Why I raise my children without God.

[The Prodigalson]

whether u believe in god or not u gotta admit the argument that he doesnt exist because bad things happen and we cant see him is a pretty weak stupid argument...

You mean likes chemo patients being cured of cancer and it's a miracle from God even though they under went chemo therapy?

why would it be considered a miracle if the cure in this example can be perfectly explained through chemotherapy?

Because anything good god has a hand in. You know this.

 

[VIBE]

So getting back to the "why I don't raise my children on God", is his reasoning good? Is it not?

 

[Gold_Certificate]

i think carl sagan said it the best i've ever heard

"An atheist is someone who is certain that God does not exist, someone who has compelling evidence against the existence of God. I know of no such compelling evidence..."

His argument fails because the claim of the "supernatural" is an unscientific one. So by the very nature of the claim, evidence can't be compiled for or against it.

Such claims don't automatically get a status quo of "true" or "valid" simply because someone comes up with them.

he didn't say anything about supernatural, if the laws of the universe are "god", the universe is not supernatural. my whole point is, faith is doubt (i know that sounds like one of the phrases from animal farm) and what you choose to make it, at least that's how it is for me. i don't think this is an issue you come to a conclusion on and move on, for me it's a lifelong kind of thing, that is riddled with doubt and questions

i'm not even sold on the realness of ours or anythings existence to be honest. and i find the more i learn the more i realize how much i don't know.

He said "God"; which is a supernatural concept:

If he was referring to the laws of the Universe, there was no need to use the word "God" in the first place.

That's no better than saying "If this oxygen atom is 'the internet', then 'the internet' is not technological.".

Defeats the purpose of words having meanings.

 

[Ajackson17]

i think carl sagan said it the best i've ever heard

"An atheist is someone who is certain that God does not exist, someone who has compelling evidence against the existence of God. I know of no such compelling evidence..."

His argument fails because the claim of the "supernatural" is an unscientific one. So by the very nature of the claim, evidence can't be compiled for or against it.

Such claims don't automatically get a status quo of "true" or "valid" simply because someone comes up with them.

My reasoning stands correctly and Carl Sagan stands because all you are saying is you have proof of your beliefs in which you don't because you can't see it. Your logical fallacies are showing. All in all is that we don't know because we can't approve or disapprove God exists. Until we can actually travel through hyperspace and know what is there to know about the universe we wouldn't have the capacity to express such a belief is actually true.

I actually said the opposite of this b:

His argument fails because the claim of the "supernatural" is an unscientific one. So by the very nature of the claim, evidence can't be compiled for or against it.

Such claims don't automatically get a status quo of "true" or "valid" simply because someone comes up with them.

Unscientific claims are untestable, so there will never be any proof for or against them.

So the claim that "supernatural" beings exists has the same weight as the claim that a giant objectively unobservable\unmeasurable teapot orbits the sun between Earth and Mars; which has the same weight as any other unscientific claim.

You said it's "arrogant" to dismiss such claims; if so, it is also "arrogant" to consider anything to be "false" or "true".[/quote]

That's my whole damn argument man!! >

We know the supernatural doesn't exist that everything has laws and there is order in everything, we don't know all the laws that are in place, but we do know the universe functions on LAWS, but we don't have enough information on every anomaly, etc as of NOW to say if we can say a deity actually exists or not. That's all. You are not FIAT!

 

[powerman 5000]

Keep your race, religion, politics, and sexual preference at home all that shit needs to be taboo. i'm all for an agnostic society... I saw a bumber sticker the other day that said "that obama sticker on your car might as well say 'yeah, I'm stupid'" I support no politician but I wanted to beat the piss out of that person just based on their arrogance.

 

[Copper]

I dont think the human race is advanced enough to be saying for a fact if omnipotent beings exist or not....we still rage war against one another over money and religion

Sure they are yo.

The only thing supporting the claim that "supernatural" beings exist is the claim that "supernatural" beings exist.

If humans applied such circular reasoning to everything, they'd have to be agnostic about an infinite number of claims that others come up with.

