What belief of mine are you asking about? I need not make any claims or present any beliefs in order to reject another belief. If you claim to not believe it when someone explains bigfoot to you, you're asserting another belief that 'there is no bigfoot'... you just don't accept the claim that there is one.
Too many people think 'atheist' means that the person is claiming there 'is no god'.
@mooseflier "If you claim to not believe it when someone explains bigfoot to you, you're NOT asserting another belief that 'there is no bigfoot'... "
@treasureinthesnow217 Hardly a cop out. Do you believe in faeries or leprechauns? Big foot or Nessi? If you don't do you need to provide an argument that those creatures don't exist? Of course not, it's up to the person making the claim to provide an argument and some evidence for that claim. And god is no different.
But, you would probably leave open the possibility that those creatures may exist right? But you're not going to believe it until you have a good reason.
@treasureinthesnow217 No one mentioned a need to disprove anything. Again, if you make an incredible claim, it is up to you to provide evidence to support it. Nice cop out though. Besides, a mathematical proof does not play in the same arena as physics or metaphysics in your case. Regardless, I need not disprove anything in order to not believe in it. See again the Big foot analogy.
@mooseflier if God is so irrational to believe in it should be quite easy to disprove....especially coming from the "enlightened" community dont you think?
@treasureinthesnow217 I never said anything about irrationality. I think you need to take a breath and go back over our conversation. You started it out by asking me why I don't believe in god. So I used an analogy with something I thought you could relate to (bigfoot, faeries, etc). Then you make a couple responses about things I never said. What gives? I'm not being rude to you, just answering your questions... you trying to troll me? This isn't very christian behavior.
@mooseflier "You started it out by asking me why I don't believe in god.".....i never asked you why you dont believe in God i simply stated you were using a cop out in order to never have to defend your position your the one that needs to keep up.....tell me what i did that "isn't very christian"
@treasureinthesnow217 "Be more specific, who never met him, yes said he rose from the dead? And I simply say I don't accept that, that is fine by me. But if I were to ask "why?" what would your response be?"
@johhnycarlos Not really, as I saw no arguments 'against' theism. Either you accept theistic ideas or you don't. You don't need to put up some sort of argument 'against' theistic beliefs to reject them.
I mean, we have the theist claim that 'Jesus was the son of God because someone that never met him said he rose from the dead'. Then we have the atheist response, 'I don't accept that'. And in your eyes both 'arguments' are just as bad? Boy, someone is confused.
@mooseflier Be more specific, who never met him, yes said he rose from the dead? And I simply say I don't accept that, that is fine by me. But if I were to ask "why?" what would your response be? See I have a rational in what I believe, do you?
@johhnycarlos "But if I were to ask 'why?' what would your response be?"
Probably the same response you would give if you were asked why you do not believe in the Loch Ness monster, or BigFoot... or leprechauns. I simply give no credibility to the explanations and reasoning that I've ever heard. That's a start... but also the absurdity of such hugely supernatural claims. It's really just added complexity to the world we see around us, with no real benefits.
@mooseflier "You don't need to put up some sort of argument 'against' theistic beliefs to reject them."....especially if your intellectually stagnant;)....gotta love cop outs
Paul relentlessly remarked how He rose from the dead which trumps news of a virgin birth since our salvation depends on His resurrection. The virgin birth is waned by the marvelous feat of conquering death. Amen.
@N0TS0SUBTLE LOL... ya he couldn't find even space for one sentence about it! You have some serious delusion going on there buddy!
The truth: it's a story tale passed down the generations, and like all tales, they change over time. Paul never met Jesus and didn't know a lot of the details of the old tale because so much time had passed. Simple. Sorry bud, virgins don't give birth, snakes don't talk, people can't live in giant fish, and people don't come back from the dead. Grow up.
@N0TS0SUBTLE Rising from the dead is awesome...but I'm pretty sure I could have spared a little papyrus for the whole "Born to a Virgin" part of the story...unless it was made up way later and it wasn't being told when I wrote my stuff...
You believe the Virgin Birth Story...but you realize that was added decades years after Christ's death, and that Paul (the nearest witness to Christ's time) never mentions it. Nor does Mark in his gospel...did both of them forget that Christ was born from a virgin? That seems like a big thing to leave out of the story. If I were telling a story about a good friend, and he was miraculously born to a virgin, and that God was his father, I'm pretty sure I'd have to include that in my story.
@ninetailschris "Mark" whoever he was, wasn't an apostle that walked with Christ. The Gospel of Mark was written 25-35 years after Christ's death by an educated Greek speaking person...which none of the apostles were. By the time that part of the story was added 50-60 years had passed...makes you wonder what else was added to the story...
"I have a rational in what I believe, do you?"
What belief of mine are you asking about? I need not make any claims or present any beliefs in order to reject another belief. If you claim to not believe it when someone explains bigfoot to you, you're asserting another belief that 'there is no bigfoot'... you just don't accept the claim that there is one.
Too many people think 'atheist' means that the person is claiming there 'is no god'.
mooseflier 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mooseflier "If you claim to not believe it when someone explains bigfoot to you, you're NOT asserting another belief that 'there is no bigfoot'... "
Fixed!
mooseflier 3 weeks ago
@mooseflier in that lack of belief in God....do you leave room that there may be a God?
treasureinthesnow217 3 weeks ago
@treasureinthesnow217 Hardly a cop out. Do you believe in faeries or leprechauns? Big foot or Nessi? If you don't do you need to provide an argument that those creatures don't exist? Of course not, it's up to the person making the claim to provide an argument and some evidence for that claim. And god is no different.
