• 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:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

ADigitalArtist

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
I get more comfort being true to what I actually believe than pretending I'm something I'm not.
 

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
I get more comfort being true to what I actually believe than pretending I'm something I'm not.
Atheism doesn't benefit anything. In my case, it's simply just waiting to believe in a god until I have enough evidence. I haven't seen any evidence convincing enough, so until I do, I'm still an atheist.

If to choose on the basis of the following observation, then it is evidence for Theism, rather than Atheism.
Fact: the existence of Jews, Holy Land, and Jerusalem.

Evidence is not rigorous proof, but it increases the chances for Christianity to be correct.
The existence of Biblical Jews does not speak for Atheism.
 

ADigitalArtist

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
If to choose on the basis of the following observation, then it is evidence for Theism, rather than Atheism.
Fact: the existence of Jews, Holy Land, and Jerusalem.

Evidence is not rigorous proof, but it increases the chances for Christianity to be correct.
The existence of Biblical Jews does not speak for Atheism.
I do not see the evidence as compelling. Just like any other theistic belief.
 

ADigitalArtist

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
But there is evidence. Evidence for theism is there. It is Jerusalem and his Jews. That is why Adolf Hitler was "cleansing" this living evidence from the face of the Earth.
Lots of different religious groups were targeted. That doesn't mean they were correct. There are pagan groups older than Judaism who were almost wiped out by Abrahamics. But they endured.
 

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
Lots of different religious groups were targeted. That doesn't mean they were correct. There are pagan groups older than Judaism who were almost wiped out by Abrahamics. But they endured.
Please understand: evidence is not proof. The evidence speaks for. Jews speak for God.
 

SigurdReginson

Grēne Mann
Premium Member
If to choose on the basis of the following observation, then it is evidence for Theism, rather than Atheism.

Could you explain how your observation points to a god existing?

Fact: the existence of Jews, Holy Land, and Jerusalem.

Yes, Jews, the holy land, and Jerusalem exist. Why does Jews exist = god exists?

Evidence is not rigorous proof, but it increases the chances for Christianity to be correct.

Which evidence?

The existence of Biblical Jews does not speak for Atheism.

Why does a people group existing point to a god also existing?
 

MikeF

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
If to choose on the basis of the following observation, then it is evidence for Theism, rather than Atheism.
Fact: the existence of Jews, Holy Land, and Jerusalem.

Evidence is not rigorous proof, but it increases the chances for Christianity to be correct.
The existence of Biblical Jews does not speak for Atheism.

Is that a sound argument, though? If 150 years after the birth of Jesus, there were only 40,000 Christians in the world, compared to several million Jews, compared to hundreds of millions of pantheist who believed in many, many different things, and Judaism evolved from Canaanite pantheism, a compilation of El and Ba'al, should not this incongruity of belief be reconciled? What of all the millennia where the only humans roaming the earth we animistic hunter-gatherers?

A mere shared belief is not evidence unless all conflicting beliefs on the subject can be satisfactorily reconciled. What was the basis for those earliest beliefs. Why have these types of beliefs changed over the millennia?

These questions must be answered first before any claim of evidence.
 

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
A mere shared belief is not evidence unless all conflicting beliefs on the subject can be satisfactorily reconciled. What was the basis for those earliest beliefs. Why have these types of beliefs changes over the millennia?

These questions must be answered first before any claim of evidence.
Do not be another Einstein. Be as simple as a fisherman, e.g. apostle Peter. You have Christianity vs. Atheism. Let us consider only two subjects. Not pantheism+Christ+Atheism, but only Christianity vs Atheism.
A piece of evidence is a fact, which speaks for. The existence of Jews speaks rather for Christianity than Atheism.
 

SigurdReginson

Grēne Mann
Premium Member
YES. Or do you have a scientific disproof of that idea?

It's not my job to disprove a myth... It's the person who tells me the myth is real that has to prove it. o_O

Otherwise, everything is to be taken at face value as real, cause it can't be disproven.

Did you know that I have the soul of a wolf, and not a human? Can you prove that I don't?
 

idea

Question Everything
Truth is not always comfortable, but it is more comforting than lies.
I am thankful to scientists for the many advances that have prolonged and increased the quality of our lives - for the real, tangible, true things they have contributed to the entire world.
 

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
Truth is not always comfortable, but it is more comforting than lies.
I am thankful to scientists for the many advances that have prolonged and increased the quality of our lives - for the real, tangible, true things they have contributed to the entire world.
Google: mother of all bombs.
 

questfortruth

Well-Known Member
It's not my job to disprove a myth... It's the person who tells me the myth is real that has to prove it. o_O

Otherwise, everything is to be taken at face value as real, cause it can't be disproven.

Did you know that I have the soul of a wolf, and not a human? Can you prove that I don't?
The soul is connected to the body. Can you move your tale? No. Thus, no animal soul there.
 

QuestioningMind

Well-Known Member
Do you agree? It seems, that atheism does not benefit the ability to be reasonable:
What Atheist Steven Hawking Has Discovered at All, if Black Holes Do Not Evaporate?, viXra.org e-Print archive, viXra:2012.0054

Then Jesus said, “Come to me, all of you who are weary and carry heavy burdens, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you. Let me teach you, because I am humble and gentle at heart, and you will find rest for your souls.

Matthew 11:28-29




If to choose on the basis of the following observation, then it is evidence for Theism, rather than Atheism.
Fact: the existence of Jews, Holy Land, and Jerusalem.

Evidence is not rigorous proof, but it increases the chances for Christianity to be correct.
The existence of Biblical Jews does not speak for Atheism.


But there is evidence. Evidence for theism is there. It is Jerusalem and his Jews. That is why Adolf Hitler was "cleansing" this living evidence from the face of the Earth.


Please understand: evidence is not proof. The evidence speaks for. Jews speak for God.



It is logic: no theists means, no God.
existence of theists means, that God is at least probable. The existence of theists does not speak for atheism.


But it is evidence. Atheists say, that there is no single evidence for God, they are wrong.


Do not be another Einstein. Be as simple as a fisherman, e.g. apostle Peter. You have Christianity vs. Atheism. Let us consider only two subjects. Not pantheism+Christ+Atheism, but only Christianity vs Atheism.
A piece of evidence is a fact, which speaks for. The existence of Jews speaks rather for Christianity than Atheism.

Atheism gives comfort. Having comfort the mind works better.
 

MikeF

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Do not be another Einstein. Be as simple as a fisherman, e.g. apostle Peter. You have Christianity vs. Atheism. Let us consider only two subjects. Not pantheism+Christ+Atheism, but only Christianity vs Atheism.
A piece of evidence is a fact, which speaks for. The existence of Jews speaks rather for Christianity than Atheism.

Is it not this inconguity of many different beliefs that the atheist is, in part addressing. It is not just about Christianity for the atheist. If ignore the incongruity of belief, then you concede your argument to the atheist. And simple fisherman would agree.
Do not be another Einstein. Be as simple as a fisherman, e.g. apostle Peter. You have Christianity vs. Atheism. Let us consider only two subjects. Not pantheism+Christ+Atheism, but only Christianity vs Atheism.
A piece of evidence is a fact, which speaks for. The existence of Jews speaks rather for Christianity than Atheism.

It is the incongruity of all the different religious beliefs throughout history that the atheist is addressing, not just Christianity. If you claim that animism or pantheism are not valid, then simply being theist proves nothing other than people believe different things.
 
Top