Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
On the contrary, it is the standard theists excuse when all else fails.
But attribution to another of fantastic abilities is often a sign of a problem in the thinking of the attributor
Because we are trying to nail down just exactly what we are supposed to potentially believe in. Continuing additions of squishy words is not conducive to mutual understanding.
I try to be as neutral as possible, so another word would be accepts. Faith has a bias towards theism, and would add fuel to an already raging atheist fire if they were to say they had faith god didn’t exist.
Spaceless inmaterial personal inteligent timeless creator of the universe, who came to earth as a human and resurrected .
Where do you get all the straw from?
Well, it's normally used to denote some sort of being. Just check a dictionary. Your take on might not be unique but it's comparatively rare, in my experience. And you've already done the switch by giving everything a purpose.
Yet another straw man. I've repeatedly and explicitly said that the reason why stuff exists is a mystery, on this thread and elsewhere.
An ad pop fallacy from the self-proclaimed greatest logical mind in history. Also, making up a fantasy about an unknown and living your life by it is totally irrational, no matter how popular it might be. But, as I said, I doubt very much that most people think about it as a mystery, they just accept their cultural superstitions. You've chosen to try to justify it as a mystery but that's you, not most people who have a god or gods.
Genuine LOL! This is coming from somebody who thinks he knows more about how time works than all the scientists and philosophers who have considered it to date, and that it's a 'simple realisation' that somehow everybody else missed.
Tried and tested by the sound of it.
It’s worse to have a preoccupation about such people and to ruminate on their perceived ignorance.
You identified the problem and highlighted what not to do. How do you propose to move forward?
Eh? How the hell did you get that from what I said? Is English not your first language?
Not is it's into baseless fantasy.
Again I'm given to wonder about your grasp of English. Because a mystery is a mystery, not something you know lots about. The more you know about it, the less it's a mystery.
Does dementia run in the family? Or just unmarked graves?
I’m shocked you are capable of wonder at all, let alone coherent enough to give an elementary analysis of why mysteries get less mysterious when you’ve never experienced one yourself.
You do post the most bizarre things, and this is also a rather silly and childish misrepresentation of what I said, unless you think you're also a mind-reader (you're not).
Bizarre to you is thinking God can be mysterious so I let that slide.
Name one if you are so inclined.
So subjectivity and a false dichotomy.
Wow. There's this big bridge in London I'm selling at a bargain price, you interested in buying it?
Evidence is objective facts (typically observations or experiments) that could potentially falsify a proposition but are consistent with it and not consistent with any alternatives.
You seriously seem to be reading a different thread to me.
One of which?
Like the bridge to look at but it is a little oldy moldy. Is this an original?So subjectivity and a false dichotomy.
Wow. There's this big bridge in London I'm selling at a bargain price, you interested in buying it?
Evidence is objective facts (typically observations or experiments) that could potentially falsify a proposition but are consistent with it and not consistent with any alternatives.
The reason god fails is that it is simply unfalsifiable. Any possible observation of the world is consistent with it.
The question that needs asking when you think you have evidence for something, is "what could falsify my proposition?" If the answer is nothing, then you don't have evidence. And, no, something that is obviously already known to be false doesn't work, so you can't say something like "the existence of the universe is evidence, if my God didn't exist, there would be nothing". That would be a bit like saying that gravity is caused by subatomic sized pixies that push things around, and if the pixies didn't exist, neither would gravity.
I would respect any atheist that admitted they were putting their faith in the idea that no gods exist. Far more than some silly pretense that they’re undecided when they are decidedly NOT undecided,
Faith does not require any realization that God exists. It becomes it’s own realization. All it requires is that we have the courage and clarity to act on whatever idea of God we are placing our faith in. Then we can see the results for ourselves, and alter our position accordingly.
I most definitely could not follow your line of reasoning, and believe in God.I would respect any atheist that admitted they were putting their faith in the idea that no gods exist. Far more than some silly pretense that they’re undecided when they are decidedly NOT undecided,
Faith does not require any realization that God exists. It becomes it’s own realization. All it requires is that we have the courage and clarity to act on whatever idea of God we are placing our faith in. Then we can see the results for ourselves, and alter our position accordingly.
We can define Hobbits. That doesn’t mean they exist beyond an abstraction.
So you think your God couldn’t exist until a human was able to define it?
Yet not even believers in these god can do this. Theists can believe their God exists, but they can’t claim to know it exists. All belief is uncertain and subject to error.
You’re asking for an example of something we don’t know exists yet? Brilliant. Science reports on discovering new species quite frequently.
Then what exactly is it you are accepting? It’s not a fact of a God existing so it must be you accepting what others have told you about a God existing, and without questioning it. That isn’t what rational minds do.
False, you know what you imagined. It doesn’t mean the fallible human mind created a God.
Right, a sound and lucid mind can’t realize the imaginary. But this is what theists create in their illusions.
Depends how you define them.
I am the human and the definer, are you?
Agreed.
Incorrect understanding of what was said, and extrapolation beyond what was defined.
This is not a detriment. Your perception of my illusion is your construct.
Poor example. This is a consequence of evolution which is established understanding. Every morning bowel movement would then be an example of something that didn’t exist.
Wrong. That’s the approach an atheist takes, which is denying what others define as God. There is paucity of rationality that the vocal atheist knows underpins his or her position.