If ur not certain of a certain things theres nothing wrong with saying ur not certain..theres something wise in being agnostic instead of feigning proof of non existence

 

[Ajackson17]

plus they real as shit at my church...

one of the Reverends said some shit one day that i'm positive is a rap lyric... she was on some

1 Timothy 2:11-12

Let a woman learn in silence with all submission. And I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man, but to be in silence.

I guess its to be orderly but it does sound like sit down baby maker, that is your primary job in life. That seems lifeless.

if you just single out this verse and ignore everything else, then yeah, you have a point.

Lol, yeah you are right.

 

[Copper]

if there is a supreme being wouldnt he be incomprehensible to us?

Your providing the answer before you even provide the question.

therefore one cannot say he does or doesnt for a fact

 

[Ajackson17]

So getting back to the "why I don't raise my children on God", is his reasoning good? Is it not?

No, it's better than a lot of other reasonings, but the main point is that he should be truthful about his beliefs to his child and allow them to understand its up to them to find their own beliefs and ideology and guide them within a safe zone, cause an ideology that preaches erdication of human beings isn't a helpful ideology for us lol

 

[Matt-]

So getting back to the "why I don't raise my children on God", is his reasoning good? Is it not?

whoever wrote it, in my opinion, doesn't understand enough about the religion so it really makes no difference as far as the reasoning. He doesn't seem to grasp the concept. Its like he's trying to use math teach the kid that 2 + 2 =5.

 

[MARIO_DRO]

@VIBE

Why are you CONSTANTLY making the same " i dont believe in God/Jesus thread"? Ok bruh we got you... You were once a believer, now you're now.. Your kids want to know and believe, SO LET THEM!.. Drop them off of Kids church/bible study. Dont let your doubt and disbelief cloud your kids judgement.

Stop tring to convince people that God aint real... If I wanna belive, let me do that...

There shouldnt be an announcement thread EVERY week, because to me its OBVIOUS that you're struggling. Deep down you wanna believe but you continue to fight...

Its like YALL get mad when folks believe and talk about God....

It like if we all go to a buffet, I decide to get grilled lima beans..Would you announce to the wholre resturant that IM eating something that YOU dont like or you feel is nasty??? No... you eat want you want, let me eat what i want; EVERYBODY IS HAPPY!

now re-read it, but in ALL CAPS

 

[Ajackson17]

@kai_vayla that man isn't Fiat, he is under a gold currency and the real fiat would never subject himself to be under a system that has boundaries.

 

[bambu]

perhaps our definition that "god" is in fact supernatural is wrong

Shut the fuck up dumb bitch.............

Learn how to fucking read before you make comments.....

 

[Shuffington]

if there is a supreme being wouldnt he be incomprehensible to us?

Your providing the answer before you even provide the question.

therefore one cannot say he does or doesnt for a fact

lol

I can say that about a lot of things.... Trust... its a whole lot of shyt that doesn't exist .... I'm not holding out hope for it...lol. I'm more concerned about real life problems.

Also... my life is not built on me NOT believing in God...

because I dont care to even consider NOT BELIEVING in a God.. see what I'm saying.

but I gather your just hung up on the term "ATHEIST". That seems to strike a cord with you.

Which is normal cause people seem to swallow my lack of beliefs when I dont use the "A" term...

 

[VIBE]

@VIBE

Why are you CONSTANTLY making the same " i dont believe in God/Jesus thread"? Ok bruh we got you... You were once a believer, now you're now.. Your kids want to know and believe, SO LET THEM!.. Drop them off of Kids church/bible study. Dont let your doubt and disbelief cloud your kids judgement.

Stop tring to convince people that God aint real... If I wanna belive, let me do that...

There shouldnt be an announcement thread EVERY week, because to me its OBVIOUS that you're struggling. Deep down you wanna believe but you continue to fight...

Its like YALL get mad when folks believe and talk about God....

