ForumsWEPRTheism and Atheism

4684 503618
thepyro222
offline
thepyro222
2,162 posts
910

I grew up atheist for 16 years. I had always kept an open mind towards religion, but never really felt a need to believe in it. My sister started going to a Wednesday night children's program at a church. Eventually, I was dragged into a Christmas Eve service. Scoffing, I reluctantly went, assuming that this was going to be a load of crap, but when I went, I felt something. Something that I've never felt before. I felt a sense of empowerment and a sense of calling. Jesus called upon my soul, just like he did with his disciples. he wanted me to follow him. Now, my life is being lived for Christ. He died on the cross for my sins, and the sins of everyone who believes in him. He was beaten, brutalized, struck with a whip 39 times, made to carry a cross up to the stage of his death. This I believe to be true, and I can never repay him for what he has done.
I still have my struggles with Christianity, but I've found this bit of information most useful. Religion is not comprehensible in the human mind, because we cannot comprehend the idea of a perfect and supreme being, a God, but we can believe it in our heart, and that's the idea of faith. Faith is, even though everything rides against me believing in Jesus, I still believe in him because I know that it's true in my heart. I invite my fellow Brothers and sisters of the LORD to talk about how Jesus has helped you in your life. No atheists and no insults please

  • 4,684 Replies
Moe
offline
Moe
1,728 posts
2,670

You're probably thinking of this <-> in which case it would be false.


I wish I was because I'm starting to get confused by this stuff. But what I learned was definitely F->T is F.
thepyro222
offline
thepyro222
2,162 posts
910

@ Darkroot. A theory is a puzzle of information that has bits and pieces, but it really doesn't fit together. I can prove the Bible in the real world because it proves itself. The Bible, as I have stated before, is made up of eyewitness accounts, which, in a court of law, is the strongest evidence that someone can give. You're giving me bits and pieces of coincidental evidence filled with assumptions and opinions

vesperbot
offline
vesperbot
959 posts
115

Moe, it's "T->F" is false, and this is the main means of implication, if all the base statements are true, then the resultant statement is true, provided that resultant statement is entirely based on base statements.

Einfach
offline
Einfach
1,457 posts
195

I wish I was because I'm starting to get confused by this stuff. But what I learned was definitely F->T is F.

T -> F is F - is this what you were thinking?
You all are assuming that Christianity is false, so therefore, all of your arguments are going to be the same. I grew up atheist for 16 years. I know the arguments, I've been there, and you're arguments make no sense

This is a fallacy. I used to think X but now I know better.
Philosophy is all opinion

No - there is all right or wrong - otherwise there is a contradiction.
Darkroot
offline
Darkroot
2,799 posts
1,120

but I am listening to the CD "The Top 10 Proofs Christianity is the only true religion," which has restored my faith.


That's nice you have to buy your faith.

I'm guessing there are multiple types of logical reasoning then. Because I just had a couple weeks of lectures on, I think boolean logic, where false implying true is the only time an implies is false.


Hmmm that smells like Discrete Mathematics I. But it's probably philosophy, I personal don't like the wordy-ness of philosophical logic and prefer mathematics to express proofs.
Einfach
offline
Einfach
1,457 posts
195

I can prove the Bible in the real world because it proves itself.

Circular reasoning. The Bible is right because the bible is right because...
Moe
offline
Moe
1,728 posts
2,670

All morals came from one form of religion or another.


I would think many morals could be traced back to early humans living in close groups. Where killing other members of the group is bad, where stealing from other is bad, and other such things. All would be harmful to the group, which would require the group to find a way to punish the individual causing problems.

"look, the bible is based off of eyewitness accounts, and is backed up with other historical documents." if you discount the bible, then you're discounting all of the proof for the argument of Christianity


I have yet to see any document that backs up the Bible.

thus making you prejudiced

I may be prejudiced in some areas, but not against any religion.

Moe, it's "T->F" is false,


I guess I shouldn't debate logic late at night. When I saw that it looked more familiar so I checked my notes, you are right.
vesperbot
offline
vesperbot
959 posts
115

Einfach, it's weird that you don't oppose ME, while I'm backing up thepyro222's statements. Since if you don't, then his assumptions are unprotested, so can be claimed as true.

Moe
offline
Moe
1,728 posts
2,670

Hmmm that smells like Discrete Mathematics I. But it's probably philosophy, I personal don't like the wordy-ness of philosophical logic and prefer mathematics to express proofs.


