»God proof&Are Christians closer to truth than others?«
|
||||
 Since stinkz brings up this topic once in a while ("Christianity is rational  , Atheism is irrational  ") I wanted to start this topic.
Can there be ANY god proofs at all? Does logic lead us to the conclusion that the bible/Christianity is more trustworthy than other bleif systems or atheism?
OK, stinkz, show us why you think Christianity is the rational choice... Present us your logical god proofs/Christianity proofs And anyone who disagrees, please tell us why atheism is rational (or Christianity is irrational) posted by knn |
||||
|
|
||||
| in-my-opinion.orgReligion and Mysteries, from worship to werewolvesReligious & Philosophical TopicsGod proof&Are Christians closer to truth than others? |
|
|||
 I have two more topics I plan on posting and dealing with before I get to this one. One of them has to do with it, though. A proper response to this question isn't going to come over-night. In fact, I hardly think I deserve to be placed in the position of defending the Christian faith. I'm merely 20 years old, and I do not consider myself a Christian apologist. However, once I have time to deal with these next two threads, I will devote some time to putting together my thoughts on the subject into some sort of coherant essay, if you wish. posted by stinkz |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 Yep, you're not apologising for anything Stinkz, lol! The thing is that you aren't defending THE Christian point of view. You are defending your point of view, which you consider to be 'true' Christianity. The stupid thing is that unlike the apologetics who were explaining how the beliefs of Christianity work. You are simply dismissing those who don't think Christianity makes sense as 'irrational' and sometimes even 'stupid'. No you're far from apologetic and from the looks of it you don't find it any easier to argue for rationality in your views than anyone else. Stop calling people irrational and start making proper arguments. "You are irrational" is just as immature as saying "You're a twit!". posted by fatpie42 |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 fatpie42: Stop calling people irrational and start making proper arguments. Please do! The arguments you actually do make hold good water and some are even outstanding, I daresay...why not make more instead of just dismissing other people's arguments? Unless you can't, of course... 
I would like to respond to knn's question with: What is NOT rational about Christianity that makes you ask this question? posted by nocturnal_anonymous |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 ATHIEST in the roman times meant you wrship one God posted by Agent Zero |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Agent Zero: ATHIEST in the roman times meant you wrship one God I think it was more that atheist meant 'denying that the EMPEROR was God'. It was still a denial of God, but not ALL gods. (It was generally considered that if you worshipped many Gods you would have no trouble worshipping the emperor alongside them). What is irrational about religion is: That no proof of God's existence is good enough. (Remember what I was saying in the other thread, using the proofs Flew never came up with more than a belief in deism ♣. IMO → Famous Atheist Now Believes in God That there is no evidence that God works in our lives. That there is no explanation why one religion is better than others and normally it is very natural for religions to war with each other (which kinda undermines the idea that religions bring peace and harmony). Even Buddhists (in Sri Lanka) have been known to wage wars and commit atrocities. There's your cue nocturnal. Argue for religion. Let's try not to sidetracked by Stinkz too much. I want to see what YOU have to say. 
posted by fatpie42 |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 stinkz: I have two more topics I plan on posting and dealing with before I get to this one. One of them has to do with it, though. A proper response to this question isn't going to come over-night. Translation: OK, but first let me go ask my bible teacher a few questions. stinkz: In fact, I hardly think I deserve to be placed in the position of defending the Christian faith. I'm merely 20 years old, and I do not consider myself a Christian apologist. You don't need to be a "Christian apologist" as you said. You think you're not in the position of defending your own faith?  P-A-T-H-E-T-I-C And what does your age have to do with anything? Nocturnal is only 15 I think, and she is light years ahead of you! If you come to this forum and rant about how great Christianity is and how rational it is, etc, etc, etc. then provide valid arguments.stinkz: However, once I have time to deal with these next two threads, I will devote some time to putting together my thoughts on the subject into some sort of coherant essay, if you wish. Translation: Like I said, I need time to go ask my bible teacher a few questions so I can come back here and kick all your asses! Hehe! 
Good luck trying to write a coherent essay, you'll need it, since you can't even write ONE coherent sentence.
