Christianity has been debunked once and for all
- Thread starter trishmybiscuits
- Start date
- Status
email468
Well-Known Member
I did not write that response (but i think you know that).
To be clear, the things I have been posting on this thread pertains to the "debunking of Christianity" which I take to mean mainstream Christianity which does agree on all the "biggies" like Christ's divinity and the only way to heaven is through believing in the trinity, the infallibility of God, etc...
As soon as we venture into the "most Christian's might believe that but I don't" conversation then we are off topic and no longer discussing the biblical God and literal interpretation of the bible which is what this thread seemed to be about.
If you want to discuss a more philosophical god then that is fine too provided we understand that we are no longer in the realm of the bible and christ and an interventionist deity. We can talk about an inter-dimensional being that has orchestrated all the universe but it seems to me that all that amounts to is excuse making for a god that doesn't really need to exist except as a comfort for us or as some kind of cosmic judge and rule maker.
I would not condemn someone for blazing their own spiritual path - in fact I encourage it. At least until their own spiritual path becomes the "one true way". As for me, I like to have evidence before I believe something but evidence isn't always readily available which means I have to deal with a lot of uncertainty in my life and philosophies. I am comfortable with that but not everyone is and I don't expect them to be.
What I do condemn is a faith (belief without evidence) so strong that no amount of contradictory evidence will make a dent in that faith. And I doubly condemn thinking this stubborn self-inflicted ignorance is some kind of virtue.
I hope this clears up any misconceptions about what I am saying as it pertains to the thread's original meaning.
PoseidonsNet
Well-Known Member
debunked?
well most of the world has not noticed
http://www.2010-south-africa.net/world/Statistics.htm%20
well most of the world has not noticed
http://www.2010-south-africa.net/world/Statistics.htm%20
email468
Well-Known Member
The number of people who believe is not relevant to reality. Many, many more folks are not Christian - does that mean they are right because of their numbers?
PoseidonsNet
Well-Known Member
So if mosy people BELIEVE that killing one another is wrong - then that is not going to effect reality?
What a world...
email468
Well-Known Member
Effect does not equal relevant.
I did not say the number of people who believe (or disbelieve) would not affect reality - i said it is not relevant to reality.
I am fully aware that what people perceive as real is real in its consequences (with apologies to R.D. Lang for the paraphrase).
If people believed the moon is made of cheese we might try to go there to harvest it but that doesn't mean the moon is really made of cheese.
PoseidonsNet
Well-Known Member
So the effect things have is not relevant then...?
email468
Well-Known Member
I still did not say that but I think i see where the confusion is at... I said: The number of people who believe is not relevant to reality. I think you inferred that to mean - the number of people who believe is not relevant to the reality around them. My meaning was: The number of people who believe is not relevant to (the) reality of whether God exists or not. Sorry for any confusion my leaving that off has caused.
In case there is still confusion, I'll try again.
Let's pretend that in reality the moon is made up of rock and dust.
Let's also pretend that nearly everyone believes the moon is made of cheese.
Would people's belief affect how they view and think about the moon? YES.
Would people's belief that the moon is made of cheese be relevant to what the moon is actually made of? NO - it is still made of rock and dust not cheese - regardless how many people believe otherwise.
now to transpose this onto religious thinking...
Would people's belief in God affect the way they deal with other people and themselves? YES
Would people's belief in God be relevant to whether God exists or not? NO
does that make sense?
PoseidonsNet
Well-Known Member
You beg the question : You assume God does not exist, then 'prove' this based on your assumption.
If you were God, and you creation did not believe in you, you would turn your back, and as regards your people, you would not exist. : ARMAGEDDON.
If I can prove the moon is made of cheese will you TRY to believe in God?
ZenMaster
Well-Known Member
Excuse me? Who the hell do you think you are?
