**Official Religious Debate Thread**

[knapplc]

It means that despite the fact that we don't know who wrote the books, that the books were written by non eye-witnesses decades after the event, that we have no autographs of any of these books, that the inspiration of the books themselves is in question, that the books we have at all appear to be anything but the selection of a deity, and contain many inconsistencies between each other––you still would consider it, at least for someone if not yourself, evidence for the existence of God. To me this is a disappointment. I would love to see better evidence then that.

 

Your search has led you to look for proof. That is something I very much understand, and I have no problem with it. I have asked the same questions you're asking and I think they are worthy questions, perhaps the most important questions we can ask, even. At the end of the day you're going to come up with answers, or at least conclusions, that are palatable to you, just like I (and everyone else who has asked What? Where? Why? How?) have.

[knapplc]

Edit: Point of curiosity, what did Christ teach?

 

Have you not read the Bible, and specifically, any one of the books Matthew, Mark, Luke and/or John? That seems like an awfully curious question to be asking if you're engaged in a discussion like this.

[Husker_x]

It means that despite the fact that we don't know who wrote the books, that the books were written by non eye-witnesses decades after the event, that we have no autographs of any of these books, that the inspiration of the books themselves is in question, that the books we have at all appear to be anything but the selection of a deity, and contain many inconsistencies between each other––you still would consider it, at least for someone if not yourself, evidence for the existence of God. To me this is a disappointment. I would love to see better evidence then that.

 

Your search has led you to look for proof. That is something I very much understand, and I have no problem with it. I have asked the same questions you're asking and I think they are worthy questions, perhaps the most important questions we can ask, even. At the end of the day you're going to come up with answers, or at least conclusions, that are palatable to you, just like I (and everyone else who has asked What? Where? Why? How?) have.

 

My only point of clarification would be that I don't require proof, mostly because it's a scientifically unimportant concept when meant in the absolute sense. Just because I throw an apple in the air a hundred times and it comes down, it does not follow that the hundred and first time it must necessarily come down. But from what I've seen personally and discussed with believers––and even believed myself when I considered myself a Christian––there is this idea that the bible we have somehow fell out of a divine vortex. The information I presented in my last post is either unknown or disregarded. But, of course, it burns down the faith for the faithful. It's more or less what I've been saying throughout the thread. But if you want to make me believe what you do, I'm happy to reconsider my position. Just give me the evidence.

 

But that's me. What about you? What do you believe, and why do you believe it?

[Husker_x]

Edit: Point of curiosity, what did Christ teach?

 

Have you not read the Bible, and specifically, any one of the books Matthew, Mark, Luke and/or John? That seems like an awfully curious question to be asking if you're engaged in a discussion like this.

 

I was being tricksy. If you posted love and tolerance, I would have posted Jonathan Edwards. There are thousands of Christian sects, and "and these pious men, like their predecessors, contend and wrangle, and pretend to understand the Bible; each understands it differently, but each understands it best; and they have agreed in nothing but in telling their readers that Thomas Paine understands it not." (Age of Reason)

[knapplc]

But that's me. What about you? What do you believe, and why do you believe it?

 

I believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God, that I exist in a fallen world, that I am a sinful creature, and that, although I do not deserve it and could not possibly earn it, I have been given a reprieve from my sins, that I have been justified with God and that when I die I will live with Him in heaven.

 

As for why I believe that, those are very personal reasons that are not open to debate.

[huskerjack23]

I'm not gonna suppose that...there's no evidence for it.

 

Why are you posting in this thread again? You realize we are talking about God?

 

You just defined God as not omniscient. All knowing means everything, past present and future, you can't redefine it.

 

I don't know what you think I am redefining? I was merely trying to provide a different way of perceiving how God most likely works.

 

Also impossible task for an omnipotent being? Seriously? You're tugging at straws to find answers that aren't there...

 

This is taken out of context, you know, just a little bit. I said it would be impossible for an omnipotent being to create a society of free souls without also creating an independent world. You are the one who keeps trying to make the point how God operates within logic and reason, so I don't know why this is hard to understand for you. Omnipotence doesn't allow a being to do that which is intrisically impossible. If you were to say "God can give a creature free will and at the same time withhold free will from it", you haven't really said anything about God at all. All things are possible with God, intrinsic impossibilities (such as creating a race of free creatures without creating an independent world) are not things at all, but nonentities, and thus, impossible.

Alright then...you don't believe in the God of the bible because you don't think that he is omniscient or omnipotent. You keep saying "all things are possible with god" yet continue to say that he can't do things because they are impossible. Contradictions.

 

The reason why I am in this thread? We are talking about belief in god. I don't believe in one and I'm trying to get that across. Yet you keep stomping on my beliefs because I can't suppose there might be one. NO EVIDENCE FOR IT! He's the tooth fairy!

[huskerjack23]

But that's me. What about you? What do you believe, and why do you believe it?

