₦airaland Forum

PrecisionFx:
I don't think Christianity has ever been majority in Israel? Judaism is, and only a small percentage seem to be Christians.



This shows Christianity is not an Israeli / Hebrew religion....

What do you think Christians mean by Christianity?

Seun:
From the title of this thread, it looks as if Winner01 is conceding that his God doesn't have the ability to use evidence and reason to convince every atheist in the world that he actually exists. Apparently his God isn't clever enough to persuade rational skeptics. If Charles Darwin, a mere man, could convince the vast majority of skeptics that they are apes, why can't winner01's God convince them that He exists? It's not hard.

Smh. You too didn't read the thread to understand.

And its funny you still think God owes you anything. It's understandable.

So what would be your own answer to johnydons question?

budaatum:
There, finally, a flash of intelligence from you winner01! Thank you for taking the time to comprehend my "crap". You have restored my faith in you.

Now, just for the sake of it, assume I am convinced that indeed, there is God, and that I become a Christian. As I said in that post, I too would probably go about screaming at every opportunity I have that my "God is a Great Big God". However, haven been an atheist myself, I don't expect that other's would take my word for it. After all, it took a personal encounter with God for me to 'know' there is God, so why should those others not have the same privilege that I had so they too could be convinced and know too? And I do expect to be mocked and ridiculed for my conversion, as you said I would. In fact, to be honest, my new bone to pick with God would be to ask why it hadn't bothered to encounter those other atheists so they too can know as I now do. And the only way I would shut the fuq up is if God were to tell me that there is something I did that made it bother to encounter me but which others have not done that makes it not bother to encounter with them. And if that were the case, would it not be more appropriate for me to tell those atheists to do what I did so they too could have the same encounter that I had with God, if they cared to, that is?

I have continually agreed with you that anything that I say to what would now be my previous fellow atheists would be "rationalized or mocked" and called "crap" by them. But in my new state of being converted, if to the God of Christianity which is through Christ, then explain why I should be that bothered when my newly acquired God was, in the flesh, mocked, ridiculed, told he had a demon in him, spat on, made to wear a crown of thorns, stabbed, crucified, buried and descended into hell? Why should I be bothered when John, Peter, Simon, Paul and very many others before me all went through much more than whatever ridicule I could possibly go through at the hand of atheists who the best they could do is claim the Almighty God that I now confess is a figment of the imagination that I have cooked up in my mind? Would anything they come up with make me doubt the evidence that I experienced? Would anything they say stop God existing as far as I am concerned? Why, please tell, should I insult myself and more importantly, my God, by making out their opinion matters one single iota as if by them claiming my God, which I personally had an encounter with, does not exist, they actually make my God disappear, or even more stupidity thinking my God only exists because I say so?

I suggest to you that the only reason I would behave the way some so called Christians on here do is because they have not had the sort of convincing encounter that I describe above as that which would convince me. They show this lack of encounter in their use of the simple phrase they use to describe what they have in their God. I assure you that after the encounter described above, it would be rather remise of me to claim that "I believe in God", when I actually "know my God". I after all would never claim that I believe that my mother is my mother unless I was not certainly sure that she is.

And then consider the benefit of my knowing that my God exists. I'm blessedly assured of never dying, and going to heaven, and would live everlastingly (and yes, as ridiculous as they may sound, that's my new knowledge!), and those poor damned atheists are fools who will die and go to hell! Hopefully, I will be mindful of the sin of hubris, remembering that 'only for the grace of God go I', and not go about condemning the damned in a "thank you Lord that I am not like those tax collecting atheists over there" kind of way as some tend to do. My attitude towards their mockery and ridicule should be to joyfully turn the other cheek for I'm certain I would have read somewhere that I am rewarded the more I live in my new found Christ and Messiah and I'm persecuted and slapped for so doing.

I tell you the truth, if indeed I love my neighbour, as I am asked to do by my new found God, I will spend a considerable amount of my time begging my new found God to please show those atheists like it showed me that it exists, or forgive them for they don't know what I am privileged to know. What I wouldn't do is what some on here do which in my opinion just goes to show that they have got no clue whatsoever about the God they claim they believe exists. If anything, their attitude just shows their god actually doesn't exist, and shouldn't exist!

