Theist tries to tell atheists what they believe

[Gawdzilla Sama]

You can call me anything but "late for supper". That doesn't mean you're right. Holding belief in something that's impossible to prove, to the point (for some believers) of killing people who disagree is extremely problematical. But you won't review the situation rationally.

 

[davewhite04]

Exactly. If you come here with the attitude "I know God exists, I am right, if you disagree you're a moron" it won't go well for you.

If you come with that attitude you might learn. If you philosophise over a religious idea you might not agree with but it is worth exploring you have to assume a God(s) exists to learn anything sometimes. If you just leave one line offensive slaps and juvenile comments you will learn nothing.

 

[Trek]

You can call me anything but "late for supper". That doesn't mean you're right. Holding belief in something that's impossible to prove, to the point (for some believers) of killing people who disagree is extremely problematical. But you won't review the situation rationally.

Huh??

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Like that.

 

[DaveC426913]

Ten evidence you seek is on your own concoction of what you set God to be.

Then correct me.

But you can't, can you? You've admitted you can't.

 

[davewhite04]

You can call me anything but "late for supper". That doesn't mean you're right. Holding belief in something that's impossible to prove, to the point (for some believers) of killing people who disagree is extremely problematical. But you won't review the situation rationally.

I agree.

Jesus said... those who kill with the sword die by the sword. The Christian kings/queens etc. throughout the middle ages practiced the opposite of what Jesus taught.

Any Christian killing non believers(where is this happening?) isn't practicing Christianity.

So who do you blame?

 

[DaveC426913]

If you come with that attitude you might learn.

The beauty of real things is that they exist regardless of one's "attitude" toward them.

It's pretty hard to deny the Sun and the wind.

If we need a proper "attitude" to hear about God, that means we have to put aside our rational mind to make it ripe for indoctrination.

 

[davewhite04]

The beauty of real things is that they exist regardless of one's "attitude" toward them.

It's pretty hard to deny the Sun and the wind.

If we need a proper "attitude" to hear about God, that means we have to put aside our rational mind to make it ripe for indoctrination.

I don't think so. Not on sciforums!

In philosophy sometimes you need to assume unknown conditions to make progress in a fruitful dialog.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I agree.

Jesus said... those who kill with the sword die by the sword. The Christian kings/queens etc. throughout the middle ages practiced the opposite of what Jesus taught.

Any Christian killing non believers(where is this happening?) isn't practicing Christianity.

So who do you blame?

Humans.

 

[DaveC426913]

In philosophy sometimes you need to assume unknown conditions to make progress in a fruitful dialog.

As I said, that would be fine.

But "God exists, whether you deny him to or not, you lying heathens!" is NOT philosophy. And that's what y'all have been doing.

 

[davewhite04]

Humans.

If you knew the Christian God existed, would you still blame humans?

 

[davewhite04]

As I said, that would be fine.

But "God exists, whether you deny him to or not, you lying heathens!" is NOT philosophy. And that's what y'all have been doing.

Maybe some atheists need to critque their own attitudes before blaming others. I do agree that some theists get stuck at the first fence in discussion, but so do atheists.

It's a handbag fight, with both parties to blame and the discussion going nowhere just a game of "You're stupid".

 

[DaveC426913]

Maybe some atheists need to critque their own attitudes before blaming others. I do agree that some theists get stuck at the first fence in discussion, but so do atheists.

It's a handbag fight, with both parties to blame and the discussion going nowhere just a game of "You're stupid".

Some, a bit more aggressively than others.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

If you knew the Christian God existed, would you still blame humans?

If frogs had wings they wouldn't bump their ass so much.

Nonsense ball back in your court.

 

[davewhite04]

If frogs had wings they wouldn't bump their ass so much.

Nonsense ball back in your court.

Tried to discuss something and this is the answer.

Do you see Dave?

 

[Trek]

Then correct me.

You can’t correct a world view, because a worldview is not purely an intellectual pursuit.
Your worldview is aligned with your deep core personality with an accumulation of experience From moment to moment over years.

You pretend you want evidence of God all the while knowing that for you, currently there is no God.
You have to come out of that worldview, nobody can convince you to.
Yet you ask to be convinced, not that you want to know about God. But to feel justified in your denial. If you wasn’t in denial, you wouldn’t ask anyone to prove God to you.

Ask any theist if he or she believed in God because somebody convinced them to. They may say they were inspired by someone or something. But they always come to the realisation by themselves. Because it is entirely personal.

But you can't, can you? You've admitted you can't.

It’s not my job to correct you. I’m busy dealing with my own situation. But I’ll give you some advice.
Be honest with yourself, because that’s the basic standard of being truthful. You can refer to God as God. You can be respectful to the idea of God. And it doesn’t mean you believe in God, but you will get some understanding from the person you chatting to.
It may not happen overnight for you, but a little respect can opens things.

 

[DaveC426913]

You can’t correct a world view, because a worldview is not purely an intellectual pursuit.

So no then.
For a second time, you cannot produce any evidence that god exists outside your head.

You pretend you want evidence of God all the while knowing that for you, currently there is no God.

Just like you do with unicorns. That's how rational thinking works. We don't accept that 1+1=3 until and unless someone can show us evidence of it.

You are leading us all directly to the conclusion that belief in God requires irrational thinking.

If you wasn’t in denial, you wouldn’t ask anyone to prove God to you.

It is you who assert that God is real, yet you cannot demonstrate it.

How do you know you are not simply hallucinating? You don't need to answer that; you will have your reasons for being sure, but the nature of rationality requires external reasons for accepting something exists; it is not sufficient to see something in your head and decide that it is objectively true.

Be honest with yourself, because that’s the basic standard of being truthful.

You are one of the most dishonest members on this forum. You've gaslit us with "that's your atheism talking" and "you are in denial" countless times. Unlike your empty claims that I am lying, I can quote the innumerable times you have attempted to gaslight members in this thread.

You're gaslighting again, here, suggesting I am not being honest with myself. This hurts your credibility - it says nothing about me, but it speaks to your tactics that you must gaslight to keep treading water in a discussion you've lost confidence in.

Instead of asking me to trust you that god exists, why don't you hit me with something irrefutable?

You can refer to God as God. You can be respectful to the idea of God. And it doesn’t mean you believe in God, but you will get some understanding from the person you chatting to.
It may not happen overnight for you, but a little respect can opens things.

I have been respectful. At no time have I cast aspersions upon god.

My objection is not to god as a concept, my objection has always been to your odious gaslighting that he is objectively real.

You have called me a liar several times, amongst other epithets. You - of all people - have no business demanding respect from anyone here.

 

[gmilam]

It’s not my job to correct you. I’m busy dealing with my own situation.

Yet you still take time out of your busy schedule to post in an obviously antagonistic thread only to tell us that you don't have anything... It appears to me that you are still "arguing for sport" - aka, being a troll.

 

[billvon]

If you philosophise over a religious idea you might not agree with but it is worth exploring you have to assume a God(s) exists to learn anything sometimes. If you just leave one line offensive slaps and juvenile comments you will learn nothing.

Well, no. You have to be able to examine the philosophy of the other side; you don't have to believe it.

I sometimes argue with flat Earthers. To do so effectively I do not have to assume the Earth is flat. I just have to understand why they have come to that misunderstanding.

 

[DaveC426913]

It appears to me that you are still "arguing for sport" - aka, being a troll.

At least he's conceded:

Show us any reason to conclude your god exists anywhere but in your head.
You still can't do that, can you?

You’re right atheist.. I can’t
Never said I could, neither have I attempted to.