This is one of those threads where I genuinely hope the OP is trolling as any possible alternative makes me lose any faith I still had left in humanity or anything else for that matter.
You aggressively assault people with hypocritical and contradictory nonsense, but then complain you're supposedly being assaulted yourself? When you throw rocks at people, don't complain when they are sent flying back, in particular when 90% of the argumentation in this thread consists out of throwing words like "dumb", "insecure", "child" etc. back and forth.
You do realize that people trying to 'defend' their religious believes in the way you are doing it, is the same concept as seeing a person with a nazi-swastika tattooed on his face trying to stick up for Trump. It gives a very bad signal to the overall public and isn't very convincing in the least.
They can't disprove the Bible or Gods existence..AND PLEASE DONT SAY YOU CAN.. THATS BS. Its just theories and theoretical claims. Please understand the difference between actual evidence and good theories. I get so annoyed when I see people on the base claim stuff with no solid proof, just shady websites and famous atheist theories.
Let me make myself clear! Its not up to christians to prove that the Bible and God is real, I really dont care if people go to hell. What I do care about is stupid people with no solid proof trying to attack my religion with theories that they present like actual proof or evidence for no God.
"The English theoretical physicist and cosmologist, Stephen Hawking, surprised the scientific community last week when he announced during a speech at the University of Cambridge that he believed that “some form of intelligence” was actually behind the creation of the Universe"
This is just one of many atheists who had to admit that there has to be a creator behind a so perfect universe. There is proof, but like I said atheists wouldn't belive if God himself smacked theme in the face. Nothing can't create something
Neil Degrasse Tyson is the worst of the so called experts, making documentaries and presenting "knowledge" without sources as evidence and just facts, when if you had asked him. He would tell you himself that he got no proof, and its only theories. He even throws BS facts out on talkshows and interviews. I got a friend who have a phd in religion, so I'm up to date with my facts.
Dont care to answer comments! I won't change my mind, I know whats right. No offense
Feel free to discuss
sry for my English, Norwegian her
1) Atheists don't have to disprove anything. It's the other way around; theists have to provide solid proof. That's an inherent truth to this entire discussion. Why bother believing into someone or something when there's no reason for it? Not to mention this is the weakest of all arguments as how do you prove the non-existence of something you don't even know what it's supposed to be? I can make up an imaginary entity right here and now and then you try to prove it doesn't exist. The moment you are using this argument to defend your believes, you have hit rock bottom as your omnipotent almighty god has as much credibility as the imaginary friend of a child.
You would think that for religions that have been around for several millennia you could provide something much more concrete than "you prove it doesn't exist". It's also plainly hypocritical that you request proof for the non-existence of God while you provide nothing that supports its existence and in essence a religion can also be considered a "theory". One of the major reasons people are becoming less and less religious is because the former possibility is far more convincing than the latter in the current society.
2) There are likewise numerous dubious sites trying to force-feed "proof" of a god down your throat and despite the fact I don't have any statistics about this, I reckon those are far more in number than the other way around. As I said before it's inherent to this discussion that you prove God exists. I mean it's quite easy to question the validity of a religion with complicated dogmas, concepts and rules when in reality the world is vastly different than what is explained in a holy book, so it's kind of a waste of time making sites about it.
3) Uhm yes it's very well is your duty to at least give something substantial as why there would be a god when you make a thread where you jump on people who disagree, call what they say BS, but don't explain why it's BS nor provide anything to prove your original claim. That's like you're playing a game where you make up rules that are beneficial for you during the game and by which everyone else has to abide by. It's plainly hypocritical of you that you say you don't have to prove anything, but then piss on people who disagree not even explaining why what they say would be wrong. It all comes down to you simply not accepting that people disagree with your religion, but want to pretend you're the one who's being assaulted, which is not very convincing when you sprout something like "it's not a Christian's duty to prove God exist".
4) I don't know where exactly you got that quote from about Stephen Hawking, but I'm rather certain it got ripped out from its context and that you are completely misinterpreting it. You make it appear like that he suddenly became theist, but "intelligent design" is not automatically the same thing as a god. This concept inherently holds the idea that everything we know might have been purposely made by something, but that there are an infinite amount of possibilities to what that "something" might be and that it's still bound by logic, reason and natural laws. Hypothetically speaking lets assume some unknown force created our universe, but that force had absolutely no involvement whatsoever in the creation of every religion that ever existed, heck it barely or not at all knows that something like humans exist in the vast universe. Now this conforms perfectly with the concept of "intelligent design", but that's not your god. Any kind of similarity would be a coincidence. Btw the concept of "intelligent design" isn't even a new one.
5) What a "perfect" universe should look like is a subjective matter, but I'm rather positive most people would agree that our current one can not even remotely be considered perfect. Not to mention isn't it part of Christian teachings that the world we live in by default is flawed and imperfect and that the perfect world will await you in the afterlife?
6) One of the major reasons people are becoming less religious is because God isn't smacking them. It's his seemingly lack of absence everywhere that makes people stop believing as it really shouldn't be hard for an omnipotent god to do stuff to make his existence undeniable. Your train of thought is completely upside down and also shows how oblivious you actually are.
7) And who says nothing can't create something? You refuse to provide proof for anything you say, you don't provide anything to counter what other people say other than that they are simply wrong and now you now run around with this? Where is your proof for this? An who made God then?
8) Neil deGrasse Tyson is one of the most intelligent people in the world. He has a tremendous amount of knowledge about a large variety of fields. It's kind of laughable that you call him the worst while he has done everything you refuse to do that is required to be considered knowledgeable, credible and trustworthy. You provide no proof for anything. You claim you don't need proof for anything. He on the other hand has been researching, investigating, collecting, studying, observing, formulating and adapting information his entire life. Remember what I said about you making rules up? You think are not obliged to provide any proof, but then throw garbage at deGrasse that he doesn't use any sources while he has done almost everything that could be done to be objectively correct. You on the other hand....
And remember when I said that you are misinterpreting things? You just did it again. When a scientist talks about theories and proof it has a completely different connotation than in regular conversations. One of the foundations of science is that as long as not everything is discovered, nothing can be absolute certain. So even if they are 99.9% certain, they still would officially call it a theory because it's not a 100% accurate. That's what makes it different from religion as science accepts that their results aren't certain, but they are open to further research. You on the other hand don't find any need nor even can provide anything to prove anything you say. When deGrasse says he hasn't got any proof, that doesn't mean he just made something up for the fun of it as he very well has a solid foundation on which his statements stand on. And even in the worst of cases he still has much more than you as you have nothing.
8) You have a friend with a PhD in religion? So? That's irrelevant and to be honest a laughable joke when if it's used as an attempt to sound more credible. Having a friend in means nothing as it's not you who has the PhD. And how many friends with PhD's do you think deGrasse knows, huh? You also pretty much admitted you merely parroted the words of someone else without verifying anything and on average I don't think people who go for PhD's in religion have atheistic tendencies, which makes them not that credible sources either.
No one cares about you changing your mind, you would be a lost cause either way, but that you know what's right is doubtful...or that you know anything at all for that matter. What simply annoys people is this hypocritical behavior of yours and your nonsensical reasonings. Btw I'm neither theist nor atheist, I simply have a dislike for people, no matter their believes or lack thereof, who start jumping on other people and try to force BS like this down their throats. Instead of pissing on people like Hawking and deGrasse, try to learn something from them.
