Top 10 Christian fails 2013

[Blake]

Fail? okay, Nemo.

you fail in a variety of ways

[xmas1997]

Atheism is not the belief "there is no God".

Atheism is the withholding of belief about God until it has been reasonably proven.

You have presented a false dichotomy. It is possible to withhold belief about something being true, and withhold belief in the opposite.

I don't believe there is a pink dancing elephant on planet in a neighboring star system, but neither do I have enough evidence to rule it out for certain.

What I can say for certain is that bible God is false, because as presented, bible God is given qualities that are, by definition, impossible. Omnipotence and omniscience for example. Both of these things are paradoxical and logically similar to a sphere with corners or a four sided triangle. This is why decent theologians have fully abandoned that stupidity to its fate.

I think you should have just stopped with "Atheism is the withholding of belief about God" and left the rest off, because otherwise you are saying that something HAS to be reasonably proven in order for it to be true. There are things that are not reasonably proven in order to be true such as love, or hope.
In doing that you imply that someone must prove it or must disprove it.
Either way, it does not matter to me what you believe or disbelieve, or even WAIT for evidence to become available.
This is for each to examine and wrestle with how ever they desire, it is "subjective rather than objective", and not to be judged by anyone unless those individuals wish to be considered judgmental IMHO.

[Blake]

you are saying that something HAS to be reasonably proven in order for it to be true.

Pretty much

Spaghetti monster, tbh

[xmas1997]

Pretty much

Spaghetti monster, tbh

And then why do you think of God as a monster, or that he likes spaghetti?
Seems a bit hypocritical to me.
If you really thought He did not exist, then you wouldn't label Him anything at all, you would simply say He does not exist, and as a former atheist myself, I could and would respect that opinion!

[spurraider21]

And then why do you think of God as a monster, or that he likes spaghetti?
Seems a bit hypocritical to me.
If you really thought He did not exist, then you wouldn't label Him anything at all, you would simply say He does not exist, and as a former atheist myself, I could and would respect that opinion!

its not necessarily that it doesn't exist, but more that there is no evidence to suggest that it exists. the simple fact of us not knowing the answers to particular questions yet isn't enough. saying that it must exist because we don't know about the beginning of the universe/time is just the fallacy of the god of the gaps

[xmas1997]

its not necessarily that it doesn't exist, but more that there is no evidence to suggest that it exists. the simple fact of us not knowing the answers to particular questions yet isn't enough. saying that it must exist because we don't know about the beginning of the universe/time is just the fallacy of the god of the gaps

I see your point.

[RandomGuy]

I think you should have just stopped with "Atheism is the withholding of belief about God" and left the rest off, because otherwise you are saying that something HAS to be reasonably proven in order for it to be true. There are things that are not reasonably proven in order to be true such as love, or hope.
In doing that you imply that someone must prove it or must disprove it.
Either way, it does not matter to me what you believe or disbelieve, or even WAIT for evidence to become available.
This is for each to examine and wrestle with how ever they desire, it is "subjective rather than objective", and not to be judged by anyone unless those individuals wish to be considered judgmental IMHO.

It has to be reasonably proven before I will believe it is true. I don't know how low you set your standard of evidence, but I kinda tend to think that extraordinary claims require a smidge more evidence.

My belief in the truth of something is irrelevant to whether it actually is true or not, just as it is for you.

As I have said before though, the bible God is pretty much provably false, so that makes my job of not believing in that load of primitive supers ion a lot easier.

[RandomGuy]

In doing that you imply that someone must prove it or must disprove it.

The person claiming God exists has the burden of proof. The default position is to withhold belief until one has a good reason to believe it is true.

[Blake]

And then why do you think of God as a monster, or that he likes spaghetti?
Seems a bit hypocritical to me.

Seriously, it's difficult to want to have a philosophical conversation with you when you are so far behind.

[Blake]

I see your point.

That point has been made to you multiple times before.

[xmas1997]

That point has been made to you multiple times before.

No it hasn't.
I am just wondering why you label Him anything, rather than simply stating that "He does not exist"?
If you said that, then I could, and probably would, respect that opinion.
Instead though, you come up with silly labels like spaghetti monster?
What's up with that?
Is it supposed to be funny? If so, you have an odd sense of humor.

[Blake]

No it hasn't.

Yes. It has. Multiple times.

I am just wondering why you label Him anything, rather than simply stating that "He does not exist"?
If you said that, then I could, and probably would, respect that opinion.
Instead though, you come up with silly labels like spaghetti monster?
What's up with that?
Is it supposed to be funny? If so, you have an odd sense of humor.

it's an easy google

[RandomGuy]

No it hasn't.
I am just wondering why you label Him anything, rather than simply stating that "He does not exist"?
If you said that, then I could, and probably would, respect that opinion.
Instead though, you come up with silly labels like spaghetti monster?
What's up with that?
Is it supposed to be funny? If so, you have an odd sense of humor.

The flying spaghetti monster has more explanatory power than bible god, as far as explaining our physical universe. As such it is funny to me, because all the silly arguments put forth to defend belief in bible god , also argue for fsm.

[xmas1997]

The flying spaghetti monster has more explanatory power than bible god, as far as explaining our physical universe. As such it is funny to me, because all the silly arguments put forth to defend belief in bible god , also argue for fsm.

So you find it to be funny too?
To each his or her own, it takes all kinds to make this crazy world go around.

[xmas1997]

Yes. It has. Multiple times.



it's an easy google

No, you are wrong, it never has, not even once.
Just because YOU "think" it has does NOT make it so, and that is a FACT.

[cantthinkofanything]

So you find it to be funny too?
To each his or her own, it takes all kinds to make this crazy world go around.

nope...world will go around with 0 or several billion of us...it does not care...
I never understood this saying

[Blake]

No, you are wrong, it never has, not even once.
Just because YOU "think" it has does NOT make it so, and that is a FACT.

I say it has because it has. Fact.

[RD2191]

Atheist are stupid.

[RandomGuy]

Atheist are stupid.

[xmas1997]

I say it has because it has. Fact.

No, you just "think" it has, but the truth is you really don't know for sure. That is probably closer to being a fact than anything you have said so far.
I think you are proselytizing tbh.

[Blake]

No, you just "think" it has, but the truth is you really don't know for sure. That is probably closer to being a fact than anything you have said so far.
I think you are proselytizing tbh.

No, I know for sure.

[xmas1997]

No, I know for sure.

How do you know for sure, if you are so sure?
I think you just think you know for sure.

[spurraider21]

Atheist are stupid.

says the guy who doesn't even understand the theory of evolution

"how come a cat never gives birth to a turtle lol, evolution are stoopid"

[RD2191]

Atheist are stupid.

[Blake]

Atheist are stupid.

Did god tell you that