nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

How do you convince people god exists?

ILoveYourVibes

How do you in history?

And how do you do it now?

With all the evidence etc.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

robindch

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Do you think this is some amazing Gotcha moment and people here will think gosh, I never thought of it like that - my lack of belief is a belief therefore I believe and if I believe I must believe in the existence of God?

As somebody once said, if your only tool is a hammer, then every problem looks like a nail.

Bannasidhe

SouthWesterly wrote: »

So you don't believe that God doesn't exist.
That leaves 2 options.
1. You don't know, whether God exists or no... Agnostic
2. You believe God exists but refuse to acknowledge that existence.

But if I was really to the letter, since you refer to God as "she", you're referring to a different entity that the one I refer to. Therefore you've not answered my original point.

What exactly are you trying to achieve with this frankly schoolyard tactic of word twisting and semantics crushing?

Do you think this is some amazing Gotcha moment and people here will think gosh, I never thought of it like that - my lack of belief is a belief therefore I believe and if I believe I must believe in the existence of God?

It isn't.

smacl

SouthWesterly wrote: »

So you don't believe that God doesn't exist.
That leaves 2 options.
1. You don't know, whether God exists or no... Agnostic
2. You believe God exists but refuse to acknowledge that existence.

Sorry, but that is flawed logic. If I say that "I don't believe God exists" what that means is that I have no reason to believe that god exists, there being no substantive or strong evidence to support such an assertion, but in the highly unlikely case that such evidence presents itself I will change my position. Note that you can substitute any piece of mythology, pseudoscience or random unevidenced fantasy for God in this argument and it remains the same.

The difference between saying "I don't believe God exists" and "I believe God doesn't exist" is more than just semantic. The former is not a statement of belief, the latter is. For following well worn chart illustrates this, where my position above is one of moderate atheism

atheist%2Bscale.png

karlitob

SouthWesterly wrote: »

So you don't believe that God doesn't exist.
That leaves 2 options.
1. You don't know, whether God exists or no... Agnostic
2. You believe God exists but refuse to acknowledge that existence.
.

So you don't believe that Pink Unicorns exist.
That leaves 2 options.
1. You don't know, whether Pink Unicorns exists or no... Agnostic
2. You believe Pink Unicorns exists but refuse to acknowledge that existence.

[Deleted User]

Pherekydes wrote: »

I do NOT believe that she does exist.

So you don't believe that God doesn't exist.
That leaves 2 options.
1. You don't know, whether God exists or no... Agnostic
2. You believe God exists but refuse to acknowledge that existence.

But if I was really to the letter, since you refer to God as "she", you're referring to a different entity that the one I refer to. Therefore you've not answered my original point.

nozzferrahhtoo

SouthWesterly wrote: »

Examine the teachings of Jesus Christ and obey them, then you've a different story and effect in the world.

I think that is an awful idea. To examine one human being and live exactly like them or "obey" them. We are enlightened and educated humans and get to do more than that. We get to look back at ALL the characters from our history, and their ideas, and construct a world view based on the best of them. INCLUDING the Nazarene.

SouthWesterly wrote: »

Btw, Jesus brought it further by saying hate was the same as murder. Lust, as adultery.

That is one of the reasons I would not emulate him entirely. I agree with some of his ideas. I disagree with others. I would STRONGLY disagree with the above for example. The claims above parse as complete nonsense to me.

Worse, he appeared to espouse a position against thought crime. Likening thoughts internally of things like lust and desire, to actual adultery. That is thought crime.

No way, no how, no thanks. As the German song for children says "Die Gedanken sind frei". I can think and feel whatever the hell I like. My thoughts and feelings are not crimes. Nor are they immoral. It is what I DO with my thoughts and emotions and desires that define me as a moral being.

What Christianity appears to be doing is creating an imaginary disease and a cure for that disease at the same time. A nice marketing ploy. If you convince people their perfectly natural thoughts and desires are some how thought crime, and then sell following the path of this Jesus guy as salvation from that..... that's a marketing move. Nothing more.

SouthWesterly wrote: »

Your lack of faith is as much faith like it or not. No atheist has ever been able to proved to me that God doesn't exist, despite my asking.

Often you will find that this is because you are asking them to prove a position they neither hold, nor have espoused.

