Discussions on a ranges of philosophical issues including the nature of truth and reality, personal identity, mind-body theories, epistemology, justification of beliefs, argumentation and logic, philosophy of religion, free will and determinism, etc.
What I don't get is atheists claiming there is no evidence or proof for God and yet they choose to be an atheist and live out there life as if God does not exist when there is no evidence muchless proof atheism is true.I mean,atheism is bottom of the barrel when it comes to evidence,conspiracy theorists ,even people in false religions present more evidence than atheists do.
There are many reasons I'd choose Jesus over any other God out there but especially atheism that is so empty.In all other religions nothing is or was done about sin and sinners are allowed into the afterlife to taint it and make it just as evil as this world we now live in is and I've seen all of this world I want to see.
There will be no sin or evil in heaven where Jesus is.So all other gods are unholy gods who do not care about sin and evil and they allow it into their afterlife to taint it where if we went there it would still be like this world we now live in which is not appealing at all. I long for true justice and sin and evil being ultimately destroyed in hell when Jesus is finished.
So just based on afterlifes I'd choose Christianity over any other religion or atheism where you just die and that is it.Nothing more after death,which is the most boring afterlife to look forward to out of them all.I love the afterlife Christianity offers over any other religion but especially atheism where we would just die and nothing more.BORING! I'll choose Jesus anyday over that even if there was no proof.
Hebrews 12:2-3 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith;who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross,despising the shame,and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.
2nd Corinthians 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not,lest the light of this glorious gospel of Christ,who is the image of God,should shine unto them.
What I don't get is atheists claiming there is no evidence or proof for God and yet they choose to be an atheist and live out there life as if God does not exist when there is no evidence muchless proof atheism is true.I mean,atheism is bottom of the barrel when it comes to evidence,conspiracy theorists ,even people in false religions present more evidence than atheists do.
There are many reasons I'd choose Jesus over any other God out there but especially atheism that is so empty.In all other religions nothing is or was done about sin and sinners are allowed into the afterlife to taint it and make it just as evil as this world we now live in is and I've seen all of this world I want to see.
There will be no sin or evil in heaven where Jesus is.So all other gods are unholy gods who do not care about sin and evil and they allow it into their afterlife to taint it where if we went there it would still be like this world we now live in which is not appealing at all. I long for true justice and sin and evil being ultimately destroyed in hell when Jesus is finished.
So just based on afterlifes I'd choose Christianity over any other religion or atheism where you just die and that is it.Nothing more after death,which is the most boring afterlife to look forward to out of them all.I love the afterlife Christianity offers over any other religion but especially atheism where we would just die and nothing more.BORING! I'll choose Jesus anyday over that even if there was no proof.
I’m not an atheist because I find atheism attractive. I'm an atheist because I don't believe the people who claim that their idea of God/Gods exist, and I haven't seen any other evidence. Atheism actually comes with a lot of downsides. Religion offers answers and responses to loss, death, tragedy, inequality, and injustice. Atheism takes all of that away and offers nothing in return. That doesn't matter because I'm not sitting here doing a cost-benefit analysis. From my point of view atheism is the only option because there is no such a being that I call God.
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
What I don't get is atheists claiming there is no evidence or proof for God and yet they choose to be an atheist and live out there life as if God does not exist when there is no evidence muchless proof atheism is true.I mean,atheism is bottom of the barrel when it comes to evidence,conspiracy theorists ,even people in false religions present more evidence than atheists do.
There are many reasons I'd choose Jesus over any other God out there but especially atheism that is so empty.In all other religions nothing is or was done about sin and sinners are allowed into the afterlife to taint it and make it just as evil as this world we now live in is and I've seen all of this world I want to see.
There will be no sin or evil in heaven where Jesus is.So all other gods are unholy gods who do not care about sin and evil and they allow it into their afterlife to taint it where if we went there it would still be like this world we now live in which is not appealing at all. I long for true justice and sin and evil being ultimately destroyed in hell when Jesus is finished.
So just based on afterlifes I'd choose Christianity over any other religion or atheism where you just die and that is it.Nothing more after death,which is the most boring afterlife to look forward to out of them all.I love the afterlife Christianity offers over any other religion but especially atheism where we would just die and nothing more.BORING! I'll choose Jesus anyday over that even if there was no proof.
I’m not an atheist because I find atheism attractive. I'm an atheist because I don't believe the people who claim that their idea of God/Gods exist, and I haven't seen any other evidence. Atheism actually comes with a lot of downsides. Religion offers answers and responses to loss, death, tragedy, inequality, and injustice. Atheism takes all of that away and offers nothing in return. That doesn't matter because I'm not sitting here doing a cost-benefit analysis. From my point of view atheism is the only option because there is no such a being that I call God.
