Posts: 14259
Threads: 48
Joined: March 1, 2009
Reputation:
80
RE: Greetings!
April 16, 2011 at 7:02 am
Because Xtianity states that you can't have hard evidence.
The bible is a collection of rational evidence for God. It is information to be either accepted or rejected, but information never the less. It isn't hard evidence, because without the need to decide to believe or not, we wouldn't need to choose <---which is the crux of faith.
[Talking Xtianity] To think of belief in God as something you will ever know one way or another is counter logic, given the definition of God. IMO an agnostic isn't someone waiting to know, it's someone who cannot ever know.
Posts: 12232
Threads: 324
Joined: April 14, 2011
Reputation:
140
RE: Greetings!
April 16, 2011 at 7:09 am
(This post was last modified: April 16, 2011 at 7:13 am by Napoléon.)
(April 16, 2011 at 7:02 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Because Xtianity states that you can't have hard evidence.
The bible is a collection of rational evidence for God. It is information to be either accepted or rejected, but information never the less. It isn't hard evidence, because without the need to decide to believe or not, we wouldn't need to choose <---which is the crux of faith.
[Talking Xtianity] To think of belief in God as something you will ever know one way or another is counter logic, given the definition of God. IMO an agnostic isn't someone waiting to know, it's someone who cannot ever know.
your right, it isnt hard evidence and thats my point. thats why i dont believe it. i think faith is just something to disguise the fact that there is no hard evidence.
if god exists why does he want us to believe? if he does then why doesnt he just show himself? the purpose of 'faith' is a complete mystery to me, if something exists and knows that itself exists and wants the things which its created to know that it exists then for fuck sake it should just SHOW that it exists.
you can be agnostic but still hold a point of view. i would call myself agnostic because i dont KNOW everything, it's impossible to prove one way or another. but just asserting this fact does not mean you can't come to judgements based on what you have seen in your life.
everyone is different, no doubt you've seen things which sway your opinions and incline you to believe in a god? well i have experienced nothing of the sort to compell me to this belief, therefore i do not believe it.
and by your logic an agnostic is someone who cannot ever know, THEREFORE they cannot have an opinion and must just sit there like a brain dead zombie? no i think not. this is what i am saying.
Posts: 14259
Threads: 48
Joined: March 1, 2009
Reputation:
80
RE: Greetings!
April 16, 2011 at 9:21 am
(This post was last modified: April 16, 2011 at 9:23 am by fr0d0.)
If you take a look at my religious views up there ^^ you'll notice that I too am an agnostic... because I can't know either > no I haven't experienced anything that would remove my choice to believe... because that's not how it works.
Posts: 12232
Threads: 324
Joined: April 14, 2011
Reputation:
140
RE: Greetings!
April 16, 2011 at 10:00 am
yes i saw that, yet you are a theist aswell?
i really dont see where you're trying to go with this
alot of people on this site just seem to enjoy picking apart arguments for the sake of it. i would of thought some of you guys would of enjoyed a forum more devoted to debating itself rather than one which promotes us all to share or beliefs.
Posts: 14259
Threads: 48
Joined: March 1, 2009
Reputation:
80
RE: Greetings!
April 16, 2011 at 10:21 am
I am a fully signed up vanilla Christian AND I'm an agnostic... as the two are compatible. I believe in God but cannot know that there's a God. Is all I'm saying.
I guess the precise definition of agnostic is something we've agreed to on this site.
Point is... if you think you can know for sure that there is a God then you're misinformed. Faith is needed to believe in God (the commitment to information that you trust to be true).
You made the categoric statement that belief is irrational. I say belief is purely rational.
Posts: 12232
Threads: 324
Joined: April 14, 2011
Reputation:
140
RE: Greetings!
April 16, 2011 at 10:29 am
(This post was last modified: April 16, 2011 at 10:30 am by Napoléon.)
(April 16, 2011 at 10:21 am)fr0d0 Wrote: I am a fully signed up vanilla Christian AND I'm an agnostic... as the two are compatible. I believe in God but cannot know that there's a God. Is all I'm saying.
I guess the precise definition of agnostic is something we've agreed to on this site.
