Those who believe there is no God live by faith

[3rdAngel]

It is rather amazing how he constantly refutes himself without knowing it. He simply cannot understand that a lack of belief based on a lack of evidence is not faith based.

I would suggest your comments are a personal judgement about yourself and only proves the scriptures true *ROMANS 2:1

 

[3rdAngel]

Of course he understands. But hes far too invested in error to back out now so he will just wear you out and claim victory

I would suggest this is also a personal judgement about yourself proving the scriptures true *ROMANS 2:1 but in your case and some others here will also add 1 CORINTHIANS 2:14

 

[3rdAngel]

He is breaking the Ninth Commandment whether he is honest or not as @3rdAngel demonstrated in one of his own posts where it gave countless variations of the Ninth Commandment. One of the variations included repeating a falsehood. All that a falsehood is is a untrue or false statement. It need not be a lie. In other words one breaks the Ninth by merely repeating a false claim about someone whether one knows it is false or not. The lesson should be don't say anything bad about anyone unless you can prove it.

Our OP probably believes the falsehoods that he keeps repeating because he cannot understand a basic idea. He is probably not lying. But at the same time he almost certainly is very afraid that he is wrong. He won't debate properly, a sure sign that one is afraid that one is wrong.

Well none of that has any truth in it whatsoever. Then I guess breaking God's ninth commandment does not mean much when you do not believe in God. I did not give you variations to what God's ninth commandment means. I provided you the scriptural definition of the ninth commandment as evidence to show that your understanding of it was in error. You simply ignored it and never responded to it because it shows why your not telling the truth. The post demonstrated that the the ninth commandment is saying falsehood with the intention to deceive. Something you have yet to pick up on.

The post is linked here in post # 582 linked quoting what you believe the ninth commandments means and post # 583 linked proving this your understaning of the ninth commandment is in error.

If you disagree with me prove me wrong. If you cannot why not learn something and be honsest and own the fact you were simply wrong?

 

[3rdAngel]

What does "live by faith" mean?
How does one go about living that way?

Faith is having a belief that cannot be conclusively proven by external evidence. The bible definition is that "faith" is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

 

[SomeRandom]

What anger and threats? The end of the world and second coming of Jesus has been predicted since ancient times lol. The Chick tracts just provides the narrative art to easily show and explain the Bible's message.

2020 will be the year the Lucas museum of narrative art opens. Already, George Lucas has bought Robert Crumb's Genesis narrative art -- Comics A.M. | George Lucas' museum acquires Robert Crumb art. Crumb was going to make it a parody, but God made him do it straight.

Kalam has not been defeated. You atheists will just have to deal with it .

Omg Chick Tracts!!!!
Those are fun. I like “Spike” the dog.



And I‘ve clearly watched way too much Bible Reloaded, because their “theme song” automatically started playing in my head. Good times.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Omg Chick Tracts!!!!
Those are fun. I like “Spike” the dog.



And I‘ve clearly watched way too much Bible Reloaded, because their “theme song” automatically started playing in my head. Good times.

Me too. I truly enjoy Chick Tracts, but only because they are my one source of them.

 

[3rdAngel]

3rdAngel said: ↑ A belief that has no evidence is simply faith based.

Your response...

That's simply not true. As I showed, belief can be based in faith. It can also be based in skepticism.

Nonsense. A belief is a belief regardless what it's origin is and where it comes from. If there is no evidence for a belief than it is simply faith based.

 

[3rdAngel]

3rdAngel said: ↑ Athiesm assumes that non existence of God is the default position until evidence is provided

Your response...

You're never going to get it. Why not?, the thread wonders. They're speculating about whether this is an intellectual or moral issue.

Perhaps you are the one who is never going to get it. Your projections on others do not mean what you are saying is true. It is simply your opinion that you have not proven. The thread is very simple and not hard to understand. If you have a belief for or against something and you cannot prove your belief it is simply faith based

3rdAngel said: ↑ It is not for me to say if someone cannot understand something or not IMO
Your response...

Sure it is, if it's clear that they don't understand. You've been told just that repeatedly - that you don't understand - and have yet to acknowledge that you have. I find that odd. You don't deny the claim, you don't attempt to rebut it, you don't ask for clarification - you just ignore the comments.

