im saying that god is not doing things the way god should according to his description in the bible.So you say God is not handling things the way that an omnipotent, omnibenevolent God should? But then, you have to make a judgement...how does an 'omnipotent, omnibenevolent' God handle things? Is this not reflective of your own judgement's and criteria, set by you and your perspective of what God should ideally do? Thus, you are indirectly, knowing or unknowingly stating that God isn't doing things the way you think God should, and therefore, God doesn't exist. This is a common mistake made by most atheists.
Yes, the onus is on me, if I wish to claim God exists. However, the onus is on you to prove that 'God' should handle things in the way that an 'omnipotent, omnibenevolent god' should. Why should God handle things in a specific way, as you claim? These standards of how God should handle things, ultimately, are standards set by you, are they not?
Inevitably, to reject God, or any entity for that matter, you must have a definition. Think in the shoes of a theist, now try to define God. To a theist, on a metaphysical level, what is God?
im saying that god is not doing things the way god should according to his description in the bible.
(Psalms 116:5 NIV) The LORD is gracious and righteous; our God is full of compassion.
(Deuteronomy 4:31 NIV) For the LORD your God is a merciful God; he will not abandon or destroy you or forget the covenant with your forefathers, which he confirmed to them by oath.
(Ephesians 4:24 NIV) and to put on the new self, created to be like God in true righteousness and holiness.
(1 John 4:16 NIV) And so we know and rely on the love God has for us. God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in him.
(1 John 1:5 NIV) This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all.
Originally Posted by alstah
Inevitably, to reject God, or any entity for that matter, you must have a definition. Think in the shoes of a theist, now try to define God. To a theist, on a metaphysical level, what is God?
that question was wat i was trying to get you guys (namely noworriez1) to answer, my definition of god is 'god is a fictional being made up by humans as means to explain the mysteries of the universe'. i dont know what your definition of god is which why ive been asking noworriez1 for about 2 pages, but he doesnt seem to want to answer for some odd reason
There isn't a sole definition (3rd time now)that question was wat i was trying to get you guys (namely noworriez1) to answer, my definition of god is 'god is a fictional being made up by humans as means to explain the mysteries of the universe'. i dont know what your definition of god is which why ive been asking noworriez1 for about 2 pages, but he doesnt seem to want to answer for some odd reason
you are plain, 100%, unequivocally wrong. i must not need a definition to reject something which there is no evidence for. i simply seek knowledge through logic and science, which over hundreds of years has disproved religion on the cosmos, on creationism and many other things. why would you presuppose that a god must exist? it is a thought without merit, without evidence to purport it.Inevitably, to reject God, or any entity for that matter, you must have a definition. Think in the shoes of a theist, now try to define God. To a theist, on a metaphysical level, what is God?
no, Islam is GOD MADELike I said, the Bible, Christianity and ALL religions for that matter, are MAN MADE. How do we know this description of God in the Bible is the way God should be doing things? Does not the Bible say: "For they provoked Him with their high places, And aroused His jealousy with their graven images" (Psalm 78:58), and, "You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God” (Exodus 20:4-5). Christianity, like all religions is a means of comprehending God, and achieving spiritual salvation. Quoting the Bible/Religious texts is not proving anything.
Also, you didn't answer my question.
"reject" is a verb that does require a quantifier to make any sense. You cannot just "reject" (maybe as some kind of general personality trait?).you are plain, 100%, unequivocally wrong. i must not need a definition to reject something which there is no evidence for. i simply seek knowledge through logic and science, which over hundreds of years has disproved religion on the cosmos, on creationism and many other things. why would you presuppose that a god must exist? it is a thought without merit, without evidence to purport it.
the gap in knowledge which those of faith claim can only be answered by god is wrong. first of all they knew not of how life could exist from no life at all, which science explained. religion explained that the world was only thousands of years old, to which science also provided evidence to the contrary. existence and our universe doesn't need a god, only your fragile mind does.
if an ancient greek man came up to you, and told you you must need a definition to reject zeus as the creator of everything, wouldn't you just tell him, 'why?' similarly, why can i just not reject any of the 1000s of gods that still exist today.
well this looks interesting
can you give me a quick summary, i'll read it when i get time (at work at the moment)
If you don't have a definition of God then you believe in nothing and are an atheist. :OThere isn't a sole definition (3rd time now)
It would be unfair to let mine stand for the rest of Christianity as a subject of debate which would reflect, ultimately, on the religion
But by all means, let the show go on
Like jezzmo said, ""reject" is a verb that does require a quantifier to make any sense. You cannot just "reject" (maybe as some kind of general personality trait?)."you are plain, 100%, unequivocally wrong. i must not need a definition to reject something which there is no evidence for. i simply seek knowledge through logic and science, which over hundreds of years has disproved religion on the cosmos, on creationism and many other things. why would you presuppose that a god must exist? it is a thought without merit, without evidence to purport it.
the gap in knowledge which those of faith claim can only be answered by god is wrong. first of all they knew not of how life could exist from no life at all, which science explained. religion explained that the world was only thousands of years old, to which science also provided evidence to the contrary. existence and our universe doesn't need a god, only your fragile mind does.
if an ancient greek man came up to you, and told you you must need a definition to reject zeus as the creator of everything, wouldn't you just tell him, 'why?' similarly, why can i just not reject any of the 1000s of gods that still exist today.