- Joined
- 10 Jan 08
- Moves
- 16953
31 Dec 08
Originally posted by josephwthroughout my life i've seen some pretty awful things.
You can't prove that God doesn't exist through experience.
where was god a few years ago when a 16 year old friend of mine was beaten to death with baseball bats just for wearing a certain soccer jersey?
where was god when george bush went into iraq to murder innocent men, woman and children claiming god was on his side?
does god not recognize the continent of africa? how many people have to die of starvation, of aids and because of the simplest of things that we take for granted, clean drinking water or the lack of it.
where was god when 3 friends of mine lost everything when their bus was held up at gun point in ecuador? where was he again when 2 of them where robbed at knife point less than 2 weeks later?
your god is a murderer.
lets face it, not you or anyone else has ever seen god or has ever been helped by god in any way throughout your life.
he doesn't exist.
whatever you make of your life is of your doing and of no one elses. if you're weak enough to have to believe in a superior being to help you get through life well than that's your problem.
if you can't prove god does exist stop trying to convince others of its existence.
31 Dec 08
1 edit
Originally posted by trev33========================================
throughout my life i've seen some pretty awful things.
where was god a few years ago when a 16 year old friend of mine was beaten to death with baseball bats just for wearing a certain soccer jersey?
where was god when george bush went into iraq to murder innocent men, woman and children claiming god was on his side?
does god not recognize the contin blem.
if you can't prove god does exist stop trying to convince others of its existence.
where was god a few years ago when a 16 year old friend of mine was beaten to death with baseball bats just for wearing a certain soccer jersey?
========================================
I met a woman whose daughter was set on fire and burned to death by her crack addict boyfriend. The mother still had an encredible strong faith in Jesus Christ and God in spite of this tragedy. She didn't complain about God's non-existence.
I know a family member whose lost two sons to drugs and a husband to alcohol. In spite of losing thee loved ones to substance abuse she never complained about the non-existence of God. She is still a prayer warrior offering up petitions and supplications to God for all sorts of people.
I know another family member whose son was given a 20 year prison sentence because of a crime which he probably did not commit. His public defender was not competent. Neither the son nor his mother complain about the non-existence of God. They hope and depend upon God. They put thier trust in Him.
I invite the Christians to relate similar testimonies of people who have undergone tragedy who still have faith in Christ. The athiest who thinks God will go away because of bad things which have happened is really a fool.
31 Dec 08
Originally posted by SwissGambitYou are sssuming the premise is valid which it isn't, it's trite.
Exactly.
Khightmeister made a good point related his personal relationship with his wife. To compare that to a childs assotiation with santa and getting toys is complete worthless trite.
Grow up.
31 Dec 08
Originally posted by divegeesterMake an actual argument that the comparison is "trite".
You are sssuming the premise is valid which it isn't, it's trite.
Khightmeister made a good point related his personal relationship with his wife. To compare that to a childs assotiation with santa and getting toys is complete worthless trite.
Grow up.
You might first try looking up the word in a dictionary. If anything, KM's point was trite; i.e. hackneyed and overused.
The point was that people believe all the time in things that aren't true based on "their personal experience". Consider a child who actually goes to the mall with her parent and meets Santa. While on Santa's lap, she tells him she wants a Barbie for Christmas. Lo and behold, she gets a Barbie for Christmas! If she relied solely on her "personal experience", she would have to conclude that the stories about Santa were true, that he was real and that he brings toys to good boys and girls.
Like this girl, KM chooses to believe in a magical figure based on "personal experience". Like this girl, he is impervious to reality based it is far more pleasant to believe in fairy tales. Fortunately, the girl will grow up and realize that her belief in Santa was based on her misunderstanding of reality and that her "personal experience" was limited and unreliable. Sadly for KM, it doesn't look like he'll ever "grow up" and realize the same thing.
31 Dec 08
lets face it, not you or anyone else has ever seen god or has ever been helped by god in any way throughout your life.Here you're wrong. There are hundreds of people who claim to have personal experiences in which they feel the presence of God. There are a few excellent examples in William James: A Religious Experience. People make their own decisions. God doesn't control us! We're not robots or pieces on a gigantic chess board that is the Earth. We are free to make our own decisions however bad those may be. By putting trust in God we get glory in the next life not necessarily in this one.
he doesn't exist.
.[/b]
31 Dec 08
2 edits
Originally posted by no1marauderThank you for helping me with the definition of trite. your presumption of my ignornce and assumption of your own superiority is astonishing.
Make an actual argument that the comparison is "trite".
You might first try looking up the word in a dictionary. If anything, KM's point was trite; i.e. hackneyed and overused.
The point was that people believe all the time in things that aren't true based on "their personal experience". Consider a child who actua y for KM, it doesn't look like he'll ever "grow up" and realize the same thing.
To propose that adults believe in God for the same reason that a child believes in Santa (i.e. fairytails) and to hold as proof that God doesn't exist, is an tired argument used so many times (especially in this forum) that imo it is completely boring and unimaginative, not to mention lacking in fundamental validity.
As I have to explain the blatantly obvious, I will. Children are very different from adults, for example they may believe an inanimate object such as a toy is alive, it's called anthropomorphism, you may want to look this up in a cognitive development book.
31 Dec 08
Originally posted by divegeesterI don't know what they teach you in those parochial schools (if anything), but you obviously don't know what anthropomorphism means.
Thank you for helping me with the definition of trite. your presumption of my ignornce and assumption of your own superiority is astonishing.
