Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
To put it in simple words, you don't have a proof that God does not exist.
Yes. From my reply, it was abundantly clear than I understood your illogical premise. I illustrated its illogic by pointing out that the same is true for leprechauns and Darth Vader. Yet, unless you're even more ridiculous than you at present seem, you accept that those do not exist. As such, you do not really believe that proof is required for disbelief. Predictably, this all went completely over your head.
Let's talk some more about proof. Can we prove that passenger pigeons are extinct? No. We cannot even prove (it seems obvious that you really don't comprehend what that word means) that tyrannosaurs are extinct. Can we prove that George Washington lived, or that the planet Mars really exists? No. We simply have evidence that they exist. When evidence for something reaches a certain level, we accept it. Absence such evidence - as with leprechauns, Darth Vader, extant tyrannosaurs, God - the logical conclusion is non-existence.
So clearly, no one ordinarily demands the threshold of proof for belief and disbelief. In the real world, evidence suffices. Strong, compelling evidence, but still just evidence - which is infinitely short of proof. This is why it is hypocritical for you to demand proof for the non-existence of God. I suspect this completely eludes you, so rest assured - I do not expect you to reply coherently. This post is intended for other posters; those with a firm sense of logic and a grip on reason.
On the plus side, at least you didn't try to cling to your silly "Death proves God!" thesis. Baby steps...
Yes. From my reply, it was abundantly clear than I understood your illogical premise. I illustrated its illogic by pointing out that the same is true for leprechauns and Darth Vader. Yet, unless you're even more ridiculous than you at present seem, you accept that those do not exist. As such, you do not really believe that proof is required for disbelief. Predictably, this all went completely over your head.
Let's talk some more about proof. Can we prove that passenger pigeons are extinct? No. We cannot even prove (it seems obvious that you really don't comprehend what that word means) that tyrannosaurs are extinct. Can we prove that George Washington lived, or that the planet Mars really exists? No. We simply have evidence that they exist. When evidence for something reaches a certain level, we accept it. Absence such evidence - as with leprechauns, Darth Vader, extant tyrannosaurs, God - the logical conclusion is non-existence.
So clearly, no one ordinarily demands the threshold of proof for belief and disbelief. In the real world, evidence suffices. Strong, compelling evidence, but still just evidence - which is infinitely short of proof. This is why it is hypocritical for you to demand proof for the non-existence of God. I suspect this completely eludes you, so rest assured - I do not expect you to reply coherently. This post is intended for other posters; those with a firm sense of logic and a grip on reason.
On the plus side, at least you didn't try to cling to your silly "Death proves God!" thesis. Baby steps...
This is my favorite thing to see - watching people slither their way out of the Bible's flagrant immoral stance on so many issues.
Then you just played your card and revealed your true motive. Thank you. I will know now to not take your questions seriously as you have no desire for answers. Your only desire to make Christians squirm because that props up your own faith in atheism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina
Well, for one thing, God could have commanded the Israelites not to own slaves from the very beginning. Did they have slaves in Egypt? Slaves owning slaves? No? Then the practice of owning people must have started AFTER God gave the Hebrews the Torah. Which means if God had said "No slaves" from the beginning, this wouldn't even be a problem.
The problem is you don't know all the facts surrounding the culture of the time so it is unfair to make such a judgement.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shirina
For another thing:
"However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way." (Lev 25:44-46)
Hmm .... purchasing people. Treating them like property. Passing them on to your children. Yeah, that just doesn't sound like voluntary servitude to me. Unless they were volunteering to be slaves. Ooh, pick me! I wanna be a slave. Me! Me!
But the Bible commands that they are not treated as property. Property in the sense you suggest means I could do whatever I want with my property. There are numerous OT verses that demand humane treatment of the slave as an equal member of the household. Exodus 21:12 for starters. Galatians 3:28 also shows that God regards all men, even slaves as equal:
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
1 Timothy 1:8-10 also condemns enslavers as sinners:
We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. 9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine 11 that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.
If God truly approved of slavery, why do we have these verses?
Stopped reading after this.
How do you know something doesn't exist? Prove it to me.
I'm not sure I can improve on Unsettomati's response, so I'll just copy it.
Again, if something never existed there can't possibly be any evidential way to disprove it because any remnants found would indicate it does (or did) exist. But if something never existed there would be no trace of it's non-existence. How could there possibly be?
Consequently, if someone argues that something exists, but presents absolutely no evidence, it's logical to conclude such a thing probably does not. Do you understand logic?
