------------------- Okay. First, you construct an experiment, for me, under strict scientific conditions that can show that a 'thought' exits. or You construct an experiment, for me, under strict scientific conditions that can show that a 'feeling' exists. Do you see the error in your logic? Not everything that exists can be validated by scientific scrutiny, much to the dismay of your science gods. "It is the evangelical nature of Christianity to attempt to convince others of their claims." --------------------------------------- Indeed, Christians are instructed to give accounts for their beliefs (1 Peter 3:15). My words cannot save you, only Jesus can do that. However, if you choose to deny God's existence, you will be held accountable. I am here more for the entertainment, which you consistently provide. "Your claim is that one has to feel convinced first before they can be convinced." ------------------------------------------ One is saved by His grace through faith in Him. ><>
Inspector, Who created sin? If God created all, then He created sin, too. If God knows all, He knew man would sin. And again, if God created all, He could've created a world free of sin. So, who created this, this, SIN!
Cris, ...again, from a dictionary: Atheist- Main Entry: athe·ist Pronunciation: 'A-thE-ist Function: noun Date: 1571 : one who denies the existence of God Although your definitions of strong-atheist/weak-atheist are convincing, I like to go by what many accept as linguistic standards...hence the dictionary. There's a difference between: There is no God and There is no proof of God I'm agnostic because I think there's a possibility God exists...I just have been given no proof. If I said God doesn't exist, then I would be atheist.
inspector Are eyewitness testimonies admitted in a court of law? Not really. Eyewitness testimonies are categorically inadmissible and must be considered by the judge case-by-case. A judge must consider the testimony if offered but may dismiss it on the grounds that it would not be helpful to the jury. In any case, circumstantial evidence has jurisdiction over eyewitness testimony since it is admissible for every case. Either way, the decision is left to the jurors who must be convinced of the evidence whether it eyewitness testimony, circumstantial evidence or empirical evidence. In the case of the resurrection, we can consider all of us judge and jury. Therefore, we find that the eyewitness testimony may be used in this case. Please present your eyewitness testimony that we may all judge its credibility.