Its is Discrete Mathematics, but it also goes into programming it.
Einfach
offline
Einfach
1,457 posts
195

Einfach, it's weird that you don't oppose ME, while I'm backing up thepyro222's statements. Since if you don't, then his assumptions are unprotested, so can be claimed as true.

No - I protest his statements. To make the claim that his assumptions are true because of this is straw man. You back up the strongest parts of his argument, while I tear down the weaker parts. You haven't stated anything wrong yet...
thepyro222
offline
thepyro222
2,162 posts
910

This is a fallacy. I used to think X but now I know better.


No, it's called enlightenment. It happens in the real world. I know something different now because I cam across new information.
No - there is all right or wrong - otherwise there is a contradiction.


Saying that in itself is a contradiction, saying that implies that everything is predictable, which in the real world, it's not. I can't predict next time I'm going to take a dump. It just happens, I can't predict that in two days I'm going to get hit by a car, and it actually happens (unless of some major coincidence). The only person that can determine definite right and wrong is God
thepyro222
offline
thepyro222
2,162 posts
910

I would think many morals could be traced back to early humans living in close groups. Where killing other members of the group is bad, where stealing from other is bad, and other such things. All would be harmful to the group, which would require the group to find a way to punish the individual causing problems


This would have needed a way to explain it, which would have been a religion
Darkroot
offline
Darkroot
2,799 posts
1,120

@ Darkroot. A theory is a puzzle of information that has bits and pieces, but it really doesn't fit together. I can prove the Bible in the real world because it proves itself. The Bible, as I have stated before, is made up of eyewitness accounts, which, in a court of law, is the strongest evidence that someone can give. You're giving me bits and pieces of coincidental evidence filled with assumptions and opinions


Doesn't fit together? Huh if that was true we wouldn't have computers. But I don't really want to explain science to you since it seems you have never really studied it.

Bible proves itself? You know my fictional character also proves himself he is the very definition of correct and rigorous logic. I thought all religious texts proved themselves too, hmmm.. that would be a contradiction wouldn't it?

You do know eye witnesses give incorrect statements right? Have you studied psychology? Also eyewitness doesn't prove anything if you can't replicated it by anyone with the ability.

You're giving me faulty logic and evidence from a book that wants to prove itself.
MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,540 posts
2,210

Yes Stephen Hawking said that "What comes before the Big Bang?" is like asking "What is North of the North Pole?"


Actually this is the source of that statement.
(J. Richard Gott III, James E. Gunn, David N. Schramm, and Beatrice M. Tinsley, "Will the Universe Expand Forever?" Scientific American [March 1976], p. 65)

1. ~(p ^ ~p) - Law of Non-contradiction
2. (p v ~p) - Law of the Excluded Middle
3. ~D --> (p ^ ~p) - Not-Determinism (~D) implies a contradiction.
4. ~~D - Not-Not determinism, because Not-determinism implies a contradiction.
5. ~~D --> D - Not-Not something implies something.
6. Therefore, D - Determinism is inevitable!!!


I can think of situations where some of these would break down but most are dealing with quantum physics. Applied to the physical world they should hold. So nevermind...

God ended the world once with the flood of Noah,


A flood that left no geological evidence what so ever and required far more water then what exists on the entire planet. That's one magical flood.

And at the big bang, what created the big bang?


Likely the separation of the fundamental forces of the universe from the singularity going critical.

All morals came from one form of religion or another.


No they didn't. There are non religious aboriginals who hold a strictly naturalistic view of the world who got along fine without any religion with there own moral structure. (Sorry I can't think of the name of these people, if anyone knows please post.)

"look, the bible is based off of eyewitness accounts, and is backed up with other historical documents."


It's based off second hand accounts at best and there are no contemporary document supporting it.
driejen
offline
driejen
486 posts
85

You all are assuming that Christianity is false, so therefore, all of your arguments are going to be the same.

I am assuming that Christianity is not automatically correct. Now to convince me to buy into it, you have to present valid evidence.

I know the arguments, I've been there, and you're arguments make no sense.

I know the arguments, mainly arguments from ignorance, special exception, beauty, emotion, all fallacies. Also baseless assertions and misrepresentation of theories... If you have anything new to share that would be great.

I'm coming at you and saying "look, the bible is based off of eyewitness accounts, and is backed up with other historical documents."

Why is there so many contradictions in the bible then? Also even if parts of the bible were accurate, how does that imply that the whole book is accurate? Who witnessed genesis?

if you discount the bible, then you're discounting all of the proof for the argument of Christianity, thus making you prejudiced

I'm going to write some random **** on a piece of paper and claim it as fact. If you discount this piece of paper as evidence then you are prejudiced.
Showing 211-225 of 4684