 

I believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God, that I exist in a fallen world, that I am a sinful creature, and that, although I do not deserve it and could not possibly earn it, I have been given a reprieve from my sins, that I have been justified with God and that when I die I will live with Him in heaven.

 

As for why I believe that, those are very personal reasons that are not open to debate.

Closing your mind to evidence is why most scientists fear fundamentalists.

[knapplc]

But that's me. What about you? What do you believe, and why do you believe it?

 

I believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God, that I exist in a fallen world, that I am a sinful creature, and that, although I do not deserve it and could not possibly earn it, I have been given a reprieve from my sins, that I have been justified with God and that when I die I will live with Him in heaven.

 

As for why I believe that, those are very personal reasons that are not open to debate.

Closing your mind to evidence is why most scientists fear fundamentalists.

Scientists are not immune to closing their minds to evidence.

[huskerjack23]

But that's me. What about you? What do you believe, and why do you believe it?

 

I believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God, that I exist in a fallen world, that I am a sinful creature, and that, although I do not deserve it and could not possibly earn it, I have been given a reprieve from my sins, that I have been justified with God and that when I die I will live with Him in heaven.

 

As for why I believe that, those are very personal reasons that are not open to debate.

Closing your mind to evidence is why most scientists fear fundamentalists.

Scientists are not immune to closing their minds to evidence.

Yeah, they're called creationists.

[knapplc]

But that's me. What about you? What do you believe, and why do you believe it?

 

I believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God, that I exist in a fallen world, that I am a sinful creature, and that, although I do not deserve it and could not possibly earn it, I have been given a reprieve from my sins, that I have been justified with God and that when I die I will live with Him in heaven.

 

As for why I believe that, those are very personal reasons that are not open to debate.

Closing your mind to evidence is why most scientists fear fundamentalists.

Scientists are not immune to closing their minds to evidence.

Yeah, they're called creationists.

And Meteorologists, and Astrophysicists, and Climatologists, and Biologists, and about every other kind of "ist" you can think of.

[Landlord]

I really enjoyed this thread until the point where huskerjack came in...there's no point in arguing if you aren't going to listen to what the other says.

 

 

Now I will just watch knapplc and Husker_x go at it.

[huskerjack23]

I really enjoyed this thread until the point where huskerjack came in...there's no point in arguing if you aren't going to listen to what the other says.

 

 

Now I will just watch knapplc and Husker_x go at it.

Do you want me to accept that you define your beliefs on so many illogical and irrational contradictions? Fine...I accept it. The real question is do you accept that? Do you accept the fact that you stated so many contradictions yet continue to have faith in its existence?

[knapplc]

Now I will just watch knapplc and Husker_x go at it.

 

Eh, I'm pretty much done. While I appreciate the conversation I've had with Husker_x, I've had more than enough of these to know we're not changing minds, and I'm just not interested in rehashing the same conversation again. Nothing against Husker_x, it's just the nature of the conversation.

 

No matter where you lie on the issue, the most important thing is to be tolerant of the other guy's view. It's when we become intolerant of others that problems arise.

[Landlord]

I really enjoyed this thread until the point where huskerjack came in...there's no point in arguing if you aren't going to listen to what the other says.

 

 

Now I will just watch knapplc and Husker_x go at it.

Do you want me to accept that you define your beliefs on so many illogical and irrational contradictions? Fine...I accept it. The real question is do you accept that? Do you accept the fact that you stated so many contradictions yet continue to have faith in its existence?

 

 

Accept whatever you want. You think they are contradictions, I think they make perfect sense, I tried explaining it, but you kept saying the same things.

 

Maybe you're right, maybe I'm right, no point in continuing on with it if the way I see it doesn't make sense to you (or maybe you just dismissed my argument altogether...that's ok too).

[Husker_x]

I really enjoyed this thread until the point where huskerjack came in...there's no point in arguing if you aren't going to listen to what the other says.

 

 

Now I will just watch knapplc and Husker_x go at it.

 

Have to agree with Knapplc. We're at a point in the conversation where minds rarely change. I think the reason is that Knapplc knew before we even started talking that faith was going to be his answer in the absence of tangible evidence. He also briefly referenced a non-debatable personal experience of some kind. This is the essence of faith. I would even generously concede (some wouldn't) that depending on the nature of the non-debatable experience, Knapplc himself might be totally justified in believing in God. I, however, and everyone else reading the thread, are not; and I would like to examine the specifics of the claim if given the opportunity.

 

The issue at hand isn't so much personal belief as what are you doing with it. In the United States you are free to believe anything you want basically for any reason. But if you want to convince me, teach your creation myth to other peoples' children, or legislate from your holy book, it's your job––your duty, really––to present your case with as much evidence as you can find. For my part, I'm completely open to any line of reasoning you want to try. But I'm a skeptic, and nothing goes unchallenged. So far I have to say that the lines of science, philosophy, and history usually taken to support any form of theism are unimpressive efforts. But keep at it. I'm not interested in being right as much as having more true beliefs than false ones.