The debate is over

[fr0d0]

I wonder the same about atheists Skepsis. After years of searching I've yet to find a single one. Search these forums and you'll find several xtians who have put up.

[Epimethean]

What you will find is several smarmy apologists: true athletes in the art of circles.

[fr0d0]

I think the same Epi. Securely shackled to a pov, olympian standard at the backflip.

[LastPoet]

I wonder the same about atheists Skepsis. After years of searching I've yet to find a single one. Search these forums and you'll find several xtians who have put up.

Perhaps your search terms were godlike? Like unexistant?

[Ace Otana]

What's the point of keeping up debate which ended long time ago.

I know where you're coming from. Mostly you'll get "oh you're just ignorant" or "you've never searched for god" or " you're scared". Personally, I can't be fucked with them anymore.
The world is too beautiful to ignore and my life is too short to waste on such crazy people.

Now I just reply with "whatever floats your boat" or "to each their own" and walk away. After coming back from Devon, I noticed how much I've missed. I've already considered religion many times over and over, looked at it from multiple point of views and have questioned my stance on the matter but no matter how equal and balanced I look at things, theists will STILL call me ignorant, it's because apparently I'm ignorant if I don't believe the same things they do, as if they've got it right some how. Just because they can easily believe in something doesn't make me ignorant of it for simply rejecting such ideas. They could be wrong (and they most likely are).

So yeah for me, for the most part, the debate on the existence of god is over. The matter is closed.
Good thing too, don't want to waste too much time on silly unsupported claims.

[Creed of Heresy]

I think the same Epi. Securely shackled to a pov, olympian standard at the backflip.

Isn't that the whole thing with religion, Fr0ds? No matter which way you're coming at it, it IS all a matter of view. You see a book with some supporting evidence and believe in it wholeheartedly. I see a book with not enough supporting evidence and reject it as little more than a collection of old myths and stories. You believe, I do not. It is simply that. You have your reasons, I have mine.

Edit: Also the reference to Olympian athletics is amusing to me. Remember what Mt. Olympus used to symbolize? Just saying, pantheism/polytheism -> monotheism -> atheism sure seems to the way it's going, doesn't it? ;D

[Light of Truth]

I had to go to sleep and then to work. Sorry for the delay. Lol.

All that I was trying to do was show that it is POSSIBLE that Christianity is true. No one can disprove it. One might say that Christianity is not likely, but it is a possibility. That was all that I was trying to do. There are texts (Mark for instance) that could be used to back up a Christian's claim. One would have to consider whether or not Mark is reliable, though. To most of us, Mark is NOT reliable. A Christian would disagree.

I don't understand why discussing possibilities gets everyone's panties in a bundle.

I have had plenty of real life conversations with atheists and they have no problem discussing possibilities.

[Skepsis]

No one has ever had a problem with discussing possibilities. Most of us, I wager, just look at it as a waste of time. Often times when people muse on about the intricacies of life or the possibility of claim x they aren't doing anyone a favor. It is just a waste to drone on when the premise of your mental journey isn't founded in truth. And it wasn't simply the fact that you squandered your own and other's time on things that really didn't merit any deep discussion- it was your phrasing of certain things, as well as your inability to admit you misspoke.

Regardless, everyone understands your point now. Even if I think it is still a mental jerkfest.

Also, if you consider the argument from evil or the argument from unbelief, it is arguable that the Chrsitian God can fit his own description in the Bible as a "perfectly good" or even a marginally good God. But, like I said before, Cristianity is just as possible as any other make-believe concept.

[Epimethean]

When you decide to make the argument that christianity, or islam, or judaism "might" be true, and you find yourself beset by those who ask you for evidence for such a possibility, and you then begin to try conditionalizing everything in order to construct an imaginary deck of cards, which, were they to actually coalesce into physical being could just as easily be blown over by the standard method of inquiry, you shouldn't take it too hard when everyone has a go at you.

Do you see the use of a contrafactual condition in there?

Now. What is it you're after? Do you want everyone to say hallelujah, or praise be, or perhaps an "Our father, who might be in a possible place which we like to call heaven?" What do you want?

[Taqiyya Mockingbird]

I wonder the same about atheists Skepsis. After years of searching I've yet to find a single one. Search these forums and you'll find several xtians who have put up.

PFFFFFFFFFFFFFT.

You have presented not a shred of evidence to support your extraordinary claim that your fairy tale is true.

If your god-figure were real, it would be no effort at all for it to present itself to all of us in a meaningful and convincing way, and it would understand the need for it to show itself.

We ask you for evidence of your claims and all we get is "pay no attention to the man behind the curtain".

And this:

---

I had to go to sleep and then to work. Sorry for the delay. Lol.

All that I was trying to do was show that it is POSSIBLE that Christianity is true.

And its possible that monkeys will fly out of my butt.

No one can disprove it.

Argument from ignorance.

One might say that Christianity is not likely, but it is a possibility.

One can say that it's a fairy tale unless you can present your god figure for examination.

That was all that I was trying to do. There are texts (Mark for instance) that could be used to back up a Christian's claim. One would have to consider whether or not Mark is reliable, though. To most of us, Mark is NOT reliable. A Christian would disagree.

TO most of us, Harry Potter is not real. But to a credulous and insane few....

I don't understand why discussing possibilities gets everyone's panties in a bundle.

'

It doesn't. What it IS, though, is disingenuous and intellectually dishonest.

I have had plenty of real life conversations with atheists and they have no problem discussing possibilities.

So? Perhaps they were just being polite when they should have been telling you to bugger off.