Christians on PH?

[mybrainhurts]

plasticpig said:

Not sure how you make that out? Not sure there is any scientific view on original sin. Immaculate conception means being born without original sin.

What, in the name of the Holy Minge Of Macclesfield, does that mean?

[plasticpig]

mybrainhurts said:

What, in the name of the Holy Minge Of Macclesfield, does that mean?

Holy Minge Of Macclesfield,sounds like a Macc Lads song?

[anonymous-user]

Steve H said:

DrSteveBrule said:

Yes, one.

Do you love him/her?

Yes, she's great.

[Hilts]

j4ckos mate said:

I've no interest in it but we seem to turn towards it in crisis (weddings and funerals).

[Blakewater]

NeMiSiS said:

DrSteveBrule said:

A friend in the States is having treatment for melanoma and some brain tumours. It's all going well I'm pleased to say but on his Facebook page of updates, the amount of comments attributing his recovery to the greatness of God is staggering. The medics hardly get a mention, and if they do someone chips in with 'Praise be! God make the doctors capable of curing him'.

I was so tempted to point out that if there was a God, it wouldn't have given him the condition in the first place.

Well put.

But really the doctors and nurses/machinery/drugs etc wouldn't be there if it were not for God putting them there.

The specialists are there but for the grace of God...remember.

The grace of God and the ability in the USA to afford health insurance. What about all the people who can't obtain healthcare for one reason or another?

Lots of people are without basic healthcare because of poverty and corrupt government.

It seems a little self centred for people to think God is taking the trouble to help them while allowing other people to suffer. The easy thing is to dismiss it as some greater plan, but why should a greater plan all be in their favour?

[Butter Face]

DrSteveBrule said:

Steve H said:

DrSteveBrule said:

Yes, one.

Do you love him/her?

Yes, she's great.

Can't wait to see where this goes?!

Either

A) they're a gift from the good Lord and you should love him like you do them.

B) you loved your child before they existed

Or

C) something else religious like.


I can't work it out.

[Steve H]

Steve H said:

DrSteveBrule said:

The invisible and non-existant look remarkably similar.

Bear with me on this.

Do you have kids?

DrSteveBrule said:

Steve H said:

DrSteveBrule said:

Yes, one.

Do you love him/her?

Yes, she's great.

How can you prove that?

DrSteveBrule said:

I don't think atheists (myself included) are on here trying to covert anyone; it's nigh on impossible when common sense and evidence are ignored or denied. The burden on proof is on the believers to prove a positive, not on us to prove a negative. We're not the ones claiming something as yet unseen or proven exists.

I think we are on about the same page but there are some attempts at conversion going on this thread, it just seems to me to be a bit pointless to use logic to disprove faith, feeling or belief.

Edited by Steve H on Sunday 3rd July 21:31

[Steve H]

Steve H said:

DrSteveBrule said:

The invisible and non-existant look remarkably similar.

Bear with me on this.

Do you have kids?

DrSteveBrule said:

Steve H said:

DrSteveBrule said:

Yes, one.

Do you love him/her?

Yes, she's great.

How can you prove that?

DrSteveBrule said:

I don't think atheists (myself included) are on here trying to covert anyone; it's nigh on impossible when common sense and evidence are ignored or denied. The burden on proof is on the believers to prove a positive, not on us to prove a negative. We're not the ones claiming something as yet unseen or proven exists.

I think we are on about the same page but there are some attempts at conversion going on this thread, it just seems to me to be a bit pointless to use logic to disprove faith, feeling or belief.

Edited by Steve H on Sunday 3rd July 21:31

[Steve H]

Butter Face said:

Can't wait to see where this goes?!

Either

A) they're a gift from the good Lord and you should love him like you do them.

B) you loved your child before they existed

Or

C) something else religious like.


I can't work it out.

Sorry to disappoint

[WinstonWolf]

plasticpig said:

WinstonWolf said:

Science shows us immaculate conception is impossible...

Not sure how you make that out? Not sure there is any scientific view on original sin. Immaculate conception means being born without original sin.

In that case who was Jesus's dad?

[anonymous-user]

Steve H said:

it just seems to me to be a bit pointless to use logic to disprove faith, feeling or belief.