To propose that adults believe in God for the same reason that a child believes in Santa (i.e. fairytails) and to hold as proof that God doesn't exist, is an tired argument used so many times (especially in this ...[text shortened]... e, it's called anthropomorphism, you may want to look this up in a cognitive development book.
Anthropomorphism n. Attribution of human motivation, characteristics, or behavior to inanimate objects, animals, or natural phenomena.
It is giving human characteristics to something, not believing inanimate objects are alive. The root 'anthro' refers to man. Your whole argument is staggering in that Christians have anthropomorphized their god to such an extent throughout the years.
31 Dec 08
1 edit
Originally posted by divegeester==========================================
Thank you for helping me with the definition of trite. your presumption of my ignornce and assumption of your own superiority is astonishing.
To propose that adults believe in God for the same reason that a child believes in Santa (i.e. fairytails) and to hold as proof that God doesn't exist, is an tired argument used so many times (especially in this ...[text shortened]... e, it's called anthropomorphism, you may want to look this up in a cognitive development book.
To propose that adults believe in God for the same reason that a child believes in Santa (i.e. fairytails) and to hold as proof that God doesn't exist, is an tired argument used so many times (especially in this forum) that imo it is completely boring and unimaginative, not to mention lacking in fundamental validity.
===================================
I agree. Actually, I thought the old "Invisible Pink Unicorn" was more spiffy.
31 Dec 08
2 edits
Originally posted by rwingett=======================================
I don't know what they teach you in those parochial schools (if anything), but you obviously don't know what anthropomorphism means.
Anthropomorphism n. Attribution of human motivation, characteristics, or behavior to inanimate objects, animals, or natural phenomena.
It is giving [b]human characteristics to something, not believing inan in that Christians have anthropomorphized their god to such an extent throughout the years.[/b]
It is giving human characteristics to something, not believing inanimate objects are alive. The root 'anthro' refers to man. Your whole argument is staggering in that Christians have anthropomorphized their god to such an extent throughout the years.
========================================
Do you express a similar concern for the way you anthropomorphize that horn headed goat person you like for your personal icon? Whose that suppose to be, the Devil or a demon?
Whose preoccupied with anthropomorphizing here anyway?
31 Dec 08
Originally posted by jaywillThat icon is Krampus, one of Santa's minions in Central European folklore. So, no, it's not the devil.
[b]=======================================
It is giving human characteristics to something, not believing inanimate objects are alive. The root 'anthro' refers to man. Your whole argument is staggering in that Christians have anthropomorphized their god to such an extent throughout the years.
========================================
Do you expre ...[text shortened]... at suppose to be, the Devil or a demon?
Whose preoccupied anthropomorphizing here anyway?[/b]
31 Dec 08
Originally posted by LemonJelloI can't prove that God exists to anyone but myself.
[b]I can prove God exists to myself through experience though.
You just said "I can't prove that God does exist". So if we are not to take this as simple contradiction, what you really mean is the following: you're certain that you know God through experience and revelation, but you cannot offer me epistemic reasons that bear favorably on the [i]d ...[text shortened]... ces). So I do not take you seriously here. How could I when you simply have no argument?[/b]
"So I do not take you seriously here. How could I when you simply have no argument?"
I had no intention of arguing. I simply made a few statements and asked for thoughts about them.
The main idea though, is that I claim to know that God exists through experience.
31 Dec 08
Originally posted by divegeester"The burden of proof of God's existence lays with God himself."
The burden of proof of God's existence lays with God himself. A christian's responsibility is laid out in 1 Peter 3:15
...and be ready always to offer defence to every one who is asking of you for an account concerning the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear.
If someone chooses not to accept or believe you then that is their business.
I think you are right! It's true. God has indeed shown Himself in creation. There can be no doubt. Of course, that is an entirely subjective point of view, and open for debate.
"If someone chooses not to accept or believe you then that is their business."
Again, you are correct. Believing is the responsability of the individual, and no one has the right to force anyone to believe anything.
Concerning 1 Peter 3:15, I'm always ready when someone asks me for an account concerning the hope that is in me!
But then again, why wait for them to ask?
31 Dec 08
Originally posted by josephwThere can be no doubt? But then it's an entirely subjective opinion open for debate? I'm sure you can spot the contradiction there. If there can be no doubt, then it is not a subjective opinion and it is not open for debate. If it is a subjective opinion and is open for debate, then obviously there is some doubt.
[b]"The burden of proof of God's existence lays with God himself."
I think you are right! It's true. God has indeed shown Himself in creation. There can be no doubt. Of course, that is an entirely subjective point of view, and open for debate.
"If someone chooses not to accept or believe you then that is their business."
Again, you are ...[text shortened]... n account concerning the hope that is in me!
But then again, why wait for them to ask?[/b]
No one has the right to force anyone to believe anything? No one except god, that is.
31 Dec 08
Originally posted by trev33Have you ever considered that it is because of the lack of God in peoples lives that causes them to commit evil?
throughout my life i've seen some pretty awful things.
where was god a few years ago when a 16 year old friend of mine was beaten to death with baseball bats just for wearing a certain soccer jersey?
where was god when george bush went into iraq to murder innocent men, woman and children claiming god was on his side?
does god not recognize the contin ...[text shortened]... blem.
if you can't prove god does exist stop trying to convince others of its existence.
Blaiming God for the crimes of certian individuals, and then denying His existence is irrational.
The crimes you speak of, and all other acts of evil committed by man, are the responsibilty of those who committed them. Blaiming God or anyone else is a denile of reality.