A call for good samaritans

[Veritas]

I wrote:
Pure atheism means "No God" it is basically a confirmation of a negative in the absolute. Which is, in fact, illogical.

peace4all wrote:
heh?

In order to prove something absolutely, you need absolute knowledge about the subject; otherwise, there is always a possibility. Since we are most certainly limited in our knowledge regarding the existence or non-existence of God, there is always a possibility.

To say "There is absolutely no God" is similar to saying "there is absolutely no square black rock with pink circles and purple zig-zags." You'd have to search the entire universe to say that with absolute certainty.

 

[peace4all]

well the same goes about santa clause. we cannot, 100% prove that santa clause does not exist. Maybe he doesn't exist in the form that most of us believe, but maybe there is a man that goes aroudn christmas night with a sleigh full of toys that delivers things (maybe not presents, but other stuff) to good boys and girls.

However, it is so non plausible, that I take it, and will say "there is no santa clause"

I see the same thing With the mainstream religions. I see them as so NOT plausible, that I am willing to say it is not the truth.

basically. The odds of there being "God" to me, are the same as the easter bunny, or santa, or a monster in my closet (well, I guess i have an armoire (sp) ). I have tons of proof and evidence that it )or atleast parts of it) are wrong, and I have yet to find a shred of seemingly credible evidence to back up that it is right.

 

[Veritas]

peace4all wrote:
I see the same thing With the mainstream religions. I see them as so NOT plausible, that I am willing to say it is not the truth.

And that, whether you like it or not, is called a leap of faith
.

 

[Guest]

And that, whether you like it or not, is called a leap of faith
.

But since we are talking about the life in the here-after, shouldn't that leap be built on some solid footing?

What if you take the 'wrong' leap, but it was done with all faith?

In other words, one can take a 'leap of faith' - but isn't there still that possibility of it being the 'wrong leap'?

 

[peace4all]

yes, I understand the leap of faith, but as Alone said.. What if I leap the wrong way? Or what if I don't leap far enough, or I i overleap and end up like Jerry falwell?

 

[Veritas]

peace4all wrote:
yes, I understand the leap of faith, but as Alone said.. What if I leap the wrong way? Or what if I don't leap far enough, or I i overleap and end up like Jerry falwell?

I doubt that you will ever end up like Jerry Falwell. That just doesn't seem... "you". ;)

But think about what we say here. I'm assuming you believe that you just die and thats it. And what we're saying is: all you have to do is believe that you're saved by Jesus, and you'll have life after this one. Thats it. What then, would you lose by believing that?

aLoneVoice, yes, we need solid footing. Perhaps you'd like to expand?

 

[peace4all]

Because then I have to follow what I see as silly rules, and I have to hate and discrimate against people that this "God" doesn't like.

 

[TanNinety]

peace4all, I think you have misunderstood what Veritas meant by 'leap of faith' (or may be it's me that misunderstood his post, if so I will let him correct me).

He wasn't asking you to take a leap of faith into Christianity. But he was pointing out that you have already taken that leap of faith into atheism.

You seem to assume you haven't taken a leap of faith since you don't follow religion, but this is being dishonest with yourself and not acknowledging the 'faith' that goes into being an atheist. You have chosen atheism based on your personal evidence that you have submitted to yourself which helps you believe that there is no God. This is not subjective proof that you can present to another but your own personal evidence. When a theist presents the same personal evidence for the existence of God you would reject it because it's not "subjective" enough for you. You are special pleading your case as an atheist.

Both our faiths are on the same level - personal. To paint that your faith is in any way more superior to a theists faith is hypocritical, as it shows when you call religion 'blind' faith. I in no way will call your faith in atheism blind even though you wont be able to provide me ample subjective evidence to bolster your position.

That is one of the reasons I have spent the last couple of years of my life being agnostic than being an atheist. If you want to choose a non-faith based stance I would recommend you look into agnosticism rather than atheism.

 

[Guest]

aLoneVoice, yes, we need solid footing. Perhaps you'd like to expand?

Well, you spoke of 'taking a leap of faith'. Assuming you are making the arguement from the Christian perspective, you are suggesting to take a "leap of faith" into Christianty.

But how do you know that Christianity is where you should take that 'leap of faith'. Why not take a leap of faith into Hinduism, Islam, Budduism, etc.?

What is your 'solid footing' to take the leap into Christianity over any other faith system?

 

[peace4all]

well actually.

I don't believe humans are born into a religion, at all. So staying out of a religion, in my opinion, is not taking a leap anywhere.

Some people believe they are born Christian, or "god's Children" or born a Muslim etc.

I believe religion is something you learn.
To analogize, I see that everyone is born, standing on a dock. You can board one of 500000 different ships if you want, or you can just be content sitting on the dock.

 

[christian_soldier]

When all is said and done, every knee WILL bend.

Sadly, for some, it will be too late.

Eternity is a long time to mull over erroneous thinking.

peace4all, you have to date posted 2692 times on this Christian forum.

I can't help but wonder why you spend so much time here?

Because then I have to follow what I see as silly rules, and I have to hate and discrimate against people that this "God" doesn't like.

Please support this contention that God (who you say does not exist) doesn't like folks, causing you to discriminate.

 

[Solo]

well actually.

I don't believe humans are born into a religion, at all. So staying out of a religion, in my opinion, is not taking a leap anywhere.

Some people believe they are born Christian, or "god's Children" or born a Muslim etc.

