Absurd things Christians say...

[swarm]

You can define God as ...

You can define god to your heart's content, but it don't mean spit.

 

[takethewarhome]

You can define god to your heart's content, but it don't mean spit.

I agree. God is the least defined thing we know of [or don't].

 

[Lori_7]

I never said I don't want god to exist, I said I don't believe in god. So why do I have to believe before it shows itself.

Shouldn't be a requirement at all for an omnipotent being.

you don't have to believe before. how could you? you just have to sincerely want to know one way or the other, and logic would have it that if god is in fact god, then it could handle the task of providing you with an answer. but you have stated that you've already made up your mind. why would you ask?

Sure. But my point was do you believe in bigfoot ? If you don't why spend energy searching for something you are certain does not exist ?

i don't know about bigfoot. but why on earth would i care?

And children believe in Santa claus as well.

that's because their parents lie to them.

Why is there a responsibility to search for god, or try and understand god ?

well, if god is god, then there's an assumption of creator, source of truth and understanding, possibly a spiritual realm. i consider these things relevant to my life. you know, unlike bigfoot.

 

[jpappl]

Originally Posted by jpappl
I never said I don't want god to exist, I said I don't believe in god. So why do I have to believe before it shows itself.

Shouldn't be a requirement at all for an omnipotent being. ”

you don't have to believe before. how could you? you just have to sincerely want to know one way or the other, and logic would have it that if god is in fact god, then it could handle the task of providing you with an answer. but you have stated that you've already made up your mind. why would you ask?

This is the common response to this issue. If only we atheist would try harder god would show itself to us. Your being contradictory here. First saying that

you don't start out with that premise. you start out with the possibility and the assumption that if god is indeed an entity, and worthy of the name god, then it should be able to handle proving it's existence to you.

and then saying I need to believe in it or seek it.

So which is it. Does god show itself to me without me seeking it or not.

Sure. But my point was do you believe in bigfoot ? If you don't why spend energy searching for something you are certain does not exist ? ”

i don't know about bigfoot. but why on earth would i care?

Make it anything that you don't believe exists. Why would you try to seek it or find it if you are pretty sure it will be a waste of time.

There has to be some justification for you to seek it out. There is no evidence of a god that I have ever encountered so why seek it ?

If I saw or found evidence of one I would be damn curious that's for sure.

And children believe in Santa claus as well. ”

that's because their parents lie to them.

Yep

Why is there a responsibility to search for god, or try and understand god ? ”

well, if god is god, then there's an assumption of creator, source of truth and understanding, possibly a spiritual realm. i consider these things relevant to my life. you know, unlike bigfoot.

At this is a good point and I don't mean to make the two on even playing fields when considering the importance of such a discovery. I was merely trying to offer an example of a lack of evidence to prompt the search.

I understand seeking spirituality because to me this does not have to include a specific deity, it's in a way reaching out and opening yourself to the unknown, but I like to consider the unknown, unknown. Being open to previous unknowns is understandable.

Seeking a specific entity seems absurd since there is no evidence of such an entity, I don't even know what I would be looking for.

When you talk about creation, this is a great place to make my point. All of the religious texts which is where the notion of god is presented as an entity are full of errors especially the part about creation. So the evidence is damning not supportive of such an entity.

 

[Lori_7]

You know what I think j? You know...that religion is detrimental.

 

[jpappl]

You know what I think j? You know...that religion is detrimental.

Yes, I agree. The messages, whether it be from a god or from us with the best of intentions has been perverted by it, or more specifically, people who use it in a way it was never intended to be used.

 

[NMSquirrel]

But God isn't just some metaphysical concept, he is supposed to interact with the physical world, answer prayers, guide events. If such phenomenon exist, they can be studied by science.

I believe he interacts through ppl..and a certain amount of the butterfly effect ties into this..science wants to prove one way or the other with certainty. again i believe this will never be done..to prove one way or the other would not be beneficial to society,

Because his believers insert their beliefs into many areas of political life that affect me. His believers include presidents of the United States, and those beliefs sometimes influence these powerful people to deny the revealed knowledge of science, leading to bad decisions, even to wars and death.

This i agree with 100%..which is why i am anti-religion..it comes down to two choices for me..do I listen to MAN or to GOD..
Listening to God takes alot of discernment..Listening to man just requires a 'do as your told' mentality (ask the tough questions and ppl get Pissed cause they dont have the answer and it makes them feel worthless)

lol, very funny. So what part of the bible do you think they got right if any ?

