Jump to content

Why you don't believe?


Recommended Posts

Yes I believe they do. The origin of the universe could very likely be due to physicalistic events.

 

In some other forum a poster called paddoboy explains this better than I can:

 

http://www.sciforums.com/threads/a-universe-from-nothing-not-that-hard-to-understand.158811/

 

Listen to this...

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZO4FmrlZnQ

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 203
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Strange Post: "And your god doesn't care that millions of innocent babies are killed in horrible ways."   It is due to human sinful acts. It is not God's acts. Due to greediness and

When, one day when you see how foolish having an imaginary friend is, it will be important to remember what you said there... Don't let go of the idea of limitless love.x Don't loose all of the pos

Aren't you quite the special one?   This reminds me of the kind of mindless, meaningless drivel, scripted for perfume adverts.

Theres no scientific proof of a god, thats enough reason not to believe, a lot of religions also hold a lot of morals that are simple common sence and you should simply be a decent human being and be nice without feeling that you have to be nice because of your religion is supportive of it, theres also a lot of bogus in religion, like in some religions the wife belongs to the husband and she has to be there to sexually please him when he wants, he's allowed to beat her etc, just outrageous and outdated it makes me sick, if there is an almighty god up there this being must be rather sadistic considering what happens here on earth to innocent people, and that is certainly not someone I want to follow.

When I've read about science if god exists I only find articles that can easily be explained with other things, science doesn't dismiss the idea of god since there is no proof there ISN'T a god, but the lack of proof makes the idea unprobable, when we first found fossils 2000 years ago they thought it was a dragon, it was a dinosaur, something similar might have happened to the conjuring of god, maybe someone ate a poisonous mushroom and hallucinated and voila god was made up or a lot of people had mental illnesses that made them see things, a lot of people still believe in ghosts despite science prove against it.

Seen lots of articles mention that the eye is such an amazing thing it must be created by a god, but it's evolution and it came with the evolution of the spine and nerv, the brain is a big lump of nerves, and eyes started to evolve from the primitive brain, tough what they never mention is different types of eyes, like insect eyes that funtion in a different way them human eyes.

God comes from a time when humans knew less, god is not explained with science, logic and reason and rather gives people the pack and acknowledgement that we humans as social animals need. it's purely emotional and not scientifical, especially since in general religion doesn't allow homosexuals and claim it's against god and/or unnatural despite it being EVERYWHERE in nature

which then means they are dismissing nature itself, the animals out there just doing their thing naturally without weird ideas, musts or preassure, animals don't believe in religion and they don't see it as a crime, it's closeness and fun for them ( or in some cases sexuall frustration )
Link to post
Share on other sites

Theres no scientific proof of a god, thats enough reason not to believe... snip... if there is an almighty god up there this being must be rather sadistic considering what happens here on earth to innocent people

 

 

Since we both believe there's no god, at least no god that intervenes on a daily basis, then we both also know that it's not god that's being a sadistic prick; it's greedy power hungry pricks, that use the innocent people to further there unholy desires.

 

As you say, all we need is that most of us be decent human beings, I couldn't agree more; so why attack the decent, innocent human beings that choose to believe something you don't?

 

Being a decent human being includes tolerance and acceptance; and, no, not all religious people are decent human beings but those that are should be allowed to find solace in their faith, without being brow-beaten.

 

It wasn't a religion that sanctioned Guantanamo bay .

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

then we both also know that it's not god that's being a sadistic prick; it's greedy power hungry pricks, that use the innocent people to further there unholy desires.

 

 

 

I thought mostly of diseases and such, a god could also prevent evil people. So if there is a god that allows these things, doesn't sound like a good deal following this thing to end up in heaven.

Link to post
Share on other sites

a god could also prevent evil people. So if there is a god that allows these things, doesn't sound like a good deal following this thing to end up in heaven.

 

It's not about prevention, it's about forgiveness, if people believe the evil will get their comeuppance, then it's much easier for them to their loose the anger and maybe come to understand that heaven doesn't come after life, it's here and now if we listen (not blind faith) to some-one like Jesus or Mohamed or Buddha etc...