I am not sure why we periodically get theists coming into this forum to tell us what we think. We want to hear what YOU think, that is how conversation works. But when you walk in and tell us what we think.... and then disagree with someone when they tell you what they actually think..... then you are not conversing. You are straw manning, misrepresenting, and engaging in bad faith. Is that you emulating Jesus somehow? If so, you can keep it.

My position is not that I claim a god does not exist. My position is that I have never seen a shred of argument, evidence, data or reasons to suggest one DOES exist so I A) Do not believe there is one and

proceed in life under the rubric that one does not exist.

None of that is me claiming / believing there is no god. It is me operating without a belief in god. You would do well to learn the difference.

Or you could continue to pretend to know what people think, better than they themselves do. Unsure how far / what that will get you however.

Pherekydes

SouthWesterly wrote: »

You believe God doesn't exist.

I do NOT believe that she does exist.

nthclare

Getting back to the original post.

There's ways of convincing people that they might believe you that God exists.

Take someone who's vulnerable and they're at rock bottom, such as an addict, alcoholic or just in plain old trouble and locked up in jail.

They're introduced to Religion , told if they do certain rituals and believe in a diety their lives will prosper on an enhanced level, nothing to do with a better materialistic lifestyle but more towards peace of mind and self acceptance.

Now they may end up leading a more trouble free lifestyle and let go of their past and build bridges and gain a meaningful standing in society.

Does someone need a God to better themselves, of course they don't there's a lot of different ways of getting help and learn how to help themselves and redeem their character.

I'm sure a lot of Atheists here know more about religion and Christianity than myself and some Christians that post here.
And ye are probably blue in the face from debating about the existence of God.
That's ok too.

There's probably a lot of money to be made in America by being a superstar pastor and spouting lies to the masse's, many of us could do it.
All it takes is courage and confidence, but none of ye would lie to people obviously.

Organised religion is basically an organisation, there's always a leader and the majority of the time anyone who leads are more than likely control freaks and have alterior motives.

So there's certain people who can be convinced that something that doesn't exist exists.

Don't mind your Russell's teapot or spaghetti monster analogies, that's not going to work with a lot of Theists.

The only way to salvation from the God head is self realization that there's no bearded man in the sky listening in or watching you constantly.

nozzferrahhtoo

antiskeptic wrote: »

The size of the IF isn't established by it's failure to jump through an arbitrary hoop.

There is nothing arbitrary about it. It is key. Either such things have happened or they have not. If you can not establish any such thing has EVER happened, then it is not admissible as anything other than navel gazing fantasy.

I have no issue with the claim you made. If a god reveals itself to a person that person's position on the existence of that god is going to be affected. If something happens that the person merely parses as a god revealing itself however, the effect is likely to be the same.

So unless we can show in any way whatsoever a god actually has done this, then pointing out the "IF" in your statement is anything but arbitrary. We have zero way to show that it was the former, not the latter, that has occurred. And worse, we have many many examples of the latter happening to our species and zero examples of the former.

This is an issue for your position on the existence of god, not mine.

antiskeptic wrote: »

You do know that it is only your claim about your philosophies that holds you afloat? They aren't to be proven. And philosophies and religions have a tendency to shape society. And so it's not quite a matter of live at let live. Is it.

You are doing your usual vague dodge stuff here. You are complaining about my philosophies and positions without actually saying which view or position you are discussing. So you are flinging spears against which there is no defence given no one, probably not even yourself, knows what you are flinging them at.

If you have an issue with a specific claim or position I have espoused then have the decency to be clear about which one it is when you are attacking it, so I know what I am responding to. The text from you above says precisely nothing, about anything. It is like the Dawkins discussion which you have seemingly now left. You were attacking positions YOU claimed he held while adamantly refusing to offer any actual specifics so we could see what it was you (thought you) were attacking.

It is a very disingenuous, dishonest, and bad faith way to communicate and I really wish you would stop doing it.

antiskeptic wrote: »

We? We the folk who have the truth or some such?

"We" as in anyone who has identified a harm is in play and feels motivated to remove it. This can, and hopefully should, include the believer themselves. If they themselves believe something and this belief manifests in their world, or the world around them, as a genuine harm.... then the "we" of which I speak can and I hope would include that believer too.