If you choose to live as an atheist you are finding it attractive for who knows what reason but like I said atheism is empty and that is pretty much what you explained.Why are'nt you doing a cost-benefit analysis? Because if you did I think you'd realize what I'm saying.There are many reasons I'd choose Jesus and even if I thought there was no evidence just based on afterlifes alone and what each offers. I saw atheist Sam Harris giving a speech talking about how there is no afterlife,no heaven,hell,etc just death when we die and I thought to myself BORING! And that is what you expect when you die and ywt it is you that has no evidence or proof you are correct to lve as an atheist. I think it is hyocritical fpr atheists to claim there is no evidence for God when the fact is,it is they who have no evidence. They accuse Christians and religious people of what really applies to themselves. And you just seem to go on how you personally feel and opinion alone rather than any evidence.
But I would not choose to just die over what Jesus and Christianity offers and I would not choose any other god or religion either based on afterlife alone. Why would I want to go to an afterlife that is still like this world still full of evil and sin? I don't desire it at all and yet all other gods offer this,of course it is more polished to make it sound good but the bottom line is nothing is ever done about evil and sin and so it just taints the afterlife. Take reincarnation for example,you go on into your next life and yet are still effected by sin and evil around you that can effect your karma and effects what your next life is gonna be like. I don't desire that over what Jesus offers.So evidence or not I'd still choose Jesus over Krishna,
Hebrews 12:2-3 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith;who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross,despising the shame,and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.
2nd Corinthians 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not,lest the light of this glorious gospel of Christ,who is the image of God,should shine unto them.
What I don't get is atheists claiming there is no evidence or proof for God and yet they choose to be an atheist and live out there life as if God does not exist when there is no evidence muchless proof atheism is true.I mean,atheism is bottom of the barrel when it comes to evidence,conspiracy theorists ,even people in false religions present more evidence than atheists do.
There are many reasons I'd choose Jesus over any other God out there but especially atheism that is so empty.In all other religions nothing is or was done about sin and sinners are allowed into the afterlife to taint it and make it just as evil as this world we now live in is and I've seen all of this world I want to see.
There will be no sin or evil in heaven where Jesus is.So all other gods are unholy gods who do not care about sin and evil and they allow it into their afterlife to taint it where if we went there it would still be like this world we now live in which is not appealing at all. I long for true justice and sin and evil being ultimately destroyed in hell when Jesus is finished.
So just based on afterlifes I'd choose Christianity over any other religion or atheism where you just die and that is it.Nothing more after death,which is the most boring afterlife to look forward to out of them all.I love the afterlife Christianity offers over any other religion but especially atheism where we would just die and nothing more.BORING! I'll choose Jesus anyday over that even if there was no proof.
I’m not an atheist because I find atheism attractive. I'm an atheist because I don't believe the people who claim that their idea of God/Gods exist, and I haven't seen any other evidence. Atheism actually comes with a lot of downsides. Religion offers answers and responses to loss, death, tragedy, inequality, and injustice. Atheism takes all of that away and offers nothing in return. That doesn't matter because I'm not sitting here doing a cost-benefit analysis. From my point of view atheism is the only option because there is no such a being that I call God.
If you choose to live as an atheist you are finding it attractive for who knows what reason but like I said atheism is empty and that is pretty much what you explained.Why are'nt you doing a cost-benefit analysis? Because if you did I think you'd realize what I'm saying.There are many reasons I'd choose Jesus and even if I thought there was no evidence just based on afterlifes alone and what each offers. I saw atheist Sam Harris giving a speech talking about how there is no afterlife,no heaven,hell,etc just death when we die and I thought to myself BORING! And that is what you expect when you die and ywt it is you that has no evidence or proof you are correct to lve as an atheist. I think it is hypocritical for atheists to claim there is no evidence for God when the fact is,it is they who have no evidence. They accuse Christians and religious people of what really applies to themselves. And you just seem to go on how you personally feel and opinion alone rather than any evidence.
But I would not choose to just die over what Jesus and Christianity offers and I would not choose any other god or religion either based on afterlife alone. Why would I want to go to an afterlife that is still like this world still full of evil and sin? I don't desire it at all and yet all other gods offer this,of course it is more polished to make it sound good but the bottom line is nothing is ever done about evil and sin and so it just taints the afterlife. Take reincarnation for example,you go on into your next life and yet are still effected by sin and evil around you that can effect your karma and effects what your next life is gonna be like. I don't desire that over what Jesus offers.So evidence or not I'd still choose Jesus over Krishna.
Hebrews 12:2-3 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith;who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross,despising the shame,and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.
