Do you believe in God?

pearcider · 09-10-2019 3:51pm

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

It is not the word but the intent. You are playing the player not the ball in pretty much every reply you throw out. It does not matter WHAT the insult is, you can take the ones you use like "arrogant" and "angry" and so forth out and replace it with any other. The issue is that you are using that ad hominem to dodge engaging in good faith discourse on the topic with anyone who even attempts to engage with you. Assuming you reply to them at all, given how many posts you have not even deigned to do that with.

Case in point....

Denigrate the interlocutor, refuse to engage, retreat. That is your MO. If that is the "fruit" of being a Christian that you are representing..... you can keep it. But do keep posting and representing! It serves my purposes well.

Your post is typical of an atheist both aggressive and full of untruths. I am not trying to save any of the atheists here since it is Jesus alone who saves. Also you seem to forget that I am free to choose to respond to whichever posts I wish.

nozzferrahhtoo · 09-10-2019 3:52pm

See? Again you attack the poster personally, and dodge answering anything in the actual post. Wonderful stuff.

What did I say that was untrue? I can evidence every line of it.

AndrewJRenko · 09-10-2019 4:02pm

pearcider wrote: »

I will not engage with aggressive atheists who continue to make the same point that I have previously addressed.

You still haven't addressed the point as to why your god created a world that includes childhood cancer.

Greyfox · 09-10-2019 4:49pm

pearcider wrote: »

Also you seem to forget that I am free to choose to respond to whichever posts I wish.

That's a politicians way of saying you don't have a SHRED of argument, evidence, data or reasoning to suggest there is a god

auspicious · 09-10-2019 4:57pm

The basic premise of Christianity amounts to salvation.
As I stated earlier the omniscient God created man knowing all the implications. The main implication being to subject man to God's idiosyncratic will - do as I say or be given an enternal fate far worse than you can dare to imagine.
It reduces to extortion.

nthclare · 09-10-2019 5:11pm

nozzferrahhtoo wrote: »

It is not the word but the intent. You are playing the player not the ball in pretty much every reply you throw out. It does not matter WHAT the insult is, you can take the ones you use like "arrogant" and "angry" and so forth out and replace it with any other. The issue is that you are using that ad hominem to dodge engaging in good faith discourse on the topic with anyone who even attempts to engage with you. Assuming you reply to them at all, given how many posts you have not even deigned to do that with.

Case in point....

Denigrate the interlocutor, refuse to engage, retreat. That is your MO. If that is the "fruit" of being a Christian that you are representing..... you can keep it. But do keep posting and representing! It serves my purposes well.

I'm an agnostic myself and this is the type of rabble and word salad I read frequently from atheists, trying to wind up Christians by making the debate more emotively charged than having a more civil debate.
And some of your moderators on A+A not all would be at the same drivel

You'll get plenty of validation and thanks in your Atheist and Agnostic forum and from your buddies, but people who can see through the bull**** aren't as accomodating.

Can some of you guys debate without the insult's or narcissistic undertones ?

Your first paragraph sounds like someone who's schizophrenic or on Xanax

Timberrrrrrrr · 09-10-2019 5:13pm

nthclare wrote: »

I'm an agnostic myself and this is the type of rabble and word salad I read frequently from atheists, trying to wind up Christians by making the debate more emotively charged than having a more civil debate.
And some of your moderators on A+A not all would be at the same drivel

You'll get plenty of validation and thanks in your Atheist and Agnostic forum and from your buddies, but people who can see through the bull**** aren't as accomodating.

Can some of you guys debate without the insult's or narcissistic undertones ?

Your first paragraph sounds like someone who's schizophrenic or on Xanax

The absolute irony :pac:

nthclare · 09-10-2019 5:17pm

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

The absolute irony :pac:

Ironically you frequent A+A too

Waiting for the rest of your buds to hone in like a swarm of Wasps...

Timberrrrrrrr · 09-10-2019 5:19pm

nthclare wrote: »

Ironically you frequent A+A too

Waiting for the rest of your buds to hone in like a swarm of Wasps...

Where i post has nothing to do with what you wrote!

You seriously cannot see the irony in you accusing others of insults and the very next sentence you post an insult

Or should you be immune to being called out on BS?

nthclare · 09-10-2019 5:22pm

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Where i post has nothing to do with what you wrote!

You seriously cannot see the irony in you accusing others of insults and the very next sentence you post an insult

Or should you be immune to being called out on BS?

I never said I don't insult anyone.

I sometimes throw stones while living in a glasshouse.

What about it ?

Where's the irony ?

Anyone can call someone out on their BS like you did me.

Do I really care ?