You obviously don't understand what I mean then. Why do you think that sacrifice was all over the Old Testament? Because we are a very tribal civilization even today, we, humans, have to have symbols and idols.
email468
Well-Known Member
You are still misunderstanding me. I am basing all assumptions on we don't know if god exists or not. All i am saying is everyone in the entire world could belief in a god but that doesn't make it so.
Look at how many folks have believed in Zeus, Thor or dare I say ... Poseidon - that doesn't make those gods any more real than the biblical god of Abraham.
There are many things that would persuade me that a god or godlike entity exists. False claims are most definitely not one of them.
Is there any evidence I can present that will cause you to not believe in god?
PoseidonsNet
Well-Known Member
Yes...
Logic.
Logic is also known as logos : the ordering factor of the universe : AKA : (___) fill in the missing word.
IE your assumption would undermine your question on the basis that in order to answer the question (or any question) one would have to assume logos exists.
If I can prove the moon is made of cheese will you TRY to believe in God?
email468
Well-Known Member
Huh? Are you saying that if there is logic then there has to be a god? how do you figure that? rather than Greek you may want to look up some Latin like Post hoc ergo propter hoc
and by all means prove the moon is made of cheese - NASA will be highly interested.
PoseidonsNet
Well-Known Member
God is defined as the ordering factor of the universe : Omnipotent and Omnipresent.
And I'll only prove the moon is made of cheese if you promise to try and believe in God.
o and I'm not saying the whole moon is cheese, the force of gravity would rip it apart then we would have a ring like saturn, only ours would be cheese.
what i'm saying is the surface layer is cheese. and not just any cheese, grommit, its swiss cheese!
Do you believe me yet?
And I'll only prove the moon is made of cheese if you promise to try and believe in God.
o and I'm not saying the whole moon is cheese, the force of gravity would rip it apart then we would have a ring like saturn, only ours would be cheese.
what i'm saying is the surface layer is cheese. and not just any cheese, grommit, its swiss cheese!
Do you believe me yet?
email468
Well-Known Member
Nature's laws are the ordering factor of the universe: knowable and immutable with or without a god.
But that is a neat trick defining something that hasn't even been proven to exist.
I can't promise to try to believe in God anymore than I can promise to believe in anything without evidence. I can promise if I see evidence for God I will consider it exists - provided there is no natural explanation.
Short of redefining the meaning of cheese to something other than a dairy product (or the moon as something other than the moon), it is not possible to provide evidence that the moon is made of cheese. But I'm waiting....
PoseidonsNet
Well-Known Member
You haven't promised to try yet email468...
... i am waiting too ...
its almost full cheese (I mean moon) tonite
God is defined as the laws of nature, but more than that - because God is also the laws of nature which we do not understand. We are debating the meaning of words, actually.
... i am waiting too ...
its almost full cheese (I mean moon) tonite
God is defined as the laws of nature, but more than that - because God is also the laws of nature which we do not understand. We are debating the meaning of words, actually.
email468
Well-Known Member
Why would I try to believe in something that I don't think exists? That makes no sense to me at all.
We aren't debating the meaning of words. Or at least I hope we aren't wasting our time that way.
You presume the existence of god and I do not. How can god be the laws of nature if god doesn't exist?
PoseidonsNet
Well-Known Member
because god IS a word used to describe the laws of nature that go beyond our immediate understanding.
If you were not capable of trying to believe in new things (that you don't think exist) then you will never learn anything new, as you will then only ever believe that which you already know.
email468
Well-Known Member
God of the gaps!?! that is what you're arguing for? what we don't understand yet must be god? please tell me you have more substance to your argument for god.
I have looked into this god thing and found the evidence lacking and therefore, currently do not believe. If evidence is presented, I will reconsider my stance. How does that stop me from learning new things?
PoseidonsNet
Well-Known Member
we infer god exists because absolute logic (logos) exists.
more like an argument from design.
ever noticed how the sun and the moon are the same size in the sky?
what are the odds that that is a random FACT?
more like the solar system was designed, just like the laws of nature were designed.
pythagorus' triangle is more evidence.
thats great, so you promise to just try then?
- Status