It is true because you dont understand it

[solarwave]

chatpilot:

So you don't believe and your not all that open to believe really? You know the Hebrews rebelled against God even though God showed Himself. What they lacked was a will to follow. So prophecy as in someone telling you something they couldn't have known otherwise?

[chatpilot]

Yes,I meant prophesy in precisely the way you have defined it.And I do know that the Hebrews rebelled but I don't take any of the stories in the bible as historically accurate and rather view them as stories that have been greatly exaggerated to glorify the Hebrews as a nation and their God and religious beliefs.

I am no longer open to believe and have been sufficiently convinced in my mind that Christianity is myth and folklore like all the other religions that have preexisted before it.

[Edwardo Piet]

Your logic is seriously screwey TBF. But that's the nature of atheism I guess

Non-belief in God leads to "screwey" logic? Substantiate that claim please.

He's only expressing the logic of the theists

...from a position of ignorance. Yes.

It's only ignorance if there's any knowledge out there, otherwise there's nothing to be ignorant of. You have failed to demonstrate that there's anything to be ignorant of. What more can he (or anyone else for that matter, theologian or non-theologian) more than hypothesize, until it has been demonstrated that there's any way God can be studied, that there's anything to be ignorant of - that you can do anything more than indulge in "what if", hypothetical thinking, speculation.

To quote Adrian from earlier on these forums: "Nothing wrong with being clueless if there are no clues" (may have possibly paraphrased like 1 word or something).

EvF

[fr0d0]

Your logic is seriously screwey TBF. But that's the nature of atheism I guess

Non-belief in God leads to "screwey" logic? Substantiate that claim please.

TBF declares atheism and displays screwey logic. QED

He's only expressing the logic of the theists

...from a position of ignorance. Yes.

It's only ignorance if there's any knowledge out there, otherwise there's nothing to be ignorant of. You have failed to demonstrate that there's anything to be ignorant of. What more can he (or anyone else for that matter, theologian or non-theologian) more than hypothesize, until it has been demonstrated that there's any way God can be studied, that there's anything to be ignorant of - that you can do anything more than indulge in "what if", hypothetical thinking, speculation.

To quote Adrian from earlier on these forums: "Nothing wrong with being clueless if there are no clues" (may have possibly paraphrased like 1 word or something).

The logic is presented in the bible which is quite easily demonstrable as "out there". As is mountains of theological reference and proposition and attempted refutation. He can go get informed as can you quite easily. No need for hypothesis or speculation at all.

[theblindferrengi]

TBF declares atheism and displays screwey logic. QED

I do declare athiesm, but an agnostic athism, although, I don't care if god actually exists or not, im still going to live my life my way, to me god is a discussion topic of philosophy, and phillosophical conversation is interesting. Logic and athiesm [at least for me] are mutually exclusive.

The logic is presented in the bible which is quite easily demonstrable as "out there". As is mountains of theological reference and proposition and attempted refutation. He can go get informed as can you quite easily. No need for hypothesis or speculation at all.

This is not hypophesis, or speculation, as the "gods plan is not understandable, and therefore true" argument has been used by churches to get people to believe their side of an issue [non-religeous], basically saying "god wants this" about a current day issue. To this end, it doesent matter if the bible is true or not, because it is so outdated, nobody knows anything about what god is now, only about what god was when the scriptures were written, and alot can change in 2000 years. Or is god INcapable of changing?

[Edwardo Piet]

Non-belief in God leads to "screwey" logic? Substantiate that claim please.

TBF declares atheism and displays screwey logic. QED

That's an Ad-Hom Fallacy.

And you also haven't displayed how his logic can possibly be screwy, considering he is being hypothetical about something that no one can know the mind of, and no one has any evidence of, that being "God".

The logic is presented in the bible which is quite easily demonstrable as "out there". As is mountains of theological reference and proposition and attempted refutation. He can go get informed as can you quite easily. No need for hypothesis or speculation at all.

How is what's in the Bible logic about God at all? It just makes a bunch of unsubstantiated claims. If there is a God, what "logic" have we got to go by that it would be the Biblical one? The Bible makes unsubstaniated claims, and so any old hypothesizing and speculation is equally valid or invalid, until a reason is given that it's not.

How does any theological reference substantiate any of the claims about God in the Bible? How does it deal with reality in any way at all? How can it actually explain God? How can it be a proper subject, if there are not any means by which the reality of God's existence, can actually be studied? Because if there's no reason to believe that God exists, then there's no reason to believe that Theology is anything more than speculation, and any guess is as good as any other...until there's actually some evidence.

EvF

[chatpilot]

fr0d0 I love the way you are so sure of yourself and the bible as a "torch" or "guide".Nothing in the bible can be proven and as I stated many times that going on the testimony of a nomadic tribe (the Hebrews) and a bunch of yokels (the authors of the N.T.)who wrote 2000 years ago is hardly logical.Especially when none of it can be confirmed from secular sources outside of the self propagandizing text that is the bible.

