Win Prizes Ask an Atheist II

[Gethelred]

Welcome to the Ask an Atheist thread II.

Previous part:

Win Prizes - Ask an Atheist - Shoe's on the other foot now!

Alright, we're going to have a change of tack. As I'm sure you can see, the thread title has been changed to Ask an Atheist. People who have a question to ask of the atheists who populate this thread - more than the christians do - should feel free to ask questions of them. If you've still got...

www.bigfooty.com

Standard board rules apply.

 

[Total Power]

Einstein once said and let me paraphrase as my memory is fading
“ the evidence of God is nowhere and everywhere …when one leads with their soul then the evidence becomes overwhelming. “

I think it was Einstein.

Lies. Einstein said he doesn't believe in a god which judges people, punishes people and listens to people. He was a pantheist, he doesn't believe in a soul.

Source your quote.

 

[Total Power]

Read above.
Very well written.
Christianity is not provable by science, nor is belief in God.
Believers do not need proof.
That you folk can be so adamantly convinced it is all impossible and bunkum, without proof, is the question believers have.

This is not a court of law btw.

Proof has to be provided, orelse anyone can claim anything and that will be right by default. What makes Joseph Smith's claims of revelation any worse than Moses or Mohammed?

the question I KEEP coming back to is a common one: if you place god in a non physical realm and keep him there, then your fine. Faith can power a belief in an undetectable entity.

But once this entity interacts with the physical world, (as always happens if your god is going to be useful at all) now your operating in the domain of the detectable, the measurable and the observable.

That’s where science engages and challenges the idea that god is the best explanation for the things being observed.

Like all the prayers that are going on for Palestine..if God saves the first Christians from damnation, i will be ok with it. Instead God chooses to listen to privileged white people and help them in their head.

Nope, doesn't do it in any objective way.

 

[evolved2]

1.

https://files.alislam.cloud/pdf/Ten-Proofs-for-The-Existence-of-God.pdf

that's the Islamic description, and an interesting read, carltonchelsea

2.

10 Proofs for Existence of God

I have met many people who think that a belief in God is like believing in Santa Claus. You must simply "just believe." While faith is the key aspect to knowing God, it is not blind. There are many great reasons for a belief in a transcendent, prime-mover, and Uncaused

www.brandoncannon.com

Those "proofs" are easily dismantled.

Would you care to pick the best 2 or 3 and explain why you find them convincing?

 

[evolved2]

Very good, so can you satisfactorily prove beyond doubt that God exists, that God created all things, that we were meant to have a relationship with God?
Of course you can't, so while that doubt will exist for eternity, there will always be a proportion of humanity who will defer to the possibility that God is real.

I can prove biblegod isn't real.

"Is anyone among you sick? Let him summon the elders of the church, and let them pray over him, having anointed him with oil in the name of the Lord. And the prayer of faith will restore the one being ill, and the Lord will raise him."
James 5:14-15

Do you believe that passage is literally true?

 

[Vdubs]

Those "proofs" are easily dismantled.

Would you care to pick the best 2 or 3 and explain why you find them convincing?

I'm bored by those proofs, they are now redundant. I want you to utterly convince me that God never existed, that Jesus is not God, and that peoples' lives are not changed by being born again.

 

[evolved2]

I'm bored by those proofs, they are now redundant. I want you to utterly convince me that God never existed, that Jesus is not God, and that peoples' lives are not changed by being born again.

Changed lives are extremely common with or without god. I'm sure you can think of examples.

It's probably for the best that you keep believing at this stage of your life. I don't get flybuys points in the afterlife for deconverting people, and the motivation isn't particularly strong right now.

There are bigger threats on the horizon than Christians.

 

[Vdubs]

Changed lives are extremely common with or without god. I'm sure you can think of examples.

It's probably for the best that you keep believing at this stage of your life. I don't get flybuys points in the afterlife for deconverting people, and the motivation isn't particularly strong right now.

There are bigger threats on the horizon than Christians.

So you can not reply. I'm not asking to be deconverted, just asking you to prove without doubt why you know that God does not exist, and that people can not get to God by being Christians.

 

[evolved2]

So you can not reply. I'm not asking to be deconverted, just asking you to prove without doubt why you know that God does not exist, and that people can not get to God by being Christians.

Win Prizes - Ask an Atheist II

Welcome to the Ask an Atheist thread II. Previous part: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/ask-an-atheist-shoes-on-the-other-foot-now.1295001/ Standard board rules apply.

www.bigfooty.com

Impenetrable proof that biblegod isn't real to the rational man. Do you consider yourself a man of logic and reason or a man of faith?

 

[Total Power]

I'm bored by those proofs, they are now redundant. I want you to utterly convince me that God never existed, that Jesus is not God, and that peoples' lives are not changed by being born again.

Show me where Jesus says himself that he is God, except for that one line in John? not his disciples...but he himself. A lot of people even now claim their guru is God. Happens regularly in cults. Where did Jesus claim he himself is God?