No

I'm not infallible, I'm just like everyone else full of contradictions and I'm okay with that.

Timberrrrrrrr · 09-10-2019 5:25pm

nthclare wrote: »

I never said I don't insult anyone.

I sometimes throw stones while living in a glasshouse.

What about it ?

Where's the irony ?

You said

Can some of you guys debate without the insult's or narcissistic undertones ?

Then go on to insult the poster.

Maybe practice what you preach? :rolleyes:

Pherekydes · 09-10-2019 5:30pm

nthclare wrote: »

Ironically you frequent A+A too

Waiting for the rest of your buds to hone in like a swarm of Wasps...

Nothing ironic about it at all.

Have a look at the thread title.

If the thread was entitled "Do you believe in Santa?" a lot less mercy would be shown, and, I suspect, a lot less agnosticism.

Cyrus · 09-10-2019 5:30pm

God im not sure, i doubt there is one but i suppose being raised as a catholic gives you some sort inclination to believe there is something but how any educated person in this day and age can believe in the teachings of any one particular religion is beyond me. Do people really think that their version of the story is true and all of the others are false.

whatever gives people comfort and doesnt impinge on me is ok with me but i dont buy any of it personally.

nthclare · 09-10-2019 5:32pm

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

You said

Then go on to insult the poster.

Maybe practice what you preach? :rolleyes:

Calling me a preacher now are you

igCorcaigh · 09-10-2019 5:39pm

Whenever I come back to a thread, people are arguing!

Anyway, I wanted to say that the belief in God, or at least the argument for a God, has declined as our scientific knowledge increased. That is regarding academic thought. Not among the masses (!) of people.

Before Darwin, it could have been arguable based on the mystery of biology.

Physics, though, has not provided that counter argument at all, it seems, because physics is in crisis and has been since the creation of quantum theory about 100 years ago.

Plus, we are nowhere near explaining consciousness, despite many claims to the same.

Does science really have a role in the God idea anymore?

auspicious · 09-10-2019 5:41pm

Here's one I heard before:

Can God create a rock that is too heavy for him to lift?

igCorcaigh · 09-10-2019 5:45pm

auspicious wrote: »

Here's one I heard before:

Can God create a rock that is too heavy for him to lift?

If he can, then he's not powerful enough. If he can't, he's not powerful enough.

Or something on those lines?

Fourier · 09-10-2019 5:47pm

auspicious wrote: »

Here's one I heard before:

Can God create a rock that is too heavy for him to lift?

igCorcaigh · 09-10-2019 5:47pm

That paradox points to the fact that the very definition of God is undefined, or illogical.

Of course, the adherer would say that God is beyond logic?

igCorcaigh · 09-10-2019 5:50pm

Nice, but by definition God is the resolver of the paradox. All recursive arguments are collapsed, by Him and Him alone.

Fourier · 09-10-2019 5:53pm

igCorcaigh wrote: »

Nice, but by definition God is the resolver of the paradox. All recursive arguments are collapsed, by Him and Him alone.

So you're saying God-God-man is just God-man in disguise? I doubt it, they spell and pronounce their names differently.

igCorcaigh · 09-10-2019 5:54pm

But is it this silly illogical God, is it really the kind of god that millions of people believe in and pray to?

Surely not.

But can all these arguments be brushed away then?

Maybe so?

igCorcaigh · 09-10-2019 5:56pm

Fourier wrote: »

So you're saying God-God-man is just God-man in disguise? I doubt it, they spell and pronounce their names differently.

He is the knowing one.
You will know him too, one day, young son.

Fourier · 09-10-2019 6:03pm

igCorcaigh wrote: »

He is the knowing one.
You will know him too, one day, young son.

But who will travel the way? The he or the me?
(Gnomic answer, Gnomic response)

theological · 09-10-2019 6:48pm

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Would you like to try to answer any of the questions that pear is trying to avoid please?

You've been getting all kinds of excellent Bible based answers from a number of posters. I've got pretty much nothing to add.

The problem is that you don't like the answer. That's fine, we don't promise that you will. However, the questions I've seen on this thread have been clearly answered with reference to Scripture.

Here's a great answer below for example:

Len_007 wrote: »

How is it impossible?
If this omnipotent God that we both have assumed was one who created humans so that they would suffer, then the conditions you highlighted would be quite inline with this God's intentions for the world. That I think describes the God you are talking about.
However the God as revealed in the OT/NT, clearly did not create humans to experience pain and suffering. That was not his primary purpose as you read Genesis 1 & 2. (There's probably an argument to be made that pain and suffering was always part of the design, not all of it is bad, as in ouch I'm too near fire).
The primary purpose of the creation of Man was to live with God in his presence, which they forfeited when they rejected his Word and Rule over them. When that happened sin entered the world wrecking all in it's path, the devastation of which is still experienced today.
But, the God of the OT/NT is on record endeavouring to reverse the great rupture that happened in the first pages of the Bible, as I said above flick to the end to see how it all pans out.