My whole point rests on the fact that it is not for me to prove to anyone that my God exists by just telling them it does. My new found God would have clearly explained to me that if I be like salt and a mustard seed, and those whom Luke describes as blessed, my light will shine, and those who see it would ask me where it is that I lay my head. And when I point to my God as the source of my new found faith, they would not mock and ridicule my godliness but behave like those who find a good thing and bow down and worship it (and hopefully not me, which I better be mindful of knowing what people are like!). But if my new found God compels me to behave like say Sciencewatch, for instance, I should expect people to run away from me and that sort of god, which they ought to do, atheist or not, for if anything, a god that compels one to be like him is really no god at all, but the devil, which, if one can, should be told to "get behind one, satan!"

Again, thanks for taking the time with my "crap". As I said, you are able!

1. The best way a Christian can preach to you is through his lifestyle not by arguments or forceful convictions.
2. Christians are to put on a humble attitude anytime they engage in these discussions
3. It's natural for Christians to feel insulted when atheists mock them. Atheists do not necessarily mock Christians only when they are being preached to. This is a religion section for instance, one will wonder why there are many atheists here.
4. When some Christians choose to give you the dose of your medicine, I noticed that atheists get overtly aggressive.
5. It's better both sides remain humble and hear themselves out. Only then can truth prevail.

PrecisionFx:
"" CHRISTIANITY WINS EVERY BATTLE NO MATTER THE ODDS STACKED AGAINST IT.
""

I didn't want to intrude because I can see that my brother @ScienceWatch is having a good time.

But really that seems to be the truth. Lets take a look at Voltaire, a french infidel, who died in 1778
- he said that within 100 years of his time, Christianity would be swept away from existence and pass into the obscurity of history.
-Yet 50 years after his death, the Geneva Bible Society used his house and printing press to produce stacks of Bibles.

www.nairaland.com/attachments/7477203_img20180727183850_jpeg94f5ffa2346816c54b29150573181a01

The corpse just never stays put.

PrecisionFx:
Christianity is dead in Europe (where it originated).

But it isn't

Christianity did not originate in Europe and majority of Europe still seems to be christian.

www.nairaland.com/attachments/7477146_img20180727182425_jpeg2053c2a3609eecf47c44c63015dab45a

PrecisionFx:
Christianity is dead in America, One of its strongest strongholds.

PEW researchers seem to think otherwise and 71% Christians sound more like majority than dead.

www.nairaland.com/attachments/7477143_img20180727182441_jpeg61e57974da9f5b512737f5bd26a8ed2d

PrecisionFx:
Christianity is non-existent in Israel, The supposed people who Jesus was their brother .

I don't think Christianity has ever been majority in Israel? Judaism is, and only a small percentage seem to be Christians.

PrecisionFx:
I don't need to fight Christianity, Nobody needs to. It's lies have caught up wit it and thus it's dying across board.

Maybe its not a lie after all. World powers like Russia, Germany, France, Italy, U.S etc still seem to be overwhelmingly christian communities. China has had to consciously put a leash on the growth of Christians by banning online sales of Bible, embargo on Bible importation. Etc.
https://www.nairaland.com/3172960/china-course-worlds-most-christian
www.nairaland.com/attachments/3852846_china2887244b_jpeg70bb797466de6037a5669b505dc48ea2


Our own Nigeria is just 45% Christian with majority being terribly superstitious. That being said, I think you should be grateful to Christianity for the freedom you have.

Christianity is why many of us know about democracy, freedom of speech and religion. Christianity the reason why atheists are outspoken in places like U.S and U.k. Christianity is why you have a voice.

www.nairaland.com/attachments/4097577_1122789810693818964391852365028311777142063n_png_jpeg897da8fe73b10c634aec971b3c6ed8e3

Christianity is even why Nigerians can criticize Buhari's government. Imagine Nigeria was an Islamic country, your voices would have been taken forcefully. The same with almost all of the atheist countries that have ever existed.


For instance, the first ever officially declared atheist nation in the world was Albania under the rule of communist dictator Enver Hoxha (1908-85).