Edited by dimreepr
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

My friend, Christianity is superior to other religion because it worships the true God.I know that Christianity is true because God Spirit lives in me and assures me that it is true and you can know that it is true too, because God is knocking on your heart.If you sincerely seek Him then He will give you the assurance that the gospel is true.Now to try to show you that it is true, I'll share with you some arguments and evidence that I really find convincing. But should my arguments seem weak and unconvincing, that's my fault, not God's. Whatever you think about my arguments, God still loves you and holds you accountable. I'll do my best to present good arguments to you. But ultimately, you have to deal not with arguments, but with God Himself.

 

 

I will provide my first evidences for Christianity: (Quoted from website:http://www.thedivineconspiracy.org/Z5221O.pdf in the Book Reasonable Faith by William Lane Craig pages 29-35)

 

From the book I quote:

1. According to Augustine:

 

"We see that something is true by either physical perception or rational demonstration. We believe that something is true on the basis of the testimony of others. Hence, with regard to miracle and prophecy, Augustine says that the trustworthiness of reports of either past or future events must be believed, not known by the intelligence. Elsewhere he declares that one should believe in God because belief in him is taught in the books of men who have left their testimony in writing that they lived with the Son of God and saw things that could not have happened if there were no God. Then he concludes that one must believe before he can know. Since for Augustine the historical evidence for miracle and prophecy lay in the past, it was in the realm of authority, not reason. Today, on the other hand, we would say that such a procedure would be an attempt to provide a rational foundation for authority via historical apologetics.

 

Why accept the authority of the writers of the past, whether they be the classical writers or the authors of Scripture? Clearly, if Augustine is to avoid circular reasoning, he cannot say that we should accept the authority of the evangelists because of the authority of Scripture, for it is the evangelists’ testimony to miracle and prophecy that is supposed to make evident the authority of Scripture. So Augustine must either come up with some reason to accept the evangelists’ testimony as reliable or abandon this historically oriented approach. Since he lacked the historical method, the first alternative was not open to him. Therefore, he chose the second. He frankly admits that the books containing the story of Christ belong to an ancient history that anyone may refuse to believe. Therefore, he turns to the present miracle of the church as the basis for accepting the authority of Scripture. He saw the very existence of the mighty and universal church as an overwhelming sign that the Scriptures are true and divine."

 

2. According to Aquinas:

 

"Thomas’s procedure, may be summarized in three steps: (1) Fulfilled prophecies and miracles make it credible that the Scriptures taken together as a whole are a revelation from God. (2) As a revelation from God, Scripture is absolutely authoritative. (3) Therefore, those doctrines taught by Scripture that are neither demonstrably provable nor empirically evident may be accepted by faith on the authority of Scripture. Thus, Aquinas can say that an opponent may be convinced of the truths of faith on the basis of the authority of Scripture as confirmed by God with miracles.8

 

Again the question arises: How do we know that the purported miracles or fulfilled prophecies ever took place? The medieval thinkers, lacking the historical method, could not answer this question. They developed a philosophical framework in which the signs of credibility confirmed the truths of faith, but they had no way of proving the signs themselves. About the only argument was Augustine’s indirect proof from the miracle of the church. Thus, Thomas declares:

 

"Now such a wondrous conversion of the world to the Christian faith is a most indubitable proof that such signs did take place. . . . For it would be the most wondrous sign of all if without any wondrous signs the world were persuaded by simple and lowly men to believe things so arduous, to accomplish things so difficult, and to hope for things so sublime."

 

3. According to Locke:

 

"In his subsequent works The Reasonableness of Christianity (1695) and Discourse on Miracles (1690), Locke argued that fulfilled prophecy and palpable miracles furnish proof of Christ’s divine mission. He set forth three criteria for discerning a genuine revelation. First, it must not be dishonoring to God or inconsistent with natural religion and the natural moral law. Second, it must not inform man of things indifferent, insignificant, or easily discovered by natural ability. Third, it must be confirmed by supernatural signs. For Locke, the chief of these signs was miracle. On the basis of Jesus’ miracles, we are justified in regarding him as the Messiah and his revelation from God as true."