I always liked Proverbs personally, lots of wisdom in that book.(test all things, hold onto what is good)

but the term 'right' is relative, there are alot of facts in the bible that have been proven,and still ppl ask for proof..if man were to confirm the existence of everything in the bible as true..they would miss the point and still they would ask for more proof..

So why are you using it as "the Bible is the closest we will ever get to understanding what god is about". If it is so full of errors and omissions, who is to say that it's not all as I believe a bunch of nonsense when it discusses the notion of god.

im not sure if this question is for or against...

Which is further open to interpretation. So again, if none of it is the claimed literal word of god, then why believe in the god ?

so is this a 'throw the baby out with the bathwater' question?
(find one thing wrong with the bible..and its all wrong?)

See to me this is just sidestepping the issue. When you believe in something like this, god, but have no real evidence of such, it becomes something other than an entity that we can communicate with and interact with.

The claim of what god is keeps changing, the more science provides evidence that contradicts the religious texts, the more people move away from the texts and change what god is supposed to represent.

science has also proved evidence that confirms the religious texts..
(again ask yourself if proving god existence would be benificial to society)

Frankly, it's a cop out.

That is why people like to discuss the notion of god and not the religious texts that are supposed to be the source of evidence. Bit by bit that source is becoming an obstacle.

have you ever tried to quote from the bible to convince someone they are wrong?they will come up with several more verses trying to prove they are right..
btw..scientist will do the same thing with their facts..

So instead of discussing the errors in their source of the belief, they want to talk about something so untangible there is no way to prove it does not exist.

Then, the myth can live on.

All due respect to you as a person of course, but I just don't see the hard questions being asked of your faith here.

the hard question that comes up in these issues seems to me to be the struggle we have as individuals with our own feelings of worth..or more to the point our battle against our feelings of worthlessness.

it does not mean you are worthless if you do not believe in GOD, you are allowed by god to make your own choices (he can still utilize you if you dont believe.)

 

[spidergoat]

I believe he interacts through ppl..and a certain amount of the butterfly effect ties into this..science wants to prove one way or the other with certainty. again i believe this will never be done..to prove one way or the other would not be beneficial to society,

Science cannot prove with 100% certainty, but it can show whether the data supports the hypothesis or not beyond a reasonable doubt. I don't think religion is beneficial to society as a whole, although some aspects of it are OK.

This i agree with 100%..which is why i am anti-religion..it comes down to two choices for me..do I listen to MAN or to GOD..
Listening to God takes alot of discernment..Listening to man just requires a 'do as your told' mentality (ask the tough questions and ppl get Pissed cause they dont have the answer and it makes them feel worthless)

If you believe in God, then you are more likely to believe in a theistic religion. Belief is a prerequisite, and it makes people believe in religious texts which teach all sorts of harmful lessons. Listening to what man has learned through science doesn't have anything to do with a "do as you are told" mentality. Scientists do not get pissed when they don't know the answer, that particular perversion is limited to religious fundamentalists.

 

[NMSquirrel]

Scientists do not get pissed when they don't know the answer, that particular perversion is limited to religious fundamentalists.

....such a defensive statement coupled with a slam..
how many scientist have you met..
it is not good to stereotype either scientist or religious ppl..we are all still ppl and susceptible to our own humanity, both sides have flaws and strengths..
please do not make this a focus on who is worth more.

 

[spidergoat]

I should say that individual scientists can be as egocentric as anyone else. However, there is at least in science a healthy respect for doubt and proving people wrong.

 

[Adstar]

I mention some things that Christians have said that even Christians would probably find insane.
A Catholic Nun said to my father as a child, that if you go the Sunday Mass for 21 days in a row without missing a day you will automatically get into Heaven.
Do these people not realize that kids grow up? How can someone take them seriously when they spout rubbish like this?

Well it was a "Catholic" Nun... The Catholic Church has been adding traditions to the Word for centuries; i guess she was just trying to introduce another one. She probably was not insane. She was probably just being unwise.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

 

[Adstar]

Yeah right.

All you do is quote a bunch of scripture, which leaves the reader with nothing but interpretation and then act as if it's the word of god.

Well the more the Word of God and the less of me the better. When i am weak He is strong. When i am strong i get in the way of Him.

Your arrogance is believing that we should all accept the scripture as the word of god and I do not.

Ummm No. Wether you accept or Reject it is in your court. I am just happy to be able to give people the opportunity to consider it. I am gladdened when people accept it and saddened when they reject it.

So instead of justifying your belief with sound reason, you just quote scripture, which is a typical tactic of someone who has no justification.