Article 37 of the Albanian Constitution of 1976 stipulated: ‘The State recognizes no religion, and supports atheistic propaganda in order to implant a scientific materialistic outlook in people’ (Vickers 2001).

Article 2, A, constitution of Iraq stipulates: No law that contradicts the established provisions of Islam may be established.

Article 3, constitution of Afghanistan: In Afghanistan, no law can be contrary to the beliefs and provisions of the sacred religion of Islam.

Its easy to say Islam is intolerant, but this is the same as atheism.
I can understand why many of you don't like christianity, but at least you must be thankful for Christianity....

PrecisionFx:
Christianity is fake

Infinite knowledge

UyiIredia:
As usual, atheists vs Christians. Me I need more atheists vs Muslims. At least the Christians don't bomb like Boko Haram. Their religious madness is of a different type.

No. That's not why the thread was created.

budaatum:
On What Could Possibly Serve As Evidence To Convert Buda

I read it and it makes sense. It will be your personal experience, it will be mocked and ridiculed. Your god would be called petty wanting to prove anything to you. he'll be called wicked for not proving to others. But I understand you.

Now try to understand that this thread is the only trying to prove that whatever evidence you provide (for those who ask you) can be rationalized or mocked if it can't be rationalized.

budaatum:
Atheism is not a "worldview", whatever that means, least I never said it was. It's not like we all go somewhere to be converted. Go read what atheists have to say for themselves on here and you'd find some of us just don't believe or accept the existence of gods and later found out such attitudes are called atheism. You'd also find out there's all different sorts of us. I for instance, have been described as a Christian Atheist, which sounds like an anathema to some atheists even though I'd categorically state that gods are the figments of the imagination that only exist in the minds of those who hold to the belief that they exist.

I never said my personal experience is evidence for anyone. I in fact said that I wouldn't be as stupid as to ask any atheist to take my word for it even if what I'm telling them managed to convince me! And I categorically stated how impossible it is to get you to accept my evidence as valid for the opposing position to your's that I hold. Atheist don't tend to believe stuff. If we did, we'd have been converted on someone like your's say so ages ago. But listen to us deride you left right and centre when we but just think you are trying to convert us!

You can rant and rave as much as you want, 01, that your intention of creating this thread is for a totally different purpose. But we all know that it's sole purpose is so you and your sort can go about claiming you and your god are better than we no-godders. It's your sole reason for existing on here and you can't all of a sudden try to make out that you are some new wine whilst remaining in a rather old and tired bottle especially when you taste exactly as you always have in the opening post of your thread.

I'm going to bother to repost what would possibly convert me here though I doubt it would make an iotic amount of difference.

Maybe you just don't want to understand.

This thread is not proof or evidence for anything. Its certainly not to show that I'm better than you "no-godders", why would I even want to do that.

Atheism is not a mere negation/rejection/lack of belief etc. It's a proposition and I tried to prove this point using the ideas of renowned atheists who seemed to be honest.
An atheist even said his dog lacks a belief in God, but most atheists are not like his dog. Maybe you should try to get his point.

I'm not here to fight you or strip you of your beliefs. I'm here to show that there's a can of worms in the other side to the story, to open the can and let people see for themselves since the other side does not like to discuss about the other side and its can of worms.

I guess this is why yourself and others like dalaman took this personal. I'm not the enemy, falsehood is.

davien:
I wouldn't know since I don't profess belief in any, what would be yours?

Lol.
Easy way out.
Let me rephrase his question "what would serve as evidence for a Supreme Creator/Designer to you?"

As for what could serve as my evidence, I gave some examples in the op. You can check it out

davien:
How do you know, can detect or be aware of a transcendent reality?

What will be your answer to johndons question: "What will serve as evidence for Gods existence to you"?

budaatum:
Of course we are just unreasonable "dishonest Nigerian internet trolls". How else would we dare not allow those people you quoted to tell us how and what we think?! The thought that we have minds of our own and can use them is something you can't get your head around. After all, we are just unreasonable "dishonest Nigerian internet trolls"!

If you had understood my "crap", you would understand how difficult it is for either of us to accept the evidence either of us provide to prove our point to the other. Whatever you say to me about the existence of your god has been said in many threads over and over and I haven't budged. And whatever I provide as evidence of there being no god flies right over your head. You have taken it to new levels now though by asking us to define your god for you then to prove it doesn't exist! And all that, because those people have told you that is what you should do.

