(July 11, 2015 at 9:03 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote:

(July 11, 2015 at 8:59 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Didn't see Minimalists response?

Didn't see the part that says "according to your big book of Holy Horseshit"?

Which he has clearly stated that is based off of other religions, is contradictory, and is written by goat herders....

In other words, HE doesn't trust that source, fine, but then HE doesn't get to use that source to define what God is.


So he gave a reason why he's angry at God..... the point is he's angry at God.

(July 11, 2015 at 8:43 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(July 11, 2015 at 4:31 pm)Randy Carson Wrote: I name some names, they deny it, I look stupid...

Nah. Not gonna do it.

Just take off your atheist-colored glasses and read the posts without bias. You'll see.

That's why you include their quotes...

IF in the end, you find that God does exist .... will you unconditionally accept Him as your God?

some of the responses

(May 31, 2015 at 1:39 pm)Napoléon Wrote: No.  

(May 31, 2015 at 1:49 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Nope, the fact that I'm not christian has nothing to do with whether or not the christian god exists.  I have an ethical objection.  That's what I find so delicious about my interactions with christers desperate to convince me, btw.

(May 31, 2015 at 2:07 pm)Parkers Tan Wrote: No.

Hope your kid can top that.

Basically, these fools are saying even if they see God personally they still wouldn't accept him.... where's the logic in that?

This proves there is something else behind their "atheism" other than simply "having no belief"

Yes. It's called a coherent morality. You should spend less time stockpiling quotes and more time thinking about things like good and evil.

(July 11, 2015 at 9:10 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(July 11, 2015 at 9:03 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote: Didn't see the part that says "according to your big book of Holy Horseshit"?

Which he has clearly stated that is based off of other religions, is contradictory, and is written by goat herders....

In other words, HE doesn't trust that source, fine, but then HE doesn't get to use that source to define what God is.


So he gave a reason why he's angry at God..... the point is he's angry at God.

Let me spell this out for you so there's no confusion:

He. Doesn't. Believe. God. Exists.

(July 11, 2015 at 9:17 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote: Let me spell this out for you so there's no confusion:

He. Doesn't. Believe. God. Exists.

Let me define hypothetical for you.


hypothetical
[hahy-puh-thet-i-kuh l]

Synonyms
Examples
Word Origin

adjective, Also, hypothetic (for defs 1–4).
1. assumed by hypothesis; supposed:
a hypothetical case.
2. of, pertaining to, involving, or characterized by hypothesis:
hypothetical reasoning.
3. given to making hypotheses.
4. Logic.
(of a proposition) highly conjectural; not well supported by available evidence.
(of a proposition or syllogism) conditional.
noun
5. a hypothetical situation, instance, etc.:

(July 11, 2015 at 9:21 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(July 11, 2015 at 9:17 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote: Let me spell this out for you so there's no confusion:

He. Doesn't. Believe. God. Exists.

Let me define hypothetical for you.


hypothetical
[hahy-puh-thet-i-kuh l]

   Synonyms
   Examples
   Word Origin

adjective, Also, hypothetic (for defs 1–4).
1. assumed by hypothesis; supposed:
a hypothetical case.
2. of, pertaining to, involving, or characterized by hypothesis:
hypothetical reasoning.
3. given to making hypotheses.
4. Logic.
(of a proposition) highly conjectural; not well supported by available evidence.
(of a proposition or syllogism) conditional.
noun
5. a hypothetical situation, instance, etc.:

No shit.

(July 11, 2015 at 8:43 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Basically, these fools are saying even if they see God personally they still wouldn't accept him.... where's the logic in that?

It's simple, so I understand why you wouldn't get it: if we see that god exists, that alone is not a reason to accept him as our lord and superior. The authority that you grant him is not some automatic assumption that's going to pop into our head the moment we're given sufficient evidence of existence. No, that authority will be conferred based on consideration of his actions, goals and beliefs, and if we're to take the bible as an accurate representation of these, then we simply cannot allow god that authority over our lives based on our consciences. It would be wrong, according to my, and the others', morals to do so.

See, it's a bottom up process, ascertaining what role this god plays in reality, and to us personally: existence, then attributes, then the nature of our relationship going forward. You can't assume the latter two stages without the first, and all three stages require due consideration and may, in fact, produce conclusions that differ from your own. You seem to be blaming us for not, as you have done, operating backwards, by deciding on the relationship first, cooking the books so that the attributes are consistent with that relationship, and then just assuming existence.

