And all this time I thought you were a theist..
Well I am...
Do you believe in miracles?
- Thread starter Why?
- Start date
Well I am...
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
And yet you agree it is irrational to believe in God ? lol
Well yeah, but irrationality has nothing to do with the truth, technically it was irrational to believe the Earth revolved around the Sun before there was evidence, regardless if its true or not...I care more about the actual truth than rationality...
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Uhm, maybe you should look up the definition of 'rational'.
Anyhow, your statement here makes your previous point pretty mute. How did you come to the conclusion that your believe is based on truth and that atheism is false ? If you came to that conclusion through and irrational process then your conclusion is pretty much faulty.
Well I mean "rational" as in "logical", technically believing in lots of things that are now known to be true before was there was evidence was irrational...
The way I came to this conclusion is by my own personal experiences, observations, experiments, etc...and also somethings in science, I use to never believe in a personal God at all, and thought it was all myths or symbolic at best
These foolish atheists, they believe "evidence causes something to become true", so they say they'll never believe without evidence, according to them something cannot be true and have no evidence
Something cannot be declared true without evidence. Until then, the Loch Ness monster, God, Zeus, and the FSM are all just unsupported ideas.
ROFL, thanks for the reconfirmation, something is true with or without evidence, again you use another illogical atheistic argument with Zeus and the Loch Ness Monster, such a fool, I wonder when you'll realize its illogical and irrational
Using your logic "The Earth didn't revolve around the Sun UNTIL there was evidence" ROFL ahahahaha, man these foolish atheists are so funny, you really believe "evidence causes something to become true", the actual truth you can careless about, which is why atheists are fools, they don't care about the truth at all
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Believing in something without a scrap of evidence (and while it is totally contradictory with nature) is irrational.
Are these experiments verifiable by other people ? Can they be repeated with the same results ?
Foolish atheists eh ? :bugeye:
Evidence does not cause something to be true.
Something can be true without evidence, but you can't know that until you do have evidence. Therefor it is irrational to believe it without any evidence.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
No, he said something cannot be declared true without evidence. Meaning you can't know it's true when you have no evidence supporting it.
Yeah, and also disbelieving it too if its unverifiable (something atheists cannot handle)
So you agree with me, regardless of if something is actually true or false, its irrational to believe its true without evidence
Well all of it can be repeated yes, some of it isn't experimentally verifiableEnmos said:
Right, so you again are supporting my argument, the rational response is that its unknown whether or not God exists, not atheism or theism which are both irrationalEnmos said:
Yes it can, you declare anything to be true, if it's really true, its true, if its really false, its false...
Right, so you agree with me, the rational response is not atheism but agnosticism...Enmost said:
You are correct that it's rational to admit the existence of God is unknown. However, the existence of human mythology is well documented, therefore classifying God as another myth, a story, a piece of literary invention in the absense of any real evidence is the logical conclusion.
Well what makes you think its a literary invention? Lots of things in these literary inventions are shown to be true only in modern times, ofcourse atheists will say "Yeah well, its just a lucky guess, there's no reason to believe in God or anything supernatural"
I don't understand whats irrational about these supposed myths
Well, it's from a book. Books aren't evidence, since they are human inventions.
Books can be evidence, for instance if I wrote down something that happened and 5000 years pass the only evidence remaining that it happened is the book I wrote
Most of the supposed myths are true or have a lot of truth in them, but all of them have much deeper stories and truths that are unknown to us, lots of unknown truths exist, lots of things left out of scriptures, the truth is the only thing I want, the only thing I seek
The most reliable parts of the Bible are the words of Jesus Chrsit himself...
I'm not debating that certain parts of the bible contain philosophically interesting, even true ideas. However, when you talk of literal facts, such as the exodus of the Jews from Egypt, that is not supported by any archeological evidence.
That's not to say it couldn't be an inspirational message for those that are oppressed or enslaved.
That's not to say it couldn't be an inspirational message for those that are oppressed or enslaved.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Yes, I agree.
However the existence of God is unlikely in the extreme, therefor it is not nearly as irrational to assume God doesn't exist than to assume He does.
Also, why aren't you agnostic if you really believe what you just said ?
Can you please tell me why its unlikely? Atheists always say that but can never explain why except for "oh well I'm a foolish person, so I'll say since I don't believe in a FSM I also don't believe in God" or "I'm such an amazing fool that I think since there's no evidence when there shouldn't be evidence present that it indicates that God doesn't exist"
Also I already explained why I'm not agnostic, its because my personal experiences, read my previous post
The universe seems to move from simplicity towards complexity over time, so a God, which is inherently a complex entity, is unlikely to exist before there was any time for that complexity to come about.
Also, God resembles the early Jews in most respects, coincidence?
Also, God resembles the early Jews in most respects, coincidence?
Wtf are you talking about? An unborn, unmade, unchanging, ever-existing God most certainly exists, the only thing atheists say is "well in order to escape this I have so say that God is so complex that the unborn thing cannot be God"
But no one ever said God was complex as in having many parts, etc...like atheists have to believe in order to preserve the atheistic faith, these foolish atheists, they have to escape all theistic conclusions in order to preserve their faith instead of being agnostics
Also if some QM interpretations are correct then a first observer which caused all existence would be likely (God), or an original observer, or an unborn from which all universes come from
So tell me why is it irrational to believe that there is no unborn, unmade, ever-existing as opposed to believing there is?