1. Standard memberAgerg
    The 'edit'or
    converging to it
    Joined
    21 Aug '06
    Moves
    11458
    24 Oct '10 18:154 edits
    Reveal Hidden Content
    Don't know whether I made a similar thread way back in history but if so, then for a different audience I'll post again:
    Until I see some firm evidence that magic is possible there is no way I could possibly accept the notion that an omnipotent omniscient creator of universes that sometimes performed miracles in the past existed and is displeased with non-believers. Sorry but that's just the way my brain is wired.

    Often the standard response to this is:
    So you think god should just suspend the laws of physics and perform miracles just for you so that you'll believe???

    Or words to that effect. My response would be
    Yes!!!...that is precisely what god should do!...given it wants me to believe, along with it's omnipotence, what stands as an obstacle to this endeavour???

    What is the problem with my requirement for direct evidence???
  2. Joined
    27 Sep '06
    Moves
    9651
    24 Oct '10 18:36
    Originally posted by Agerg
    [hidden]Don't know whether I made a similar thread way back in history but if so, then for a different audience I'll post again: [/hidden]Until I see some firm evidence that magic is possible there is no way I could possibly accept the notion that an omnipotent omniscient creator of universes that sometimes performed miracles in the past existed and is displea ...[text shortened]... bstacle to this endeavour???[/i]

    What is the problem with my requirement for evidence???
    "What is the problem with my requirement for evidence???"

    Not a problem at all. You should want evidence. Otherwise it would be blind faith. And there is no Biblical proof for such a thing contrary to what some may say.


    Consider the resurrection. If it's true, that's a miracle. No? But just because you didn't see it doesn't mean it's not true, or that you can't believe it based on the record. Don't you find it interesting that there are no other claims of a resurrection any where else in recorded history?
  3. Standard memberAgerg
    The 'edit'or
    converging to it
    Joined
    21 Aug '06
    Moves
    11458
    24 Oct '10 18:427 edits
    Originally posted by josephw
    [b]"What is the problem with my requirement for evidence???"

    Not a problem at all. You should want evidence. Otherwise it would be blind faith. And there is no Biblical proof for such a thing contrary to what some may say.


    Consider the resurrection. If it's true, that's a miracle. No? But just because you didn't see it doesn't mean it's not true, ng that there are no other claims of a resurrection any where else in recorded history?[/b]
    To be honest I don't find it all that interesting, sorry.

    More importantly though Reveal Hidden Content
    (I've edited the end of my OP)
    I'm interested in direct evidence...say, for example, my hands turning into custard and the ability to see through myself as I orbit the planet Blob in some far away galaxy (without a spacesuit), present with me would be the entire population of the earth to witness this event and convince me I'm not stark raving mad!! Would this be too difficult for your *omnipotent* god?...too much of an inconvenience??...Why???

    Perhaps if I desired a Ferrari and one floated immediately through my window dropped the keys, then floated back out and parked itself outside on the road for me...yeah that'd do too!

    Not interested in Bible says blah...
  4. Joined
    27 Sep '06
    Moves
    9651
    24 Oct '10 19:01
    Originally posted by Agerg
    To be honest I don't find it all that interesting, sorry.

    More importantly though [hidden](I've edited the end of my OP)[/hidden] I'm interested in direct evidence...say, for example, my hands turning into custard and the ability to see through myself as I orbit the planet Blob in some far away galaxy (without a spacesuit), present with me would be the enti ...[text shortened]... lf outside on the road for me...yeah that'd do too!

    Not interested in Bible says blah...
    "To be honest I don't find it all that interesting, sorry."

    That's too bad. Because the whole thing rests on that premise.
  5. Standard memberAgerg
    The 'edit'or
    converging to it
    Joined
    21 Aug '06
    Moves
    11458
    24 Oct '10 20:05
    Originally posted by josephw
    [b]"To be honest I don't find it all that interesting, sorry."

    That's too bad. Because the whole thing rests on that premise.[/b]
    Tell you what, if god resurrects Jesus right now, infront of me, then I'll take the idea that he was resurrected 2000 years ago seriously.

    Again, why can't your god make this happen???
  6. Joined
    27 Sep '06
    Moves
    9651
    24 Oct '10 20:24
    Originally posted by Agerg
    Tell you what, if god resurrects Jesus right now, infront of me, then I'll take the idea that he was resurrected 2000 years ago seriously.

    Again, why can't your god make this happen???
    You don't realise what you're saying.

    I don't even know if I can explain it to you.

    Asking for God to show you a miracle is tantamount to blasphemy. God has done all He could do already. What more do you want? Should God send His son to you personally, die in front of your eyes and rise again to prove He did it?

    Believe the scriptures. They tell the truth. There is really no other alternative worth believing. If you don't believe me, then why do you believe others? They are just ordinary men. What do they know? Conjecture, theories, hypotheses.

    Face the truth. Do you want to live forever? Show me another way if you can.
  7. Standard memberAgerg
    The 'edit'or
    converging to it
    Joined
    21 Aug '06
    Moves
    11458
    24 Oct '10 20:293 edits
    Originally posted by josephw
    You don't realise what you're saying.

    I don't even know if I can explain it to you.

    Asking for God to show you a miracle is tantamount to blasphemy. God has done all He could do already. What more do you want? Should God send His son to you personally, die in front of your eyes and rise again to prove He did it?

    Believe the scriptures. They tell th hypotheses.

