Do you have to disprove other people's belief or non-belief?

[F1fan]

Believe in God is a personal belief, disbelief, in the physical world is a personal belief. Disbelief in a God is a personal lack of belief in something"unseen"

They are all valid to the one who believe in them.

Sure. And if they want to present what they believe is true to themselves in an open forum then they had better be prepared for questions that might not be comfortable.

 

[F1fan]

Being rude and condescending to others isn’t debate or winning.

Right. That is why we should all use good manners. But we can still ask hard questions.

 

[F1fan]

Now why would anyone want to miss out on all this fun?

I cannot speak for @Firelight but I can take anything that anyone wants to throw at me.

If only I could lift a refrigerator.

 

[Firelight]

That tends to be the case. That is true.

I’m really not interested in your responses. I just had a point to make.

Furthermore, I know my God lives. I know He created the earth, and everything in, on, and above the earth. He created the very first humans to ever walk the earth, Adam and Eve. I know the theory of evolution is false. I know my God has all wisdom, power, and knowledge and man’s knowledge pales in comparison.

Can’t handle the claiming of my knowledge of my God? Too bad. Any of your questions and comments attempting to challenge my knowledge would be weaker than a kick from a gnat to an elephant.

 

[rational experiences]

Why does it seems like some people must defend their belief no matter what? Are they that unsure about their own belief?

Why does it seems like some people must do everything in their power to discredit or disprove other people's faith or belief? Are they so desperate to prove God can not exist because they themselves does not see any proof of God?

Are both groups wasting their time on proving to others that they are the one who are right?

Every human reason owns two faces.

Truth about lying but truth in lying.

As both concepts are used.

So if you have to tell a satanic scientist theist man there is no God it is for and in satanisms. Then you tell a truth. No God in science rationally.

If you know father is now God it owns a human man's experienced life spirit explanation.

Being the sacrifice of his life split into bio and spirit water records due to satanic science practice.

Owning a complete review history of why to believe in the gods teaching was to support life's continuance versus very evil men of science machine practices cause.

 

[F1fan]

I’m really not interested in your responses. I just had a point to make.

Furthermore, I know my God lives.

How do you have this knowledge? Do you have special powers or ability? I ask because no gods are known to exist as any form of knowledge.

I know He created the earth, and everything in, on, and above the earth. He created the very first humans to ever walk the earth, Adam and Eve. I know the theory of evolution is false. I know my God has all wisdom, power, and knowledge and man’s knowledge pales in comparison.

How is this knowledge and not just your religious belief? None of this is backed up by facts or science.

Can’t handle the claiming of my knowledge of my God? Too bad. Any of your questions and comments attempting to challenge my knowledge would be weaker than a kick from a gnat to an elephant.

Your claims are not factual and inconsistent with actual academic knowledge. Im not sure why you believe what you believe.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Well gee whiz that's everyone, including Charlie Manson. It includes the 9-11 hijackers. And this is completely irrelevant to proof of a supernatural being.


That sounds pretty dubious.

That is your view of it

 

[Spirit of Light]

Is it not the Will of Allah that permeates humanity?

If so Truth is defined by that Will and in every age Allah sends Messengers to correct where man has gone astray.

In every age only 12 to 24 souls recognise that God has sent a new Messenger.

How does everyone else find that Truth if those 12 to 24 people do not go out and tell people where they have gone astray, because inevitably, those that do not want change will never see they have departed from the guidance of their faith.

That is how Faiths are spread, in this age it is not different.

Regards Tony

It could be spread by how the believer act, speak and think according to the teaching, if the believer act and speak as the 99 attributes of Allah people will see a person who become embodiment of Allah. They would ask the questions.

 

[Heyo]

No we are not, but many atheists act as if we are, and they don't understand why it is illogical to expect objective evidence for God.

Just as many theists feel "interrogated" when asked and they "bear witness" when they talk. Now who is pretending to be in court?

And some atheists (me included) are absolutely glad when we can even agree that there is no objective evidence for god. (Although the next theist wandering by will through a wrench in that agreement by stating that he has evidence.)

 

[Heyo]

It would not be a disservice to not mention

Tripple negative! New record!

 

[Trailblazer]

Just as many theists feel "interrogated" when asked and they "bear witness" when they talk. Now who is pretending to be in court?

And some atheists (me included) are absolutely glad when we can even agree that there is no objective evidence for god. (Although the next theist wandering by will through a wrench in that agreement by stating that he has evidence.)

I did not know you were an atheist. I thought you believed in other planes of existence
Not that I don't like atheists, I am often close to becoming one myself and I would if I saw no evidence for God.

Why would anyone expect to see objective evidence for God? I know that is what atheists want, but I cannot se how that would ever be possible.

 

[We Never Know]

Why does it seems like some people must defend their belief no matter what? Are they that unsure about their own belief?