Quote:This proves there is something else behind their "atheism" other than simply "having no belief"

What it proves is that you have a complete inability to think beyond the confines of the position you've already accepted as true. That's not surprising: I already suspect you're basically a sociopath.

Oh, but Randy? Don't think I missed you agreeing with this louse back there. That's disappointing; we might disagree, but I always figured you as having some modicum of intelligence to go with that. Are you seriously telling me that the only possible reaction to god existing you can envision is automatic worship? Despite having a holy book that literally includes characters that have other reactions than that?

Satan, for one? Are you honestly telling me that you've forgotten the second (arguably third, depending on how one views Jesus) most important character in your own holy book?

(July 11, 2015 at 9:23 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote: No shit.

So you understand?

Obviously I KNOW HE DOESN'T BELIEVE. His response was in relation to the (hypothetical) question "IF in the end, you find that God does exist, will you unconditionally accept Him as your God?", to which he clearly indicated he would still not accept him.... Got it?

(July 11, 2015 at 8:43 pm)Huggy74 Wrote: Basically, these fools are saying even if they see God personally they still wouldn't accept him.... where's the logic in that?

This proves there is something else behind their "atheism" other than simply "having no belief"

Esq. has answered this very well but I was curious why you believe those particular quotes show anger at your god? What about them sounds angry to you? If your god was real, why would not worshipping him be a sign of anger against him?

(July 11, 2015 at 9:37 pm)Huggy74 Wrote:

(July 11, 2015 at 9:23 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote: No shit.

So you understand?

Obviously I KNOW HE DOESN'T BELIEVE. His response was in relation to the (hypothetical) question "IF in the end, you find that God does exist, will you unconditionally accept Him as your God?", to which he clearly indicated he would still not accept him.... Got it?

Holy eff. Right; it's a hypothetical. How can someone be angry at something he only considers hypothetical?

Jesus effing fuck, your twists and turns are really boring.

(July 11, 2015 at 9:31 pm)Esquilax Wrote: It's simple, so I understand why you wouldn't get it: if we see that god exists, that alone is not a reason to accept him as our lord and superior.

You've gotten one thing right...it IS simple. A being who created the universe out of nothing and to who you owe your whole existence, IS reason alone to accept him as your "lord and superior" (the two are synonymous). Add to that, the fact that he was willing to take on human form and suffer horribly, so that he could adopt you as a son and sit with him in his throne, is even more reason to accept him as your (lord and superior).

Are you saying that you never considered your parents as your superior? How are they somehow more worthy of being your superior than God?

(July 11, 2015 at 9:31 pm)Esquilax Wrote: The authority that you grant him is not some automatic assumption that's going to pop into our head the moment we're given sufficient evidence of existence. No, that authority will be conferred based on consideration of his actions, goals and beliefs, and if we're to take the bible as an accurate representation of these, then we simply cannot allow god that authority over our lives based on our consciences. It would be wrong, according to my, and the others', morals to do so.

Authority is not in your power to grant God. Either he has authority / power or he doesn't, regardless of his "actions, goals and beliefs".

If a guy walks up to you points a gun in your face and asks for your wallet.... he's the one with the authority because he has power over life and death. The smart move would be to give him the wallet, because if you don't he'll just shoot you in the face and take it anyway.

So whether or not you believe God is "good" or "evil" is irrelevant. As the scripture says

so that at the name of Jesus EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. - Philippians 2:10

Your only choice is where you bend the knee, heaven or hell... either way, you WILL acknowledge God as superior.

(July 11, 2015 at 9:31 pm)Esquilax Wrote: See, it's a bottom up process, ascertaining what role this god plays in reality, and to us personally: existence, then attributes, then the nature of our relationship going forward. You can't assume the latter two stages without the first, and all three stages require due consideration and may, in fact, produce conclusions that differ from your own. You seem to be blaming us for not, as you have done, operating backwards, by deciding on the relationship first, cooking the books so that the attributes are consistent with that relationship, and then just assuming existence.

The above shows why your reasoning is flawed.

---

(July 11, 2015 at 9:56 pm)rexbeccarox Wrote: Holy eff. Right; it's a hypothetical.  How can someone be angry at something he only considers hypothetical?

Jesus effing fuck, your twists and turns are really boring.

Are you serious?
The point of a hypothetical question is to see how one would react IF they were put in that position... It is ASSUMED to be a REAL situation.

If you had PROOF God does in fact exist, then you'd HAVE to accept him as God, you'd have no choice if you were the slightest bit logical. it'd be like not accepting your parents as parents.... you have no choice.

If you claim you would not accept your parents even though you had proof they were your parents, that shows you have some sort of animosity towards them.