Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Are Atheists more honest than Christians?

So you are not going to answer the question?

Or perhaps you just did not understand, so let me rephrase the question:

What if on judgement day you learn the correct answer was "Mormons", or Catholics, and not your sect?

According to your faith, they are all part of his plan.

In addition, God specifically takes credit for the creation of Evil in Isaiah:

Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

That another is as crazy as you.

Pascal's Wager, covers all eventualities.

Here is something to reason on........


It would seem that any Man who is wise would intelligently reason that there is a fair amount of evidence pointing to a possibility of a God.


A wise and Just God would provide sufficient evidence to at least warrant investigation.

A wise and Just God would also provide validation apon investigation.

The possibility of our oweing our existence to a creator in light of a fair amount of evidence would at least seem to warrant investigating just out of the possibility that a good man may be entitled to show gratitude for ones life.

It would also seem fittingly Just that if one is not inclined to seek the possibility of gratitude that may be owed in light of the fact there is so much evidence!!!! Perhaps God could rightously and justly not include such ones in a Kingdom to which they have shown no interest.



Shod

[/quote]

Do you really believe I haven't investigated this?

We have evidence of Ceremonial Burial 100k years ago, organized religions 40k years ago, and priesthoods since at least the beginning of towns and cities 10k years ago.
uif
So if there is a singular god, he's had 40,000 years to get out his unified message, and bring all of humanity under his loving umbrella. If there was one god, and he had all that time, we would expect he could at least transmit his unified message to the whole of humanity.

But we don't see that. Instead we see what we would expect if religion is man made, i.e. Many regional religions, and great fragmentation and many different sects among the various religions. There's no unity, no unified message, but many local religions, many of which claim their practitioners are a chose people with special rights to kill, rape, murder, and enslave all who hold beliefs different them their own. This is what we would expect from man made, not god made religions.

What you are proposing is known as Pascals Wager, and it's been thoroughly debunked for 100+ years. It's actually considered on of the weakest arguments in all of apologetic and amounts to little more then a threat.

Where I am only trying to change minds with reason, you are using the threat of eternal torture.

First, the proposition in not between one god and no god, it's between all the thousands of god, and the variations within those religions, and the possibility that all those god beliefs are wrong. If the Muslims or Hindu's are right, you've still lost everything you've invested in this life into your Christian religions, and you are still going to a version of hell.

Even if we are just discussion the proposition of your god vs. no god, to say that you loose nothing is still incorrect. You could loose much from this world. How many hours have you invested in prayer? How much money have you given to your holy-man/church. How many wrong actions have you taken in this life as a result of your beliefs, and how many discoveries were lost because you believed an incorrect conclusion because of "faith". So you still have much to loose in this life due to an incorrect belief.

As for you assertion that one who is made so that he could not believe (that was the original antagonist in Pascal's Wager), do you really believe your God is so stupid that he would not know if I was just pretending to believe so I could get a free trip to heaven? Shouldn't that really piss him off? If I am wrong, I would much rather face God as a honest man who used all the reasoning capacity we posses and did not see sufficient evidence then as some huckster who was trying to lie and scam my way into heaven.

But that goes back to the OP's original question about honesty, doesn't it?

I like Curdog.

He seems like a good guy.

Atheist does not require evidence. A lack of evidence for a god or gods is sufficient not to accept the proposition.

On the other hand Anti-theist, those who assert "there are no gods", do have a burden of proof, and need to present it to support their positive proposition.

Good VanTillian presuppositionalism right there my Dutch brother!

I dunno. is he a natural curtailed dog, or did someone just cut his tail short? I guess one is like the other, but not exactly.

Many people believe, and many people 'know' from their own experiences, that...regardless of anything else...one will have a better life by following the teachings of Jesus. Some people have posted on this board...and these are people that have lived a long time and have had much life experience...that their walk with Jesus was the easiest life they've ever known. Many people want their life to be better...and many people want to be better at life.

They see it as a win-win situation.

Curdog, let me help you out.

In a formal debate, there is a single proposition. It is the side that claims the proposition is true that must prove it. The against the proposition has no burden of proof. If the side claiming the proposition is true is not able to provide sufficient evidence to prove their proposition, that is sufficient for the against side to win.

There is a similar think in science. Some one will propose a Hypothesis, however until they've presented sufficient evidence for their hypothesis, the default position remains the "null hypothesis", or a rejection of the hypothesis until it is proven. It is not sufficient to just prove the hypothesis is possible, you must actually prove that is it true before the null hypothesis is rejected.

So now lets apply these principles to a supernatural, or a God claim. In these cases the null hypothesis, or the default position is to NOT believe the claim until sufficient evidence is provided. Again a claim that it COULD be true it not sufficient to accept the claim and reject the null hypothesis.

In addition, a supernatural or god claim is an extraordinary claim, and required evidence proportionate to the claims. Since you are making an extraordinary claim it requires extraordinary evidence, as opposed to a common claim, which would only require common evidence.

So, the Theist are the one's making the positive supernatural god claims, so lets here your extraordinary evidence.

You have a lot of assertions, very facts.

You say you have proof.
Great. How do we quantify it, and make it into a verifiable, repeatable experiment.

According to your Theology, who created Satan?
If Satan is so Evil, why doesn't your god do anything about him. Is he unable, unwilling, or just doesn't care enough?

You have evidence that God created time?
Great, lets hear it. Until you offer sufficient evidence, the default position is that he did not create time.

Curdog, where do you come up with the "self worship" BS. Do you really think I sit around saying prayers to myself? If you knew very many atheist you would understand this position is absurd.

Which of Einsteins theories do you believe are not correct?

So, you are claiming that your Supernatural God acts in a manner that is undetectable in this world. In practical terms, how is that any different them him not existing AT ALL. YOUR catch 22 is that you just admitted that he exists in a manner that is no different from him not existing at all.

At least I know the tree in my backyard is real.

Just because someone is not following your understanding of Christianity, does not mean they are not Christians

There are over 400 contradictions in the Bible. Some scholars count over 700. As a result, someone can have beliefs very different from yours, but still be following the Bible, just following the other side of some of these contradictions.

What amazed me is there is over 30,000 Christian sects, but you think you know the One True Christianity.

Bad analogies lead to faulty conclusions.

One does not "put on" Christianity like one puts on a police uniform.

Christianity works from the inside out.

That's nice.

But it does not address the question of Truth.

I care what is true.