Here is my other trick. I'm thinking of a 4 digit number. Presumably, God knows what it is. Will he tell a Christian what it is? Or is he so much of a jerk that he won't even do that to give his follower some credit?

You can write it down in advance on a piece of paper so they can't accuse you of changing your mind later.

"God doesn't like to be tested". Sure, someone who knows they are going to fail a drugs screening doesn't like to be tested either.

God can't tell someone anything they don't already know themselves.

(June 7, 2015 at 8:07 am)Britney blue Wrote: How can I corner, of course with my words, Christians and make them feel they have no choice but admit to rethinking their position or part of their positions when it comes the bible or their god? I usually go fishing online at conservative news sites like Breitbart News Network. I'll click on a story or headline, look down at the comments and either look for key words that Christians use or post a stimulating comment, which they would of course feel the need to correct me or defend their so called faith. Is there any tools or creative weapons of reason and logic that I can use to stump them?

As long as a person has an emotional need to believe in Christianity or any religion, that is what they will believe. I was a Christian for 25 years, and none of what I say here could have convinced me otherwise. But what we can do is plant seeds. Other experiences in a person's life may nourish that seed and help it to grow into emotional freedom.  It's not my job to make a horse drink. After leading him to water, I'm through.

(June 5, 2015 at 2:25 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: I'm not denying that you have "trust" and "confidence" in your god Drich, I'm saying that trusting and being confident in something isn't evidence for its existence.  And that's all you have as far as "evidence" for god goes...your feelings and experiences.

So what 'evidence' would you have of any one you love or any relationship other than your "feelings and experiences" with that person?

(June 5, 2015 at 3:00 pm)Nope Wrote: Drich, I do not believe in soul mates or one true loves.  Sometimes people are very compatible and they feel a very deep connection with one another. This is what happened to my husband and me but if I had never met him, that doesn't meant that either of us would have ended up unhappy or that we might not have found someone else that we felt a similar connection.  There isn't one set person for anyone.

You seem to be going by the assumption that my trust in my marriage is the same type of blind trust that a religious person places in their god. It isn't.  There are reasons that my husband and I would divorce and neither would be justified in hurting or torturing the other because they left the marriage.  I have seen my husband, touched him and heard his voice so I know he exists.

A better analogy would be if one person agreed to be married to a person that they never spoke to, met or interacted in any physical way.  When something good happened- like they get a job they wanted or a really good parking spot-then they believe that their unseen spouse is somehow working behind the scenes.  They also know that if  they commit adultery then their invisible spouse will know and make them suffer forever.

(June 5, 2015 at 3:00 pm)Nope Wrote: Drich, I do not believe in soul mates or one true loves.  Sometimes people are very compatible and they feel a very deep connection with one another. This is what happened to my husband and me but if I had never met him, that doesn't meant that either of us would have ended up unhappy or that we might not have found someone else that we felt a similar connection.  There isn't one set person for anyone.

You seem to be going by the assumption that my trust in my marriage is the same type of blind trust that a religious person places in their god. It isn't.  There are reasons that my husband and I would divorce and neither would be justified in hurting or torturing the other because they left the marriage.  I have seen my husband, touched him and heard his voice so I know he exists.

A better analogy would be if one person agreed to be married to a person that they never spoke to, met or interacted in any physical way.  When something good happened- like they get a job they wanted or a really good parking spot-then they believe that their unseen spouse is somehow working behind the scenes.  They also know that if  they commit adultery then their invisible spouse will know and make them suffer forever.

You seem to be stuck on the idea my analogy can only work if it speaks to every aspect of your deepest thoughts desires and personal experience. Take yourself out of the analogy and look at the principles. That is what or how all analogies work. We are comparing principles and not specific instances.

Nice try at a red herring, but it fails because you don't seem to understand how analogies work or it is your hope I don't.

*Sigh* If it hasn't already been added, we can mention the theists' tendency to torture the shit out of bad analogies while insisting that no one else gets the point of the analogy.

(June 7, 2015 at 11:15 am)Drich Wrote:

(June 5, 2015 at 2:25 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: I'm not denying that you have "trust" and "confidence" in your god Drich, I'm saying that trusting and being confident in something isn't evidence for its existence.  And that's all you have as far as "evidence" for god goes...your feelings and experiences.

So what 'evidence' would you have of any one you love or any relationship other than your "feelings and experiences" with that person?