 

And I added:

 

Mat. 24:14 of the scripture:

King James Version (KJV)

"And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come."

The Gospel shall be preached into the whole world which is actually happening now.. Missionaries go to and fro to preach the Gospel. Almost all the nations of the world know about Jesus Christ and His Gift of salvation. Christianity is the world's biggest religion.

As what we see, what is written in the bible is actually happening now.

 

 

So when people die in natural disasters, it is because they have been bad? And that is also true of children and infants?

 

How bad can a baby have been in a few months to deserve to be killed in a tsunami?

 

 

It's just because we are really a fallen world. The curse resulted from sin affected God's creation. It doesn't mean that babies are bad.

 

 

So when people die in natural disasters, it is because they have been bad? And that is also true of children and infants?

 

How bad can a baby have been in a few months to deserve to be killed in a tsunami?

 

 

It's just because we are really a fallen world. The curse resulted from sin affected God's creation. It doesn't mean that babies are bad.

 

I thought mostly of diseases and such, a god could also prevent evil people. So if there is a god that allows these things, doesn't sound like a good deal following this thing to end up in heaven.

 

If you want God to eradicate evil, you are demanding Him to eradicate us. But we all know God did not do it because God have a great mercy on us.

Salvation is His alternative for us rather than eradication. Instead of eradicating us, He gave His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ, to save us from our sins. We see here that God really is an Omniscient Being because He knows what is the right thing to do for us, coupled by His great love and mercy on us.

 

So it is claimed. I am skeptical. It allegedly reveled itself to a small group of people ~2000 years ago.

 

Why did people believe in God before 2000 years ago?

 

And if God is not like us, why assign it the male gender?

 

 

That's baloney, but a topic for discussion elsewhere.

 

 

God has no gender because, He is spirit. The pronoun He only represents a Higher authority. In this worldy scenarios, men symbolizes authority, like father in the family.

Edited by Randolpin
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Therefore, he chose the second. He frankly admits that the books containing the story of Christ belong to an ancient history that anyone may refuse to believe. Therefore, he turns to the present miracle of the church as the basis for accepting the authority of Scripture. He saw the very existence of the mighty and universal church as an overwhelming sign that the Scriptures are true and divine."

 

 

And which miracle is this? I see none whatsoever.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will provide my first evidences for Christianity: (Quoted from website:http://www.thedivineconspiracy.org/Z5221O.pdf in the Book Reasonable Faith by William Lane Craig pages 29-35)

...

 

 

 

This is the fallacy of begging the question.

 

Christianity must be the truth because people believe in it.

Why do they believe in it?

Because it is the truth.

 

 

 

It's just because we are really a fallen world. The curse resulted from sin affected God's creation. It doesn't mean that babies are bad.

 

And your god doesn't care that millions of innocent babies are killed in horrible ways.

 

That sort of scum doesn't deserve worship. He should be indicted.

 

 

 

Salvation is His alternative for us rather than eradication. Instead of eradicating us, He gave His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ, to save us from our sins.

 

And yet millions of innocent babies die is horrible ways. Looks like his plan didn't work.

 

What is plan B?

 

 

 

In this worldy scenarios, men symbolizes authority, like father in the family.

 

Welcome to the 19th century.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Elsewhere he declares that one should believe in God because belief in him is taught in the books of men who have left their testimony in writing that they lived with the Son of God and saw things that could not have happened if there were no God. Then he concludes that one must believe before he can know. Since for Augustine the historical evidence for miracle and prophecy lay in the past, it was in the realm of authority, not reason.

 

If you start with the premise that the bible is a collection of stories, written by man, designed to teach contentment and god is just part of the story then this makes sense

Edited by dimreepr
Link to post
Share on other sites

God has no gender because, He is spirit. The pronoun He only represents a Higher authority. In this worldy scenarios, men symbolizes authority, like father in the family.

No gender, so the proper word is "it"

Link to post
Share on other sites

And your god doesn't care that millions of innocent babies are killed in horrible ways.

 

That sort of scum doesn't deserve worship. He should be indicted.