2nd Corinthians 4:4 In whom the god of this world hath blinded the minds of them which believe not,lest the light of this glorious gospel of Christ,who is the image of God,should shine unto them.
abelcainsbrother wrote: ↑Sat Dec 29, 2018 7:30 pmWhat I don't get is atheists claiming there is no evidence or proof for God and yet they choose to be an atheist and live out there life as if God does not exist when there is no evidence muchless proof atheism is true.I mean,atheism is bottom of the barrel when it comes to evidence,conspiracy theorists ,even people in false religions present more evidence than atheists do.
There are many reasons I'd choose Jesus over any other God out there but especially atheism that is so empty.In all other religions nothing is or was done about sin and sinners are allowed into the afterlife to taint it and make it just as evil as this world we now live in is and I've seen all of this world I want to see.
There will be no sin or evil in heaven where Jesus is.So all other gods are unholy gods who do not care about sin and evil and they allow it into their afterlife to taint it where if we went there it would still be like this world we now live in which is not appealing at all. I long for true justice and sin and evil being ultimately destroyed in hell when Jesus is finished.
So just based on afterlifes I'd choose Christianity over any other religion or atheism where you just die and that is it.Nothing more after death,which is the most boring afterlife to look forward to out of them all.I love the afterlife Christianity offers over any other religion but especially atheism where we would just die and nothing more.BORING! I'll choose Jesus anyday over that even if there was no proof.
I’m not an atheist because I find atheism attractive. I'm an atheist because I don't believe the people who claim that their idea of God/Gods exist, and I haven't seen any other evidence. Atheism actually comes with a lot of downsides. Religion offers answers and responses to loss, death, tragedy, inequality, and injustice. Atheism takes all of that away and offers nothing in return. That doesn't matter because I'm not sitting here doing a cost-benefit analysis. From my point of view atheism is the only option because there is no such a being that I call God.
abelcainsbrother wrote: ↑Sat Dec 29, 2018 7:30 pmIf you choose to live as an atheist you are finding it attractive for who knows what reason
Because of the month I was born, my zodiac sign is “Scorpio”. I no more live my life as an Atheist than I live as a Scorpio IOW it means nothing to me.
abelcainsbrother wrote: ↑Sat Dec 29, 2018 7:30 pmbut like I said atheism is empty and that is pretty much what you explained.Why are'nt you doing a cost-benefit analysis?
The same reason I don’t do a cost-benefit analysis on being a Scorpio! Again; it means nothing to me.
abelcainsbrother wrote: ↑Sat Dec 29, 2018 7:30 pmBecause if you did I think you'd realize what I'm saying.There are many reasons I'd choose Jesus and even if I thought there was no evidence just based on afterlifes alone and what each offers.
But if it isn’t based on the truth, why bother?
abelcainsbrother wrote: ↑Sat Dec 29, 2018 7:30 pmI saw atheist Sam Harris giving a speech talking about how there is no afterlife,no heaven,hell,etc just death when we die and I thought to myself BORING!
Reality is rarely as exciting as fiction; but I would choose a boring reality over an exciting fiction any day.
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
PaulSacramento wrote: ↑Fri Dec 28, 2018 1:10 pm
Nope, that have the same ability to receive the message as everyone else.
Okay; if I and a billion other people didn’t get the message when it was being given, but later I am able to see what I was unable to see before; when it is covered on the evening news and the countless other recording devices, I would assume something was wrong with me before, but I’m okay now; and anyone who still can’t see what happened on the recording devices, I would assume there is still something wrong with them
So, if I understand you correctly, if you and a billion other people didn't receive a message ( which you have stated would be PROOF) BUT billions of others did, you would ONLY think that there was something wrong IF, somehow, you would hear that message eventually or if technology would allow you to hear eventually ?
PaulSacramento wrote: ↑Fri Dec 28, 2018 1:10 pm
Nope, that have the same ability to receive the message as everyone else.
Okay; if I and a billion other people didn’t get the message when it was being given, but later I am able to see what I was unable to see before; when it is covered on the evening news and the countless other recording devices, I would assume something was wrong with me before, but I’m okay now; and anyone who still can’t see what happened on the recording devices, I would assume there is still something wrong with them
So, if I understand you correctly, if you and a billion other people didn't receive a message ( which you have stated would be PROOF) BUT billions of others did, you would ONLY think that there was something wrong IF, somehow, you would hear that message eventually or if technology would allow you to hear eventually ?
I'm sure that would convince me. However it may not even take that much; if the vast majority of people heard the message, and everybody who heard it agreed on what the message said, that would probably be enough to convince me. (believe it or not, it doesn't take much to convince me) However I would spend much time trying to figure out why I didn't get the message everybody else was able to receive.
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
So, it seems to me that, you are ok with evidence by volume, correct?
