Poll: If you are a Trump supporter, do you consider him to be a “good Christian?”

[dalton_vol]

You seem to think that atheists and agnostics have a hardon for not believing in your flavor of God or religious offshoot. In fact, your god isn't that special at all - these groups don't believe in any of the 3,000+ gods.

How can you be so certain that any one or more of the other 2,999+ aren't right.... and you chose wrong? They have as much proof as you do.

Lol, you're such a simpleton. Those 2999 gods are the same, same beliefs, same way to get to a better world, they all make it human-centric.
Christianity isn't man-centric That's what you fail to understand.

 

[Septic]

Any proof, you'll reject. It doesn't matter how much evidence presented you'll reject it.

On the contrary, you present evidence and I'll absolutely consider it. If it's legitimate evidence that there is a God, I'll be the first to acknowledge it.

What you guys consistently fail to consider is that some agnostic and atheists would love nothing more than to share the "hope" that a loving creator gives you. The promise of an afterlife and all the bells and whistles that come with it - but you can't fake that funk. Surely a omnipotent creator would see through the fake belief. Wouldn't it?

Some of us asked the tough questions in Sunday school, did the math - and it didn't check out for us. It's not that agnostics and atheists don't want to believe, it's that in the absence of evidence - we can't. We won't.

Again - it's you who is making the claim so it's you that must pony up the evidence.

Whining about not wanting to provide the evidence because " yU WoN'T AcC3pT ThE 3vIdenCe!" is intellectually lazy. If you have it, present it or STFU about having any high ground in the debate.

 

[Septic]

Lol, you're such a simpleton. Those 2999 gods are the same, same beliefs, same way to get to a better world, they all make it human-centric.
Christianity isn't man-centric That's what you fail to understand.

ok

You going to let me know why your flavor of god is the right one and all of the others are wrong or just babble?

 

[Wireless1]

ok

You going to let me know why your flavor of god is the right one and all of the others are wrong or just babble?

As an atheist/agnostic do you just not believe in a Crestor/God or do you not believe in a spiritual realm either…. Are humans made up of a mind, body and spirit?

 

[Septic]

As an atheist/agnostic do you just not believe in a Crestor/God or do you not believe in a spiritual realm either…. Are humans made up of a mind, body and spirit?

As an agnostic, I have not been presented with ample evidence to support that there is an omnipotent, omniscient creator as presented by any religion. I'm not saying there isn't, I've just not seen enough proof to convince me.

Spirituality or a spiritual realm? I'm not sure what that is and I'm not sure I could even define it. Is it a feeling?

 

[Wireless1]

As an agnostic, I have not been presented with ample evidence to support that there is an omnipotent, omniscient creator as presented by any religion. I'm not saying there isn't, I've just not seen enough proof to convince me.

Spirituality or a spiritual realm? I'm not sure what that is and I'm not sure I could even define it. Is it a feeling?

The spiritual realm is the area where our souls (spirit) reside. The “feelings” in this realm would be grief and joy where in the physical realm happiness and sadness

 

[Septic]

The spiritual realm is the area where our souls (spirit) reside. The “feelings” in this realm would be grief and joy where in the physical realm happiness and sadness

That's not something I've put any thought into. Seems unnecessary and something contrived or otherwise ginned up to sell that there is something after death.

I think that when you're dead, you're dead. That's it. Fin.

I get that it's an unwelcome take. Hard to sell salvation and get people to dig into thier wallets on Sunday if this is all there is.

 

[Wireless1]

That's not something I've put any thought into. Seems unnecessary and something contrived or otherwise ginned up to sell that there is something after death.

I think that when you're dead, you're dead. That's it. Fin.

I get that it's an unwelcome take. Hard to sell salvation and get people to dig into thier wallets on Sunday if this is all there is.

So how do you reconcile the known unknowns like a dog seeming to recognize evil people, or knowing things about people there’s no way you should know,

 

[Septic]

So how do you reconcile the known unknowns like a dog seeming to recognize evil people, or knowing things about people there’s no way you should know,

Dogs recognizing evil people? I've not put any thought into that, I've certainly not needed to reconcile it. Are you suggesting dogs are able to sniff out good and bad spirits?

 

[volfanhill]

So how do you reconcile the known unknowns like a dog seeming to recognize evil people, or knowing things about people there’s no way you should know,

What? Dogs have instincts like we do. Hitler had dogs. Appeared to love him. It's about energy and aggression.

 

[Wireless1]

Dogs recognizing evil people? I've not put any thought into that, I've certainly not needed to reconcile it. Are you suggesting dogs are able to sniff out good and bad spirits?