But, you would probably leave open the possibility that those creatures may exist right? But you're not going to believe it until you have a good reason.
mooseflier 3 weeks ago
@mooseflier its quite easy to disprove a negative.....square circles do not exist
treasureinthesnow217 3 weeks ago
@treasureinthesnow217 *prove*
treasureinthesnow217 3 weeks ago
@treasureinthesnow217 No one mentioned a need to disprove anything. Again, if you make an incredible claim, it is up to you to provide evidence to support it. Nice cop out though. Besides, a mathematical proof does not play in the same arena as physics or metaphysics in your case. Regardless, I need not disprove anything in order to not believe in it. See again the Big foot analogy.
mooseflier 3 weeks ago
@mooseflier if God is so irrational to believe in it should be quite easy to disprove....especially coming from the "enlightened" community dont you think?
treasureinthesnow217 3 weeks ago
@treasureinthesnow217 I never said anything about irrationality. I think you need to take a breath and go back over our conversation. You started it out by asking me why I don't believe in god. So I used an analogy with something I thought you could relate to (bigfoot, faeries, etc). Then you make a couple responses about things I never said. What gives? I'm not being rude to you, just answering your questions... you trying to troll me? This isn't very christian behavior.
mooseflier 3 weeks ago
@mooseflier "You started it out by asking me why I don't believe in god.".....i never asked you why you dont believe in God i simply stated you were using a cop out in order to never have to defend your position your the one that needs to keep up.....tell me what i did that "isn't very christian"
treasureinthesnow217 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@treasureinthesnow217 "Be more specific, who never met him, yes said he rose from the dead? And I simply say I don't accept that, that is fine by me. But if I were to ask "why?" what would your response be?"
What were you asking 'why' about here?
mooseflier 3 weeks ago
LOL, almost as bad as the drcraig videos!
mooseflier 3 weeks ago
@mooseflier Amen...you know what I mean...
sundude5 3 weeks ago
@mooseflier which raises the crucial question why you are watching them in the first place.
ignatei 3 weeks ago
@mooseflier Right? The arguments against theism, Christianity were just as bad as in drcraig videos. So bad...who created the creator? LOL
johhnycarlos 3 weeks ago
@johhnycarlos Not really, as I saw no arguments 'against' theism. Either you accept theistic ideas or you don't. You don't need to put up some sort of argument 'against' theistic beliefs to reject them.
I mean, we have the theist claim that 'Jesus was the son of God because someone that never met him said he rose from the dead'. Then we have the atheist response, 'I don't accept that'. And in your eyes both 'arguments' are just as bad? Boy, someone is confused.
mooseflier 3 weeks ago
@mooseflier Be more specific, who never met him, yes said he rose from the dead? And I simply say I don't accept that, that is fine by me. But if I were to ask "why?" what would your response be? See I have a rational in what I believe, do you?
johhnycarlos 3 weeks ago
@johhnycarlos "But if I were to ask 'why?' what would your response be?"
Probably the same response you would give if you were asked why you do not believe in the Loch Ness monster, or BigFoot... or leprechauns. I simply give no credibility to the explanations and reasoning that I've ever heard. That's a start... but also the absurdity of such hugely supernatural claims. It's really just added complexity to the world we see around us, with no real benefits.
mooseflier 3 weeks ago
@mooseflier "You don't need to put up some sort of argument 'against' theistic beliefs to reject them."....especially if your intellectually stagnant;)....gotta love cop outs
treasureinthesnow217 3 weeks ago
Paul relentlessly remarked how He rose from the dead which trumps news of a virgin birth since our salvation depends on His resurrection. The virgin birth is waned by the marvelous feat of conquering death. Amen.
N0TS0SUBTLE 4 weeks ago
@N0TS0SUBTLE LOL... ya he couldn't find even space for one sentence about it! You have some serious delusion going on there buddy!
The truth: it's a story tale passed down the generations, and like all tales, they change over time. Paul never met Jesus and didn't know a lot of the details of the old tale because so much time had passed. Simple. Sorry bud, virgins don't give birth, snakes don't talk, people can't live in giant fish, and people don't come back from the dead. Grow up.
mooseflier 3 weeks ago
@N0TS0SUBTLE Rising from the dead is awesome...but I'm pretty sure I could have spared a little papyrus for the whole "Born to a Virgin" part of the story...unless it was made up way later and it wasn't being told when I wrote my stuff...
sundude5 3 weeks ago
You believe the Virgin Birth Story...but you realize that was added decades years after Christ's death, and that Paul (the nearest witness to Christ's time) never mentions it. Nor does Mark in his gospel...did both of them forget that Christ was born from a virgin? That seems like a big thing to leave out of the story. If I were telling a story about a good friend, and he was miraculously born to a virgin, and that God was his father, I'm pretty sure I'd have to include that in my story.
sundude5 4 weeks ago
@sundude5
I don't remember paul or mark being there.I could be wrong though.
ninetailschris 4 weeks ago
@ninetailschris "Mark" whoever he was, wasn't an apostle that walked with Christ. The Gospel of Mark was written 25-35 years after Christ's death by an educated Greek speaking person...which none of the apostles were. By the time that part of the story was added 50-60 years had passed...makes you wonder what else was added to the story...
sundude5 3 weeks ago