RE: reasons to believe, there is no God
February 28, 2010 at 12:33 am
(This post was last modified: February 28, 2010 at 12:34 am by tavarish.)
(February 28, 2010 at 12:02 am)Tsidkenu Wrote: I care in the sense that i would like, that all human kind would accept God's offered forgiveness of sins.
But i do not try to convert anyone. If you do want to convert yourself, or not, is entirely your own business.
I want everyone to accept this nice gift. Or burn in hell. Whichever you choose, I don't care.
(February 28, 2010 at 12:02 am)Tsidkenu Wrote: I cannot, and i do not want to prove anything, to anyone. The christian faith does not rely on proofs, otherwise it would not be faith anymore.
Then it would be knowledge, and you know we can't have that when talking about the origin of life and other scientifically unexplained matters. Hell no, we need FAITH!
(February 28, 2010 at 12:02 am)Tsidkenu Wrote: I don't attribut critical thinking to atheists. Actually, the atheistic position is in my opinion the most irrational and senseless position someone can get.
Yes. Statistically atheists tend to be the dumbest people on the planet. It's not like any atheist has ever done anything of use in the world.
(February 28, 2010 at 12:02 am)Tsidkenu Wrote: it seems you change proofs with evidence. there are in fact no proofs for Gods existence. But there is our cosmos. Creation and all that exists. We are intelligent beings, and capable of analying and thinking about all that surrounds us. Based on that, we can come to different conclusions. And one of them is, that there must be a higher being, that created everything. So our cosmos IS evidence for God's existence, for the ones, that believe God is the best explanation for our existence. Others might think the oposit. But then, they must come up with a explanation, why they think a OTHER cause for all that exists is better than God. I am still waiting a atheist to come up with a better explanation. So far, i have not seen one.
Let's take a look at this. First you assume a conclusion, then you come up with "evidence" to support your conclusion, none of which is verifiable or falsifiable. I'll explain to you how your argument is faulty:
I'm going to make a simple substitution. I hope you understand it.
"We are intelligent beings, and capable of analying and thinking about all that surrounds us. Based on that, we can come to different conclusions. And one of them is, that there must be a higher being, that created everything. So our cosmos IS evidence for The Invisible Pink Unicorn's existence, for the ones, that believe The Invisible Pink Unicorn is the best explanation for our existence. Others might think the oposit. But then, they must come up with a explanation, why they think a OTHER cause for all that exists is better than The Invisible Pink Unicorn. I am still waiting a aunicornist to come up with a better explanation. So far, i have not seen one."
That argument is just as valid as any God you could put in that place.
Saying the universe is evidence of God doesn't give us any more information about the universe or God. I can say "God's in that rock" and not give any attributes to the rock. It's not a valid statement because it's a placeholder for whatever made-up conclusion you want to make about that particular object.