-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I think it's to do with our own default position. My default position is nothing supernatural exists and it would take pretty good evidence to change that.
Your default position is that god is there and it would take some real good evidence to make you think otherwise.
We can argue all day about snakes and free will etc. I think we really need to hone in on what's deep inside us that determines our default position... And how we are convinced we are both right.
Your default position is that god is there and it would take some real good evidence to make you think otherwise.
We can argue all day about snakes and free will etc. I think we really need to hone in on what's deep inside us that determines our default position... And how we are convinced we are both right.
J
I know, but humor me. =) I'm prolly just splitting hairs and getting into semantics, but this point interests me.
an athiest claims that God doesn't exist based on a lack of proof, but can they honestly say, "I am 100% certain there is no God." Again, Dawkings isn't even willing to say this.
The Christian Believes in God 100%, because God revealed Himself to the Person.
The Christian makes his statement of "I know 100%" based on personal testimony. Athiests can try to refute it, but the Christian still has his positive claim.
the athiest makes his "I know 100%" negative claim based on lack of evidence. But can lack of evidence produce such an absolute claim?
An athiest can say I BELIEVE there is no God based on lack of proof, but can they really say "I know 100% that there is no God" based on lack of proof?
The Christian has a positive claim.
the athiest has a negative claim. But can a "I know 100%" claim be made out of a negative?
does that make any sense?
an athiest claims that God doesn't exist based on a lack of proof, but can they honestly say, "I am 100% certain there is no God." Again, Dawkings isn't even willing to say this.
The Christian Believes in God 100%, because God revealed Himself to the Person.
The Christian makes his statement of "I know 100%" based on personal testimony. Athiests can try to refute it, but the Christian still has his positive claim.
the athiest makes his "I know 100%" negative claim based on lack of evidence. But can lack of evidence produce such an absolute claim?
An athiest can say I BELIEVE there is no God based on lack of proof, but can they really say "I know 100% that there is no God" based on lack of proof?
The Christian has a positive claim.
the athiest has a negative claim. But can a "I know 100%" claim be made out of a negative?
does that make any sense?
I've never understood why an atheist would say they can't be certain. They are usually certain about the non existence of other things but seem happy to give god a special status of belief. I find that baffling.
I'm not even a fan of the word atheist. There's no special term for someone who doesn't believe in Bigfoot, werewolves or poltergeists... So again why put god on a pedestal and have a special word for not Believing god. By doing that your instantly giving credibility and special status to the thing your so vocally rejecting.
Some people say they aren't certain as not to obstruct debate and make themselves appear more open to discussion.
Others just feel they are hypocrites because they tell theists often enough that there's no way to know for sure that their god exists. Some also like to say it just to give themselves some sort of higher ground. "oh.. How can you be sure? At least I'm open to possibilities.. Your so close minded etc"
I won't give any ground nor compromise my stance lol
I'm not even a fan of the word atheist. There's no special term for someone who doesn't believe in Bigfoot, werewolves or poltergeists... So again why put god on a pedestal and have a special word for not Believing god. By doing that your instantly giving credibility and special status to the thing your so vocally rejecting.
Some people say they aren't certain as not to obstruct debate and make themselves appear more open to discussion.
Others just feel they are hypocrites because they tell theists often enough that there's no way to know for sure that their god exists. Some also like to say it just to give themselves some sort of higher ground. "oh.. How can you be sure? At least I'm open to possibilities.. Your so close minded etc"
I won't give any ground nor compromise my stance lol
To give a precise answer... You would never say to me that it's silly not to believe in monsters under my bed just because there's no evidence.
And to me god is in the exact same category. It's outrageous and absurd in my eyes, and that alone is enough for me to know it's not true.
Is that closer to what your looking for? I don't want to appear as if I'm avoiding anything lol
And to me god is in the exact same category. It's outrageous and absurd in my eyes, and that alone is enough for me to know it's not true.
Is that closer to what your looking for? I don't want to appear as if I'm avoiding anything lol
P
By "you" I presume you are speaking of all believers? If so, default is a horrible word that has no place in my belief. Obviously you didn't mean it in the primary definition, but one of the secondary definitions.
Default: 1: failure to do something required by duty or law : neglect
2archaic: fault
3: a failure to pay financial debts
4a: failure to appear at the required time in a legal proceeding
b: failure to compete in or to finish an appointed contest <lost the game by default>
5a: a selection made usually automatically or without active consideration due to lack of a viable alternative
b: a selection automatically used by a computer program in the absence of a choice made by the user
5a is the only one that you could have meant, surely, and it isn't even close. God is not only NOT the selection made because of a lack of an alternative, He is the only selection available. He is the primary choice, not the second one.
Default: 1: failure to do something required by duty or law : neglect
2archaic: fault
3: a failure to pay financial debts
4a: failure to appear at the required time in a legal proceeding
b: failure to compete in or to finish an appointed contest <lost the game by default>
5a: a selection made usually automatically or without active consideration due to lack of a viable alternative
b: a selection automatically used by a computer program in the absence of a choice made by the user
5a is the only one that you could have meant, surely, and it isn't even close. God is not only NOT the selection made because of a lack of an alternative, He is the only selection available. He is the primary choice, not the second one.