What I believe it there is a spiritual realm that our human bodies are not atuned to but that animals are. Our spirits are atuned but if we can suppress it. Just like we can let our minds or body overtake the other facets of our being. Examples, we can let our bodies be overwhelmed with lust and cheat on a loved one when our minds are screaming to stop. Or our minds having a hold my beer moment when our bodies are saying don’t. Our spirits seem to communicate best when our minds and bodies are quietest like before we go to sleep, in our dreams or as we wake up….,our when in prayer

 

[creekdipper]

Having spent many hours over the years debating the finer points of atheism/agnosticism vs. belief, a concise overview of my logical reasons for belief centers mainly about order in two realms:

(1)Moral: No scientific explanation that excludes the supernatural can begin to explain how the universe and all creation could exist apart from a Creator. Atheists/agnostics accept things they cannot explain and put their faith in natural origins that defy logic; that is to say, they rely upon faith in things they cannot observe or test repeatedly in the laboratory.

(2) Purpose: Apart from religion, all life has no ultimate purpose. Existence for the sake of existence is the order of the day, and human life has no more significance than a grain of sand. Likewise, "morality" is simply a programmed evolutionary trait that is arbitrary in nature. Ideas about "wrong and right" are simply reactions to biological impulses. This especially doesn't make sense in a view that our existence is the result of random events that arose out of chaos.

 

[LouderVol]

To me the point is that there isn't proof. Proof would invalidate freewill.

Proving that God exists in a objective, scientific manner would invalidate freewill? How so?

I believe in God, I believe God gave us free will. Me knowing that God exists in a scientific manner wouldn't do anything to invalidate my freewill. nor would it remove freewill from others, I believe God exists even for them now, and they have freewill. similarly, if they knowing he exists too would not remove their freewill.

some people are Thomas, they need to touch to believe. Its just a shame that people, believers, Christians, the various faiths, aren't up to a standard to show God's work & word to the world.

 

[LouderVol]

Having spent many hours over the years debating the finer points of atheism/agnosticism vs. belief, a concise overview of my logical reasons for belief centers mainly about order in two realms:

(1)Moral: No scientific explanation that excludes the supernatural can begin to explain how the universe and all creation could exist apart from a Creator. Atheists/agnostics accept things they cannot explain and put their faith in natural origins that defy logic; that is to say, they rely upon faith in things they cannot observe or test repeatedly in the laboratory.

(2) Purpose: Apart from religion, all life has no ultimate purpose. Existence for the sake of existence is the order of the day, and human life has no more significance than a grain of sand. Likewise, "morality" is simply a programmed evolutionary trait that is arbitrary in nature. Ideas about "wrong and right" are simply reactions to biological impulses. This especially doesn't make sense in a view that our existence is the result of random events that arose out of chaos.

neither one of those two reasons are logical belief centers FOR faith in the Christian God.

your first point requires A creator, not the Christian God.
your second point does nothing to back up the first point, or specify what God/religion is required. its also a redundant argument, your religious beliefs state that there is no point outside of your religious beliefs....its the exact same argument they will likely use, there is no point in life but life.
you include morality in the second point and claim that it doesn't make sense in a world of chaos, but it does. basic evolutionary principles require it. Our morals help us survive and thrive as a society in a world of chaos. without those morals we would be subject to the chaos and never have risen above. the people who were without morals didn't survive and pass on their genes and traits, while those with morals had much better chances to pass on those traits and their genes. animals have a basic sense of morality as well. when fighting they will accept surrender, they don't harm their own packs, food is shared, the sick and injured are cared for as much as possible. its not as developed as our morality, but it exists.

 

[creekdipper]

My points were meant to emphasize the emptiness of an atheistic outlook. You correctly recognize that they aren't specific arguments for a specific religion. That would be a separate argument on comparative religious doctrine.

As for Christianity, there are unique elements of that religion (as another poster already described in a previous post referencing man-centered vs. God-centered religious beliefs).

The question of faith is different. Why can two similar people be presented with the exact same message and one believes while the other rejects the same message? A biblical reading definitively states that saving faith is a gift and is entirely based upon God's choice. Saving faith is not based upon any actions or innate superiority of converts. All people glorify God by demonstrating either His justice or His mercy.

 

[turbovol]

Why don't we end this by saying that trump is a horrible human being who has no virtuous traits---none, zero---and if some want to carry on
by reciting scripture, blah, blah, they can start a religion thread somewhere.