I tire for you. My atheism is not a belief. It's what I know from many years of research into gods. I however do not expect you to understand any of it, after all you have not seen the evidence I have seen. But it cuts both ways. I haven't seen any evidence for your god either, apart from the anecdotal tales you present. But if you had any idea of atheism, you'd understand anecdotes don't cut the mustard. Only religious people like you would call anecdotes, evidence. It's why your belief is based on faith, and in the unseen, for that matter! Basically, you hope its true, and you close your eyes to anything that might possibly make you doubt your beliefs. Though, I am beginning to wonder if all the atheist threads you start aren't about you arguing with your so called faith!

You should learn from honest atheists.

You claim you give evidence, yet you don't think atheism is a worldview. Ironic!

You are mostly unreasonable and dishonest internet trolls. I can create a thread to prove this in my spare time.

You're being defensive for nothing. Don't worry, I'm not trying to take your atheism from you. The thread is about scrutinizing evidences which atheists claim will convince them, nothing more.

budaatum:
You don't get to put words into people's mouths. We say what we want. You can very well ignore us you know! Or don't you have the god power that allows you to do so?

Emmanuel Swedenborg went on a whole tour of Heaven and Hell. I doubt he cared who believed him.

In Swedenborg's final hours, his friend, Pastor Ferelius, told him some people thought he had written his theology just to make a name for himself and asked Swedenborg if he would like to recant. Raising himself up on his bed, his hand on his heart, Swedenborg earnestly replied,
"As truly as you see me before your eyes, so true is everything that I have written; and I could have said more had it been permitted. When you enter eternity you will see everything, and then you and I shall have much to talk about".

He then died, in the afternoon, on the date he had predicted, March 29.

Perhaps you should read his report of his tour. Its a very interesting read.

My point. No one really cares if your personal experience is true or not. Your personal experience can't be evidence for another person and certainly you need not shove it down peoples throats.

Understand that I'm not interested in discussing my personal belief here, neither am I interested in providing evidence for anyone here. This thread is for a totally different reason.

dalaman:
You and your friends have been stating and even given examples to show that your God exist, but you'll still lie and state that you aren't.

Anyway you call your God a liar when you say that no amount of evidence will convince an atheist. Your God according to the bible says believers will have signs that will follow them so that unbelievers will see and believe, while you are saying that nothing will convince them there by stating that your God was telling lies when he made that statement.

What have I stated and what are the examples I've given on this thread?

ScienceWatch:
I venture to give an instant diagnoses based on your observations of Dalaman. Psychosis would be accurate sir. Depression and hallucinations should also be considered.

Good job.

ScienceWatch:
Yes sir it is utterly disgraceful. That is why I have never and never will disobey the warning in the Holy Bible which says, "Do not throw your pearls of wisdom to the atheist swine, they will mock it, then turn to destroy you."

I was a member of a church that had a fake pastor with no spiritual initiation leading Christ's church which is supposed to be a spiritual training center. He forced the innocent congregation to bring lots of swine to fill his church to stroke his sad ambitions and steal the money. God will not stand by and be mocked. I witnessed the shocking consequences in that fake pastors life.

If we love this incredible Jesus Christ but have not entered deep enough for spiritual initiation, never claim positions of Shepard/pastor of a church.Be happy to evangelize and point people to all true initiated pastors where they will see evidence that your words and the gospels are practical and 100% accurate.

For true Christians, the evidence for God is evidence of the Word and the Spirit of God working as one to produce the miracles as evidence that every word of Jesus is reliable and true always.

Don't throw your pearls to the swine.
Get behind me Satan said Jesus when a man tried to confuse the truth.

Don't throw your pearls to the swine.

Nothing truer has been said.

darkchild64:
Fine if u say so,but I hope u understand exactly what you are saying and you stay true to it

This thread has a purpose. You're not going to bring up totally different arguments or divert the purpose of this thread.

dalaman:
Read through yours and the comments of your fellow Christians here . That's all what they've been doing.

What's the title of this thread and where in my comments did I ask you to "believe in my God"?