[fr0d0]

Logic and athiesm [at least for me] are mutually exclusive.

You said it!

This is not hypophesis, or speculation, as the "gods plan is not understandable, and therefore true" argument has been used by churches to get people to believe their side of an issue [non-religeous], basically saying "god wants this" about a current day issue. To this end, it doesent matter if the bible is true or not, because it is so outdated, nobody knows anything about what god is now, only about what god was when the scriptures were written, and alot can change in 2000 years. Or is god INcapable of changing?

The bible is absolutely applicable as it details what the correct moral standpoint is and what God is. We can take that and use it to understand the present.

God is what he is. A known attribute is that he is never changing.

That's another impossible question... which gives first: the immovable object or the irresistible force / is an omnipotent and unchanging God not powerful enough to change himself? You cannot pair absolutes, it's illogical.

---

Non-belief in God leads to "screwey" logic? Substantiate that claim please.

TBF declares atheism and displays screwey logic. QED

That's an Ad-Hom Fallacy.

And you also haven't displayed how his logic can possibly be screwy, considering he is being hypothetical about something that no one can know the mind of, and no one has any evidence of, that being "God".

His logic is screwey because he attributes wildly to Christianity what is not Christianity:

"there is no question about [God's existence]" - yes there is.
"god exists because humans cannot understand god" - no he doesn't.
"church tells us something, and tries to pass it as truth, and tells us we don't understand it therefore it is true" - crazy logic

Atheist argument relies on screwey logic.. cherry picking as with denying philosophy with science.

How is what's in the Bible logic about God at all? It just makes a bunch of unsubstantiated claims. If there is a God, what "logic" have we got to go by that it would be the Biblical one? The Bible makes unsubstaniated claims, and so any old hypothesizing and speculation is equally valid or invalid, until a reason is given that it's not.

It makes logically sound claims. Other logical claims can stand against it. I have never seen, and you haven't presented anything that comes close.

How does any theological reference substantiate any of the claims about God in the Bible? How does it deal with reality in any way at all? How can it actually explain God? How can it be a proper subject, if there are not any means by which the reality of God's existence, can actually be studied? Because if there's no reason to believe that God exists, then there's no reason to believe that Theology is anything more than speculation, and any guess is as good as any other...until there's actually some evidence.

My bold

There is reason and logic in the bible, and it does explain God, deal with reality and it can be studied. You refuse to consider it is because you don't understand the evidence. That's a different thing.

[theblindferrengi]

The bible is absolutely applicable as it details what the correct moral standpoint is and what God is. We can take that and use it to understand the present.

God is what he is. A known attribute is that he is never changing.

If god created as the bible said he did, he would have to be a sentient being. Sentient beings think for themselves. Are you saying that a thinking being did not change any attitudes or veiwpoints in 2000 years just because he is all-powerful? That is either extreme stubborness or god doesent care; either way those are attributes god supposedly doesent have.

His logic is screwey because he attributes wildly to Christianity what is not Christianity:

"there is no question about [God's existence]" - yes there is.
"god exists because humans cannot understand god" - no he doesn't.
"church tells us something, and tries to pass it as truth, and tells us we don't understand it therefore it is true" - crazy logic

Atheist argument relies on screwey logic.. cherry picking as with denying philosophy with science.

It is not my logic, nor is it the logic of all christians, but some of the more fundamental and extreme christians use this, and I here am stating it to be screwey in this thread.

Where is the first statement in quotemarks from? I dont recognize it from anywhere.

I agree that ""god exists because humans cannot understand god" - no he doesn't."

"church tells us something, and tries to pass it as truth, and tells us we don't understand it therefore it is true" - crazy logic <--- Entire point of this thread

Philosophy can and often does use or is based on science, instead of religion, the athiest argument here is that the church sometimes uses screwey logic.

I have never confirmed of denied if i think in my opinion the bible is logic or has some bit of reason, i do state the bible was more applicable to the peoples of hundreds of years ago than it is to us here today, as so much changes in such a long time; as you said, 'the morals in the bible are still good', but those are not affected by time, as an ethical lesson is an ethical lesson nomatter what religion you are.

[chatpilot]

fr0d0 said:"God is what he is. A known attribute is that he is never changing."

Wrong again fr0d0 I suggest you read that bible and stop relying so much on early church fathers commentaries and man made creeds.Just one example from your logical book of holy writ.

Numbers 23:19
19.God is not man, that he should lie,or a son of man, that he should (change his mind).Has he said, and will he not do it?Or has he spoken, and will he not fulfill it?

Genesis
6.And it (repented) the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his (heart).

Repent:to feel sorry, self-reproachful, or contrite for past conduct; regret or be conscience-stricken about a past action, attitude, etc.

It surely sounds like the Lord changed his mind to me.