 

[PEPPERJAX]

Why don't we end this by saying that trump is a horrible human being who has no virtuous traits---none, zero---and if some want to carry on
by reciting scripture, blah, blah, they can start a religion thread somewhere.

The gangster was in Home Alone 2. That is almost impossible for anyone else to top.

 

[jvol1]

Proving that God exists in a objective, scientific manner would invalidate freewill? How so?

I believe in God, I believe God gave us free will. Me knowing that God exists in a scientific manner wouldn't do anything to invalidate my freewill. nor would it remove freewill from others, I believe God exists even for them now, and they have freewill. similarly, if they knowing he exists too would not remove their freewill.

some people are Thomas, they need to touch to believe. Its just a shame that people, believers, Christians, the various faiths, aren't up to a standard to show God's work & word to the world.

The argument (from paradise lost) is that you would no longer be free to choose to be good, you'd always be acting in a way informed by certain knowledge of Gods existence. Without proof, if you act morally it's because you choose to do so of your own volition. You own your own actions.

 

[jvol1]

Nah, son. If you make extraordinary claims, you must provide the extraordinary proof. The burden isn't on the one buying it, it's on the one selling it.

It's really that easy.

Fact is, you probably believe what you believe because of where you were born and what church your folks drug you into as a child. That's the case for 95%+ of all "believers."

You don't believe in Thor for the same reason I don't believe in the Christian God, you just haven't reconciled the 'why' in your noodle yet. Call me when you do.

Is it really that extraordinary when more or less every culture on the planet has some sort religion which contemplates a metaphysical reality, despite a lack of scientific evidence? Are the 7.7 billion really less rational than you?

It seems safer and more rational to conclude that no conclusion can be reached when there isn't conclusive evidence either way.

 

[n_huffhines]

This week's pod is all about Trump's very Christian revenge tour. The intro is the best part, detailing how his campaign had no buzz and was stuck in the mud until he started promising his acolytes that he would get them retribution (but really for himself, not them) and they're all super pumped about that now.

Come Retribution - This American Life

Donald Trump has a plan for his second term: retribution. We check in with the people who’ve crossed him to hear how they feel about that.

www.thisamericanlife.org

 

[Septic]

Is it really that extraordinary when more or less every culture on the planet has some sort religion which contemplates a metaphysical reality, despite a lack of scientific evidence? Are the 7.7 billion really less rational than you?

It seems safer and more rational to conclude that no conclusion can be reached when there isn't conclusive evidence either way.

Yes.

If you're making claims of "metaphysical" activity without evidence, it can be dismissed just as easily. That people have been duped for a millennia isn't evidence of rational thought or proof.

Claims aren't evidence. Billions of people "believing" isn't evidence.

If no conclusion can be made for or against, because of a lack of evidence - why should anyone logically err on the side of magic?

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

That's not something I've put any thought into. Seems unnecessary and something contrived or otherwise ginned up to sell that there is something after death.

I think that when you're dead, you're dead. That's it. Fin.

I get that it's an unwelcome take. Hard to sell salvation and get people to dig into thier wallets on Sunday if this is all there is.

It isn't unwelcome. It's sad

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

Yes.

If you're making claims of "metaphysical" activity without evidence, it can be dismissed just as easily. That people have been duped for a millennia isn't evidence of rational thought or proof.

Claims aren't evidence. Billions of people "believing" isn't evidence.

If no conclusion can be made for or against, because of a lack of evidence - why should anyone logically err on the side of magic?

Duped? Can you prove that?

 

[Septic]

Duped? Can you prove that?

Do you believe that 3000+ religions and gods from the beginning of time are ALL correct?

If not, somebody got duped.

Perhaps you could weigh in on what makes yours right and all the rest wrong. Show your work, please.

 

[LouderVol]

The argument (from paradise lost) is that you would no longer be free to choose to be good, you'd always be acting in a way informed by certain knowledge of Gods existence. Without proof, if you act morally it's because you choose to do so of your own volition. You own your own actions.

but isn't that the call of the faithful anyway? we very much operate with a certain knowledge of God's existence. some faiths put a very heavy emphasis on there being real punishment for those sins (hell & satan), seems like that is also influencing ones choices.

does that change because the source of knowledge goes from the Bible, religion, faith, to science? seems counter productive, reducing the role of faith, and placing possibly false assumptions on God's gift of freewill to us.

all free will is always influenced by the reality of the individual. you are only "free" to make the choices you know of. You are always going to be constrained by your experiences, history, and context of the situation itself.