As I said personal faith should remain personal, both in terms of the person who believes it and the people who do not, until such time as a genuine harm arises. The problem many/most/all atheists seem to have, especially in activist organisations like Atheist Ireland.... is not with the beliefs themselves but in how they manifest in our world and how they are used.

antiskeptic wrote: »

My approach - and it won't be the first time you will have heard me say it - is to stalemate.

That would certainly explain the motivation behind the "disingenuous, dishonest, and bad faith way to communicate" I referred to above so it is nice of you to openly admit this. You basically admit you have no interest in open honest conversation. That your entire approach to conversation is to stale mate it. That says everything about you, and nothing about anyone else thankfully. Stalemating a conversation is.... to me at least.... indistinguishable from soap boxing however which is, as you know, against the forum charter here. So I will try to progress the conversation rather than stale mate it, so I at least do not fall foul of the mods.

antiskeptic wrote: »

You skip past that with your axe to grind

I have no such axe that I am aware of. So you are straw manning again, likely just to stalemate. My only interest is in discourse, honesty, and truth. The former two being the best ways I know of to attain the latter one. All I want to know is what is true about the universe, our world, and our existence in it. I seek tools that are most likely to assist me in that endeavour, and I reject tools that are least likely to assist.

Merely making things up, declaring them to be true by default, declaring that everyone else knows they are true by default, and then setting myself against the "sceptic" of my asserted truths..... is not an approach I can accept. It is YOUR approach demonstrably. But it is not an approach I have ever seen discern any actual truth about reality and so it is not a tool I seek to adopt.

The only one who has an axe to grind therefore is you. It is right there in your username. You have an axe to grind in being "Anti" anyone who is sceptical of YOUR asserted and declared by fiat truths.

antiskeptic wrote: »

Does it mean God doesn't exist? No it does not.

Wonderful therefore that I, and pretty much no one else on this thread, appears to be claiming god does not exist then. Just that we have seen ZERO (least of all from you) argument, evidence, data or reasoning that suggests it does.

The only people, as you can see from a user nearly directly above me, claiming god does not exist is the occasional theists who wanders in to claim it vicariously on our behalf by putting words in our mouth and claiming to know what we think/believe better than we know it ourselves.

Does it mean any thing at all. No it does not.

karlitob

Pherekydes wrote: »

No. Stop misrepresenting my position. Lack of faith is not faith. Lack of belief is not belief.

I do not believe god exists. I am not convinced that she exists.

You are deliberately misrepresenting my position.

“You don’t have enough faith,” Jesus told them. “I tell you the truth, if you had faith even as small as a mustard seed, you could say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it would move. Nothing would be impossible.” — Matthew 17:20

Come on now. Have you not moved any mountains recently with your faith in the absence of a god - any god. Or does your ungodly (or is it non-godly) faith not allow mustard seed mountain moving?

karlitob

SouthWesterly wrote: »

You adamantly believe a negative. No misrepresentation there. You believe God doesn't exist.

You don’t believe in pink unicorns. Is your lack of belief in pink unicorns - your faith in their non-existence - the same as your faith in your god?

[Deleted User]

Pherekydes wrote: »

No. Stop misrepresenting my position. Lack of faith is not faith. Lack of belief is not belief.

I do not believe god exists. I am not convinced that she exists.

You are deliberately misrepresenting my position.

You adamantly believe a negative. No misrepresentation there. You believe God doesn't exist.

Pherekydes

SouthWesterly wrote: »

Faith is belief. You believe and are convinced that God doesn't exist. That's nothing but faith.

No. Stop misrepresenting my position. Lack of faith is not faith. Lack of belief is not belief.

I do not believe god exists. I am not convinced that she exists.

You are deliberately misrepresenting my position.

nthclare

karlitob wrote: »

What you said was so mad that I thought it must be trolling. You’ll also see that I apologised to the mod where I was wrong - something religions tend not to do.

Regardless, it’s not disrespectful to say I don’t know what your point is.

What are you trying to say about poultergeists?

I didn't say anything about poultergeists, but from where I'm standing it sounds like a type of poultry or a hybrid goose or something lol

What you said was so mad that I thought it was trolling, maybe I'm slightly dyslexic but can you put that in layman's terms please ?

I never said that it's disrespectful about you not knowing what my point is.

There's a glitch in communication here I think.

So you apologize to the mod.

Fair play, what did you do to the moderator, to have to apologize ?