Is this psychosis or what exactly?

dalaman:
Some fools are still here speaking English and calling their God a liar when he says in the bible that believers will have signs that unbelievers will see and believe. If that is true then this deluded idiots will not need to talk much because we will be seeing the signs and believing as stated by their God but they themselves don't believe in the bible and their God and are just here to keep making empty noise.

Who told you anyone wants to prove anything to you and why do you think that's the aim of this thread?

Why can't you think beyond the usual "Oh no, he's trying to convert me, I must fight back" narrative

budaatum:
I don't mind being mocked and ridiculed! You've done it a lot on this thread and it hardly affects me. I can very safely say my bit and dust them of myself as I depart from them if the mockery gets out of hand.

I have no obsession to convert anyone by getting them to believe me. If an almighty god can bother to present me with evidence that is sufficient for me to know, then it can bloody well provide those other atheists with evidence that would make them know too, if it is that bothered!

What you completely miss is that I witnessed the evidence and know what I saw. So why would I be telling atheists like me to 'believe' what I saw and hence know when they were not privileged to have seen what I saw and know? Would I all of a sudden have forgotten that atheists are not believers, or something, and that they like their evidence, and for all they care, I might have been tripping on a overdose of heroin? If I forget that all of a sudden, then they should rightly mock and ridicule me, I'd deserve it!

"I know people won't believe my story and that's okay. They'll get there when they get there." - Anna Beam (who claimed to have been to heaven and gotten her incurable illness healed by Jesus).
Like I said, it'll still be your personal experience and nothing more.

Your response is still the usual paranoia. Why do you think anyone is trying to convert you with this thread? Maybe you should just quit already since you're not gonna discuss in line with the thread.

budaatum:
Oh, you miss their point completely!

Since you refute the existence of their god, you must provide evidence that their god does not exist because the burden is on you, but before you begin, you must define the properties that constitutes their god that doesn't exist for them!

That is the entire premise of op's thread that he claims is not understood!

This is extremely foolish. Read the first paragraph of the op, I explained this and supported it with assertions from other honest atheists. I expected you to be smarter than this.

I posted this from reasonable atheists, you obviously don't want to read the thread.
Luke Muehlhauser who writes at Common Sense Atheism: “I think the burden of proof falls on whoever makes a positive claim. If you claim that Yahweh exists, it’s not my duty to disprove Yahweh. But most intellectually-inclined atheists I know do not merely “lack” a belief in God – as, say, my dog lacks a belief in God. Atheists like to avoid the burden of proof during debates, so they say they merely “lack” a belief in God. But this is not what their writings usually suggest. No, most intellectual atheists positively believe that God does not exist. In fact, most of them will say – at least to other atheists – that it’s “obvious” there is no God, or that they “know” – as well as we can “know” anything – that God does not exist.
Thus, if the atheist wants to defend what he really believes, then he, too, has a burden of proof. He should give reasons for why he thinks that God almost certainly doesn’t exist.”


Alvin Plantinga
“Lack of evidence, if indeed evidence is lacking, is no grounds for atheism. No one thinks there is good evidence for the proposition that there are an even number of stars; but also, no one thinks the right conclusion to draw is that there are an uneven number of stars. The right conclusion would instead be agnosticism.”

Atheist Kai Nielsen God still may exist even if there is no, or weak, evidence: “All the proofs of God’s existence may fail, but it still may be the case that God exists. In short, to show that the proofs do not work is not enough by itself. It may still be the case that God exists”.

Atheist Scot Shalkowski
"if there were no evidence at all for belief in God, this would [at best] legitimize merely agnosticism unless there is evidence against the existence of God”.



These are reasonable people, not some dishonest Nigerian internet trolls.

RuthlessLeader:
Okay.

But by definition, A god is more powerful than us mortals and should be able to do anything within his domain.

You'd have to assume he wants to do anything.

gabe:
You'll have to define God before we proceed.

Johnydon22 asked the question, I wouldn't know what idea of God he meant.

budaatum:
And why, pray tell, would I be thinking twice when I am witness to the actual event itself!? Am I not an atheist who relies on evidence anymore? All of a sudden, evidence is before my eyes, and you call it "subjective experience subject to ridicule and mockery from other atheists" as if the opinion of other atheists would, or should actually make me deny what I saw?!