There's too much evidence in the synoptics:

Mathew 24:36 But about that day or hour no one knows, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.

So only the father knew? who is also the son?

John also states this:

“If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me"

He is glorified by YWH, but he wasn't God. Without God he is nothing.

Before you say he is god in human forum, Trinity states all 3 were 100% god. Anything less means he isn't a god.

As i said if he was that important there would be historical records. There are historical records of Buddha, why none, except for the Gospels which weren't eyewitness statements?

Another question, how old do you think John was when Jesus was preaching? John was re-written for over 1,000 years you realise this, right?

 

[Total Power]

I'm bored by those proofs, they are now redundant. I want you to utterly convince me that God never existed, that Jesus is not God, and that peoples' lives are not changed by being born again.

I want you to convince me that multiple God doesn't exist? Allah pretty much opposes everything Jesus said, yet you claim he is the same God. There's many gods, you are not able to defend your own argument yet want us to prove there's no pink unicorn in the universe?

The OT clearly hints on multiple gods in several passages.

 

[Roylion]

Those "proofs" are easily dismantled.

They are.

The Kalam Cosmological Argument for example - an argument vehemently supported by Christian apologist William Lane Craig for example - has a number of logical flaws.

For example in physics, things do not begin to exist. The conservation of mass means that things form from other things already in existence. So it is meaningless to state that they have a cause because they begin to exist.

In quantum mechanics, things happen that are not caused. For example, the spontaneous generation of virtual particles randomly appear, even in complete vacuum

It is also far from certain that the universe had a beginning. Just because most things within the universe require a cause/causes, does not mean that the universe itself requires a cause.

And even if we entertain the conclusion that the universe was created by a 'god;, it still doesn't explain where that God came from - who designed the designer? If we can simply conclude that the God created itself (or always existed), then why also simply conclude that the universe created itself (or always existed)?

 

[Roylion]

I'm bored by those proofs, they are now redundant.

Of course they are. They are all flawed for different reasons.

I want you to utterly convince me that God never existed,

I don't need to convince you.

There is no need to prove to you there is no 'god'.

The claim of the existence of God is an unfalsifiable claim - it can be proven neither right nor wrong.

But as you continue to assert that 'God' exists and is real (and you continue to do this in the thread that is now titled 'Ask an Atheist') it is reasonable to dismiss your claim there is a god, as non-factual. I can't definitely prove that, but I see no reason to take your claim seriously or consider that it might be valid.

The burden of proof is on the believer to give us some reason for believing in God. After all, if there is no evidence for the existence of God, then the probability that he/she/it exists is very low. If there is no evidence that there is a God, we can have no rational reason for believing that he/she/it exists, while we have very good reasons for believing that he/she/it does not exist, namely, that there is no evidence at all for the existence of a putative reality bearing the extraordinary descriptions given to God.

So until you can provide objective evidence in support of your faith based beliefs, I can certainly dismiss your claim that there is a god as non-factual and accordingly live my life with the concept of 'god' having no meaning or presence in my life.



I also see no reason to accept your claim that Jesus is divine or that he was resurrected from the dead.

that Jesus is not God,

There is no evidence that Jesus is god as you claimed. Why should that be believed?

and that peoples' lives are not changed by being born again.

That people change their lives by being 'born again' is not evidence that 'god' exists. People 'changing their lives' relies on those people's subjective personal experience of 'God' - which is neither testable nor verifiable by any observer. You're also claiming that those people's perceived personal experience with 'god' trumps any countervailing argument or evidence for God that is presented. So, your conviction that 'god exists' arises from purely subjective factors. Hence I see no reason to accept the premise that 'god exists'.

 

[SBD Gonzalez]

So you can not reply. I'm not asking to be deconverted, just asking you to prove without doubt why you know that God does not exist, and that people can not get to God by being Christians.

OK, you’re out of petrol.

You said you understood the video about the burden of proof and now you go straight back into ignoring it.

Your faith means everything to you. Revel in it. You’ve found the answer for you and that is wonderful. You have failed to intellectually convince anyone else however, and that is always going to be your problem, because religion by definition is an attempt to make the personal universal, and that cannot be done using logic, which is what the world relies on post-Enlightenment.

 

[Vdubs]

OK, you’re out of petrol.

You said you understood the video about the burden of proof and now you go straight back into ignoring it.

Your faith means everything to you. Revel in it. You’ve found the answer for you and that is wonderful. You have failed to intellectually convince anyone else however, and that is always going to be your problem, because religion by definition is an attempt to make the personal universal, and that cannot be done using logic, which is what the world relies on post-Enlightenment.

Ok, out of petrol?
I am never embarrassed to give an account for my faith, which is all an individual can do- have never been here to convince anyone else. Have always been under the impression that something that helps people should be shared, nothing else. That you guys have been helped by losing faith, or declining it, amen. I got questioned to the nth degree for the reasons for my faith, if not ridiculed at times, but we believers know that is part of the deal- no problem.
You make valid points, except that if after sharing a testimony, it is rejected or ridiculed, we know that there is little more to do. If sowing the seed is not good enough at the time, so be it. It is not a problem.
On a personal level, I too enjoy the discussion at times, hence the frequent flyer points, but it I do not feel defeated that nobody here agrees with anything I say. It's to be expected.