Not neccesarily. To me it is many here including yourself either do not understand the concept of faith and they do understand the concept but a being intellectually dishonest and hiding the fact. It is not up to me to determine what someone understands or does not understand as I do not know for sure their motives for what they say. Just because someone tells you something it does not mean by default that person is right and you are wrong. This is simply a logical fallacy that is not based on evidence and if no evidence is faith based. Both religion and athiesm are on equal terms in this regards and if neither has external conclusive evidenece that God does not exist then both positions are faith based. The difference between the Chrsitian and the Athiest is that the Christian acknowledges this fact while the Athiest seeks to hide from it. I do not ignore any comment. I read it and consider what is said and carefully reply to it stating why I agree or disagree. I do my own research into the beliefs of others from so do not need to ask for clarification of things already known. If I am unsure of someones position and belief I will ask them directly so I do not misunderstand them.

There are multiple definitions of Christian. I gave you mine, which is anybody who calls himself a Christian, the one census and poll takers use. They don't grill you on your doctrine to see if you are a "true Christian" true to the faith. They ask you your religion, and if you say Christian, or Protestant, or Baptist, they just tick off a box.You're a Christian if you say so. Now I can elaborate on what Christians tend to believe, but those things aren't relevant to me or most other unbelievers, and so don't appear in my definition, The Jehovah's Witnesses seem to like to disqualify most of Christianity from Christianity based on doctrinal differences, and many Protestants will tell you that Catholics aren't Christian based on doctrinal differences, but as I said, those distinctions don't matter to most non-Christians just as you probably don't care about doctrinal disputes between competing forms of Islam, and wouldn't care if a Shia told you that Sunnis are heretics, and not Muslim. Yeah they are, if they say they are.

A christian according to the biblical definition is someone that believes and follows the teachings of Christ. This is the only correct definition of what a christian is according to the bible.

Unfortunately, the mistake is yours. You might want to consider whether there might possibly be any validity to the claim that there are two statements that are distinctly different to just about everybody else except you, who has never articulated one of the two to confirm that he has ever understood what it means. This many voices in unison is evidence. Consilience is the convergence of evidence. When the evidence coming from multiple independent sources is in agreement, that should become significant. If three different people at a party separately tell you that you are too intoxicated to drive home, you should at least consider that they might be right.

Nonsense. I believe the mistake is yours unfortunately wheather you want to admit to it or not. I have considered the claims being made here very carefully. I would suggest you may want to consider the claim that if you do not believe in God or in existence of God and that is your belief for which you have no evidence then this belief is simply faith based and no more different to the thiest and is therefore hypocritical for someone who believes in athiesm to say in word that they base their claims on evidence when they simply have no evidence themselves to prove there is no God and that God does not exist.
The fact is and I agree that I am a minority here. The fact is me being a minority in regards to what others believe is not an argument for or against truth. Fact is though at the end of the day if you have no evidence to show that God does not exist and there is no God that is simply an unproven opinion that is faith based.

I disagree. @Subduction Zone has been consistent. He has said what every agnostic atheist has said, that although he has no way of knowing that there is no god, he has insufficient evidence to believe that one exists, and therefore doesn't, which you keep changing to him saying that there is no god.or God. Except that he doesn't make that claim, and needs no evidence to support his agnostic unbelief.

You are free to disagree all you like. On the other hand I have provided evidence to show inconsistency that @Subduction Zone simply denies despite me posting his own words that prove his denials false. He stated in his own words not mine that he does not believe in God and he does not believe in the existence of God. These are his words and belief as shown by what he wrote when directly asked some time ago then simply denied he never said such things...

Subduction Zone said: ↑ Right I do not believe in God. Or god. Do you believe in Allah? I don't. Is there a burden of proof upon you to prove that Allah does not exist? You might get this right.

Subduction Zone said: ↑ I don't believe in the existence of a god or gods.

Sometime latter after the above conversation...

3rdAngel said: ↑ You were the one who said to me you do not believe in God or the existence of God not me

Response....

Subduction Zone said: ↑ I never made that claim. Poor reading comprehension might lead one to think that. In fact that is one of the main reasons I concluded that may be a problem of yours. It is also reportable if you continue to make that claim.

I think the evidence here speaks for itself and disagrees with your claims here. No need to say much more IMO.

You seem to be confused about what atheist and agnostic mean notwithstanding your multiple dictionary definitions. You use the words as if they are mutually exclusive categories, that is, if a person is either, he can't also be the other. There is no logical reason why a person can't be both an unbeliever (atheist) and unwilling to say that gods do not (or do) exist (agnostic atheist)

There is no confusion my side. Your definitions are not those of the links provided in the multiple encyclopedias and dictionaries previously provided in this thread on athiesm as listed below.

1. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
2. Encyclopedia Britannica
3. Encyclopedia of Philisophy
4. Merriam Webster dictionary
5. Cambridge Dictionary
6. Dictionary.com
7. International Stantard Bible Encyclopedia
8. Wiki
9. Your Dictionary
10. Someone who believes in Atheism...........?
Merriam Webster dictionary

The reason why a person cannot be either or both is that athiesm is based on the belief that there is no God and that God does not exist and argues their belief based on what they believe even though they have no evidence for what they believe. On the other hand if someone has the view that they do not know if there is a God or God does not exist then they simply do not know and have not formed a belief one way or another. Once you form a view for or against it simply becomes a belief even if you admit to it or not. So if you have a belief that there is no God and that God does not exist then that is your beleif. If your belief has no evidence and you cannot prove that there is no God and that God does not exist it is simply faith based just as much as those who believe in thiesm.

Thanks for sharing your view IANS. Nice discussion.

 

[SomeRandom]

Me too. I truly enjoy Chick Tracts, but only because they are my one source of them.

They’re amazing! It’s like if Alex Jones decided to make tiny comics about the Bible.
For the longest time though, I thought it was satire

 

[3rdAngel]

But I know. And you are breaking it.

I would argue you do not know anything because you do not know the scriptures. I would also ask you to prove your claims which I know you cannot. If you cannot, why say things that are not true?

 

[3rdAngel]

Now you're claiming "special knowledge." Just sad.

Not at all it is available to everyone who believes and follows Gods' Word through the scriptures. It would seem you do not know what the scriptures teach from what you say or you would never had posted what you have posted right now IMO.

 

[3rdAngel]

Goodness past the 1000 post.. Well I have to get back and do some work nice discussion @Everyone. Will be back latter

 

[sojourner]

Your response...


Nonsense. A belief is a belief regardless what it's origin is and where it comes from. If there is no evidence for a belief than it is simply faith based.

This doesn’t speak to my argument. Please try to stay on topic.

 

[sojourner]

I would argue you do not know anything because you do not know the scriptures

My graduate degree in biblical studies says otherwise.

 

[sojourner]

Not at all it is available to everyone who believes and follows Gods' Word through the scriptures. It would seem you do not know what the scriptures teach from what you say or you would never had posted what you have posted right now IMO.

If it ain’t available to the general public, it’s special knowledge.

 

[McBell]

Your comment...

Well gobbldy goop. You tell me...

Your response...

From your post # 403 linked in your words in the closed thread "Setting the bible reader straight".

and again...

Responded with...

From your post # 415 linked in your words in the closed thread "Setting the bible reader straight".

There are others but I these will do could not be bothered chasing them.

Then after the above comes this....

Response....

3rdAngel said: Are you being honest now my friend? These are your words not mine in context...

Yep. No false witness my side

Thank you for clearly showing everyone not only your bearing false witness, but your flat out denying it.

 

[3rdAngel]

This doesn’t speak to my argument. Please try to stay on topic.

Nonsense...

3rdAngel said: ↑ A belief that has no evidence is simply faith based.

Your response...

sojourner said: ↑That's simply not true. As I showed, belief can be based in faith. It can also be based in skepticism.

Responded with...

3rdAngel said: ↑ Nonsense. A belief is a belief regardless what it's origin is and where it comes from. If there is no evidence for a belief than it is simply faith based.

See very much on topic. Perhaps you did not like the answer?

 

[3rdAngel]

3rdAngel said: ↑ I would argue you do not know anything because you do not know the scriptures

Your response..

My graduate degree in biblical studies says otherwise.

I would suggest if it is not too late to go and get your money back if you still do not know what the scriptures teach

 

[3rdAngel]

3rdAngel said: ↑ Not at all it is available to everyone who believes and follows Gods' Word through the scriptures. It would seem you do not know what the scriptures teach from what you say or you would never had posted what you have posted right now IMO.

Your response...

If it ain’t available to the general public, it’s special knowledge.

It's available to the general public. It is called the bible. You should read it

 

[McBell]

Goodness, you do know right that you trying to justify your friends actions only makes you are partaker of the same dishonesty right?

Except there is no "justifying" his statements.
You have clearly shown to anyone paying attention that you are not only breaking the Ninth Commandment, but also in complete denial of it.

What makes it all the worse is that you believe your god is ok with it.
Isn't your pride also a sin?
Or is that yet enother thing you deny?

What lies do you accused me of and where?

That has already been established for everyone to see.

If you cannot show evidence anywhere that I have lied why do you accuse me of doing such things?

No need for any one else to do what you yourself have already shown.

This is turn is simply a lie with intent to deceive.

Yes,
You do just that with damn near every post.

What amazes me is that those who do not believe in God or the existence of God have no regards to the ninth commandment or understand it's meaning or consequences. This is simply sad for you IMO and also for anyone that supports what you say.

Even worse for you, who claims to not only understand it, but also some imaginary high ground when blatantly violating it.

The only thing stronger than your faith is your denial.