The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom

As I thought. That’s why I hope you can appreciate the irony of your refusal to be open minded when you so easily conclude that non believers would see that God existed if they weren’t close minded.
As has already been discussed, proving the NONexistence of something in the universe is impossible.

So no irony here at all for not answering your question. It is not a comprehendible question to the open minded
 
That would presume personal consciousness existed after death. But let’s say it did. Why would you presume after death you would immediately see God and heaven.
Because the evidence of people who have had near death experiences, sometimes death experiences, and care takers who watch people die for a living who report where people will start to reach for heaven, talk to their passed family members, and report seeing God/Jesus right before their death.

These reports are not scientific so I know you will blast them out for anecdotal evidence or some sort of neurochemical reaction to give peace at death's front door. But the people who were clinically dead and came back, what's that say?

How do you reconcile an atheist raised girl in Russia painting a vivid beautiful picture of a man she has seen only in dreams and a child in the US having a death/drowning experience where he was clinically dead, and reporting that the person he saw and identified as Jesus was the man the girl in russia dreams about?

These things are evidence. Not all science can be repeated due to the singularity of it, but over time a pattern develops and shows us something. We can not be tone deaf to the reality of what these experiences tell us.
 
As has already been discussed, proving the NONexistence of something in the universe is impossible.

So no irony here at all for not answering your question. It is not a comprehendible question to the open minded
Ah yes so you can see why believers constant refrain to nonbelievers that they prove their lack of belief rings hollow. But in spite of this nonbelievers are willing to engage on the believer’s turf and explain their position. As you pointed out they don’t have to but they do. In general this involves pointing out specific concepts of God, especially those that are internally inconsistent or make testable claims that are unlikely to be true. There is no reason believers can’t engage in the same discussion. So yes my irony comment was legit. The point of my question was not to prove God does not exist but to show which side is willing to critically examine its position and move the needle of their beliefs in a different direction.
 
@Beagle1 first of all, no one asked uou to come and engage anyone on this thread. I am not asking you to get outta here, but be mindful YOU came here and started spouting stuff that was contra-thead. We have been politely discussing topics with you that you keep bringing up.

You keep asking for proof of this and proof of that…do you live your life only on things that can be repeatedly “proven” and determined by scientific experiments?
 
The point of my question was not to prove God does not exist but to show which side is willing to critically examine its position and move the needle of their beliefs in a different direction.
I would urge you to be careful with the brush you’re painting with.

Trust me when I say, I have examined my position more than critically, and have actually moved my needle on belief back-and-forth.

Saul and road to Damascus moments…
 
Because the evidence of people who have had near death experiences, sometimes death experiences, and care takers who watch people die for a living who report where people will start to reach for heaven, talk to their passed family members, and report seeing God/Jesus right before their death. Additionally persons high on psyedelic drugs experience similar visions.

These reports are not scientific so I know you will blast them out for anecdotal evidence or some sort of neurochemical reaction to give peace at death's front door. But the people who were clinically dead and came back, what's that say?

How do you reconcile an atheist raised girl in Russia painting a vivid beautiful picture of a man she has seen only in dreams and a child in the US having a death/drowning experience where he was clinically dead, and reporting that the person he saw and identified as Jesus was the man the girl in russia dreams about?

These things are evidence. Not all science can be repeated due to the singularity of it, but over time a pattern develops and shows us something. We can not be tone deaf to the reality of what these experiences tell us.
Google is your friend. Basic fact checking on your claims will show you they are scientifically explainable and anecdotally unreliable as evidence for an afterlife. The NDE were meaningful to the people who had them but that does not show they are true. But a few quick points. People from other religions who have NDE have visions of important religious figures from their religions not of the Christian God. Similar experiences occur in persons high on psychedelics. Additionally just look at the sheer numbers of people who were briefly clinically dead and did not have NDE.

As to your stories on the Russian girl and American boy just doing some basic checking will show you these stories are part of a Christian narrative that has evolved into folklore and is at best anecdotal, distorted and unverifiable. But for the sake of argument let’s say instead of Jesus being the center of the stories it was Santa Claus. Would their anecdotal stories be solid evidence to you of Santa Claus’s existence.
 
I would urge you to be careful with the brush you’re painting with.

Trust me when I say, I have examined my position more than critically, and have actually moved my needle on belief back-and-forth.

Saul and road to Damascus moments…
I don’t have a brush that is specific to each person. You say you’ve done your homework more than critically and it moved your needle. That is all that can be asked.
 
I am an agnostic… from the Greek for “I dunno”. I have often wished that I could believe because it would be comforting. For those of you who find that an opening to save me, don’t waste your pearls. But I will never try to erode someone else’s belief for three reasons.

1) It is none of my business
2) it seems cruel to me to attempt to take away someone’s source of comfort and hope whether I agree with it or not.
3) I am 67 years old and in that time I’ve never seen an atheist convert a Christian. (I have seen people abandon their faith for money, power, sex, substance abuse etc…. But not for logic)

The only argument I will make is when people of faith try to impose their belief systems through politics. That is my business, and That is seriously unamerican.
 
I am an agnostic… from the Greek for “I dunno”. I have often wished that I could believe because it would be comforting. For those of you who find that an opening to save me, don’t waste your pearls. But I will never try to erode someone else’s belief for three reasons.

1) It is none of my business
2) it seems cruel to me to attempt to take away someone’s source of comfort and hope whether I agree with it or not.
3) I am 67 years old and in that time I’ve never seen an atheist convert a Christian. (I have seen people abandon their faith for money, power, sex, substance abuse etc…. But not for logic)

The only argument I will make is when people of faith try to impose their belief systems through politics. That is my business, and That is seriously unamerican.
More or less agree. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but that doesn’t mean they get a pass when misrepresenting their support and the opposing viewpoint. I know people on both sides who were once members of the other team. I don’t argue much with happiness, life is too short.
 
Ah yes so you can see why believers constant refrain to nonbelievers that they prove their lack of belief rings hollow. But in spite of this nonbelievers are willing to engage on the believer’s turf and explain their position. As you pointed out they don’t have to but they do. In general this involves pointing out specific concepts of God, especially those that are internally inconsistent or make testable claims that are unlikely to be true. There is no reason believers can’t engage in the same discussion. So yes my irony comment was legit. The point of my question was not to prove God does not exist but to show which side is willing to critically examine its position and move the needle of their beliefs in a different direction.
To believe the absolute nonexistence of something is inherently close minded. Not open minded

The "internally inconsistent claims" you say exist are often, actually very consistent among the educated practicers of their faith. Many things are not straightforward. Not everyone is a theology major in their own religion (as great as that would be) so the "gotcha" moments on the average layperson is not evidence of inconsistency. It's evidence of a lack of education, which absolutely exists in every collection of people on every topic.

To your point on inconsistent claims though, some of those are in fact the result of the large amount of denominations that exist.

And some things that are not settled are simply deemed "mysteries of faith". I can see how those can be construed as an "inconsistency" from the outside looking in
 
Please educate us illogical christians to the logic of agnosticism and/or atheism.

I am very interested to see how logical this argument is…
 
That would presume personal consciousness existed after death. But let’s say it did. Why would you presume after death you would immediately see God and heaven.
Because the sinner on the cross gave us the hope that we will.

He replied to him, “Amen, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.”
Like 23:43
 
Back
Top