Why am I even obsessed with them all believing me when I tell them what I witnessed? What reason exactly would you think I'd have for that? The desire to make "other atheists who did not experience it first hand" my sheepie and buda the lord over them, perhaps? It's the only reason I can think of.

You use your religious lens to define atheists, winner01, and are unable to see us through a more objective lens!

I didn't deny that such an experience could change you. As a matter of fact it's changed other atheists.

It will change you and you alone. And you dare not explain to other atheists the reason why you're changed simply because you'll be mocked and ridiculed.

And who says anything about obsession with believing? Why are you desperate to start new arguments that have nothing to do with the point of this thread?

budaatum:
Which part of "spark discussions" exactly does "your previous post was truly a pile of crap" come under again? You need to learn to stop hiding your intelligence winner01. You got quite a bit of it in there somewhere, I tell you. It shines through sometimes, then you go and muddy it up with your not so intelligent remarks! Just listen to yourself. Only you could claim "Its not always my position is true", tell another to be "less defensive", claim what another wrote is a "pile of crap" and believe you're not saying "yours is a lie"!

Please don't cc me in your ops. I see them anyway since I'm mentioned ('atheist'), in the topic, so you don't need to twice! Besides, you don't need my "crap" cluttering up your mind!

Read this again:

I begin threads to spark discussions

I started this thread to spark discussions. Those who quickly grabbed the point either didn't comment or commented in line with the thread. Your post was a long pile of crap that had nothing to do with the thread I began.

RuthlessLeader:
Op, which God are you talking of. Is it christian version?

I've not said anything about any God. How difficult is this for you guys to understand.

I simply took johnydon22s question and subjected the answers therein to scrutiny.

darkchild64:
But your god is omnipresent why should it be impossible to present evidence to every single atheist at the very same time

I haven't said anything about my God. I'm only giving replies to the evidence described by other atheists. I'm not here to tell you about my God or to provide evidence for anything. I hope you can understand.

Only one or two atheists got the point of this thread and discussed in line with it. The rest are locked on to the "he's trying to convert us" mentality and are being unnecessarily defensive.

So disgraceful!

Gggg102:
just saying... if johnnydon, Dalaman, budaatum,... were present at month Sinai when God spoke to Moses, and the Israelites,when he provided food and drinks, and was working in ways that every individual experienced obviously, none of them, except if their insanity and dishonesty are astronomical, would deny God.

if something like that happens today, would there be any way an atheist can logically say there is no God?

If this happens today, it only means johnydon, dalaman, and Budaatum might think twice about their atheism. It would still be their subjective experience subject to ridicule and mockery from other atheists who did not experience it first hand.

For this to affect the beliefs of every atheist in the world, they'll all have to be present at such a scene and that's impossible.

Butterflyleo:
Some just do copy and paste now from previous responses with the assumption that "its the same crap from theists" so no need to read or understand.

Makes the brain bleed.

Its sickening really and to think he believes there was sense in that

budaatum:
No, not necessarily, unless they have an inflated notion of themselves and think they can possibly come up with some argument that would make you abandon your Almighty God, and there are a few of those. Mostly, they are trying to get your attention to respond to the thread. Rarely, they want to just know your view on the specific topic. Often they want to provoke you for their own silly reasons and engage you in a your god does not exist argument. But you knew this, winner01. You just needed to ask yourself why you begin threads and invite atheists in them. Rarely, they are genuine threads with no obvious motive of provocation (and I wish you'd do more of those since you are intelligent enough to). But often, and especially those with atheist in the topic and peppered with words (the "nothing" in the topic of this one, to mention just one of the numerous in this thread), you just want to provoke atheists, and present a clarion call to your supporters and an avenue for ridicule and a your god is bigger than my god argument.

I begin this threads to spark discussions. Its not always my position is true, yours is a lie. Learn to be less defensive.

And your previous post was truly a pile of crap. That you predicted it does not mean it isn't.

budaatum:
Oh come on winner01. You start threads, mention us in the title, mention us in the body of the post itself, throw false statements you very well know we would respond to, and you call us thirsty?