The Message of the Scripture is the sound reason i believed.

Run and and hide behind the scripture because it works amongst those who have swallowed it already, hook line and sinker.

Horse before the cart thinking there: It is the Word of God that has the power to convince, to move one to believe with it's truth. The Message has power to change attitudes.

I reject the bible as the word of god, it is filled with errors and thus is to be treated as fiction.

So be it. That’s your decision.

I don't treat or believe anybody is above or below me based on whether they are a believer or not.

I don't believe this statement for a moment.

But don't expect me to accept your reasons for the belief when your not using reason in the first place. You are just accepting it on faith.

The reason i believed was because of the power of the reasoning in the Word of God as a Whole. Of course since my initial belief i have had confirmations of it time and time again. I have very little need for faith now as of the type you seem to interpret faith to be.

I have no need for faith that God exists or that God is the God of Abraham. Or that Jesus is the Redeemer. But i still need Faith as in Faith/trust in Him. And i need His help in having the courage to stand up for Him.

So in your own words please. What is your justification for the belief.

That’s like asking me to provide justification for my belief that grass is green.

It just is.

You can demand this or that or anything you want. I am under no call to justify anything. God is Justified and He is the justifier of those who believe Him. You chose to reject the Message of God as evil or foolish? And then from that point spend your efforts trying to disprove God by your reasoning. What Vanity. You and all the atheists in this place can do Nothing to disprove God.


All Praise The Ancient Of Days

 

[NMSquirrel]

I should say that individual scientists can be as egocentric as anyone else. However, there is at least in science a healthy respect for doubt and proving people wrong.

there is a few ppl in the science field who have that respect you are talking about.i wont argue that point..but i will argue that the desire to prove someone wrong is not limited to scientist.....

 

[jpappl]

Squirrel,

“ Originally Posted by jpappl
lol, very funny. So what part of the bible do you think they got right if any ? ”

I always liked Proverbs personally, lots of wisdom in that book.(test all things, hold onto what is good)

but the term 'right' is relative, there are alot of facts in the bible that have been proven,and still ppl ask for proof..if man were to confirm the existence of everything in the bible as true..they would miss the point and still they would ask for more proof..

The historical facts don't prove their is a god and really have nothing to do with the notion.

The information that claims there is a god, IE how we got here, when and who did it is completely bogus.

Otherwise I understand there is some value in there. But not enough to take a leap and say it proves there is a god.

“ Originally Posted by jpappl
So why are you using it as "the Bible is the closest we will ever get to understanding what god is about". If it is so full of errors and omissions, who is to say that it's not all as I believe a bunch of nonsense when it discusses the notion of god. ”

im not sure if this question is for or against...

This part:

"the Bible is the closest we will ever get to understanding what god is about".

Was your quote and that is what I was referring to.

Originally Posted by jpappl
Which is further open to interpretation. So again, if none of it is the claimed literal word of god, then why believe in the god ? ”

so is this a 'throw the baby out with the bathwater' question?
(find one thing wrong with the bible..and its all wrong?)

Find one thing wrong with the bible and it's not the word of god. Yes. And we aren't talking about one thing are we.

I am not suggesting we throw out the book, I am suggesting we take it's value for what it is and not make claims that are not supported by reality.

science has also proved evidence that confirms the religious texts..
(again ask yourself if proving god existence would be benificial to society)

Where or when has science proved the religious text prove there is a god ?

That would be news to me. I am assuming you are talking about historical reference which has nothing to do with evidence for God.

Proving god's existence would be the greatest discovery ever. It wouldn't change what we have done and it wouldn't change what we have learned through science, but of course it would have a massive impact on us as a species.

The question would remain, based on what we have learned so far, what kind of god is it and what part did it play in our being here.

“ Originally Posted by jpappl
So instead of discussing the errors in their source of the belief, they want to talk about something so untangible there is no way to prove it does not exist.

Then, the myth can live on.

All due respect to you as a person of course, but I just don't see the hard questions being asked of your faith here. ”

the hard question that comes up in these issues seems to me to be the struggle we have as individuals with our own feelings of worth..or more to the point our battle against our feelings of worthlessness.

it does not mean you are worthless if you do not believe in GOD, you are allowed by god to make your own choices (he can still utilize you if you dont believe.)

The hard questions are what am I using as a basis for my faith ?

If it's the bible or the quran or any other religious texts, what is the certainty that I have that the information in the text is the word of god ?

If it's not, what am I believing in and why ?

It I believe it is, what justification do I have to accept this considering the contradictions with reality ?