Please reread Unsettomati's response below. If you still don't understand concepts like logic and evidence I'll try to talk you through them, and I'd hazard a guess that he/she will as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unsettomati
Yes. From my reply, it was abundantly clear than I understood your illogical premise. I illustrated its illogic by pointing out that the same is true for leprechauns and Darth Vader. Yet, unless you're even more ridiculous than you at present seem, you accept that those do not exist. As such, you do not really believe that proof is required for disbelief. Predictably, this all went completely over your head.
Let's talk some more about proof. Can we prove that passenger pigeons are extinct? No. We cannot even prove (it seems obvious that you really don't comprehend what that word means) that tyrannosaurs are extinct. Can we prove that George Washington lived, or that the planet Mars really exists? No. We simply have evidence that they exist. When evidence for something reaches a certain level, we accept it. Absence such evidence - as with leprechauns, Darth Vader, extant tyrannosaurs, God - the logical conclusion is non-existence.
So clearly, no one ordinarily demands the threshold of proof for belief and disbelief. In the real world, evidence suffices. Strong, compelling evidence, but still just evidence - which is infinitely short of proof. This is why it is hypocritical for you to demand proof for the non-existence of God. I suspect this completely eludes you, so rest assured - I do not expect you to reply coherently. This post is intended for other posters; those with a firm sense of logic and a grip on reason.
On the plus side, at least you didn't try to cling to your silly "Death proves God!" thesis. Baby steps...
Then you just played your card and revealed your true motive. Thank you. I will know now to not take your questions seriously as you have no desire for answers. Your only desire to make Christians squirm because that props up your own faith in atheism.
The problem is you don't know all the facts surrounding the culture of the time so it is unfair to make such a judgement.
But the Bible commands that they are not treated as property. Property in the sense you suggest means I could do whatever I want with my property. There are numerous OT verses that demand humane treatment of the slave as an equal member of the household. Exodus 21:12 for starters. Galatians 3:28 also shows that God regards all men, even slaves as equal:
There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
1 Timothy 1:8-10 also condemns enslavers as sinners:
We know that the law is good if one uses it properly. 9 We also know that the law is made not for the righteous but for lawbreakers and rebels, the ungodly and sinful, the unholy and irreligious, for those who kill their fathers or mothers, for murderers, 10 for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and liars and perjurers—and for whatever else is contrary to the sound doctrine 11 that conforms to the gospel concerning the glory of the blessed God, which he entrusted to me.
If God truly approved of slavery, why do we have these verses?
"God regards all men, even slaves as equal:"? really? And you don't see a contradiction there? If God disapproved of slavery, why would he have to declare slaves and free men as equals in the first place? Why didn't he simply ban it altogether by declaring "thou shalt not enslave thy fellow humans"?
Why would Christians need to squirm if there is nothing to squirm about? Do you feel uncomfortable discussing these things? Why?
There isn't anything to squirm about. That's the false illusion that atheists want to believe. If anything, the venomous attacks only serve to strength my faith because I know in the spiritual realm, Satan is behind it. If Christianity was just a myth, atheists would go on about their business and leave it alone instead of trying to tear it apart piece by piece.
There isn't anything to squirm about. That's the false illusion that atheists want to believe. If anything, the venomous attacks only serve to strength my faith because I know in the spiritual realm, Satan is behind it. If Christianity was just a myth, atheists would go on about their business and leave it alone instead of trying to tear it apart piece by piece.
Jeff, you're stumbling in the dark with all the other fundamentalists.
Try re-reading some of the previous posts by those whom you believe to be Satan-inspired. Reason, logic and sense abound in them.
Perhaps a careful re-reading will ignite a wee light in your mind and you'll find that truth isn't as frightening as you previously thought.
In fact, one can believe in a Creator without having to accommodate the hypocritical, mythical, just-plain-wrong trappings of a "holy" book.
I hope one day you'll experience the joy of liberation when you've grown strong enough to cast off those shackles.
There isn't anything to squirm about. That's the false illusion that atheists want to believe. If anything, the venomous attacks only serve to strength my faith because I know in the spiritual realm, Satan is behind it. If Christianity was just a myth, atheists would go on about their business and leave it alone instead of trying to tear it apart piece by piece.
Let's talk some more about proof. Can we prove that passenger pigeons are extinct? No. We cannot even prove (it seems obvious that you really don't comprehend what that word means) that tyrannosaurs are extinct. Can we prove that George Washington lived, or that the planet Mars really exists? No. We simply have evidence that they exist. When evidence for something reaches a certain level, we accept it. Absence such evidence - as with leprechauns, Darth Vader, extant tyrannosaurs, God - the logical conclusion is non-existence.
...
Surely the lack of evidence today doesn't preclude the possibility that it won't be available tomorrow, no?
Then perhaps, to be fair, your assertion should say, "Absence such evidence - as with leprechauns, Darth Vader, extant tyrannosaurs, God - the logical conclusion is non-existence" as of now.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
