Moderator: Community Team
I think if we were immortal we wouldn't have such a hard time believing in an immortal God right?suggs wrote:Essentially, belief in God is based on fear of death.
Or, counter factually, would anyone belive in God if they were immortal?

Prove that something does not exist? Agreed. It is very hard to prove, for example, that Leprechauns do not exist. Yet, most people believe they do not. Is it because they simply lack faith? Or because rational people realize that this is a superstition invented by man to explain away mysteries.daddy1gringo wrote:I think it’s been proven pretty effectively, both in this thread and others, that while science, facts, and logic cannot prove that God exists, neither can they prove that he does not.
Probably not to you, as you obviously have blind faith in a god. To those with clear heads, it is more obvious.daddy1gringo wrote:Nevertheless, somehow an impression has been created that asserting that God exists is blind faith, and asserting that he does not is reason. That is simply not true.
Then by this reasoning, you must also believe in Leprechauns. After all you cannot prove they do not exist so by your thinking, they must.daddy1gringo wrote:Believing that God does not exist is no more rational than believing that he does. As others have said, those who believe God does not exist, do so because that is what they have chosen to believe, just as much as, and I believe more so than, those of us who believe He does.
But that is only because it never existed in the first place. Please prove RA the Sun God, Poseidon or Quetzalcoatl do not exist. You cannot, so perhaps you are worshiping the wrong god, eh?daddy1gringo wrote:I cannot prove by facts and logic that God exists. But I can, by facts and logic, disprove any argument that purports to prove He does not.
It is extremely illogical to think that an all powerful, all knowing god who wants us all to trust and worship him, yet never shows himself, and allows horrible things on the world he supposedly created, exists? That's not logic. That is delusion.daddy1gringo wrote:What you usually get is something that starts with “Well, if there were a God he would/wouldn’t do X. Either it’s the evil in the world, or something in the Bible that is against the laws of nature, or is apparently cruel or contradictory, or to what extent he would go to make his existence evident to people. But that’s not logic. As a matter of fact it’s extremely illogical.
Ah yes the "we cannot fathom his actions" defense. He never shows himself or acts upon any of the ugliness of the world, therefor it must be that we just don't understand him. This is just convenient wishful thinking for an absent diety.daddy1gringo wrote:The beginning premise of these assertions is “*IF* God, the God of the Bible, existed…” *If* such a god exists, he created all of the minds that have ever existed and gave them their capacity to think. Yours, mine, MeDeFe’s, DaVinci’s etc., etc. If he exists his plans are constantly taking into account everything from the galaxies to the electrons, from the actions and intentions of the greatest ruler to those of the humblest beggar, past, present and future. If he exists, he exists outside of our 4 dimensions and laws of nature, since he created them. Do you really think that one finite human mind is going to understand always his plan and actions?
Pretty much...yes.daddy1gringo wrote:The answer always comes, “Oh yeah, hide behind ‘it’s a mystery, we can’t understand it,’ that’s an intellectual cop out!”
Again, please PROVE that Fire Breathing Dragons don't exist. You cannot. ..but this does not make them exist either.daddy1gringo wrote:But the intellectual cop out is not facing that your supposed “proof” doesn’t prove anything. It is absolutely logical, given the premise, to realize that we are not going to understand all of the things he does, and absolutely illogical to expect that we would.
Yet it is perfectly acceptable for you to withdraw a perfectly logical premise of non-existence by saying "we cannot fathom his actions because he is so great". That is a double-standard and indeed a convenient cop-out.daddy1gringo wrote:You can't ask me to prove that it is reasonable that God exists, starting with the premise that he does not. That is illogical. You can't start a hypothesis with a particular premise, and then withdraw it at the end when it is inconvenient.
And just this week I met a 30 year old man with a degree in Theology who recently, after studying religions for many years, discarded christianity after having come to his own conclusion that god(s) don't exist.daddy1gringo wrote:There are several people I have heard of who set out to disprove God, or Jesus, or the Bible, and became believers, convinced by the facts, but I believe that is not usually the way it is.

are registered trademarks of Backglass Heavy Industries.Please don't try to tell us that you are 'no more, no less'. You are trying to disrupt a conversation between CoffeeCream & the Jesus Freaks. If it bothers you so much that people don't buy into your personal beliefs then start a thread of your own where you can proselityze all you want. You spend an awful lot of time arguing against things you don't believe exist.Backglass wrote:I am an atheist, simply because I don't believe that supernatural gods exist. No more, no less.