posted by Echelon |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 fatpie42: What is irrational about religion is: I refuse to take part in this thread as long as rationality isn't defined. Imagine a cat in front of your eyes. Is it rational or irrational to have an imagined cat? That's the same case with religion: Imagine a god. posted by knn |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Echelon: Nocturnal is only 15 I think, and she is light years ahead of you! Echelon: You think you're not in the position of defending your own faith? . Echelon: Good luck trying to write a coherent essay, you'll need it, since you can't even write ONE coherent sentence. I have to defend stinkz here. I don't see anything that he posted here that should make us think that stinkz is not in the position to defend his own religion. I think he is a great poster. posted by knn |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
knn: I have to defend stinkz here. I don't see anything that he posted here that should make us think that stinkz is not in the position to defend his own religion. I think he is a great poster. He said it himself: stinkz: I hardly think I deserve to be placed in the position of defending the Christian faith. I'm not making anything up. posted by Echelon |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
 knn: I refuse to take part in this thread as long as rationality isn't defined. Agreed! knn: I have to defend stinkz here. I don't see anything that he posted here that should make us think that stinkz is not in the position to defend his own religion. I think he is a great poster. Agreed again! He has been posting pretty logical arguments defending his religion, don't take it out of context because you don't believe his beliefs! He's a bloody devoted Christian and I'll give him credit for that and not posting stuff like "Jesus is great and he loves ya!" But I'm pretty interested to see what stinkz thinks is rational about Christianity! I think rationality barely works when working with something that will eventually be defined as spiritual or divine! I think with the rationality all we need is a bit of logic that links the Bible to god and a logical reason to believe it, why does Christianity make more sense then Atheism? What about it possibley makes it so coherent and rational? No point treating him like an idiot when there's no real reason, I mean his posts are good enough and this rationality about christianity essay could pose some good arguments! Just wait till he posts his essay! posted by hungarian kid |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Simply put, Christinaity and the other major monotheistic relegions are irational because their respective Gods have been proven nonexistent. The Epicurus Riddle runs thus: Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? Besides the blatant impossibilities (and translatory mess ups. Virgin Mary? That was a Monk's copying mistake.) described in the Bible. I may be missing the point there, though. If what you have is *God* then walking on water and so on should present no problem. I've also heard of ways such things as thr resurection could have been faked, if they weren't just written down fabrications to begin with. Now I'm rambling anyway. The riddle above proves at least that if there is a God He, She or It isn't what the Christians, Mormons or followers of Islam think He is. I've just realised that that dosen't quite justify athiesm, just disblief in a god like that described by Christians. Thank you thread posters, I'm now going to go away and look at other relegions to see if any of their premises are possible. posted by Seb |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
fatpie42: There's your cue nocturnal. Argue for religion. Let's try not to sidetracked by Stinkz too much. I want to see what YOU have to say. We'll see how I do in the battle against the big scary monsters of debate-topics.com... *whispers*Help, stinkz, help!  Echelon: And what does your age have to do with anything? Nocturnal is only 15 I think, and she is light years ahead of you! Er...I'm fourteen, and stinkz, in my opinion, expresses his arguments much better than I do. I'm afraid age difference does show after all.  knn: I refuse to take part in this thread as long as rationality isn't defined. Then why don't you define it? You are the one who created this thread after all...and yet you refuse to take part in it...? knn: I have to defend stinkz here. I don't see anything that he posted here that should make us think that stinkz is not in the position to defend his own religion. I think he is a great poster. I think so too. But he really should post MORE often instead of dismissing certain ideas as simply "unintelligent." nocturnal_anonymous: The arguments you actually do make hold good water and some are even outstanding, I daresay... hungarian kid: why does Christianity make more sense then Atheism? And why does atheism make more sense than Christianity? Each "religion" (even though atheism might mean "without a religion," I personally think it IS a religion of its own) doesn't really NEED any proof. Atheism is based on the fact that most people don't see the proof that backs Christianity. Basically, athiests ask "Why?" while Christians ask "Why not?" Both sides basically present the same argument twisted around. So, rationality (of course, we're still looking for a definition...), I'm afraid, has nothing to do with religion. However, this does not mean that atheism has any rationale whatsoever either. Seb: Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God? If there is no evil, than what is good?
posted by nocturnal_anonymous |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
nocturnal_anonymous: And why does atheism make more sense than Christianity? Each "religion" (even though atheism might mean "without a religion," I personally think it IS a religion of its own) doesn't really NEED any proof. Atheism is based on the fact that most people don't see the proof that backs Christianity. No, atheism means "without a god". nocturnal_anonymous: Basically, athiests ask "Why?" while Christians ask "Why not?" Both sides basically present the same argument twisted around. So, rationality (of course, we're still looking for a definition...), I'm afraid, has nothing to do with religion. However, this does not mean that atheism has any rationale whatsoever either. Atheism does have a rationale behind it, it is based on scientific data, and it was originated by people who refused to be spoon fed all the facts and chose to reason. posted by Echelon |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Echelon: it is based on scientific data, and it was originated by people who refused to be spoon fed all the facts and chose to reason. You refuse to be spoonfed all the FACTS? And you choose to REASON? Ha, Echelon you make me crack up.
Then again, like knn said, we need some sort of definition for "Rationale." Does rationale necessarily mean scientific data? posted by nocturnal_anonymous |
|||
|
|||
1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
Goto page
1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
 Register Log in |
The time now is 23 May 2012, 22:22 php B.B. |