It like if we all go to a buffet, I decide to get grilled lima beans..Would you announce to the wholre resturant that IM eating something that YOU dont like or you feel is nasty??? No... you eat want you want, let me eat what i want; EVERYBODY IS HAPPY!

now re-read it, but in ALL CAPS

@DROSODAMFUNNY,

This is my first thread since last Oct or Nov about god.

It's not about whether or not he exists, it's to why someone raises their child without a god in their lives.

My kids do go to church, they do so because everyone else does. I know I went because they did when I was little, and like me, they'll be able to make a logical decision later in life. They probably go twice a month, plus it's good for them to get out and meet othe people and enjoy different activities.

I've gotten past it.

Why does one need to announce their belief in god? Because they want to? Same goes for those who have different beliefs or non belief in god.

 

[VIBE]

Oh great, Bambi is here.

/thread

 

[ohhhla]

Agnostic is a question of knowledge, not belief.

We don't know but it's not probable for a god to exist

I'm a man of probability.

Atheist lack a belief in a god, they don't claim gos doesn't exist.

 

[bambu]

Fuck you......

Scumbag whore.......

I know I sound intelligent........

Must be why you are in my threads getting ethered and burying my shit??????

You cannot hide the flames your little mokey ass is caught up in..........

 

[Gold_Certificate]

i think carl sagan said it the best i've ever heard

"An atheist is someone who is certain that God does not exist, someone who has compelling evidence against the existence of God. I know of no such compelling evidence..."

His argument fails because the claim of the "supernatural" is an unscientific one. So by the very nature of the claim, evidence can't be compiled for or against it.

Such claims don't automatically get a status quo of "true" or "valid" simply because someone comes up with them.

My reasoning stands correctly and Carl Sagan stands because all you are saying is you have proof of your beliefs in which you don't because you can't see it. Your logical fallacies are showing. All in all is that we don't know because we can't approve or disapprove God exists. Until we can actually travel through hyperspace and know what is there to know about the universe we wouldn't have the capacity to express such a belief is actually true.

I actually said the opposite of this b:

His argument fails because the claim of the "supernatural" is an unscientific one. So by the very nature of the claim, evidence can't be compiled for or against it.

Such claims don't automatically get a status quo of "true" or "valid" simply because someone comes up with them.

Unscientific claims are untestable, so there will never be any proof for or against them.

So the claim that "supernatural" beings exists has the same weight as the claim that a giant objectively unobservable\unmeasurable teapot orbits the sun between Earth and Mars; which has the same weight as any other unscientific claim.

You said it's "arrogant" to dismiss such claims; if so, it is also "arrogant" to consider anything to be "false" or "true".

That's my whole damn argument man!! >

We know the supernatural doesn't exist that everything has laws and there is order in everything, we don't know all the laws that are in place, but we do know the universe functions on LAWS, but we don't have enough information on every anomaly, etc as of NOW to say if we can say a deity actually exists or not. That's all. You are not FIAT!

If that's your whole argument, then that's the reason I said it was "poor reasoning"; because subscribing to such reasoning also makes it "arrogant" to say that ham exists or that unobservable giant horseshoe crabs don't exist.

The underlined substantiates my argument, since the concept of "God" is a "supernatural" one.

 

[Gold_Certificate]

I dont think the human race is advanced enough to be saying for a fact if omnipotent beings exist or not....we still rage war against one another over money and religion

Sure they are yo.

The only thing supporting the claim that "supernatural" beings exist is the claim that "supernatural" beings exist.

If humans applied such circular reasoning to everything, they'd have to be agnostic about an infinite number of claims that others come up with.

If ur not certain of a certain things theres nothing wrong with saying ur not certain..theres something wise in being agnostic instead of feigning proof of non existence

So humans are to be agnostic when it comes to any one of the infinitely-many conceivable concepts that other humans can create?

If I say "Godzilla exists and he rules the world from the shadows, controlling your every action and desire; and you can't prove he doesn't.", then is it unwise to rule out such a claim?

If anything, it's wise to rule out fantastical claims lacking in any form of proof or provability.