Point is... if you think you can know for sure that there is a God then you're misinformed. Faith is needed to believe in God (the commitment to information that you trust to be true).
You made the categoric statement that belief is irrational. I say belief is purely rational.
then i disagree with you. belief in god is entirely irrational. do you believe everything in the bible to be true? guessing as your a 'vanilla christian' the answer would be yes. this IS irrational. the bible says the age of our earth is 6000 years old.
yet it is PROVEN by science that the earth is far far older. straight away this disproves your 'rationality' in believing in god, because you have not assessed the facts in comparison to what your bible says.
Posts: 14259
Threads: 48
Joined: March 1, 2009
Reputation:
80
RE: Greetings!
April 16, 2011 at 10:50 am
I find the bible to be true as far as I know. I have yet to find fault with it. The bible never says that the earth is 6000 years old. People interpret Genesis 1 to be about material origins, but I find no evidence to support that.
The word for 'creation' = 'bara' ...which means 'organised'. The creation story is a theological representation of a temple with God at the centre (day 7). This is consistent with ancient texts of the time, which all deal with function rather than material origin. It tells us how things are set out and their purpose, rather than scientific fact.
Posts: 12232
Threads: 324
Joined: April 14, 2011
Reputation:
140
RE: Greetings!
April 16, 2011 at 10:54 am
(April 16, 2011 at 10:50 am)fr0d0 Wrote: I find the bible to be true as far as I know. I have yet to find fault with it. The bible never says that the earth is 6000 years old. People interpret Genesis 1 to be about material origins, but I find no evidence to support that.
The word for 'creation' = 'bara' ...which means 'organised'. The creation story is a theological representation of a temple with God at the centre (day 7). This is consistent with ancient texts of the time, which all deal with function rather than material origin. It tells us how things are set out and their purpose, rather than scientific fact. so you believe it is right to stone children? to destroy entire cities? to massacre thousands of tribes as moses was supposed to?
or are you one of those that picks and chooses which verses they take 'literally' and which ones they dont? hmm?
Posts: 14259
Threads: 48
Joined: March 1, 2009
Reputation:
80
RE: Greetings!
April 16, 2011 at 11:01 am
Haha! 
I take the facts as they are best interpreted, trying not to let my own influence get in the way. That's the only way I know to be rational and consistent. You think avoidance of facts is the best way to a rational stance??
Posts: 12232
Threads: 324
Joined: April 14, 2011
Reputation:
140
RE: Greetings!
April 16, 2011 at 11:03 am
(This post was last modified: April 16, 2011 at 11:08 am by Napoléon.)
what about slavery? do you believe that is right? what about bashing a baby over a rock?
here's a verse:
"As you approach a town to attack it, first offer its people terms for peace. If they accept your terms and open the gates to you, then all the people inside will serve you in forced labor. But if they refuse to make peace and prepare to fight, you must attack the town. When the LORD your God hands it over to you, kill every man in the town. But you may keep for yourselves all the women, children, livestock, and other plunder. You may enjoy the spoils of your enemies that the LORD your God has given you. But these instructions apply only to distant towns, not to the towns of nations nearby. "As for the towns of the nations the LORD your God is giving you as a special possession, destroy every living thing in them. You must completely destroy the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites, just as the LORD your God has commanded you. This will keep the people of the land from teaching you their detestable customs in the worship of their gods, which would cause you to sin deeply against the LORD your God." Deuteronomy 20:10-18 NLT
do you think this is right?
avoidance of what facts?
it is a FACT that your bible which you believe to be true promotes slavery! are you going to avoid this particular FACT?
"Happy those who seize your children and smash them against a rock." Psalms 137:9
During this period, Joshua destroyed all the descendants of Anak, who lived in the hill country of Hebron, Debir, Anab, and the entire hill country of Judah and Israel. He killed them all and completely destroyed their towns. Not one was left in all the land of Israel, though some still remained in Gaza, Gath, and Ashdod. So Joshua took control of the entire land, just as the LORD had instructed Moses. He gave it to the people of Israel as their special possession, dividing the land among the tribes. So the land finally had rest from war. (Joshua 11:21-23)
just a few examples of the evil which your true book promotes
|
