Is Atheism a Form of Blind Faith? (page 11)

passwordprotected

What I have brought up is that at best, that can only be good enough for you. Share it, I expect you to share it.

So, that's the experience of God and faith. You feel the presence of God in your life. Belief in God comes from personal experience. For some, that through seeing a stunning sunset. For others it's being healed.

If a person doesn't see God or hear God in their life, I wouldn't expect them to believe in him. If a person does see and hear God in their life, I would expect them to believe in him.

drwtsn32

I can only speak from a Christian perspective; God has spoken, through the Bible and through Jesus. Jesus left instructions for his disciples to make more disciples and teach them the things he taught them.

How would you answer a member of the LDS church who believes God spoke through the Book of Mormon and through Joseph Smith?

passwordprotected

Back to the OP;

Steven Jay Gould said ;

"Science simply cannot by its legitimate methods adjudicate the issue of God's possible superintendence of nature. We cannot affirm nor deny it; we simply can't comment on it as scientists."

Taking Gould at his word, and removing anything science may have to say on the subject - which would mean that atheists cannot point to empirical scientific evidence or anything pertaining to science - how does a person have proof that God doesn't exist?

passwordprotected

How would you answer a member of the LDS church who believes God spoke through the Book of Mormon and through Joseph Smith?

From a Christian perspective I'd point to Jesus as being the absolute last word. If Jesus is not front and centre of any post-Messiah revelation then I'd have to reject it and question where the voice of God actually came from.

Galations 1: 6 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel— 7 which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. 8 But even if we or an angel from heaven should preach a gospel other than the one we preached to you, let him be eternally condemned! 9 As we have already said, so now I say again: If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!

AllTimeJeff

So, that's the experience of God and faith. You feel the presence of God in your life. Belief in God comes from personal experience. For some, that through seeing a stunning sunset. For others it's being healed.

If a person doesn't see God or hear God in their life, I wouldn't expect them to believe in him. If a person does see and hear God in their life, I would expect them to believe in him.

Password, believe me, I am HAPPY for you, and I am not trying to be an ass about this. But this changes the rules. Now we have to feel god, and experience him personally. So why get so interested in proving god exists, when god has obviously seen fit to not reveal himself to so many?

Millions upon millions are trying to tell theists like yourself that they have had absolutely zero such experiences ever. On top of that, their examination of the universe does not reveal a higher power out there with a personality or an identity.

My point is: Why can't theists let these people be, acknowledge their honesty, instead of trying to do the talking for god that god obviously has withheld from them? You simply cannot speak for god, or frankly, about god, to a person who hasn't seen or heard from him ever. For these atheists to bow to your experience would be living a lie.

At the same time, atheists have just as much right to point out that god has NOT talked to millions (billions?) of people around the earth. Esp with all respect, the Christian god. 6 out of every 7 now worship a different god, or reject Christianity and all gods.

So when you say that your god (Jesus) speaks to you, I point out in all honesty, you are in a minority. It's all in the math.

Spook

That probably no god exists or that definitely a particular God does not is a conclusion not a premise. This conclusion - as Perry likes to flop across in his rhetoric - is made a posteriori. An a priori commitment to the baseless conclusion that probably, at least one god exists leads to the tomfoolery exemplified above.

Arguments which attempt to shift the burden of proof are rarely productive and most people who seriously engage this issue will accept a position that both the antagonist and the protagonist engaging a given debate prompt have a burden of proof.

besty

well argued Spook - I make an a priori request for you to increase your post count immediately :-)

Perry - I respectfully repeat my request to know what religion you would have been had you been born in Afghanistan.

Password - I respectfully repeat my request for some examples of the evidence you referred to in your last answer to me

Farkel

passwordprotected,

: how does a person have proof that God doesn't exist?

You just don't get it. How many times must you be told there is NO proof for or against the existence of God?

If you believe there is a God, then bless you. Now go your own way and stop being an ass just because some people disagree with you.

Farkel

Perry

No one has seen or heard god.

Let's just be honest, for once please. Jeff's statement above is the ONLY possible conclusion he can come to based on the premise "there is no God". Atheists need to function and can't go around in a total delusion, ya know. Like everyone else they need to try to make sense of their world.

The only problem is that in order for Jeff to make the above statement he would have to interview everyone who has ever lived and all of them deny that they have met God. This of course is not only false, but impossible.... as is the pemise "there is no God" I might add.

Here's the real gaff for atheists, THEIR PREMISE REQUIRES DELUSIONS OF OMNIPOTENCE in order to try and make the premise work for them. It also requires the discrediting of Christian testimony.

Born again Christians live a life of total testing out God. When I do X or, follow Y path, God responds thusly or doesn't respond thusly. They are able to prove (through testable and repeatable scenarios) to themselves what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect will of God.

passwordprotected

If you believe there is a God, then bless you. Now go your own way and stop being an ass just because some people disagree with you.

That's the sum total of your argument? I've to stop this debate and cease being an ass?

Is Atheism a Form of Blind Faith?

Share this