That is that, if enough people believe it, it must be true OR at least, these must be enough evidence for so many people to believe it ( ie: there is enough evidence to believe A if a an overwhelming number of people believe the evidence).
abelcainsbrother wrote: ↑Sat Dec 29, 2018 4:24 pmWhat I don't get is atheists claiming there is no evidence or proof for God and yet they choose to be an atheist and live out there life as if God does not exist when there is no evidence muchless proof atheism is true.
What do you mean when you say “atheism is true”? I’ve never considered atheism to be a truth claim; but a default position. Obviously you disagree, so what truth claim to you believe atheists make?
abelcainsbrother wrote: ↑Sat Dec 29, 2018 4:24 pmIn all other religions nothing is or was done about sin and sinners are allowed into the afterlife to taint it and make it just as evil as this world we now live in is and I've seen all of this world I want to see.
According to Romans 3:10, all are sinners, nobody is righteous. So if Christians are somehow purged of their sins before entering Heaven, how do you know this isn’t the case for all the other religions?
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
PaulSacramento wrote: ↑Mon Jan 07, 2019 8:30 am
So, it seems to me that, you are ok with evidence by volume, correct?
That is that, if enough people believe it, it must be true OR at least, these must be enough evidence for so many people to believe it ( ie: there is enough evidence to believe A if a an overwhelming number of people believe the evidence).
In most cases; yeah.
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
PaulSacramento wrote: ↑Mon Jan 07, 2019 8:30 am
So, it seems to me that, you are ok with evidence by volume, correct?
That is that, if enough people believe it, it must be true OR at least, these must be enough evidence for so many people to believe it ( ie: there is enough evidence to believe A if a an overwhelming number of people believe the evidence).
PaulSacramento wrote: ↑Mon Jan 07, 2019 8:30 am
So, it seems to me that, you are ok with evidence by volume, correct?
That is that, if enough people believe it, it must be true OR at least, these must be enough evidence for so many people to believe it ( ie: there is enough evidence to believe A if a an overwhelming number of people believe the evidence).
In most cases; yeah.
In what cases would you disagree and why?
Lets say if 90% of the world's population saw evidence of "X" being true, and 10% did not, and I were one of the 10% who did not; initially I would probably assume I and the rest of the other 10% did something wrong to not see the evidence, so I would do extensive research to understand why I did not get this information. If my extensive research shows the 90% to be wrong conserving the issue, I would accept it as true; thus the 90% is wrong.
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
PaulSacramento wrote: ↑Mon Jan 07, 2019 8:30 am
So, it seems to me that, you are ok with evidence by volume, correct?
That is that, if enough people believe it, it must be true OR at least, these must be enough evidence for so many people to believe it ( ie: there is enough evidence to believe A if a an overwhelming number of people believe the evidence).
In most cases; yeah.
In what cases would you disagree and why?
Lets say if 90% of the world's population saw evidence of "X" being true, and 10% did not, and I were one of the 10% who did not; initially I would probably assume I and the rest of the other 10% did something wrong to not see the evidence, so I would do extensive research to understand why I did not get this information. If my extensive research shows the 90% to be wrong conserving the issue, I would accept it as true; thus the 90% is wrong.
Hmmm, that is very interesting.
How does that work with say, quantum mechanics or things that YOU simply can't prove via the 5 senses ?
PaulSacramento wrote: ↑Mon Jan 07, 2019 8:30 am
So, it seems to me that, you are ok with evidence by volume, correct?
That is that, if enough people believe it, it must be true OR at least, these must be enough evidence for so many people to believe it ( ie: there is enough evidence to believe A if a an overwhelming number of people believe the evidence).
In most cases; yeah.
In what cases would you disagree and why?
Lets say if 90% of the world's population saw evidence of "X" being true, and 10% did not, and I were one of the 10% who did not; initially I would probably assume I and the rest of the other 10% did something wrong to not see the evidence, so I would do extensive research to understand why I did not get this information. If my extensive research shows the 90% to be wrong conserving the issue, I would accept it as true; thus the 90% is wrong.
Hmmm, that is very interesting.
How does that work with say, quantum mechanics or things that YOU simply can't prove via the 5 senses ?
I don't know much about quantum mechanics, so it's never been an issue with me.
RickD wrote
"What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
Lets say if 90% of the world's population saw evidence of "X" being true, and 10% did not, and I were one of the 10% who did not; initially I would probably assume I and the rest of the other 10% did something wrong to not see the evidence, so I would do extensive research to understand why I did not get this information. If my extensive research shows the 90% to be wrong conserving the issue, I would accept it as true; thus the 90% is wrong.
Hmmm, that is very interesting.
How does that work with say, quantum mechanics or things that YOU simply can't prove via the 5 senses ?
I don't know much about quantum mechanics, so it's never been an issue with me.