 

[Vdubs]

I want you to convince me that multiple God doesn't exist? Allah pretty much opposes everything Jesus said, yet you claim he is the same God. There's many gods, you are not able to defend your own argument yet want us to prove there's no pink unicorn in the universe?

The OT clearly hints on multiple gods in several passages.

Ask an atheist.

 

[Vdubs]

Win Prizes - Ask an Atheist II

Welcome to the Ask an Atheist thread II. Previous part: https://www.bigfooty.com/forum/threads/ask-an-atheist-shoes-on-the-other-foot-now.1295001/ Standard board rules apply.

www.bigfooty.com

Impenetrable proof that biblegod isn't real to the rational man. Do you consider yourself a man of logic and reason or a man of faith?

Yes.

 

[Roylion]

I am never embarrassed to give an account for my faith, which is all an individual can do- have never been here to convince anyone else.

Yet you continue to make statements in support of your belief as if they are actual truths that should not be rejected. I certainly understand that you believe what you do by faith. That's entirely your choice.

But it is by faith alone. There is no objective evidence provided that suggests what you claim, might be actually true.

 

[Boston tiger]

“Even the once-doubting Sir Lionel Luckhoo, identified by the Guinness Book of World Records as the most successful attorney in the world, was forced to conclude after an exhaustive analysis of the evidence, “I say unequivocally that the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus Christ is so overwhelming that it compels acceptance by proof which leaves absolutely no room for doubt.”

 

[liz]

“Even the once-doubting Sir Lionel Luckhoo, identified by the Guinness Book of World Records as the most successful attorney in the world, was forced to conclude after an exhaustive analysis of the evidence, “I say unequivocally that the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus Christ is so overwhelming that it compels acceptance by proof which leaves absolutely no room for doubt.”

Who or what are you quoting?

A quote without a source and attribution is useless.

 

[Roylion]

“Even the once-doubting Sir Lionel Luckhoo, identified by the Guinness Book of World Records as the most successful attorney in the world, was forced to conclude after an exhaustive analysis of the evidence, “I say unequivocally that the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus Christ is so overwhelming that it compels acceptance by proof which leaves absolutely no room for doubt.”

That's great.

Let's go through the evidence again.

Which one of these so called "facts" will we try first?

Joseph of Arimathea?
Empty tomb?
Experiences of the risen Jesus?
Disciples belief?

All of these "facts" are based on the hidden premise that the New Testament is an unvarnished historical record. They were hardly composed by unbiased observers and cannot be externally verified when it comes to their core claims about Jesus. Most arguments for the resurrection of Jesus are based on theological assumptions and perspectives and rarely on historical evidence.

As Richard Carrier said...

"Can you imagine a movement today claiming that a soldier in World War Two rose physically from the dead, but when you asked for proof all they offered you were a mere handful of anonymous religious tracts written in the 1980s? Would it be even remotely reasonable to believe such a thing on so feeble a proof? Well, no."

Any naturalistic explanation for the facts such as the empty tomb is much more probable, not to mention plausible, than the divinely-orchestrated miraculous resurrection story outlined in the Gospels.

And of course we've gone through all of this before.

 

[liz]

That you guys have been helped by losing faith, or declining it, amen.

Firatly, it’s not losing or declining faith. It’s rejection of the concept of an omnipotent supernatural being who creates everything. It’s rejection of a concept for which there is no objective evidence and that serves no explanatory purpose.

Secondly, we (or at least I - I shouldn’t deign to talk for others, even though I suspect most come from the same place) don’t hold our point of view to help ourselves. It’s just what it is, regardless of whether it “helps” me as an person.

I get my “help” from a perspective that we have a short time on Earth and we better make the most of it. Because then there’s nothing. And from a moral code that isn’t based on fear of punishment, or based on antiquated “rules” written by men thousands of years ago, but is based on a simpler edict of treating others as I would like to be treated myself.

 

[Frank Bunn]

It is also far from certain that the universe had a beginning. Just because most things within the universe require a cause/causes, does not mean that the universe itself requires a cause.

And even if we entertain the conclusion that the universe was created by a 'god;, it still doesn't explain where that God came from - who designed the designer? If we can simply conclude that the God created itself (or always existed), then why also simply conclude that the universe created itself (or always existed)?

It would seem contradictory to argue that the universe doesn't need a cause but God does.

 

[CM86]

It would seem contradictory to argue that the universe doesn't need a cause but God does.

It would seem contradictory to argue that God doesn't need a cause but the universe does.

 

[CM86]

Guinness Book of World Records

Interesting you mention them.
They have a lot of overlap with the Bible, and faith.

 

[Roylion]

It would seem contradictory to argue that the universe doesn't need a cause but God does.

It is contradictory. That's my point.