 

You're not scum for making a world where the beings on it have to take care of themselves and you don't do everything for them. As for worship, it's not a matter of who does or doesn't deserve it, it's a matter of it being a useless invention by a child species.

 

Welcome to the 19th century.

Indeed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I will provide my first evidences for Christianity: (Quoted from website:http://www.thedivineconspiracy.org/Z5221O.pdf in the Book Reasonable Faith by William Lane Craig pages 29-35)

 

From the book I quote:

1. According to Augustine:

 

"We see that something is true by either physical perception or rational demonstration. We believe that something is true on the basis of the testimony of others. Hence, with regard to miracle and prophecy, Augustine says that the trustworthiness of reports of either past or future events must be believed, not known by the intelligence. Elsewhere he declares that one should believe in God because belief in him is taught in the books of men who have left their testimony in writing that they lived with the Son of God and saw things that could not have happened if there were no God. Then he concludes that one must believe before he can know. Since for Augustine the historical evidence for miracle and prophecy lay in the past, it was in the realm of authority, not reason. Today, on the other hand, we would say that such a procedure would be an attempt to provide a rational foundation for authority via historical apologetics.

 

Why accept the authority of the writers of the past, whether they be the classical writers or the authors of Scripture? Clearly, if Augustine is to avoid circular reasoning, he cannot say that we should accept the authority of the evangelists because of the authority of Scripture, for it is the evangelists’ testimony to miracle and prophecy that is supposed to make evident the authority of Scripture. So Augustine must either come up with some reason to accept the evangelists’ testimony as reliable or abandon this historically oriented approach. Since he lacked the historical method, the first alternative was not open to him. Therefore, he chose the second. He frankly admits that the books containing the story of Christ belong to an ancient history that anyone may refuse to believe. Therefore, he turns to the present miracle of the church as the basis for accepting the authority of Scripture. He saw the very existence of the mighty and universal church as an overwhelming sign that the Scriptures are true and divine."

 

2. According to Aquinas:

 

"Thomas’s procedure, may be summarized in three steps: (1) Fulfilled prophecies and miracles make it credible that the Scriptures taken together as a whole are a revelation from God. (2) As a revelation from God, Scripture is absolutely authoritative. (3) Therefore, those doctrines taught by Scripture that are neither demonstrably provable nor empirically evident may be accepted by faith on the authority of Scripture. Thus, Aquinas can say that an opponent may be convinced of the truths of faith on the basis of the authority of Scripture as confirmed by God with miracles.8

 

Again the question arises: How do we know that the purported miracles or fulfilled prophecies ever took place? The medieval thinkers, lacking the historical method, could not answer this question. They developed a philosophical framework in which the signs of credibility confirmed the truths of faith, but they had no way of proving the signs themselves. About the only argument was Augustine’s indirect proof from the miracle of the church. Thus, Thomas declares:

 

"Now such a wondrous conversion of the world to the Christian faith is a most indubitable proof that such signs did take place. . . . For it would be the most wondrous sign of all if without any wondrous signs the world were persuaded by simple and lowly men to believe things so arduous, to accomplish things so difficult, and to hope for things so sublime."

 

3. According to Locke:

 

"In his subsequent works The Reasonableness of Christianity (1695) and Discourse on Miracles (1690), Locke argued that fulfilled prophecy and palpable miracles furnish proof of Christ’s divine mission. He set forth three criteria for discerning a genuine revelation. First, it must not be dishonoring to God or inconsistent with natural religion and the natural moral law. Second, it must not inform man of things indifferent, insignificant, or easily discovered by natural ability. Third, it must be confirmed by supernatural signs. For Locke, the chief of these signs was miracle. On the basis of Jesus’ miracles, we are justified in regarding him as the Messiah and his revelation from God as true."

 

And I added:

 

Mat. 24:14 of the scripture:

King James Version (KJV)

"And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come."

The Gospel shall be preached into the whole world which is actually happening now.. Missionaries go to and fro to preach the Gospel. Almost all the nations of the world know about Jesus Christ and His Gift of salvation. Christianity is the world's biggest religion.