Yeah poor wording on my part.
How about it seems normal for me that god doesn't exist. And it's normal for you that god does exist.
Basically I'm convinced he doesn't exist and You are. Something has gotten us to this mindset. That's what we need to focus in on.
I don't want to get hung up on definitions and words.
How about it seems normal for me that god doesn't exist. And it's normal for you that god does exist.
Basically I'm convinced he doesn't exist and You are. Something has gotten us to this mindset. That's what we need to focus in on.
I don't want to get hung up on definitions and words.
Once Adam and Eve sinned all of creation was in trouble and started decaying. I don't know why God punished the snake other than it was the reptile used by Satan. Not really explained why in the bible. I had heard that snakes were one of the most beautiful creatures and had wings and could fly, I have never read that in the bible and not sure where I heard or read it, but if that was so then being cursed to crawl on it's belly would certainly have been a big step down from the original.
Anyone else have an idea why God punished the snake?
Anyone else have an idea why God punished the snake?
J
To give a precise answer... You would never say to me that it's silly not to believe in monsters under my bed just because there's no evidence.
And to me god is in the exact same category. It's outrageous and absurd in my eyes, and that alone is enough for me to know it's not true.
Is that closer to what your looking for? I don't want to appear as if I'm avoiding anything lol
And to me god is in the exact same category. It's outrageous and absurd in my eyes, and that alone is enough for me to know it's not true.
Is that closer to what your looking for? I don't want to appear as if I'm avoiding anything lol
You think The idea of God and even supernatural things is absurd, but surely the 100,000's of testimonies to supernatural events (healings, deliverances, miracles) must hold some weight? It seems absurd to me for the Athiest (sorry, one who rejects the idea of God...not sure what else to call people as such. It is just a term, I suppose) can say for absolute certainty that there is no God and nothing supernatural or pertaining to a Spiritual realm ever happens in this world.
There are 100,000's of testimonies FOR the existence of God.
There are NO testimonies for his NON existence. (People can say He doesn't exist, but they have nothing to PROVE their case with).
Sure you can point to evolution and the evidences for that, but even evidence FOR evolution doesn't in any way DISPROVE God's existence.
The long laryngeal nerve of the giraffe proves the giraffe has a long nerve, it is not PROOF that God doesn't exist though.
There are 1000s of testimonies for alien abductions, ghost signings, moth man sightings etc but that doesn't validate their claim. I'm sure there testimonies for Allah and other gods too.. Again that wouldn't validate the claim in your eyes either.
There's also no proof that a teapot isn't orbiting the earth... But if never entertain the idea that there was just because no evidence proves otherwise.
There's also no proof that a teapot isn't orbiting the earth... But if never entertain the idea that there was just because no evidence proves otherwise.
J
doesnt that kind of get back to my point? =) you have your mindset, because you believe there is not enough evidence FOR God, right?
i have my mindset because I believe the evidence for God, but more than that, I have personal testimony of God revealing Himself to me. You can say it was delusion or hallucination, but that doesn't change the fact that I still have my testimony.
the athiest says there is no God, but based on what? They don't have a testimony of God coming to them and telling them that He doesn't exist. They only have evolution to look to and even that can not testify that there is no God. It can only testify to what it knows. Again, the example of the largyneal nerve of the giraffe proves that it has a long nerve. But it does not disprove God.
Maybe I'm just being picky with words, but somehow I find this really important.
i have my mindset because I believe the evidence for God, but more than that, I have personal testimony of God revealing Himself to me. You can say it was delusion or hallucination, but that doesn't change the fact that I still have my testimony.
the athiest says there is no God, but based on what? They don't have a testimony of God coming to them and telling them that He doesn't exist. They only have evolution to look to and even that can not testify that there is no God. It can only testify to what it knows. Again, the example of the largyneal nerve of the giraffe proves that it has a long nerve. But it does not disprove God.
Maybe I'm just being picky with words, but somehow I find this really important.
J
I would claim that many of those testimonies are real, but I would say that the supernatural nature of them pertain to demons and not any of the specifics that you named.
Well Neil Armstrong could have brought a teapot into space =). Haha I see your point, but you got to admit, there is alot more evidence for the existence of God than for that teapot. =)
Well Neil Armstrong could have brought a teapot into space =). Haha I see your point, but you got to admit, there is alot more evidence for the existence of God than for that teapot. =)
No I can't see how there is more evidence for god than any other myth. There's a lot of hearsay and confirmation bias. But no evidence.
A lot of Christians here have said only believers can see the evidence. But that's a catch 22 isn't it? Its like saying there's a cure for blindness but for it to work you need to be able to see first.
A lot of Christians here have said only believers can see the evidence. But that's a catch 22 isn't it? Its like saying there's a cure for blindness but for it to work you need to be able to see first.