You are smarter than you think we now you are but wish to make us think you are dumb. Well, just in case you are not aware, you failed. It's glaringly evident, and you know that means a lot to we atheists. We see right through you! We just need to make you see it too, I guess.

Quick question.

When atheists mention my moniker in threads, does it mean they are trying to prove atheism right to me?

budaatum:
I responded to this question here, and really wouldn't think another thread need be created for it.

Phew!! A whole pile of crap I regrettably must say.

Your evidence will be your personal experience going by what you posted. It can be discarded and ridiculed since the only proof will be you and can't be replicated.
So your evidence is invalid.

budaatum:
However, op claims "The burden of proof is on the positor", and while I would have been willing to engage on this basis - prove that God and gods do not exist - I would like op to consider that he is no better than I am when it comes to accepting the evidence, much of which already peppers numerous threads on this site, from the other side.

I haven't seen much evidence from the atheists. What I see here on a daily, is simply a counter or ridicule of evidences provided from the other side. Maybe you should create a separate thread and post evidences validating atheism.

budaatum:
Take an example he put forward about resurrection. How please does that prove that gods exists, even assuming it actually happened and barring any other plausible explanation? Is it because God was called prior to the resurrection? So, suppose a Muslim tells op that an Imam called Allah and someone resurrected, would he be willing to accept that as evidence for the existence of Allah? I pretty much doubt it unless he is the type who accepts that Allah and Yahweh are one and the same. What then if it is claimed that a stone was rubbed on the dead body and it resurrected, would op accept that as divinity of the stone? Would any sensible person not ask for evidence? And why pray tell would the person who performed such an amazing feat not be able to do it again and again and again? I do say, I am an atheist and I lost someone very dear to me years ago. Does anyone really think I wouldn't take my dead person to this resurrector if I knew he could resurrect this person whom I loved and miss dearly? And if the condition for the resurrecting is that I believe, do you really think I would be so stubborn to not do so? You really must believe I am stupid! Thankfully, what you believe does not necessarily have to be true, it would seem, so I thank God that you are very wrong indeed!

I didn't put forward resurrection neither did I put forward any proof. Read the op again carefully, you won't find anything of that sort.

budaatum:
But the entire premise of ops argument is defeated in one swell swoop by his own limitation of his own Almighty God to be honest, a point better illustrated in my response in the other thread of similar topic. If op understood his God as he proclaims he does, then please explain to me why that God would not find a way to get around my so called stubborn ability to disbelieve, and make me know? Is this not the God who formed me in my mother's womb and knows me in and out? Or is op admitting that his God is rather limited in its ability to convince me, a mere mortal, of its very own existence? I am afraid if it can't, then that alone is perhaps evidence that it is in no way whatsoever, almighty, as some would have one believe, in which case, in what way is it even a god?

Wrong! I never made mention of my God, neither did I make the case for my God. I simply analyzed the answers to johnydons questions and made a totally different point. You obviously didn't read the thread patiently.

budaatum:
The only evidence op is presenting for the existence of a god is anecdotal. Op's argument further falls on its ass when he claims the existence of his God is a belief, which he attempts to counter by claiming that the atheist's position is also a belief. But he couldn't get around the fact that some of us claim to know that gods do not exist. A suitable counter to ops beliefs are simply the fact that he is not alone in having beliefs about gods. It was once believed that a god called Zeus existed, and Apollo, and Osiris, and Obatala, and Ogun and numerous others who it was claimed created the heavens and the earth and the human beings in it. Is op willing to accept that if anyone still believes in any of these numerous gods, then they therefore are real? I wonder. And then there is the tiny issue of them all being the creator of the universe and the living things in it. Surely they can't all have created the one earth and the entire human race. Or is op willing to accept that gods, including op's god, are rather parochial and regional and that they created the humans in the societies that believe in their existences and maybe tiny parts of the universe?