[Deleted User]

karlitob wrote: »

Come on - you know you can’t prove a negative.

No Christian/Muslim/Jew/Miscellaneous has ever be able to prove to me that Pink Unicorns don’t exists, DESPITE my asking.

It’s why you can’t ‘prove’ innocence, only not guilty.

And besides, what sort of ego do you have to think it’s someones job to ‘prove’ to you that you’re made up god is not real. Why don’t you ask why don’t believe in Zeus? He had the same fervent believers as you do in your god. Surely he’s real and you’ve been praying to the wrong god all these years.

I can tell you about Him. About His Characteristics, what He's done, how He's changed my life. I can live according to the ways He has said I should walk and hopefully you'll see something of what I've experienced. Can I show you God like I would a puppy.. No.

Why am I asking you to prove a negative? You positively say God doesn't exist. Prove it!

I never decided which commandments were important and which aren't. They all are but some are our relationship to Him. Others our relationship to other people. You'll see those ones much quicker than the first 3.

[Deleted User]

Pherekydes wrote: »

Lack of faith is faith?

Okay then.

Do you believe in Frigg?

(The one true god)

Faith is belief. You believe and are convinced that God doesn't exist. That's nothing but faith.

As for Frigg, though she was cute in the Almighty Johnsons, I prefer the FSM ( pubh)

karlitob

nthclare wrote: »

Great, I'm happy enough with that conclusion.
We're on solid ground now.

I find it hard to figure myself out,so it's good to know I've provided you with a stencil to prove your own point and there's more than two ways to sharpen a hook...to catch a fish.

I'm kind of perplexed as to why we set off respectfully discussing a subject and then out of nowhere you suggest I'm a trool.

I didn't undermine any of your post's.

Is it because I said something about unsolved mysteries and other things that are way out there ?

Or is it something else ?

What you said was so mad that I thought it must be trolling. You’ll also see that I apologised to the mod where I was wrong - something religions tend not to do.

Regardless, it’s not disrespectful to say I don’t know what your point is.

What are you trying to say about poultergeists?

karlitob

SouthWesterly wrote: »

Youre entitled to your opinion.
what I'm saying is that if someone tells me their a Christian then I want to see what that word entails being out worked in their lives
If I don't see it I'll be as disbelieving as any atheist on this forum.

Btw, Jesus brought it further by saying hate was the same as murder. Lust, as adultery.
Didn't forget any of the commandments, just referred to those that effected those around us.

So you’ve decided which commandments are the important ones?

But still not speaking to the point - Two of your gods commandments (not mine) are thought crimes. What kind of god polices your mind?

Why does your god have an inferiority complex so much so that he made your first two commandments as a reminder to worship him. Seems strangely Vulnerable.

And lastly, if someone tells me that they don’t steal, lie or murder - I see them as a normal human being with inherent and innate morality.

karlitob

SouthWesterly wrote: »

No atheist has ever been able to proved to me that God doesn't exist, despite my asking.

Come on - you know you can’t prove a negative.

No Christian/Muslim/Jew/Miscellaneous has ever be able to prove to me that Pink Unicorns don’t exists, DESPITE my asking.

It’s why you can’t ‘prove’ innocence, only not guilty.

And besides, what sort of ego do you have to think it’s someones job to ‘prove’ to you that you’re made up god is not real. Why don’t you ask why don’t believe in Zeus? He had the same fervent believers as you do in your god. Surely he’s real and you’ve been praying to the wrong god all these years.

karlitob

SouthWesterly wrote: »

Faith in the absence of God without any proof of same and then being so convinced of its truth that everyone else is wrong.

Self belief to the extent that a supernatural entity isn't required or needed.

Then you’re the same as me. You’re just as much an atheist as I as you apply these ‘tenets’ to Zeus and Odin or any of the other 1000s of gods.

But seriously, you can apply those same ‘tenets’ to pink unicorns, or anything that there’s no evidence for.

Marhay70

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

Well we had the moving statues in the 80s

There was a guy on Radio with Dermot Monteith a few weeks ago who said he was in regular contact with fairies, on the Cooley Peninsula I think it was. Very insistent he was, no accounting for what people hear and see.:)

Pherekydes

SouthWesterly wrote: »

Whats the number of posts got to so with it?
I've over 15k posts on boards.
Your lack of faith is as much faith like it or not. No atheist has ever been able to proved to me that God doesn't exist, despite my asking.