Wanderer2010 · 09-10-2019 6:56pm

I haven't seen much of it discussed here, but I find near death experiences fascinating. Of course, you will always get the element who are only faking it to get a quick buck from a book but there have literally been millions of people who have experienced being very close to death, from people of no faith to the staunchly faithful, from children to old people and across a variety of "deaths" such as heart attacks, accidents in the water and they have come back recalling tales of floating out of their bodies, being able to name people who were performing CPR on them etc, and encountering dead family members and "beings of light".
Whats interesting is even some children have experienced this, not knowing the context as any religious beliefs have not at this stage been laid down. Now I know there is an argument that when the brain shuts down, the vision is affected and the brain fires off all manners of neurons which result in tunnels of light, feelings of happiness etc but for so many millions of people to have the same experience and indeed, be changed by it going forward, is very compelling to me. I know this doesn't proof or disprove God in any way, but its certainly food for thought for some kind of an afterlife.

Guy:Incognito · 09-10-2019 7:15pm

theological wrote: »

You've been getting all kinds of excellent Bible based answers from a number of posters. I've got pretty much nothing to add.

You cant use lines from a book some lad wrote to prove the existence of the characters in the same book.

Would you accept my argument that Harry Potter is real if my only proof for it is that theres a book about him?

The truth is, your whole faith is based on the area of the world you happen to be born in and the book that happened to take hold there. If you were born in another part of the world youd be another religion. Although maybe youd be the lone white man in the middle east and gain a following........

Guy:Incognito · 09-10-2019 7:20pm

Wanderer2010 wrote: »

I haven't seen much of it discussed here, but I find near death experiences fascinating. Of course, you will always get the element who are only faking it to get a quick buck from a book but there have literally been millions of people who have experienced being very close to death, from people of no faith to the staunchly faithful, from children to old people and across a variety of "deaths" such as heart attacks, accidents in the water and they have come back recalling tales of floating out of their bodies, being able to name people who were performing CPR on them etc, and encountering dead family members and "beings of light".
Whats interesting is even some children have experienced this, not knowing the context as any religious beliefs have not at this stage been laid down. Now I know there is an argument that when the brain shuts down, the vision is affected and the brain fires off all manners of neurons which result in tunnels of light, feelings of happiness etc but for so many millions of people to have the same experience and indeed, be changed by it going forward, is very compelling to me. I know this doesn't proof or disprove God in any way, but its certainly food for thought for some kind of an afterlife.

My dad was dead on the table for a good while before being saved by a doctor. He saw no light, no divine experience.

He didnt believe in god. Youd think hed be a prime candidate for a visit if there was one.

The reality is the brain is a very powerful thing and can conjure up allsorts during times of stress or injury.

nozzferrahhtoo · 09-10-2019 7:44pm

nthclare wrote: »

I'm an agnostic myself and this is the type of rabble and word salad I read frequently from atheists, trying to wind up Christians by making the debate more emotively charged than having a more civil debate.

Yet I am "trying" to do no such thing and there is nothing "emotive" about asking someone a direct question. If YOU personally get emotional over it, that is another issue entirely. But I can hardly be blamed for that, now can I?

One user dodges everything and flings insults, and another user points this out. And the LATTER one in your head is the one being emotive and trying to wind people up? You really have it backwards indeed.

nthclare wrote: »

but people who can see through the bull**** aren't as accomodating.

Generally when something is "bull" you can explain how and why it is bull. Merely calling it bull and running away however, is like throwing pasta at a wall to see if any will stick for you. But merely calling it "bull" and running off, does not make it bull.

Now if you want to actively engage and explain what I said that was in any way wrong... I am here for you..... but if not you are just doing the same thing I called your cohort out for really. Dodge. Dodge. Dodge.

nthclare wrote: »

Can some of you guys debate without the insult's or narcissistic undertones ?

If you find me throwing insults by all means call me out on it. Since I have not done this yet, but your cohort has, you appear to be taking this up with entirely the wrong person.

nthclare wrote: »

Your first paragraph sounds like someone who's schizophrenic or on Xanax

How so? Care to explain? Or are we sticking more pasta?

nozzferrahhtoo · 09-10-2019 7:53pm

auspicious wrote: »

The basic premise of Christianity amounts to salvation.

A nice business model that, invent the disease AND the cure at the same time.

Do you believe in God?

Comments