A Challenge

[Paleface2500]

Quote by: Lullaby Chainer I know this. Would you like me to dig up the evidence?

Have you even read the bible? My guess is no, and why should you? You don’t believe in god anyways. So how are you going to sit here and give me an informed answer about something you know nothing about? If you would have read the bible you would have instantly known what I was talking about regardless if you believed it or not.

Instead you are sitting here trying to shove this bullcrap down my throat , swinging wildly for anything thing that even remotely resembles an intelligent answer

[Jack]

Many of us who are atheists now were once theists. We've read the Bible, we know what it says. There are also non-Christian members of this forum who have their own holy texts which often don't agree with the Bible. So it's not just uninformed atheists who might be tempted to debate your suppositions.

[Gods_Mercenary]

I'm an informed theist who's debating your position for God's sake!

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Paleface2500 Have you even read the bible? My guess is no, and why should you? You don’t believe in god anyways. So how are you going to sit here and give me an informed answer about something you know nothing about? If you would have read the bible you would have instantly known what I was talking about regardless if you believed it or not.

I've read the Bible. I used to be a Christian.

Many Atheists carry a Bible with them.. and I happen to know more about the Bible than many of my theist friends, as weird as that sounds. This is true of most Atheists, because many of us became Atheists after reading that book. :) Especially in a debate site, you'll find Atheists know a lot about the Bible.

Quote by: Paleface2500 Instead you are sitting here trying to shove this bullcrap down my throat , swinging wildly for anything thing that even remotely resembles an intelligent answer

I don't even know how to respond to this. I'm sorry you feel that way.

[Gods_Mercenary]

What many atheists don't realize is how to read the bible, then again, they're better than literalist christians

[Paleface2500]

Quote by: Gods_Mercenary I'm an informed theist who's debating your position for God's sake!

Why???? Why isn't it possible that god is science. Why do you believe and then strive to discredit me? God is omnipotent, God is science.

When you are down on your faith, you can look at these holes in science and take solace in the fact that he has left you clues. Man will try to destroy god and his arguments will get stronger and more believable as time passes but this, he will never be able to destroy

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Paleface2500 Why???? Why isn't it possible that god is science. Why do you believe and then strive to discredit me? God is omnipotent, God is science. When you are down on your faith, you can look at these holes in science and take solace in the fact that he has left you clues. Man will try to destroy god and his arguments will get stronger and more believable as time passes but this, he will never be able to destroy

That's the thing. You shouldn't be in the business of conclusions first, clues later.

What you do is clues first, conclusions later.

[Gods_Mercenary]

I believe that God is superscience, he is the force of good in the universe. Science cannot dabble in what is good or what is evil, therefore it cannot consider Him, I don't necessarily agree with your concept of God, not to say that I'm right, that woud be too arrogant even for me.

[Paleface2500]

Quote by: Lullaby Chainer That's the thing. You shouldn't be in the business of conclusions first, clues later. What you do is clues first, conclusions later.

That’s where you fell off the wagon. I have my faith and use clues to strengthen it. You had your faith and in absence of so called conclusions, you abandoned it in favor of clues or lack there of and unfounded conclusions

[Jack]

When you are down on your faith, you can look at these holes in science and take solace in the fact that he has left you clues.

You've just reiterated the "god of gaps" position. Unanswered questions shouldn't strike terror in the hearts of those who seek answers. There's no need to submit an easy answer until a more logical one is found. It's OK to have unanswered questions.

[RickSp]

I would prefer to say that I don't know the answer to many questions than to say "my imaginary friend did it."

[Paleface2500]

Quote by: Isherwood You've just reiterated the "god of gaps" position. Unanswered questions shouldn't strike terror in the hearts of those who seek answers. There's no need to submit an easy answer until a more logical one is found. It's OK to have unanswered questions.

Well theres that god of gaps again.:rolleyes:

[Paleface2500]

Quote by: RickSp I would prefer to say that I don't know the answer to many questions than to say "my imaginary friend did it."

code for (I can’t intelligently answer this, so I will mock you instead)

[RickSp]

Quote by: Paleface2500 code for (I can’t intelligently answer this, so I will mock you instead)

Not at all. If you prefer to replace the word "God" for the phrase "my imaginary friend" the meaning stays the same.

I prefer not to fill the gaps in my knowlege with that which is only supported by faith. Clear enough for you?

[Jack]

Well theres that god of gaps again.

Yup.
From Wikipedia;

"God of the gaps" is often used to describe the perceived retreat of religion in the face of increasingly comprehensive scientific explanations of natural phenomena. An example of the line of reasoning starts with the position that early religious descriptions of objects and events (such as the Sun, Moon, and stars; thunder and lightning) placed these in the realm of things created or controlled by a god or gods. As science found explanations for observations in the realms of astronomy, meteorology, geology, cosmology and biology, the 'need' for a god to explain phenomena was progressively reduced, occupying smaller and smaller 'gaps' in knowledge. This line of reasoning commonly holds that since the domain of natural phenomena previously explained by God is shrinking, theistic or divine explanations for any natural phenomenon become less plausible. One modern example of God in the gaps is the theory of life. Theories of the origin of life remain outstanding questions and scientific consensus has yet to form; the position of many theists retains these within the domain of God.

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Paleface2500 That’s where you fell off the wagon. I have my faith and use clues to strengthen it. You had your faith and in absence of so called conclusions, you abandoned it in favor of clues or lack there of and unfounded conclusions

I had my faith because, like the majority of Christians, I was rooted into the shindig when I was born. I read the Bible, and became skeptical. I got rid of my beliefs and began researching for the clues. I realized that logically, morally, scientifically, psychologically, and philosophically there is no religious god.

Now, like I said, you shouldn't start with a conclusion and then try to find clues to support it. That's faulty reasoning and any reasonable scientist would wag his finger at you. This doesn't mean you can't be a theist.

[Paleface2500]

Quote by: RickSp Not at all. If you prefer to replace the word "God" for the phrase "my imaginary friend" the meaning stays the same. I prefer not to fill the gaps in my knowlege with that which is only supported by faith. Clear enough for you?

There are two types of debaters. Those who seek to discredit the opposing person’s argument, and those who seek to discredit the person.

When you find yourself discrediting the person instead of the argument, you have lost.

[Lullaby Chainer]

Quote by: Paleface2500 There are two types of debaters. Those who seek to discredit the opposing person’s argument, and those who seek to discredit the person. When you find yourself discrediting the person instead of the argument, you have lost.

Actually he was stating his own beliefs, just as you state yours. I guess you take offense to his beliefs. Weird.

[Paleface2500]

Quote by: Isherwood Yup. From Wikipedia;

That's great and i thank you for posting it, but it is not my consensus

[Paleface2500]

Quote by: Lullaby Chainer I had my faith because, like the majority of Christians, I was rooted into the shindig when I was born. I read the Bible, and became skeptical. I got rid of my beliefs and began researching for the clues. I realized that logically, morally, scientifically, psychologically, and philosophically there is no religious god. Now, like I said, you shouldn't start with a conclusion and then try to find clues to support it. That's faulty reasoning and any reasonable scientist would wag his finger at you. This doesn't mean you can't be a theist.

Why do you put science on this pedestal? I had Faith; I lost it, and found it again. I realized that there were too many questions that only God could explain. Do I believe everything I read in the bible? No. But I believe what was meant for us to believe. Our world is filled with too much beauty, pain, love, and humor to have happened by accident .