If I am not using a religious text for my faith, what kind of god is it ? Does it really have any say in any individuals life ?

etc etc.

 

[Lori_7]

jpappl,

would it make sense to you that god wouldn't want you to rely on a book to determine whether it exists?

 

[jpappl]

Adstar,

“ Your arrogance is believing that we should all accept the scripture as the word of god and I do not. ”

Ummm No. Wether you accept or Reject it is in your court. I am just happy to be able to give people the opportunity to consider it. I am gladdened when people accept it and saddened when they reject it.

First of all thanks for not quoting scripture.

That is correct. It is both of our choices. But in being happy to give me the opportunity, it boils down to preaching the gospel and not offering me justification for your own belief, why you believe short of the scripture.

Step back away from that and tell me what your justification is because the bible can not be the word of god unless you accept that everything we have learned from our scientific discoveries are lies.

So instead of justifying your belief with sound reason, you just quote scripture, which is a typical tactic of someone who has no justification. ”

The Message of the Scripture is the sound reason i believed.

The message is one thing. The actual claims which the message is built around are bogus. So the message can be of great value to humanity, but the claims do nothing to prove their is a god and not only don't offer a justification for the belief, they offer evidence against the belief.

Horse before the cart thinking there: It is the Word of God that has the power to convince, to move one to believe with it's truth. The Message has power to change attitudes.

The message has the power to change attitudes so does any self help book or any other inspirational book.

How is it the word of god if it's rife with errors. Explain please.

I don't treat or believe anybody is above or below me based on whether they are a believer or not. ”

I don't believe this statement for a moment.

Well you don't know me and I have no reason to lie. I have friends that are christian and muslim, people who I respect and interact with all the time. I don't have to agree with them on this issue, nor them with me, just like I have friends on different sides of the political equation.

I also don't like to discuss religion and politics with them too much, as that is not an area of common ground in which we interact. But we do discuss it, just not going to ruin our friendships over it.

It's not worth it. None of us have the truth market cornered.

The question can be turned around, do you have respect for me as an atheist ?

“ But don't expect me to accept your reasons for the belief when your not using reason in the first place. You are just accepting it on faith. ”

The reason i believed was because of the power of the reasoning in the Word of God as a Whole. Of course since my initial belief i have had confirmations of it time and time again. I have very little need for faith now as of the type you seem to interpret faith to be.

I have no need for faith that God exists or that God is the God of Abraham. Or that Jesus is the Redeemer. But i still need Faith as in Faith/trust in Him. And i need His help in having the courage to stand up for Him.

Constidering you believe the bible to be the words of god, it's still faith.

“ So in your own words please. What is your justification for the belief. ”

That’s like asking me to provide justification for my belief that grass is green.

It just is.

You can demand this or that or anything you want. I am under no call to justify anything. God is Justified and He is the justifier of those who believe Him. You chose to reject the Message of God as evil or foolish? And then from that point spend your efforts trying to disprove God by your reasoning. What Vanity. You and all the atheists in this place can do Nothing to disprove God.

I can't prove something does not exist correct.

The justification is not for me, it's for you, what justification do you have for the belief based on reason. There is none, only faith that there is a god.

Which is your decision and belief and your choice.

I don't claim to reject messages from religious texts, there is of course value in them, I reject the notion they prove god and that they are filled with the words of god.

This is not just you against atheists. If you choose a religious text to be devoted to, it's you against all of the other religions notions of who and what god is.

Which one is right and why would god allow so many to be proposed ?

To test your faith ?

If so, then everyone else is just here for your entertainment.

That's vanity.

 

[jpappl]

jpappl,

would it make sense to you that god wouldn't want you to rely on a book to determine whether it exists?

Yes. But that ship has sailed for any religions notion of god.

 

[Lori_7]

Yes. But that ship has sailed for any religions notion of god.

i reiterate...god is not religious.

AND, that's not true. for example, where in the bible does it describe someone interacting with, learning from, or experiencing god from reading a book?

OR is it filled to the brim with descriptions of people experiencing god through the spirit? or through god himself...hearing his voice, observing signs, etc?

 

[spidergoat]

If there is a God, and you talk to him, it is not unreasonable to assume other people have talked to him and wrote down their thoughts in the texts that created Religion.

 

[Lori_7]

If there is a God, and you talk to him, it is not unreasonable to assume other people have talked to him and wrote down their thoughts in the texts that created Religion.

well there you go. and now for some reason that religion has become a substitute for the interaction itself. why is that?