As what we see, what is written in the bible is actually happening now.

 

 

It's just because we are really a fallen world. The curse resulted from sin affected God's creation. It doesn't mean that babies are bad.

 

 

It's just because we are really a fallen world. The curse resulted from sin affected God's creation. It doesn't mean that babies are bad.

 

If you want God to eradicate evil, you are demanding Him to eradicate us. But we all know God did not do it because God have a great mercy on us.

Salvation is His alternative for us rather than eradication. Instead of eradicating us, He gave His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ, to save us from our sins. We see here that God really is an Omniscient Being because He knows what is the right thing to do for us, coupled by His great love and mercy on us.

 

 

God has no gender because, He is spirit. The pronoun He only represents a Higher authority. In this worldy scenarios, men symbolizes authority, like father in the family.

 

 

None of this gets you to a god much less the Abrahamic god or Jesus... Before you postulate Jesus you have to show evidence for gods in general. So far you nor anyone else has shown any empirical evidence for a god. Feelies do not a god make...

 

BTW WLC is a dishonest sack of steaming monkey excrement...

Edited by Moontanman
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

If you want God to eradicate evil, you are demanding Him to eradicate us. But we all know God did not do it because God have a great mercy on us.

Salvation is His alternative for us rather than eradication. Instead of eradicating us, He gave His only begotten Son, Jesus Christ, to save us from our sins. We see here that God really is an Omniscient Being because He knows what is the right thing to do for us, coupled by His great love and mercy on us.

 

 

God has no gender because, He is spirit. The pronoun He only represents a Higher authority. In this worldy scenarios, men symbolizes authority, like father in the family.

 

There are good people out there who never want to hurt anyone and only tries to help people while there are others who purpously hurt others, those are evil, I am aware of that people make mistakes but to keep forgiving and forgiving when they do horrible crimes, thats irrational to forgive someone like that and let more people get hurt by that person. And it makes no sence to sacrifice his son, for it to matter humanity would have stopped sinning but no, so that sacrifice was for naught, So God did bad parenting by getting his son killed for a bunch of dumnuts.

 

Sorry but, HE? The word "he" stands for the male gender aka god is a THEY if it should be genderless, and men does not symbolize authority, there would be no father without a woman to give birth to the children, it takes two components to make a child and none is more important then the other, oldfashioned conservative bogus is all I see.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

There are good people out there who never want to hurt anyone and only tries to help people while there are others who purpously hurt others, those are evil, I am aware of that people make mistakes but to keep forgiving and forgiving when they do horrible crimes, thats irrational to forgive someone like that and let more people get hurt by that person. And it makes no sence to sacrifice his son, for it to matter humanity would have stopped sinning but no, so that sacrifice was for naught, So God did bad parenting by getting his son killed for a bunch of dumnuts.

 

Sorry but, HE? The word "he" stands for the male gender aka god is a THEY if it should be genderless, and men does not symbolize authority, there would be no father without a woman to give birth to the children, it takes two components to make a child and none is more important then the other, oldfashioned conservative bogus is all I see.

 

Brother/sister, we are all sinners from the start of our life in this world we live. It is a hereditary sin passed on generation to generation from our first parents. We are all unrighteous. Our sinful nature affected our physical/emotional nature ( mortality, physical limitations, bad attitudes) and spiritual nature-our relationship with the Almighty Creator. But because God so loved the world, He gave His only begotten Son to wash away our sins through His cleansing blood flowed in the cross and so we are being saved. Believe in Him as a personal saviour of your life.

Edited by Randolpin
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Brother/sister, we are all sinners from the start of our life in this world we live. It is a hereditary sin passed on generation to generation from our first parents. We are all unrighteous. Our sinful nature affected our physical/emotional nature ( mortality, physical limitations, bad attitudes) and spiritual nature-our relationship with the Almighty Creator.

 

I think you've fallen to preaching. This doesn't seem to be a legitimate response to why someone doesn't believe. Perhaps we're done here?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think you've fallen to preaching. This doesn't seem to be a legitimate response to why someone doesn't believe. Perhaps we're done here?

