(May 11, 2025 at 10:57 am)Paleophyte Wrote: It's nothing more than compartmentalization and long-winded justification for people who are just clever enough to need a bit more than the average mass-produced pulp paperback deity.

... or, perhaps, backtracking from bullshit Bronze Age claims now seen for the crap that they are as scientific investigation encroaches further and further into the realm of this supposed god, and covering it up in a layer of fertilizer, hoping that the plants sprout quicker than the doubts.

(May 11, 2025 at 3:38 pm)Belacqua Wrote: I asked them about their theological beliefs and they said they had never thought about it. It was the least important part of Christianity in their eyes.

So I suspect this is true of the majority.

Wait -- on the basis of two opinions, you're fine "suspecting" that they represent the "majority" of a couple of billion Christians?!

Not only is your sample size far to small, the fact that you're happy to publicly generalize from such a particular speaks volumes about your own thought process. Stick to philosophy, because you don't know shit about statistics or demographics or analysis.

(May 11, 2025 at 7:10 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: We're not talking about relationship anymore, we're talking about what God is, his ontology, his descriptions or definitions. The typical Christian isn't preoccupied with God's exact composition, they're focused on their interactions with him.

I think I know the answer, but can you demonstrate in any remotely objectively verifiable way that this relationship exists, outside of the imagination of believers?

(May 11, 2025 at 8:00 pm)Belacqua Wrote:

(May 11, 2025 at 9:36 am)Alan V Wrote: The majority defines what the majority believes, not theologians who assumably speak for themselves too.  That point is important in assessing the relevance of certain atheistic critiques.

If you would like to stay on the topic of majority views, I think you should do that. We should all talk about what we want to talk about. 

Atheist critiques may also be critiqued, and when they address ONLY simpler views, and ignore others, I see no problem in pointing that out. 

Quote:Do you have some unaddressed God-concept you would like us to consider?  Please offer it for conversation.

No, I'm not really interested in discussing that here.

So you want to make a bare claim that atheists only address weak theistic arguments, but have no interest in presenting any strong argument for scrutiny. Tell me again how being confrontational in a debate shuts down discussion. This is simply hilarious.

(May 11, 2025 at 8:05 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:

(May 11, 2025 at 7:53 pm)Alan V Wrote: Christians go by the Bible when it comes to how God is defined, and what kind of relationship is possible with him. 

Yes, but the Bible doesn't say much about God's nature, God simply is. 

"The everlasting God...will not grow tired or weary": (Isaiah 40:28). 

That quite specifically says this deity they've imagined is eternal, and heavily implied it is omnipotent. Though why it needed to rest after just 6 days work would need an answer. Even I have managed more than double that with a day off. 

Quote: If you tell me the story of how you met your partner, I wouldn't expect you to break down their biology and genetics, I would expect you to focus on the event itself.

Another false equivalence, since we a) objectively demonstrate that a partner is possible, and b) whether a partner exists, you can do neither for a deity.

(May 11, 2025 at 1:29 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:

(May 11, 2025 at 8:45 am)Belacqua Wrote: I don't care what the majority taste in novels is, and I don't care what the majority views of religion are. Quality is a completely separate issue.

You have to go to experts who have at least attempted to come up with reasonable answers to the question.

Do you have to be an expert in Harry Potter novels to disbelieve one that wizardry is real? Also no one could hope to become an expert in every religion humans have created, so on what grounds are you dismissing all the others if that's your criteria for withholding belief?

(May 11, 2025 at 3:38 pm)Belacqua Wrote:

(May 11, 2025 at 1:29 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: Right; and the majority of Christians don't hold any strong beliefs about what God is beyond his role as creator. In much the same way that the majority of people don't have any beliefs about the workings of human perception, they just know they have eyes and that they see. And any belief they did have is guaranteed to be wrong. You have to go to experts who have at least attempted to come up with reasonable answers to the question.

I remember meeting a Christian couple here in Hiroshima -- he was from Hiroshima and she was from Nagasaki. They were both doctors who had spent the majority of their careers doing charity work. He was a founding member of an anti-nuke organization that won the Nobel Peace Prize. 

I asked them about their theological beliefs and they said they had never thought about it. It was the least important part of Christianity in their eyes.

So I suspect this is true of the majority. And it's the reason why trying to dissuade them from Christianity by asking for objective evidence of a prime mover -- or something like that -- is a niche hobby for people on line, but doesn't make much difference in their lives.

That's a hasty generalisation fallacy, also never thinking about a belief, is hardly a compelling argument it has any merit. Now I can't speak for anyone else, but I am not asking for objective evidence for the benefit of believers. Who claimed that debating theistic claims made a difference to the lives of believers? In case you failed to notice John sought out an atheist forum to peddle his superstitious wares, I don't go to church and sneer like that, and when others try to proselytise me in the flesh, they get a very polite no thank you, initially.

(May 11, 2025 at 4:33 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote:

(May 11, 2025 at 3:38 pm)Belacqua Wrote: I asked them about their theological beliefs and they said they had never thought about it. It was the least important part of Christianity in their eyes.

Herbert Simon, an early cognitive scientist, popularized the term Satisficing in the study of judgment and decision making. People do not attempt to exhaust every subject and choice presented to them before making a judgment. And for obvious reasons, we simply don't have the bandwidth nor the time to maximize every decision we have to make. Instead, we aim for good enough and extrapolate the rest. So, in the case of this couple their good enough threshold was met, and it was enough to judge God's existence as real or possible, and then to focus on living a Christian life. We never get off the ground if we require absolute certainty, on any topic.

Ah you met them then, and they divulged this to you? I wonder why they blanked @Belaqua when he asked?

That's a straw man, since no one is asking for absolute certainty for anything John, only something beyond bare assertions, and the one circular reasoning fallacy you have offered. 

Are you ready to give us something beyond a circular reasoning fallacy, for

(May 11, 2025 at 3:38 pm)Belacqua Wrote:

(May 11, 2025 at 1:29 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: Right; and the majority of Christians don't hold any strong beliefs about what God is beyond his role as creator. In much the same way that the majority of people don't have any beliefs about the workings of human perception, they just know they have eyes and that they see. And any belief they did have is guaranteed to be wrong. You have to go to experts who have at least attempted to come up with reasonable answers to the question.

I remember meeting a Christian couple here in Hiroshima -- he was from Hiroshima and she was from Nagasaki. They were both doctors who had spent the majority of their careers doing charity work. He was a founding member of an anti-nuke organization that won the Nobel Peace Prize. 

I asked them about their theological beliefs and they said they had never thought about it. It was the least important part of Christianity in their eyes.

So I suspect this is true of the majority. And it's the reason why trying to dissuade them from Christianity by asking for objective evidence of a prime mover -- or something like that -- is a niche hobby for people on line, but doesn't make much difference in their lives.

Wow - TWO people who are a couple...which sort of makes you think that they had things in common...like beliefs.

I am atheist and so are two of my kids and one grandchild.  That makes sense as that's how they were raised.

Good grief, I found out a couple nights ago that my next door neighbor is agnostic/nihilistic....the five of us plan to take over the world since we are in the majority.  /s

Yer an idiot of epic proportions.

If you said the sky was blue and grass was green I wouldn't take your word for it regardless of what book you reference.

Too broad a question.

It depends on the individual Christian why they believe, and why they accept some parts of the bible and reject others.