Christian motivations for joining AF

[TruthWorthy]

I'm sorry I have no idea what you're talking about. You made a point about testing a theory and I was attempting to show how that doesn't apply but how, given an example, rationalising from reconsidering ideas works. If you can't keep up and want to throw the dummy out of the pram, that's your choice. I'm addressing your questions, despite your increasing rudeness.

What a cop out.

[fr0d0]

Not a cop out TW... a truthful explanation in response to a seemingly irrational snub.

'Proud' was my term Evie yeh... is there any other word you'd use to describe your affiliation?

[TruthWorthy]

And what's this crap you PM'd me that it's irrational to ask where your faith comes from, why you believe?? I'll let you in on something, there's no good reason.

[fr0d0]

Dude you're turning into one fucked up individual. Firstly, it;s bad etiquette to discuss in public what's said in private, which is why I haven't mentioned your PM. Second, again I have no idea what you're talking about. I think you totally misunderstood my PM.

I'll reply to you in PM.

[TruthWorthy]

It wasn't an irrational snub is what is central to the problem. I'll PM you in kind, the irrationality of my question was to show indeed the irrationality of your reasoning. I know there's no way to test theory through rationalisation. That would be magical thinking - my point is that in other threads you say there's evidence if you come from the point of view that there is a god.
So where's the evidence, and how the hell can it be tested, regardless of whether you believe or not?

I recognise that understanding is easier from a point of belief; no secret there; but there's no substance in saying there is evidence in a perspective, in rationalisation. It's just preposterous.

[Ashes1995]

i think its mostly either seeing the athiest point of view, or trying to convert

[TruthWorthy]

i think its mostly either seeing the athiest point of view, or trying to convert

I wont be persuaded by stubbornness, no, I think the motivation is solely on argumentative discussion.

[Ashes1995]

i think its mostly either seeing the athiest point of view, or trying to convert

I wont be persuaded by stubbornness, no, I think the motivation is solely on argumentative discussion.

hmm, i have noticed a few christians starting arguements

[fr0d0]

my point is that in other threads you say there's evidence if you come from the point of view that there is a god.
So where's the evidence, and how the hell can it be tested, regardless of whether you believe or not?

You don't know how everything in the universe can be tested as real??? This ALL falls into the scope of science.

The belief that it is created by God, and therefore proof of God, is what makes the difference here. Like I keep saying... if you assume God, then this is proof. The link (belief) has to be non verifiable.

I hope that's clear. It's what I'm saying by that statement.

there's no substance in saying there is evidence in a perspective, in rationalisation. It's just preposterous.

No evidence in rationalisation, no.

[Zen Badger]

The existence of a "god" is untestable.(since a creator of the universe would be outside of the

universe and therefore beyond measurement)

However, the existence of the god of the bible can be tested.

By comparing the events portrayed in the bible to reality.

Genesis, the great flood(sic) the tower of babel etc,etc.

All of these have been shown to be fallacious.

So it can be said with a very strong degree of confidence that Abrahams God is non-existent.