The facts truly are that outside what one chooses to believe, not enough is known about the universe for anyone to claim that nothing actually existed at a particular point in time, and then some super powerful being made it all appear out of nowhere. The absurdity of such claims simply lie at the question of time, for unless one wishes to claim it is a recent occurrence, like 10,000 years at best, then one must sincerely ask how we know what we claim to believe. And when one considers that the universe is actually billions of years old, then consider how you know what happened so long ago when you most likely do not have a clue what happened four, five thousand years ago? Because it was written in one single book you read? Well perhaps that's the problem then, for surely there are a thousand more books that offer alternatives which might perhaps increase the things that the op would need to consider believing if he could but read more. He'd at least have to wonder if any of those are truer than the one that one believes in, if he were to be honest with himself.

Wrong again! The op did not present any evidence for God. The op simply examined evidences which a few atheists claim would convince them, and subjected those evidences to scrutiny. The thread is not so difficult to understand. Is it?

budaatum:
The more unfortunate fact however, is that that op is asking that the facts of his religious book are what should be believed when in actual fact, that is not really the point of those books ,In my opinion. I do not think it matters whether one believes that a fire burned and God spoke to Moses, or that an ass spoke to Balaam, or even that Jesus Christ was born of the Holy Spirit and lives forever after. For if there is anything true about those books, it surely isn't the record of facts that they present, but the truths about human nature that they actually teach and which if learnt, could be of benefit to one and the entire human race. The Gospels teach this fact very well, but it would seem op, and very many others, are yet to understand the fact that the error of the Pharisees whom Jesus Christ was alleged to have argued continuously with was that they believed but lacked understanding. It is a great pity. The person whom op and many Christians claim to revere had this lesson written in his blood so that they could live an allegorical or mystical everlasting life, but they waste that blood and revert to the pharisaic nature in humans and claim believing is what their God wants them to do. I say, if it was, then the Pharisees were doing very well thank you and there was no need to send an only begotten son to come and be killed to save anyone. Just continue to do what the Pharisees say should be done and you shall enter the Kingdom of God. One need ask why they were accused of giving stones instead of bread however. Perhaps the person accusing them was being rather harsh on them. To me it seems that they too, like op and many modern Christians think the stones are not stones but the bread, and in actual fact, they know not what the heck they are doing.

This is a disgrace!

The op never mentioned that facts of any religious book should be believed. You certainly did not read the op and were just in a haste to post a counter argument.

budaatum:
Op mentioned that he would not go into the question of the definition of the word 'atheist', but I would. The word 'atheist' used to refer to a person who did not worship the established gods. The great Socrates was killed for this one fact - deriding the gods and the beliefs in them in the society of his time. He however still believed in the existence of the gods, just not in the same way that the Greeks of his day did. If one were to be literal, Jesus Christ too was an atheist in his day, as he too did not believe in God in the same way that the priests of is time prescribed. "Is that not the son of Joseph", they wondered, knowing he had not been taught by them. And just to show he went to a different school is the odd statement, "so that it could be said that out of Egypt I called my son", a rather innocuous statement but one with significance that tends to fly over the heads of many.

I'd like to comment about this but it is regrettable that this is the only point you picked in the whole thread. I'm reluctant to argue this with you when you didn't even read the op to understand at all.

budaatum:
I'll end as I began. Op might want to consider that he is no better than I am when it comes to accepting the evidence from the other side. I'm not claiming what I've written above is evidence for there not being a God, or gods. But op, and his sort would very likely claim the entire post is a load of rubbish and not worthy of consideration, just like most atheists would react to his anecdotal evidence for his God. But I am not trying to prove to anyone that there are no gods. I just have no evidence for their existence, and the anecdotal evidence presented for them convinces me more that they definitely do not exist. As to evidence that would convince me otherwise, it really is simple, and I am wiling to set this bar really really low to assist you. You believers would claim that God took mud and breathed life into it and created humans in his own image. And Jesus is written to have asked if you know that ye are gods. When your light shines godly, I'll bow, for their is nothing more godly than a human being who behaves in a godly fashion as if God has indeed breathed into the mud that you truly are, though my bowing does not mean I get to worship that person, as reverence, and probably learning from, is surely sufficient. I just don't sit in the dark and refuse to allow a light to light up where I sit, I suppose. And I am not so stupid (though that's debatable, I am aware!) as to claim that a godly person standing before me does not exist either.

Maybe you should create a thread to state the evidences of atheism. Who knows? Maybe we might see one or two valid evidences.