I believe religion is something you learn.
To analogize, I see that everyone is born, standing on a dock. You can board one of 500000 different ships if you want, or you can just be content sitting on the dock.

Your analogy is flawed, in that ones being born again is not a choice of what is the right or wrong religion to follow.

Being born again is believing one whom you trust with your life.

A correct analogy would be that you find yourself in a burning building filled with smoke to the point were visibility is so low you can only see a couple of feet ahead of you, and you are lost in this building not knowing the quickest right way out. A man that is drunk comes up to you and tells you that he knows the way out and to follow him. A man that is blind with a white cane tells you that he knows the way out and to follow him. A man with an oxygen tank, fireman's suit, and flashlight tells you that he knows the way out and to follow him.

Who do you follow?

The one you trust is the one that has absolutely no reason to lie to you, nor would he. When the Holy Spirit convicts you of your position within the burning building and Jesus Christ tells you to follow Him you have a choice. Stay in the building and burn, or follow Jesus and live.

 

[Guest]

A correct analogy would be that you find yourself in a burning building filled with smoke to the point were visibility is so low you can only see a couple of feet ahead of you, and you are lost in this building not knowing the quickest right way out. A man that is drunk comes up to you and tells you that he knows the way out and to follow him. A man that is blind with a white cane tells you that he knows the way out and to follow him. A man with an oxygen tank, fireman's suit, and flashlight tells you that he knows the way out and to follow him.

Who do you follow?

That is not exactly accurate.

In the case of "religion" you have multiple men or women who come with oxygen tanks, suits, and a flashlight.

The question is why did you choose the fireperson that you did?

 

[TanNinety]

I don't believe humans are born into a religion, at all. So staying out of a religion, in my opinion, is not taking a leap anywhere.

Partly true. You are missing the point of atheism. I do not believe any human is born into any religion. Neither is any human born into atheism. We are all born agnostic.

You are failing/ignoring to see that we make that leap of faith into theism or atheism from being born agnostic.

Are you willing to make a case that we are all born atheists, making a positive statement of belief that "there is no God" as we enter into this world? If so, I would love to see it.

I am not trying to convert you to christianity. Just trying to understand your position and in the process may be let you hone your theory on why you are an atheist.

Can you make a case where you were born with no knowledge of God and became an atheist without the leap of faith and are able to subjectively prove your core statement of belief that there is no God?
*******

aLoneVoice, I enjoy reading your posts and welcome to the forums. It is going to be a rough ride but please do stay, it is hard to find a voice of reason sometimes on here.

 

[Solo]

That is not exactly accurate.

In the case of "religion" you have multiple men or women who come with oxygen tanks, suits, and a flashlight.

The question is why did you choose the fireperson that you did?

Concerning the various religious beliefs of man, Jesus is the only one that is the way, the truth, and the life. That was my analogy. I am sorry that you did not comprehend this truth.

Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
John 14:6

Do you believe that other ways to the Father exist other than Jesus? If so, that would explain your miscomprehension of my analogy, and align moreso with your analogy.

 

[Guest]

Concerning the various religious beliefs of man, Jesus is the only one that is the way, the truth, and the life. That was my analogy. I am sorry that you did not comprehend this truth.

Did I say that I did not comprehend your analogy?

Rather you did not make a basis as to why Jesus "is the only way" thus discounting other religious beliefs. Others from another faith system might claim that THEIRS is the 'fireperson'.

As I understand this discussion, and please correct me if I am wrong, it wasn't so much as a discussion if Jesus is the only way - but rather if their is the existence of the divine.

 

[christian_soldier]

As I understand this discussion, and please correct me if I am wrong, it wasn't so much as a discussion if Jesus is the only way - but rather if their is the existence of the divine.

If there is no God, please explain your existence.

 

[Solo]

Did I say that I did not comprehend your analogy?

Rather you did not make a basis as to why Jesus "is the only way" thus discounting other religious beliefs. Others from another faith system might claim that THEIRS is the 'fireperson'.

As I understand this discussion, and please correct me if I am wrong, it wasn't so much as a discussion if Jesus is the only way - but rather if their is the existence of the divine.

Your fallacy is such that anyone can come into the burning building and tell you to follow them out and be successful. Hoever, you will follow the one who you have learned from life's experiences which one would be better to follow. Jesus' reputation over the last 2000 years is impeccable. The unbelieving Muslims believe that Jesus is a great prophet. Unfortunately, they will follow Muhammad out of the burning building before they would follow Jesus. Many, many atheists believe that Jesus existed and was probably a good teacher, but they would follow a "free-thinker" out of the building instead of Jesus. The person in my analogy would follow whomever he believed would get him out of the fire safely. Life's experiences may have taught him that the fireman would be better to follow out of a burning building than a drunk or a blind man. When the Holy Spirit reveals the truth of Jesus Christ to an individual in that He paid the price for the sin debt of all who follow him, the choice will be made and the one making the choice will be saved or not saved accordingly. The condemnation of those who are in the burning building already exists unless they follow the only one who can save them.

 

[Guest]

If there is no God, please explain your existence.

I do not remember saying that the "divine does not exists". Rather, I stated that as I understood this discussion was to the question if the divine did exist or not.

Seeking to explain one's existence might very well lead to a conclusion that that question "Does the divine exist?"

 

[Guest]

Solo - where I have difficutly with your analogy (and please understand it is with your analogy, not necessarily with what you are attempting to convey)
is that you have not provided reason as to why Jesus should be the 'fireperson to follow out".