Why does it seems like some people must do everything in their power to discredit or disprove other people's faith or belief? Are they so desperate to prove God can not exist because they themselves does not see any proof of God?

Are both groups wasting their time on proving to others that they are the one who are right?

Insecurities is my opinion.

 

[Firelight]

I made the comment on the basis of what Truthseeker9 wrote. I neither know the answers nor the questions.

I realize that. But, you are the one who suggested to Truthseeker9 that he may be getting attacked by others because his answer may be “false and ridiculous.” Why would you suggest it’s “false and ridiculous?”

If person after person attacks your answer, then you must check your answer. It may be false and ridiculous, that is perhaps why people attack your answer. But you believe only what a horse says.

 

[Firelight]

Theists are historically at a disadvantage in debate.

In debate with whom?

First they are typically the affirmative/claimants. They represent the claim that some sort of God exists.

It’s a religious forum. There are lots of gods that exist here.

Second, not only is there is no sufficient evidence of gods, there's no reason to think they are even plausible.

Then, why are you here on a religious forum with believers in gods? Do you have sufficient evidence to prove no gods exist?

Third, in logic and debate claims are by default considered untrue UNTIL there is evidence presented that is compelling to a reasonable and objective standard, much like court.

Hahahaha. Hardly. Non-believers will attack and argue with anyone who so much as comments on a thread. They do not stick with the debate claims— the OP, the topic of the thread. It’s near impossible to even debate something on these forums due to the humongous amount of disrespect for the OP topic of a thread. Often, there are several different arguments happening on a thread with few comments related to the OP.

 

[Firelight]

Right, and do so correctly. But many of them treat their belief as if they are certain and it is knowledge, so we ask questions that the theist hasn't asked themselves. Debate, discussion? The more outrageous the claim the more a discussion will become a debate.

In what manner do you debate and discuss? Do you set up your own thread for a debate, or do you hijack the threads of others and start arguing based on someone’s comment on a thread? Hijacking threads to argue with others about their comments isn’t a debate.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Discussions and debates about beliefs can be both interesting and instructive.
However it is extremely unlikely that they will change anyone's beliefs at all.
But what they do do, is to clarify ones own mind.
They also tend to define your relationship with the other people involved.

From my own stand point, I find people who believe in conspiracy theories, or hold extreme religious or political views are very likely to hold other views, that are poles apart from from my own.

Some religious teachings are so out of step with my views on freedom and equality and fairness, that I find the gap too wide to be bridged by any sort of compromise, because those teaching are not available for re-appraisal or change in any way.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Why would you suggest it’s “false and ridiculous?”

I asked him to check his answers. I said may be they are not true, that is why people attack him.

 

[Heyo]

I did not know you were an atheist.

I'm not an atheist (well, I am by definition), I am an Agnostic by choice.

I thought you believed in other planes of existence

Probably not the kind you think of. I recognize different kinds of existence. Reality (physical existence) isn't the only one.

 

[F1fan]

In what manner do you debate and discuss? Do you set up your own thread for a debate, or do you hijack the threads of others and start arguing based on someone’s comment on a thread? Hijacking threads to argue with others about their comments isn’t a debate.

As we all know debate can go off on tangents. Sometimes it is a theist trying to distract from their own burden of proof. Sometimes it can be an atheist digging for something else other than what the theist wants to reveal.

You don't seem happy with the freedom of this debate forum. There are forums that are geared towards theists exclusively and limit the scope of debate.

 

[F1fan]

In debate with whom?

Theists as a whole have a disadvantage in open debate. With critical minds that don't assume a god exists in a forum there will be challenges to the assumption that gods exist. Many religious claims assume a God exists, and this is an error in logic. The only exception is conditional claims, and that is like "If God X exists, then Y will happen". Of course God X has to be shown to exist, and that cause Y is actually caused by this God.

It’s a religious forum. There are lots of gods that exist here.

Much in the same way that Santa exists in December.

Then, why are you here on a religious forum with believers in gods?

Entertainment.

Do you have sufficient evidence to prove no gods exist?

No more evidence that you have to prove the Tooth Fairy doesn't exist. Asking to prove a negative is a logical fallacy for a reason.

No one has to prove the non-existence of things not known to exist. If you think your version of God exists, demonstrate it.

Hahahaha. Hardly. Non-believers will attack and argue with anyone who so much as comments on a thread. They do not stick with the debate claims— the OP, the topic of the thread. It’s near impossible to even debate something on these forums due to the humongous amount of disrespect for the OP topic of a thread. Often, there are several different arguments happening on a thread with few comments related to the OP.

That's right. Theists often have a very simplistic foundation for the belief in God and with experienced thinkers asking questions these debates can expand in ways that theists never thought about. I think this is good for theists, as they get exposure to a depth of thinking they can't, or won't, do themselves. It's not for every theist.

We see many examples of theists who don't have a working knowledge of logic, or even science.