We Don't Know versus The Burden of Proof

@kevin-eleven said
Just so you know: when people write in paragraphs (as you have done here), many other people will just skim past them, no matter how well-considered and well-written those paragraphs might have been.

Yeah, well I only come here about every three days, (I think) so I have to write three days' worth all at once...Anyway I'm an author, and never write ten words when a hundred will do, and people are of course free to read stuff or not. There, that was quite quick, wasn't it, and not a paragraph in sight; a bit too quick, maybe I should end with a swift story: Once upon a time, there was this Christian who thought that snakes could talk....

Naaa, maybe I'd better leave it there.

Ooops, sorry, that was a paragraph.

@kellyjay said
Yes I am an American, and some think everything that every American does represents Christianity, from the drugs, sex, and violence you name it it’s the west it’s Christian, everything Hollywood produces is a picture of Christianity.

No, Jesus Christ is the only one who turns a person into a Christian, you can take on the label as you can being called Republicans or Democ ...[text shortened]... ey believe is wrong, you can only voice your opinion without cause with reasoning only your opinion.

Well, I'm not one of those people, and America has some brilliant minds and brilliant scientists, it's just a pity you can't appreciate them or their work.

Without Christ, it would be a bit tricky being a Christian, would it not?

In other words, you take the view that because science can't yet demonstrably explain everything, it can't explain anything. That's like saying because we can't yet find a cure for all diseases, we can't find a cure for any diseases; it's puerile, infantile logic.

@indonesia-phil said
Well, I'm not one of those people, and America has some brilliant minds and brilliant scientists, it's just a pity you can't appreciate them or their work.

Without Christ, it would be a bit tricky being a Christian, would it not?

In other words, you take the view that because science can't yet demonstrably explain everything, it can't explain anything. That's l ...[text shortened]... find a cure for all diseases, we can't find a cure for any diseases; it's puerile, infantile logic.

Not sure why you think that considering many American brilliant minds are both
Christian and scientists from Nobel prize winners on. It isn't like it is either science
or Christianity, Christianity goes well with science, not so sure about Atheism and
science since with Theism there is cause to assume our minds are the end product
of a designer who built both the mind and the universe so with our minds the
universe can be understood by us.

While a goalless system without design has to accept there is no foundational
reason we should accept we can trust our minds or that we are grasping the reality
of the universe, some even question reality. The foundation of mindlessness isn't
very trustworthy with respect to being sound.

@kellyjay said
I've asked and asked, and answered you. You simply don't keep your word, it is
as simple as that.

Here’s the question again KellyJay.

Did the Christians whom you claim you only “bumped into once or twice” teach you about Christ, the gospel and salvation such that you sought god?

Simple question
Yes, or no?

@kellyjay said
While a goalless system without design has to accept there is no foundational
reason we should accept we can trust our minds or that we are grasping the reality
of the universe, some even question reality. The foundation of mindlessness isn't
very trustworthy with respect to being sound.

Assuming "God exists" is a fact... Thought exercise #1... Why would we assume it is a "good" God?

@fmf said
Assuming "God exists" is a fact... Thought exercise #1... Why would we assume it is a "good" God?

Because evil is only possible if good is real, to be anything other than good is to be
evil and God doesn't change from one to another as people do, where we can do
both good and bad things, we don't hold the consistency that God does in His
character we can be motivated by feelings while God who is holy, righteous, just,
merciful, full of grace to be anything else would be a god who changes. If you can
only invent god in your imagination you can make him/her/it any way you desire
it will reflect your whims at the moment and change as you do. If the way you
define god only comes from other men the same is true, some believe god is only
what explains what we don't know so the more we know the less there is of that
god, the god of the gaps. We cannot conjure up God, He has to reveal Himself
to us and when He does we cannot change that to make Him into what we want
we can only accept Him for who He is.

@kellyjay said
Because evil is only possible if good is real, to be anything other than good is to be
evil and God doesn't change from one to another as people do, where we can do
both good and bad things, we don't hold the consistency that God does in His
character we can be motivated by feelings while God who is holy, righteous, just,
merciful, full of grace to be anything else would ...[text shortened]... n He does we cannot change that to make Him into what we want
we can only accept Him for who He is.

On what basis should anyone accept any of these assertions you are making about a creator entity?

It's as if your answer to the question: Why would we assume it is a "good" God? ...is "...because God IS good!"

@fmf said
On what basis should anyone accept any of these assertions you are making about a creator entity?

It's as if your answer to the question: Why would we assume it is a "good" God? ...is "...because God IS good!"

Scripture, experience, history, logic, and the evil in man.

@kellyjay said
Scripture, experience, history, logic, and the evil in man.

Do you believe that "experience, history, and logic" make your claims about the existence of eternal torture as a punishment for "calling someone a fool" [an example of "evil" you often cite] morally coherent?

@kellyjay said
Scripture, experience, history, logic, and the evil in man.

Scripture

This is your answer to the question:

Why would we assume it is a "good" God?

...is "...because God IS good! [according to your religion's literature]"?

That's the basis?

@fmf said
Do you believe that "experience, history, and logic" make your claims about the existence of eternal torture as a punishment for "calling someone a fool" [an example of "evil" you often cite] morally coherent?

The state of man is such that into the Kingdom of God after this life, man will not
be allowed, rejecting the goodness of God for one's own selfish desires makes man
reject God, and the sinfulness of man in an unrepented state makes God reject man,
and once that is done, it is done. This is why while there is time to get right with
God one should, but if you reject Him, you will be rejected, it isn't all that difficult
to work out.

@kellyjay said
The state of man is such that into the Kingdom of God after this life, man will not
be allowed, rejecting the goodness of God for one's own selfish desires makes man
reject God, and the sinfulness of man in an unrepented state makes God reject man,
and once that is done, it is done. This is why while there is time to get right with
God one should, but if you reject Him, you will be rejected, it isn't all that difficult
to work out.

Yes. I know you believe all this stuff. I asked if you could explain how it is morally coherent, and I assume that you think all this stuff you've typed does that. OK. So be it.

@kellyjay said
This is why while there is time to get right with
God one should, but if you reject Him, you will be rejected, it isn't all that difficult
to work out.

I don't see myself as rejecting the existence of a creator entity; I just don't subscribe to the tenets of your religion, that's all.

@fmf said
I don't see myself as rejecting the existence of a creator entity; I just don't subscribe to the tenets of your religion, that's all.

If we were speaking about our favorite ice cream we could say that is your opinion and that would be that. There could be people around the world who know nothing about ice cream and that too would mean nothing concerning the topic. You could live a full life never hearing about ice cream, good and evil are not like that!

World wide through all recorded history good and evil are acknowledged, what is good and evil are debated to what degrees are somethings considered good and evil.

We are all aware, we acknowledge the bad we do with our excuses for them. If good and evil were simply ours to define why make excuses? We also know if we were to simply act on all of our impulses that we would destroy ourselves and harm others. To live our lives without a moral set of boundaries is destructive, look at the end results of almost any addiction where the focus of one’s life is fixated on satisfying a need.

You simply refusing to acknowledge someone greater than you doesn’t release you from your obligations. It just adds to not following the greatest good, settling for something much less, that is all, in defiance of Him.

@kellyjay said
If we were speaking about our favorite ice cream we could say that is your opinion and that would be that. There could be people around the world who know nothing about ice cream and that too would mean nothing concerning the topic. You could live a full life never hearing about ice cream, good and evil are not like that!

You are now talking about ice cream here for some reason. I am not. And I haven't been. You are being facile.