Pointing out someone is wrong isn't a bad thing to do. Backglass isn't saying that gringo is wrong in his beliefs, he's saying that he is wrong regarding his reasoning.beezer wrote:Alright Backglass, you have made the case for your own beliefs:
Please don't try to tell us that you are 'no more, no less'. You are trying to disrupt a conversation between CoffeeCream & the Jesus Freaks. If it bothers you so much that people don't buy into your personal beliefs then start a thread of your own where you can proselityze all you want. You spend an awful lot of time arguing against things you don't believe exist.Backglass wrote:I am an atheist, simply because I don't believe that supernatural gods exist. No more, no less.
Then there should be no problem with him starting a thread where he can argue this with Daddy1gringo or anyone else. You're missing the point. The title of this thread is "Jesus Freaks, why do you believe." It's obvious that he's addressing certain members here and asking them questions. Backglass can't handle that and is trying to disrupt the conversation to the best of his ability. That is not the action of a neutral person, but someone who is desperately trying to stop an inquiring soul from a possible conversion by ridicule.Snorri1234 wrote:Pointing out someone is wrong isn't a bad thing to do. Backglass isn't saying that gringo is wrong in his beliefs, he's saying that he is wrong regarding his reasoning.

Yes! I am so desperate! I just can't handle it! AGHHH!! THE TORTURE!beezer wrote:Backglass can't handle that and is trying to disrupt the conversation to the best of his ability. That is not the action of a neutral person, but someone who is desperately trying to stop an inquiring soul from a possible conversion by ridicule.

are registered trademarks of Backglass Heavy Industries.this thread is a debate. Don't believe me? Go and read back.beezer wrote:Then there should be no problem with him starting a thread where he can argue this with Daddy1gringo or anyone else. You're missing the point. The title of this thread is "Jesus Freaks, why do you believe." It's obvious that he's addressing certain members here and asking them questions. Backglass can't handle that and is trying to disrupt the conversation to the best of his ability. That is not the action of a neutral person, but someone who is desperately trying to stop an inquiring soul from a possible conversion by ridicule.Snorri1234 wrote:Pointing out someone is wrong isn't a bad thing to do. Backglass isn't saying that gringo is wrong in his beliefs, he's saying that he is wrong regarding his reasoning.
Backglass was never asked his opinion on anything by CoffeeCream and he certainly doesn't need to ask for permission on how he reasons out his own quest for truth.
Let me see if I follow. The bible holds all the answers. It was written by different men, thousands of years ago. The assumption is that what these men wrote is the transcribed "word" of an unseen diety and not their own personal/political motives from this ancient time. Correct?Beastly wrote:To answer coffeecream,
The best way to find out why certain people believe certain things, is to study those people and what they believe.
people who are Christian rely on the bible to find out what they need to know about god, so If you study the bible, then you would understand why they believe what they believe.
I once heard this great saying, it goes like this...
Believing is all about choice..
No one can choose for you and no one can make you choose.
That is why there is free will, so you can choose what you are to believe.
The bible was written by different men, and it is what they believed.
If you can't understand the bible by reading it on your own, there are churches and bible studies.
You will only be able to make the best choice by really studying. Other wise, what you choose to believe may be based on pure ignorance.

are registered trademarks of Backglass Heavy Industries.It's spelled D-E-I-T-YBackglass wrote:Let me see if I follow. The bible holds all the answers. It was written by different men, thousands of years ago. The assumption is that what these men wrote is the transcribed "word" of an unseen diety and not their own personal/political motives from this ancient time. Correct?
It would seem to me that any ignorance lies in believing all of the above is 100% accurate and without question.
This thread is an inquiry as to why certain members of Conquer Club believe in Jesus Christ. Don't believe me? Go back and read the title of this thread. Also, from the author's first post:Iliad wrote:this thread is a debate. Don't believe me? Go and read back.
CoffeeCream wrote:If the JF's here are willing I want to engage them in a discussion because I've got some questions for them.
If any Jesus Freaks or Christians want to discuss this I will listen and not call you a name or make fun of you.
Once again, very funny but also a refusal to either address the point or change the subject on your part. This thread isn't about your opinion as it wasn't addressed to one single atheist here. You have made it quite clear that you are not either a Jesus Freak or a Christian. Yet you have quite a chip on your shoulder when another individual won't agree with you on that and has questions of their own.Backglass wrote:Yes! I am so desperate! I just can't handle it! AGHHH!! THE TORTURE!
Then you should have no problem starting your own thread which demolishes Christian beliefs. You are free to do so and it would probably be quite entertaining. Yet you don't. What you do instead is try to disrupt a conversation between someone who is earnestly searching and a specific group of people who he's inquiring answers from.Backglass wrote:It seems to me that it is you that is desperate to keep opposing views from shattering your rose colored glasses. Do my points make you uncomfortable? From your tone they obvoiously make you angry. Why? If I were you I would try to determine why pointed, valid responses about your absent diety anger you so.

I use Firefox, but not the spellchecker. I have sufficient faith in my own skills.Backglass wrote:MeDeFe wrote:Diet has nothing to do with it, unless you're dieting on herbs and mushrooms maybe... and some religious visions are weird enough to make one suppose thatDamn you Firefox spell checker! I SMITE THEE!!