Our Minecraft servers are offline but we will keep this forum online for any community communication. Site permissions for posting could change at a later date but will remain online.
I really wonder sometimes."Acknowledge me as God or face eternal suffering!"
Thanks God, loving the free will you graciously provide...
This post is simply a giant ad hominem and is intrinsically hypocritical, for obvious reasons; everything you said could also apply to you and your standpoint. You did not even attempt to give a rebuttal to my point.I really wonder sometimes.
Why do Atheists tend to mainly defend themselves and state the Christians are always wrong?
Is it because they feel threatened by Christians?
Is it because they know we have the stronger point, as they are the hypocrites stating they don't want to believe in something they cannot see?
Is it because they know we are right, an don't want to admit it?
Hmm...
<3I have my opinions, but I'll keep them to myself. Suffice it to say that I believe in God, the Christian one. I won't go into further detail, cause I don't want to pull a Mooclan or a Tenebrous12321
rabbits*What the bunnies is this
mm that's up for debate. your arguments are meh. and by meh, i mean really meh.Atheists, You cannot prove to anyone that Evolution happened. You cannot prove that a God didn't create the Universe.
its a lot more complicated than that - simplifying it like that to further a point doesn't help in a situation like this. it's basically trying to inject wit, but in a way that is distracting and (it could be argued) negative to the discussion."Acknowledge me as God or face eternal suffering!"
Thanks God, loving the free will you graciously provide...
nope.I really wonder sometimes.
Why do Atheists tend to mainly defend themselves and state the Christians are always wrong?
Is it because they feel threatened by Christians?
Is it because they know we have the stronger point, as they are the hypocrites stating they don't want to believe in something they cannot see?
Is it because they know we are right, an don't want to admit it?
sorry Evermore, but you went too far by saying:Your ignorance is truly astonishing. You assume that I am atheist, as if the only two choices in this matter is atheism or Christianity, ignoring the thousands of other religions practiced throughout the world. As an agnostic, it is people like you that make me want to disbelieve in god, as I couldn't possibly associate myself with a person so close-minded.
andYour ignorance is truly astonishing.
that's not helping, it's just being a rude dude.people like you that make me want to disbelieve in god, as I couldn't possibly associate myself with a person so close-minded.
okay sorry but no - you can't just say that. "There's your answer", but nothing to back it up. And you can't automatically assume that everyone has previous knowledge of the evidence that you're trying to (vaguely) refer to, because.. not everyone has! (that is, if there is indisputable in the first place.)The bible is a contradiction. Science has proved too much. There's your answer really.
Isn't it a bit harsh to pick on Roygator? XD The poor guy...-snip-
Hey Mooclan!<3
thanks for tagging me and making me aware of an on-going debate ;]
rabbits*
mm that's up for debate. your arguments are meh. and by meh, i mean really meh.
its a lot more complicated than that - simplifying it like that to further a point doesn't help in a situation like this. it's basically trying to inject wit, but in a way that is distracting and (it could be argued) negative to the discussion.
nope.
good for you for trying to at least raise questions, but they're questions without proper foundations.
sorry Evermore, but you went too far by saying:
and
that's not helping, it's just being a rude dude.
okay sorry but no - you can't just say that. "There's your answer", but nothing to back it up. And you can't automatically assume that everyone has previous knowledge of the evidence that you're trying to (vaguely) refer to, because.. not everyone has! (that is, if there is indisputable in the first place.)
I'm not arguing for either of these sides at the moment - I've done it before, though. I, myself, am a Christian. I'm just here to check for invalid arguments. ;]
Isn't it a bit harsh to pick on Roygator? XD The poor guy...
Because they have a different viewpoint to you.Why do Atheists tend to mainly defend themselves and state the Christians are always wrong?
I'm very scared of you preaching I'll go to hell if I don't believe in your god.Is it because they feel threatened by Christians?
Give me proof, any proof that gives existence of god. For points and evidence you need proof, from what I can see you haven't supplied any proof.Is it because they know we have the stronger point, as they are the hypocrites stating they don't want to believe in something they cannot see?
Neither side knows if they are right as there is no solid proof for either side of the debate.Is it because they know we are right, an don't want to admit it?
oh, gosh... XDMooclan
Some conversation starters if you are in the mood for this rn.
I feel like these two are linked in some ways: We are given free will, partially by the "apple" that Adam/Eve ate (whether literally or metaphorically), and partially by the way that we were created.Problem of evil
Free will
Don't know what that second one is, but morality is the sense of what is right and wrong. Christians (generally) argue that it was put in place, just like previous mentioned, by the way that we were created and also by the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. (is that the proper name? can't remember)Morality / Euthyphro's Dilemma
don't know what it is, but i'll take a quick google searchPascal's Wager
From what I remember being taught within the past year at a theological convention for high school students (it's a miracle i stayed awake for even a quarter of the classes and yet remember half of the material taught), "Hell" as we know it was originally created as a final place for the fallen angels/demons, and oh-so-conveniently (which is to say, not at all conveniently for us) fits the "bad people", to put it lightly.Problem of Hell
Well, here's an interesting story...Why there is no evidence of God
I'm not totally sure where I would start with the historicity, but the reliability of the NT is something that I'd have to be much more advanced in my learning to discuss to a degree that is deserving of that topic. I clearly recall hearing several strong arguments, and thinking something along the lines of "This is logical and makes sense," but I can't remember what those exact arguments are. I'm a bad studentHistoricity of Jesus Christ/Reliability of the NT
I remember having several moments where I was thinking about this, and I recall that I had one particular explanation that was slightly different from the more common ones, but made more sense and fit quite snugly with much of the scientific evidence that we have that is taught in schools.Theistic Evolution
read my super-long testimony, above.Give me proof, any proof that gives existence of god. For points and evidence you need proof, from what I can see you haven't supplied any proof.
not quite, actuallyBecause they have a different viewpoint to you.
sarcasm is called the lowest form of wit, but it's still good for chuckles once in a while.I'm very scared of you preaching I'll go to hell if I don't believe in your god.
mm, depends on how you define "knows" and "solid proof"Neither side knows if they are right as there is no solid proof for either side of the debate.
that was a bad usage of the word cute..cute
Keep that to yourself, tbh. If you want to be rude about it, don't go and be rude to people who can't defend themselves. (sorry roygator, but i'm not sure if you're ready for this thread yet. but thanks for trying!! <3 ur a cool kat [or gator])People like you make me sick
honestly i would like that too, if they were as childhood stories lead us to believe.sending down some unicorns would be cool too.
Alrighty, I'll clarify for you then.okay sorry but no - you can't just say that. "There's your answer", but nothing to back it up. And you can't automatically assume that everyone has previous knowledge of the evidence that you're trying to (vaguely) refer to, because.. not everyone has! (that is, if there is indisputable in the first place.)