Quote:
Originally Posted by I'mAbeliever
I'm intolerant?
|
Yes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by I'mAbeliever
I'm just asking how you can, from an objective point of view, prove that God exists.
|
Can you prove YOU exist? You are setting up a scenario in which the existence of even the most trivial thing cannot be proven. And yet, when you open your eyes and look around, you can see all the things God has created. Then you can realize "this had to come from something INTELLIGENT".
But honestly, it's quite likely you exist. Why? Because we're communicating. But guess what? We communicate with God. What do you think prayer is? Even secular scientists can confirm that the human brain works differently when communicating with God than with an imaginary being (e.g. Santa).
Quote:
Originally Posted by I'mAbeliever
I have never said I have proof - or that I know - he doesn't exist.
|
So then you live your life on
assumptions, not certainties? How can you build a solid moral code and life philosophy when you cannot even know whether God exists?
Quote:
Originally Posted by I'mAbeliever
I don't know.
|
We do know. Logic dictates that the person who doesn't know should listen to the person who does. Not the other way around.
Quote:
Originally Posted by I'mAbeliever
It's already been proven the earth is a lot more than 6000 years old - I think there are only a few small cults that believes otherwise.
|
Oh really? Then how about you take a quick look at this
anti-Christian website. They are obviously extremely biased since they call us retards:
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/...-000-years-old
150 million Americans...... sure, a "small cult"
Quote:
Originally Posted by I'mAbeliever
I can say I have an invisible pink elephant in my back yard - can you prove otherwise? No, I have to prove that I do. That's why you're the ones who needs to supply us with proof, not the other way around.
|
I know that logic is popular in atheist circles, but it doesn't work.
First, if the elephant is invisible, then how do you know it's pink? That alone makes it implausible.
Secondly, you have to establish
neutral criteria to prove existence. For example, the criteria that we can use to prove
you or anything else exists should be the same as proving that
God exists. You cannot have a special case for God, because that would be biased.
Thirdly, it is normal in rational debate (mathematics in particular) to prove a claim by showing that the opposite would lead to an impossible scenario. This is known as "
reductio as absurdum". It follows clearly and logically that the non-existence of God would lead to infinitely implausible scenarios and should therefore be discarded as mere fiction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by I'mAbeliever
The Bible is not sufficient evidence - as it's only a book. Yes, it's only a book. Nothing more, nothing less - no matter what you believe in.
|
Those are
your beliefs. We know the Bible was dictated by God.
Quote:
Originally Posted by I'mAbeliever
I never said exactly 6000 years either. Still, do you actually believe the earth is only 6000 years old? Do you believe it's flat too?
|
Yes, approximately.
Quote:
Originally Posted by I'mAbeliever
Die and cease existing - exactly! There is nothing more to it.
|
Prove it. Since you are making the extraordinary claim, the onus is on
you to prove it, now isn't it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by I'mAbeliever
Oh, right, you're not hateful at all. "Everyone who doesn't believe shall burn and suffer in Hell for all eternity". That's not hateful at all! And you say you're tolerant.
|
You are correct on all points. I do not
want you to burn in Hell for all eternity. I want you to come to Heaven with us and be with Jesus Christ.
If I see that a train is headed your way, am I a hateful person for telling you to get off the tracks? I don't think "
oh, that's a gay so I'm not going to warn him, ha ha" or "
it's just a goth, so who cares". No, I put in time and effort to save them. That, my friend, is Christianity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by I'mAbeliever
No they don't, they hate intolerant people. Most atheists approves of homosexuality, that's tolerant. Do you approve of that? If not, then you're intolerant.
|
That's fallacious reasoning. You define people as intolerant on the basis of whether or not they reject the Bible -- at least where it concerns the abomination of sodomy. Then you argue that being intolerant to people
you define as intolerant is OK.
But let's look at the dictionary meaning:
intolerant
adj 1: unwilling to tolerate difference of opinion [ant: {tolerant}]
2: narrow-minded about cherished opinions [syn: {illiberal}]
Since atheists hate Christians for no other reason than having a difference in opinion, it appears obvious that atheists are indeed intolerant. In fact, you guys come to
our forum to berate us about how "intolerant" we are. Did we come to your forum? No.
Some introspection would be welcome, my friend.
Quote:
Originally Posted by I'mAbeliever
There are unbelievably many inconsistencies in the bible, it's not perfect - not even close.
|
When people talk about "the Bible", I always ask "which one?" There are versions such as the NASB and NIV that contain a long list of corruptions of the real Bible (KJV 1611). I am not surprised that they slipped in contradictions as well.
Please feel free to point out contradictions in the KJV 1611 Bible and I'll be happy to address them.