Christians don't believe in God!?

[Guest]

but other things, like the claims of Jesus, i believe wholeheartedly. i believe there is a God. no matter what anyone says, I will believe this. therefore, while i can respectfully listen to athesistic viewpoints, i wont be convinced. how could i be? at this point you would call me close-minded. and once again i would say, "oh well."

TK

Basically, what I'm asking is "if God was proven to not exist, would you still believe?"

I wouldn't call you close-minded, like I said, I don't like that word...it doesn't fit.

[Guest]

if God was proven not to exist (dont even get me started on how this could be done) but, hypothetically, if this was in fact proven, beyond all doubt, then i would not choose to believe in something i know to be false. that would be kind of dumb.

one thing i am curious about, asimov, is what kind of proof would be required to make you believe there IS a God. o am sure you have been asked this before, maybe even by me. but i cant remember your answer.

TK

[Guest]

I completely understand that, man. I hate using the words close-minded or open-minded. I prefer to say that I'm open to being wrong if it can be shown that I am wrong.

Would you agree that is a more accurate description of you? I think I would be guilty of intellectual dishonesty if I were to reject evidence to the contrary of my belief without even analyzing it. It applies to everyone, including me, no double standard here.

Sure. I listened to Christian apologists as a teenager and wanted to hear the arguments against what they were saying. For the past twelve or so years I've listened to just about every argument against Christianity and the bible that exists. My own opinion is that the Christians have better arguments in their favor. I'm sure you disagree, this is just where I stand.

Maybe I've seen better arguments than you have and that's why I'm a Christian. Perhaps you've seen the better arugments and that's why you're not a Christian. However, I haven't heard an objection to Christianity in the last three years that I would consider new. Maybe I've exhausted the subject. Maybe not. But as it stands, I'm a follower of Christ and believe the written accounts of his life and ministry.

I'd love for you to come to the same conclusion that I've come to, but not because I want to win you over to "my team." It's because I care about people and want them to see the world through what I feel is the correct lens from which to view life. Being a film director, I know that a 14mm lens looks gorgeous on a wide landscape shot. Someone else, who's only familiar with a 75mm close-up lens, wouldn't get to see this new vantage point, which opens up so many things. Sorry... that's the best analogy I have after a long work day.

[Guest]

Christians don't believe in GOD. Christians believe in what is true. And GOD is the Truth. Therefore we beilieve in GOD.

[Guest]

Asimov Wrote:

There's a difference between outright rejecting the Gospels and treating them with contempt, roblaine. I'm skeptical of a lot of things, especially claims by other people of supernatural occurances. Are you saying you wouldn't waste your time on me because I reject the claims of the bible until they have been evidenced?

What type of evidence would satisfy you? It seems to me that atheists want to claim a lack of evidence on the side of Christians or any who believe in a creator while at the same time accepting that the universe and the world we live in came into existence on it's own, Which there is no evidence for. If there is no creator that atheists have to deny their own existence.

Basically, what I'm asking is "if God was proven to not exist, would you still believe?"

Asimov, when you figure out how to prove a negative please let me know.

[Guest]

if God was proven not to exist (dont even get me started on how this could be done) but, hypothetically, if this was in fact proven, beyond all doubt, then i would not choose to believe in something i know to be false. that would be kind of dumb.

Hehe, ok, then I wouldn't consider you close-minded there, buddy.

one thing i am curious about, asimov, is what kind of proof would be required to make you believe there IS a God. o am sure you have been asked this before, maybe even by me. but i cant remember your answer.

TK

Well, first off to consider the possibility I would have to find a justification that doesn't rest on a logical fallacy.

Then some empirical evidence of a God would help.

[Guest]

What type of evidence would satisfy you?

Facts.

It seems to me that atheists want to claim a lack of evidence on the side of Christians or any who believe in a creator while at the same time accepting that the universe and the world we live in came into existence on it's own, Which there is no evidence for. If there is no creator that atheists have to deny their own existence.

Well, I don't think it's proper to straw-man an atheistic position like the beginning of the universe. Why would we have to deny our own existence if there is no creator? Even the idea of a "creator" to the universe doesn't suddenly imply a God.

Asimov, when you figure out how to prove a negative please let me know.

It was the simplest way I could put the query, so it really has nothing to do with me.[/quote]

[Guest]

roblaine wrote:

What type of evidence would satisfy you?

Facts.

Eyewitness testimony in considered factual evidence by societies standards, and it seems to me that we have a reliable testimony in the Bible declaring that there is a God. God revealed himself revealed himself to Abraham, and established hid covenant with the house of Israel, he spoke through the Prophets and prophesied about the coming of Jesus Christ. Jesus walked on this earth and those that deny that fact deny it in the face of overwhelming evidence. Those that lived with Jesus recorded the life, death, and resurrection in the Gospels.


Atheist, as you know have attempted over the years to discredit those who believe in the Bible, but have never been able to give evidence that would require and open minded person to reject it's claims.

I don't know what type of facts you would like to see in order to accept that you were created, but if you set up a standard that is unachievable by any historical standards you have closed your mind to the possibility of believing in something that is very logical. Asimov, I will pray for you, I assume you are not only here to pick fights with Christians, because if you are a true atheist than it would all be in vain if you are correct in your view. But I assume that you are seeking truth and this is why you spend time here, and I hope you continue to.

Robin

[Guest]

Eyewitness testimony in considered factual evidence by societies standards, and it seems to me that we have a reliable testimony in the Bible declaring that there is a God.

No, it really isn't. Testimony can be corroborative in the face of facts, but it isn't factual evidence.

God revealed himself revealed himself to Abraham, and established hid covenant with the house of Israel, he spoke through the Prophets and prophesied about the coming of Jesus Christ.

That is open to debate and interpretation, roblaine.

Jesus walked on this earth and those that deny that fact deny it in the face of overwhelming evidence. Those that lived with Jesus recorded the life, death, and resurrection in the Gospels.

What overwhelming evidence? Nobody who lived with Jesus recorded it in the Gospels. The Gospels weren't written until at least 40 years after the claimed death of Jesus. 40 years of oral tradition and zealous believers aren't reliable.

Atheist, as you know have attempted over the years to discredit those who believe in the Bible, but have never been able to give evidence that would require and open minded person to reject it's claims.

Of course we have. What do you think ex-Christians are? People who accepted the claims of Christianity, believed it and then after further thought rejected those claims due to the same inabilities to provide facts.

I don't know what type of facts you would like to see in order to accept that you were created, but if you set up a standard that is unachievable by any historical standards you have closed your mind to the possibility of believing in something that is very logical.

What are you talking about? Where did I say I wasn't created? Claiming something is logical doesn't automatically make it logical, roblaine.

Asimov, I will pray for you, I assume you are not only here to pick fights with Christians, because if you are a true atheist than it would all be in vain if you are correct in your view. But I assume that you are seeking truth and this is why you spend time here, and I hope you continue to.

Hahaha...all in vain? Really? How does atheism presuppose no afterlife? You really have no idea what I believe, you assume a lot of things, make a few misrepresentations of my stand-point, not only that, but make a few naked assertions.

Do you expect me to admit that I am wrong? I hope not.

[Guest]

Hi again Asimov, you wrote:

40 years of oral tradition and zealous believers aren't reliable.

Please explain why these two claims of yours are true. Thanks buddy!