    Face the truth. Do you want to live forever? Show me another way if you can.
    You don't realise what you're saying.

    I don't even know if I can explain it to you.

    Asking for God to show you a miracle is tantamount to blasphemy. God has done all He could do already. What more do you want? Should God send His son to you personally, die in front of your eyes and rise again to prove He did it?

    Your response here is the raison d'être for this thread 🙂
    Yes...he should do this!!! What stops him from doing this? in what way is this an inconvenience to your omnipotent god? Moreover, as an atheist (ie: someone who does not believe there exists an entity to blaspheme against) I don't recognise the term blasphemy as something that should worry me!

    Believe the scriptures. They tell the truth. There is really no other alternative worth believing. If you don't believe me, then why do you believe others? They are just ordinary men. What do they know? Conjecture, theories, hypotheses.
    As I said, I don't believe in *any* holy books.
  8. Joined
    28 Jul '04
    Moves
    69643
    24 Oct '10 20:54
    Originally posted by josephw
    Believe the scriptures. They tell the truth. There is really no other alternative worth believing. If you don't believe me, then why do you believe others? They are just ordinary men. What do they know? Conjecture, theories, hypotheses.
    I am more willing to believe books written by ordinary people of modern time which have references to its sources (and can be traced back to their original experiments and observations, which are peer reviewed and scrutinised) than some obscure book written by ordinary people thousands of years ago where you cannot trace its sources.
  9. Joined
    27 Sep '06
    Moves
    9651
    24 Oct '10 21:01
    Originally posted by lausey
    I am more willing to believe books written by ordinary people of modern time which have references to its sources (and can be traced back to their original experiments and observations, which are peer reviewed and scrutinised) than some obscure book written by ordinary people thousands of years ago where you cannot trace its sources.
    The origin, source, and authors of the Bible is and has been more thoroughly scrutinized than any other book in existence.

    Whether you believe it or not the writers of the books of the Bible were inspired by God to write what has been written. And God has preserved His word through time.

    You don't want to believe that, that's your choice. But it's a bad one nonetheless.
  10. Joined
    28 Jul '04
    Moves
    69643
    24 Oct '10 21:081 edit
    Originally posted by josephw
    The origin, source, and authors of the Bible is and has been more thoroughly scrutinized than any other book in existence.

    Whether you believe it or not the writers of the books of the Bible were inspired by God to write what has been written. And God has preserved His word through time.

    You don't want to believe that, that's your choice. But it's a bad one nonetheless.
    The only reason you believe it is because it is popular, and you have been convinced by many other people who were deluded into thinking it is true, because it is popular.

    There are other popular religions, and much more not so popular ones. Each person of each of these faiths will consider it a "bad choice" that I do not follow them. Why are your beliefs so special?
  11. Subscriberdivegeester
    reality bites
    variable
    Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    86736
    24 Oct '10 21:11
    Originally posted by Agerg
    [hidden]Don't know whether I made a similar thread way back in history but if so, then for a different audience I'll post again: [/hidden]Until I see some firm evidence that magic is possible there is no way I could possibly accept the notion that an omnipotent omniscient creator of universes that sometimes performed miracles in the past existed and is displea ...[text shortened]... to this endeavour???[/i]

    What is the problem with my requirement for direct evidence???
    You cannot prove that god does not exist and no one expects you to; perhaps god does not feel obliged to prove you wrong.
  12. Joined
    06 May '10
    Moves
    4146
    24 Oct '10 21:12
    Originally posted by josephw
    [b]"What is the problem with my requirement for evidence???"

    Not a problem at all. You should want evidence. Otherwise it would be blind faith. And there is no Biblical proof for such a thing contrary to what some may say.


    Consider the resurrection. If it's true, that's a miracle. No? But just because you didn't see it doesn't mean it's not true, ...[text shortened]... ng that there are no other claims of a resurrection any where else in recorded history?[/b]
    ???...plenty of vampire myths about.....
  13. Joined
    06 May '10
    Moves
    4146
    24 Oct '10 21:14
    Originally posted by josephw
    You don't realise what you're saying.

    I don't even know if I can explain it to you.

    Asking for God to show you a miracle is tantamount to blasphemy. God has done all He could do already. What more do you want? Should God send His son to you personally, die in front of your eyes and rise again to prove He did it?

    Believe the scriptures. They tell th ...[text shortened]... hypotheses.

    Face the truth. Do you want to live forever? Show me another way if you can.
    the apostle Thomas didn't believe until he saw something with his own eyes....the dude is a saint now....i want the same deal he got
  14. Standard memberAgerg
    The 'edit'or
    converging to it
    Joined
    21 Aug '06
    Moves
    11458
    24 Oct '10 21:144 edits
    Originally posted by divegeester
    You cannot prove that god does not exist and no one expects you to; perhaps god does not feel obliged to prove you wrong.
    But then as I alluded to in the OP, such a god, hypothetically speaking, should not be displeased that I don't and cannot believe in it.
    Certainly some variants of this god entity who supposedly would send a man to hell for his disbelief suggestat the very least such gods are cruel & malevolent.
  15. Joined
    28 Jul '04
    Moves
    69643
    24 Oct '10 21:181 edit
    Notice that someone could be quite generic about a creator, then people automatically assume the position of a particular kind of god. Josephw automatically assumed the Christian God and talked about the resurrection.

    If this thread was started in a forum dominated by Hindus, then a reply is likely to be talking about the "truth" of the many Hindu gods/goddesses.
Back to Top