What Convinced you God Exists?

[Clizby WampusCat]

Yes. It's called the Doctrine of Regeneration.

I did not ask you.

 

[Paulomycin]

Nope.

Congrats, you just asserted your will as sovereign. Again.

 

[Paulomycin]

I did not ask you.

Still true.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Congrats, you just asserted your will as sovereign. Again.

So you can assert stuff with no evidence and I cannot?

 

[Paulomycin]

So you can assert stuff with no evidence and I cannot?

Why so vague?

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Why so vague?

is there something you want to know? Just ask.

 

[Paulomycin]

is there something you want to know? Just ask.

I want to know why you're so (terribly) vague about your accusations. Pretty please?

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

I want to know why you're so (terribly) vague about your accusations. Pretty please?

Why? You asserted many things about atheists that you have no evidence for like we are all here to make christians cry for one. Also that we are all here to report you to the mods. Many more that you are discussing with doubtingmerle.

 

[Paulomycin]

Why? You asserted many things about atheists that you have no evidence for like we are all here to make christians cry for one. Also that we are all here to report you to the mods. Many more that you are discussing with doubtingmerle.

I never assert anything without evidence. Ev-er. And if it appears that I have, one of you is always there to keep me honest.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

I never assert anything without evidence. Ev-er. And if it appears that I have, one of you is always there to keep me honest.

Where is your evidence that all atheists are here to make Christians cry?

 

[Mark Quayle]

I don't recall any time I was not a believer. Probably the strongest thing that I can use to point to is the intellectual realization that First Cause (and that, With Intent) is necessary, and that God is necessarily First Cause. It makes more sense to me that God should exist than that I should.

To me it is a brain teaser how it could be possible for God to make something other than himself. But that that something should be able to rebel against him is more than I can even guess at.

But that is none of it what rules my mind. God has moved in and I can't turn away from him very far or very long. I've tried.

Edit: On thinking it over, I should say that any rebellion is, actually, "very far" from God. But he still has hold of me.

 

[Paulomycin]

Where is your evidence that all atheists are here to make Christians cry?

Because you just posted again. Now you're trying to get another thread shut down. Whatever works, right?

 

[Moral Orel]

Because all atheists want to do is make believers cry.

Prove it.

Atheist activists are only here to antagonize religion.

Okay, just another assertion. Where's your evidence?

I never assert anything without evidence. Ev-er.

This is false. Here's once in this thread:

Because all atheists want to do is make believers cry.

Here's a second time in this thread:

Atheist activists are only here to antagonize religion.

 

[Paulomycin]

Okay, just another assertion. Where's your evidence?

You're the evidence. You're an activist. You're here what, 7 days a week? This isn't much of a challenge, you know.

 

[Moral Orel]

Because all atheists want to do is make believers cry.

Prove it.

Atheist activists are only here to antagonize religion.

Where's your evidence?

You're the evidence. You're an activist. You're here what, 7 days a week? This isn't much of a challenge, you know.

Okay, so I pop in a lot. And?

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

Because you just posted again. Now you're trying to get another thread shut down. Whatever works, right?

Just provide your evidence that all atheists are here to make Christians cry. If your evidence is that i posted again then I don’t think you are being serious.

 

[Lion IRC]

@Clizby WampusCat
Paul didn't say sad tears.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

@Clizby WampusCat
Paul didn't say sad tears.

Sure, he still has not provided any good evidence for his statement. It’s just more of his goading.

 

[Larniavc]

Science, maths, stats and reasoning shows that nothing does nothing, causes nothing etc.

No it doesn’t. Learn more science and maths.

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

I started with intellectual arguments, but they only go so far. As Dante has it, Virgil (Reason) can only lead you to the gates of paradise, but Beatrice (Grace) leads you in.

There are things that to me are axiomatic, such as some things being better than others, that a coherent concept of goodness exists, and that the world is basically good. That I consider these axiomatic truths is obviously my personal experience, but everyone can only base their conclusions on their own qualia, whatever they are. Sufficed to say, the implied idea of a relativistic morality and the socially constructed idea of virtues and such that only hides Selfish genes or nature red in tooth and claw, seem obviously wrong to me. It was Good, but has become flawed, matches my experience of reality. Further, in a sort of Paschal's wager or "I am for Narnia even if there is no Narnia", it doesn't matter if I am wrong, since I wouldn't want to see the world in that manner anyway. Once I accept that layer to existence, the non-theistic systems don't accord with my experience as well. I have to convince myself that my experience is faulty or illusion, akin to thinking that a table is merely a mess of atoms and not a real structure in front of me. I see no reason to give primacy to abstractions rather than my own qualia. When I once accept the idea of God, experience of the divine really starts.

As CS Lewis said, we can only meet God face to face till we have faces ourselves.