Lack of faith is faith?

Okay then.

Do you believe in Frigg?

(The one true god)

Liamo57

No one knows if any God exists and it doesnt matter a fuke to anyone about what people believe in. Thats what caused most strife in the world. Women in the Muslim world are treated like shtie, wearing head scarves for fuke sake, why dont men wear scarves, the fukers

[Deleted User]

Pherekydes wrote: »

I'd just like to point out that this is post #666 of this poster.

Do you believe in Frigg?

This is your position:

Faith in the presence of gods without any proof of same and then being so convinced of its truth that everyone else is wrong.

You believe in a god. We don't. It's that simple. The faith required is all on your side.

Whats the number of posts got to so with it?
I've over 15k posts on boards.
Your lack of faith is as much faith like it or not. No atheist has ever been able to proved to me that God doesn't exist, despite my asking.

Pherekydes

SouthWesterly wrote: »

Faith in the absence of God without any proof of same and then being so convinced of its truth that everyone else is wrong.

Self belief to the extent that a supernatural entity isn't required or needed.

I'd just like to point out that this is post #666 of this poster.

Do you believe in Frigg?

This is your position:

Faith in the presence of gods without any proof of same and then being so convinced of its truth that everyone else is wrong.

You believe in a god. We don't. It's that simple. The faith required is all on your side.

[Deleted User]

karlitob wrote: »

My best favourite argument. Since your presume that a magic man in the sky is the source of morality, and that all good things come from him or her or whatever pronoun they wish to be known by. Therefore, you condescend that I can believe whatever I want but really if I don’t murder someone then it’s must be god.

I’ve news for you. Morality is not sourced from a made up man in the sky.

You also forgot a few other commandments
- though shalt not have other gods before me
- though shaky not have strange idols.

For the creator of the universe, he (or she or they) must have a bit of an inferiority complex that the first two commandments - his 10 rules for living relate to this.

Not to mention the thought crime - though shalt not covet they neighbours wife and thy neighbours goods.

So I’m happy not to steal, lie or murder (the commandment is murder and not killing). And you can worry about a magic man policing your thoughts.

Youre entitled to your opinion.
what I'm saying is that if someone tells me their a Christian then I want to see what that word entails being out worked in their lives
If I don't see it I'll be as disbelieving as any atheist on this forum.

Btw, Jesus brought it further by saying hate was the same as murder. Lust, as adultery.
Didn't forget any of the commandments, just referred to those that effected those around us.

nthclare

karlitob wrote: »

I’m not sure what your point is but you’re certainly proving mine.

Great, I'm happy enough with that conclusion.
We're on solid ground now.

I find it hard to figure myself out,so it's good to know I've provided you with a stencil to prove your own point and there's more than two ways to sharpen a hook...to catch a fish.

I'm kind of perplexed as to why we set off respectfully discussing a subject and then out of nowhere you suggest I'm a trool.

I didn't undermine any of your post's.

Is it because I said something about unsolved mysteries and other things that are way out there ?

Or is it something else ?

[Deleted User]

smacl wrote: »

Really, care to list those tenets for us?

Faith in the absence of God without any proof of same and then being so convinced of its truth that everyone else is wrong.

Self belief to the extent that a supernatural entity isn't required or needed.

karlitob

nthclare wrote: »

People also think statue's and pictures are watching them too.

People think about a lot of things.

People all kinds of strange things, poltergeists, strange sounds in the sky.
Different realms and dimensions etc

I’m not sure what your point is but you’re certainly proving mine.

Marhay70

nthclare wrote: »

I hear what you're saying and I cannot say you're wrong.
The way I'm looking at it is, the Catholic church isn't gaining much traction anymore and eventually it'll die away and fade.

There's a lot of variables in the situation you can't just pull the carpet from underneath the education system, but it's happening and eventually it'll be no more...

Let it happen... they'll never get a grip on us again....

It's not happening quickly enough though. No matter who you think is responsible for imparting religious teaching in schools, the RCC is still a powerful force in education, young children hang on every word their teachers say and if what teachers are saying is propaganda for the RCC then it stands to reason that children will ingest that.
Religion needs to be taken out of the educational equation completely, it won't be easy because of the collusion of Church and State in the early days but a start needs to be made and not just a token one.