Total topics: 8
Stephen - Brother Thomas.
Both of you are THEISTS.
please explain to the forum why you believe in God.
If you can't - then you allow us to conclude that you both are FRAUDS!.
If you cannot provide the reasons - for the existence of your gods - then you no longer have a place on this forum.
Brother - you are the ONLY true Christian.
And Stephen - by your own admission you are a theist - so please without delay.
Please prove that you are not simply wasting all of our times.
Prove that God exists!
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
A question for atheists.
How many of you have come from a religious background? And what was this background? And what convinced you to become an atheist?
Was it a journey or an epiphany? Did it cause problems with your family or partner at the time?
And are you still connected somehow with the people from your old religious affiliation?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
What are the primary points of similarity that put it in the Christian camp? And what are the points of doctrine which distinguish it from the traditional Christian position? And what are the unique and distinct perspectives of the Mormons that radically uplift it into weird territory?
Please do not use this as a slanging board against the LDS. Use it as an opportunity to compare and contrast and analyze the Mormons and the veracity of its doctrines.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
I recently came across this on a webpage. I wonder if there are any Christians on this site who hold to it. For the record, I think it is fundamentally flawed.
1. It is impossible to define any individual thing apart from a worldview.2. At the outset Christianity is radically different than non-Christianity, on the account that to us, the most fundamental reality is personal and eternal, while in non-Christianity, the most fundamental reality is either impersonal or personal and temporal.3. Given that fundamental difference, it follows that an atheist will obviously find Christian beliefs incoherent, because they are incoherent when defined according to his worldview from the foundation.4. This means that we can't debate over a singular belief apart from talking about the worldview that defines that belief. We can't debate whether or not God exists when we're operating under different definitions of God and being itself.5. If you want to discuss this sincerely the first question you have to ask is "what is God?" and "what is being?", and then, having resolved that, we can talk about whether or not God exists.6. The problem arises when you realize that in Christianity God and being are identical, and that you can't accept that. What do you do then? Then the only way to critique Christianity is to hypothetically adopt our believes and show that we're incoherent. And we'll do the same with atheism. The difference is that you will fail, while we won't.
Firstly, are there any Christians who hold to this view and who would be prepared to discuss it further?
Secondly, would you consider a debate on the subject?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
If I am not drunk but I am also not sober? what state is this?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
People
Is Allah the same as Jehovah? Or are they two different gods?
Some suggest that even in the OT - there are two gods - jehovah and lucifer. Thor and Loki. Two brothers forever in competition.
Can this be extended to allah and jehovah?
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
It was put to me that I am inconsistent in my position in respect of the above question. And perhaps, he is correct in his assessment.
Nevertheless, until there is a simple manner on how we can do it, then the ordinary cut and thrust of the so called religious discussion on this forum is unhelpful.
It goes around and around and around - it gets bitter and twisted and nasty.
I wonder how many others think this is the case or whether I am alone? Please care to comment.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion
The first thing to do when discussing how to prove god is a lie is to understand what proof is.
Proof is not convincing someone that what you say is true. It is not providing empirical evidence. It is providing a rational scientific proof. 100% proof that is not probable.
For example - many people try and convince others that something is true - by trying to convince them they are correct. This is typically inductive reasoning - but it is not proof.
For example - I see 100 swans and they are all white. This means I can infer - or try and convince you that all swans are white. It does not prove it is so - but if I ever see white swans then there is a probability I am correct.
What we need is rational proof. For instance - all men are mortal. Socrates is human - therefore Socrates is mortal. And so far as the premises are correct then - the conclusion and the proof will be true. Not probable but true.
It is suggested that the biblical god is all knowing - all powerful - and all loving. All that needs to prove god is not true is by proving any of these things is not true.
The Holocaust - demonstrates god is not all powerful or that is he is not all loving - because he would have stopped it if he is all loving and all powerful.
Similarly, if god is all knowing he could have stopped the first people from doing evil - before they did.
As you can see - god - at least the god of the bible is not true - assuming the premises are correct.
Please proceed to prove me wrong.
Created:
Updated:
Category:
Religion