If you don't know the difference between people who are standing right in front of you (objective, physical experience) and an imaginary god whom  you've never seen or heard or felt or smelt or tasted (subjective, emotional experience) , then again this is a job for the men in the long white coats.

(June 7, 2015 at 12:37 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote:

(June 7, 2015 at 11:15 am)Drich Wrote: So what 'evidence' would you have of any one you love or any relationship other than your "feelings and experiences" with that person?

If you don't know the difference between people who are standing right in front of you (objective, physical experience) and an imaginary god whom  you've never seen or heard or felt or smelt or tasted (subjective, emotional experience) , then again this is a job for the men in the long white coats.

Yup.  Like I said above, feelings towards something does not make that something real.  It's always a step removed.  One's feelings towards their god is not evidence of that god's existence outside of the mind of the person thinking about it.  To claim otherwise is ridiculous.

Like you say, we know, objectively, that people exist.  We can actually hold a real conversation with them.  Touch them.  Disagree with them.  Smell them.  Get to know all their little quirks.  That's simply not possible with god.  And the people who tend to claim to hear god are generally the same people who try to drown their kids, so I hope Drich forgives us for not thinking destructive mental illness is something to celebrate.

And, to get back to the crucified (see what I did there?) analogy, the 'right' person for us is likely one of many such 'right' people for us, or, perhaps, no one actually is quite 'right' for us, but we make do and compromise because it's better than being lonely in most cases.  And a lot of people don't go through the process with the faith that there's a perfect person for them because a lot of people aren't children and realize that every adult relationship relies on honesty, good communication, and compromise.  Relationships require work, work that's beyond the laughable notion of working to strengthen one's faith in god.  Again, god cannot compromise.  God doesn't actually communicate with anyone - it's just words on a sheep fucker's page and one's imagination at work.  There's no possibility for an actual give and take.

Drich attempted to mansplain what an analogy was a couple posts above.  Which is interesting, since the principles he stressed were the important parts simply don't hold up to even cursory scrutiny.  In a different thread, Ronedee demanded we post an answer that would make a five year old proud.  I'm beginning to think that Christians think at a four year old's level.

(June 7, 2015 at 1:40 pm)KevinM1 Wrote:

(June 7, 2015 at 12:37 pm)Rhondazvous Wrote: If you don't know the difference between people who are standing right in front of you (objective, physical experience) and an imaginary god whom  you've never seen or heard or felt or smelt or tasted (subjective, emotional experience) , then again this is a job for the men in the long white coats.

Yup.  Like I said above, feelings towards something does not make that something real.  It's always a step removed.  One's feelings towards their god is not evidence of that god's existence outside of the mind of the person thinking about it.  To claim otherwise is ridiculous.

Like you say, we know, objectively, that people exist.  We can actually hold a real conversation with them.  Touch them.  Disagree with them.  Smell them.  Get to know all their little quirks.  That's simply not possible with god.  And the people who tend to claim to hear god are generally the same people who try to drown their kids, so I hope Drich forgives us for not thinking destructive mental illness is something to celebrate.

And, to get back to the crucified (see what I did there?) analogy, the 'right' person for us is likely one of many such 'right' people for us, or, perhaps, no one actually is quite 'right' for us, but we make do and compromise because it's better than being lonely in most cases.  And a lot of people don't go through the process with the faith that there's a perfect person for them because a lot of people aren't children and realize that every adult relationship relies on honesty, good communication, and compromise.  Relationships require work, work that's beyond the laughable notion of working to strengthen one's faith in god.  Again, god cannot compromise.  God doesn't actually communicate with anyone - it's just words on a sheep fucker's page and one's imagination at work.  There's no possibility for an actual give and take.

Drich attempted to mansplain what an analogy was a couple posts above.  Which is interesting, since the principles he stressed were the important parts simply don't hold up to even cursory scrutiny.  In a different thread, Ronedee demanded we post an answer that would make a five year old proud.  I'm beginning to think that Christians think at a four year old's level.

Maybe what Drich is attempting to do is hi-jack my thread. the majority of posts here are his or replies to him.

 Yes, over and over the Bible admonishes Christians to be like children.

The original point of the thread was interesting and I would like to get back to it.

Here are a couple:

What do you have to lose?  You might as well cover all your bases just in case my religion is true. 

If you pray and something doesn't come true then: 1. Your faith wasn't strong enough 2. God answered just not in the way you expected 3. It wasn't god's will 4. You just have to wait 5. How dare you expect god to do as you ask.