We should have realised that when the big bang was compared to a terrorist bomb.

[daemon]

WinstonWolf said:

plasticpig said:

WinstonWolf said:

Science shows us immaculate conception is impossible...

Not sure how you make that out? Not sure there is any scientific view on original sin. Immaculate conception means being born without original sin.

In that case who was Jesus's dad?

Presumably, from the House of David, as was foretold in the old testament?

Oh, hang on, nope.

[WinstonWolf]

daemon said:

WinstonWolf said:

plasticpig said:

WinstonWolf said:

Science shows us immaculate conception is impossible...

Not sure how you make that out? Not sure there is any scientific view on original sin. Immaculate conception means being born without original sin.

In that case who was Jesus's dad?

Presumably, from the House of David, as was foretold in the old testament?

Oh, hang on, nope.

And if virgin is a mistranslation the whole fable becomes a bit meh. I genuinely don't understand how some seemingly intelligent people simply ignore the gaping plot holes.

[Butter Face]

Steve H said:

Butter Face said:

Can't wait to see where this goes?!

Either

A) they're a gift from the good Lord and you should love him like you do them.

B) you loved your child before they existed

Or

C) something else religious like.


I can't work it out.

Sorry to disappoint

I was giving you more credit that you deserved.

All you have is 'how can you prove it?'

'Love' is a chemical reaction in the brain. It's a proven fact that 'love' releases chemicals in the brain (and they differ depending on what you class as 'love', from sexual attraction to the love you have for your children is all different)

[Steve H]

You don't think that god botherers get similar chemical changes when they worship or think about their cosy life in the hereafter?

[Butter Face]

Steve H said:

You don't think that god botherers get similar chemical changes when they worship or think about their cosy life in the hereafter?

I'm sure they do. Doesn't make God real, I get large doses of chemicals released in my brain when I see Dragons on GOT. Doesn't mean that dragons are real.

[anonymous-user]

Steve H said:

You don't think that god botherers get similar chemical changes when they worship or think about their cosy life in the hereafter?

I would imagine they probably do - what's your point?

I can prove my wife and kids exist but I can't prove that I love them.
I can demonstrate my love through words and actions. They can demonstrate they exist.

Christians have lots of opportunity to demonstrate their beliefs and in most first world countries they are in no way disadvantaged by their religion.

[anonymous-user]

Steve H said:

Steve H said:

DrSteveBrule said:

The invisible and non-existant look remarkably similar.

Bear with me on this.

Do you have kids?

DrSteveBrule said:

Steve H said:

DrSteveBrule said:

Yes, one.

Do you love him/her?

Yes, she's great.

How can you prove that?

Prove I love her? Parental instinct for one; it's a natural urge to love and care for one of your own. Also because (at the age of 4 and a half), she's kind, considerate, can be funny and is sweet natured. There are moments where she can be an awkward little madam but on the whole it's a feeling you can't help. Importantly, she exists and is tangible, not a character in an old book.

DrSteveBrule said:

I don't think atheists (myself included) are on here trying to covert anyone; it's nigh on impossible when common sense and evidence are ignored or denied. The burden on proof is on the believers to prove a positive, not on us to prove a negative. We're not the ones claiming something as yet unseen or proven exists.

I think we are on about the same page but there are some attempts at conversion going on this thread, it just seems to me to be a bit pointless to use logic to disprove faith, feeling or belief.

Edited by Steve H on Sunday 3rd July 21:31

I believe that people believe; my christian convert brother for one. However their evidence for why they believe is deeply suspect and doesn't stand up to even slight scrutiny.

[Steve H]

Hmmmm, I'm trying to describe why it's pointless to have a logical argument about something that isn't logical, on the internet.

Time to call it a day

[anonymous-user]

Steve H said:

Hmmmm, I'm trying to describe why it's pointless to have a logical argument about something that isn't logical, on the internet.

Time to call it a day

I think atheists realise it's futile. When you're presenting logic, reason and evidence to people who will defiantly claim 'Because God said it/made it happen' when backed into a corner, it really is time to stop.

I'm still waiting for believers to present irrefutable evidence of the existance of a god. Any god. There were thousands to choose from through the ages; there must be a mountain of evidence.