 

I'm just answering the question, justifying that we are all "evils" because we are all sinners.

Edited by Randolpin
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Brother/sister, we are all sinners from the start of our life in this world we live. It is a hereditary sin passed on generation to generation from our first parents.

 

How can this possibly make sense? I think the Christian explanation for the presence of evil with an omnipotent god is frankly quite pathetic.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea - even when I was a Christian I used to think that just quoting John 3:16 at people was a pretty lame argument for the existence of God. It has nothing to do with it... but it is the big verse that all evangelists like to push as it 'supposedly' demonstrates Gods love... So, he allowed his son to murdered because he made us wrong? Yea, great.

 

"because we are all sinners".... I actually agree, but not because it is said in a 2000 year old book with many holes and errors and obvious falsehoods in it..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea - even when I was a Christian I used to think that just quoting John 3:16 at people was a pretty lame argument for the existence of God. It has nothing to do with it... but it is the big verse that all evangelists like to push as it 'supposedly' demonstrates Gods love... So, he allowed his son to murdered because he made us wrong? Yea, great.

 

"because we are all sinners".... I actually agree, but not because it is said in a 2000 year old book with many holes and errors and obvious falsehoods in it..

 

What are other reason why we are sinners?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Brother/sister, we are all sinners from the start of our life in this world we live. It is a hereditary sin passed on generation to generation from our first parents. We are all unrighteous. Our sinful nature affected our physical/emotional nature ( mortality, physical limitations, bad attitudes) and spiritual nature-our relationship with the Almighty Creator. But because God so loved the world, He gave His only begotten Son to wash away our sins through His cleansing blood flowed in the cross and so we are being saved. Believe in Him as a personal saviour of your life.

 

This is all about forgiving ourselves, because we're all guilty of something we're not proud of, but that's always in the past and in order to be content it needs to be forgotten; it's obvious that original sin is a scrambled version of this, no god required unless you need a reason to forgive yourself.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I'm just answering the question, justifying that we are all "evils" because we are all sinners.

 

I get it. That's a great answer for why many don't believe. Attribute all the wonderful things about us to god(s), and claim the evil that's left is pure human. What a horrible, spirit-deflating, anti-human outlook!

Link to post
Share on other sites

He gave an order to two people who had been intentionally created, by him, to be incapable of understanding the difference between right and wrong, and then punished them for predictably failing to listen to him.

They are already warned by God..

 

I think you mean-God created us having free will. God created us having free will so that we are not like robots following only what is intended to do. In other words, if God did not created free willed beings, those beings will not experience God's glory in many aspects like His mercy, love, Greatness etc. We are like robots incapable of realizing God's greatness or we are not conscious about it. But if we are free willed beings, we are conscious of God's glory. We have consciousness or awareness on ourselves and the surroundings. When you are conscious, you are free on what you want to do unlike robots.

Edited by Randolpin
Link to post
Share on other sites

An alternative interpretation of the Christian creation myth is that the snake was liberating us from an overbearing patriarch; encouraging Humanity on a wonderful yet painful journey to the stars.

 

An interesting number of parallels to the Promethean myth except there the bringer of knowledge is considered a hero to Humanity by the ancient Greeks, while Christians regard the bringer of knowledge the very Devil. Says everything you need about the churches attitude to knowledge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

An alternative interpretation of the Christian creation myth is that the snake was liberating us from an overbearing patriarch; encouraging Humanity on a wonderful yet painful journey to the stars.

 

An interesting number of parallels to the Promethean myth except there the bringer of knowledge is considered a hero to Humanity by the ancient Greeks, while Christians regard the bringer of knowledge the very Devil. Says everything you need about the churches attitude to knowledge.

 

 

God is the Creator of all. After our first parents ate the apple, they become knowledgable of good and evil so we know the acts of right and wrong. The snake who is Satan, wants us to rebel also against God and became like God. This is the very reason why Satan became a fallen angel because He wants to be like God and proud of Himself. Like God in the sense that we don't depend on Him, instead we depend on ourselves, on our own knowledge and abilities.

Edited by Randolpin
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.