independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Prince fan community site
Create new topic 
Printable version (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)| Author | Message |
Why Do So Many 'Believers' Get So Offended/Defensive When Asked For Proof Of God? Why Do So Many 'Believers' Get So Offended/Defensive When Asked For Proof Of God?
| |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
Maybe the repetitive nature of the questions bug them? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
the whole concept of "belief" vs "proof" is probably the answer ...
Colonel Angus may be smelly. colonel angus may be a little rough . but deep down ... Colonel angus is very sweet. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
purplemansionFL said: Why Do So Many 'Believers' Get So Offended/Defensive When Asked For Proof Of God?
Why do 'Believers' get so offended/defensive when asked for proof of God? And why does their ultimate response to an inquiry for proof of God always end up being some variation of, "I'll pray for you"? Prayers in place of proof? What's up with that? Oh, and by the way, using the Bible to prove God exists is like using 'Fantasia' to prove Mickey Mouse exists. Seriously. The truth pisses people off..... If I knew where COVER was, I'd stay there........and there would be no NEED 2 run 4 it. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
purplemansionFL said: Why Do So Many 'Believers' Get So Offended/Defensive When Asked For Proof Of God?
Why do 'Believers' get so offended/defensive when asked for proof of God? And why does their ultimate response to an inquiry for proof of God always end up being some variation of, "I'll pray for you"? Prayers in place of proof? What's up with that? Oh, and by the way, using the Bible to prove God exists is like using 'Fantasia' to prove Mickey Mouse exists. Seriously. Its not that I get angry, its that is a no win situation. If breathing and experiencing a life you could not possibly create on your own isn't proof enough that God exists what words can I say to you? You don't believe because you don't want to and even if Jesus himself came down before you, you still wouldn't believe. Its that simple. THE CARDINAL HAS SPOKEN!!! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Why are so scared of something that doesn't exist?
| |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I don't get offended because there's no way you can convince me that God does not exist.
Second Funkiest White Man in America | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
chiltonmusic said: Its not that I get angry, its that is a no win situation. If breathing and experiencing a life you could not possibly create on your own isn't proof enough that God exists what words can I say to you? You don't believe because you don't want to and even if Jesus himself came down before you, you still wouldn't believe. Its that simple. You are close to something I have been thinking. That some people argue about the things like creationism that assume that it is not true. That a hidden premises is that there is no NO God and that Creation is not true. They tip this off by saying things like there is NO EVIDENCE that there is a GOD. But there is! They just choose to dismiss it. That is not to say that evidence is proof or that that evidence is not being misinterpreted or that there is not some other explanation for it. Just that there is evidence. They also like to say things GOD's existence can not be proven. That assume there is NO GOD. That shows that their argument is circular in that it is inserting the conclusion as part of the argument. As if there was a GOD then he could certainly prove his own existence. The logical truth is: it is imposable to prove there is NO GOD. That is NO MATTER what, no one could ever prove there is NO GOD. So the statement there is a GOD is the safer assumption IF proving he existed had any reward. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
RodeoSchro said: I don't get offended because there's no way you can convince me that God does not exist.
I do get disappointed at those who use derision to try and make their point. Pretty immature, in my opinion. Yup! you can not prove a negitive. It is like life on other planets. Even if you search each and every planet you and find NOTHING you might have just missed some living things. But find on living thing on one planet and you have proven there is life on other than on earth. (assuming that the life was not some stowaway that hitcher a ride on some object from earth. It is easy to imagine that some living thing was on the Mars lander and survived the trip and is now living it up on Mars-eating candy bars! ) | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
People get offended because their whole sense of identity and feeling of security is wrapped up in their beliefs. People don t like to feel disturbed, even if faced with facts. If human beings weren t so conditioned to want to be secure and accumulate beliefs then there would be a lot more intelligence in the world. The enemy is not the other, the enemy is you. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Question: Is GOD a human? If I knew where COVER was, I'd stay there........and there would be no NEED 2 run 4 it. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Graycap23 said: Question: Is GOD a human?
Have humans invented God? The enemy is not the other, the enemy is you. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ColAngus said: the whole concept of "belief" vs "proof" is probably the answer ...
certain "truths" in life are always questioned by skeptics - regarding the "miracles" that happen and just transfer that truth to question marks ... etc ... to someone who believes ... it is kinda silly for people to question faith / to those that question faith - the religious are just a mindless flock...    That pretty much sums it up for me as well. “When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a Communist.” Brazilian bishop Dom Hélder Câmara | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ConsciousContact said: Graycap23 said: Question: Is GOD a human?
Have humans invented God? U have 2 real choices. Either hummans created GOD, which means he does not exist or God does exist, and is NOT human and by definition is an alien. If I knew where COVER was, I'd stay there........and there would be no NEED 2 run 4 it. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Because they see their religious faith as something sacred beyond query and have no answers to questions requesting any proof. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Graycap23 said: Question: Is GOD a human?
I have seen a few *on tv and movies* that cum close!  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
OnlyNDaUsa said: Graycap23 said: Question: Is GOD a human?
I have seen a few *on tv and movies* that cum close! I hope you don't mean Peter North?  "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
mordang said: OnlyNDaUsa said: I have seen a few *on tv and movies* that cum close! I hope you don't mean Peter North? well i sure as hell did not mean Ron Jeremy! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
purplemansionFL said: Why Do So Many 'Believers' Get So Offended/Defensive When Asked For Proof Of God?
Why do 'Believers' get so offended/defensive when asked for proof of God? And why does their ultimate response to an inquiry for proof of God always end up being some variation of, "I'll pray for you"? Prayers in place of proof? What's up with that? Oh, and by the way, using the Bible to prove God exists is like using 'Fantasia' to prove Mickey Mouse exists. Seriously.  Prince:
"A future re-created to be ruled by Man is one of isolation and despair. Returning the leadership back in to God will allow mankind to achieve it's original collective goal, which is union with God. Ideas contrary to this goal should not be blamed or persecuted....just simply IGNORED. They originated when Man first chose to ignore God's rule." | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
purplemansionFL said: Why Do So Many 'Believers' Get So Offended/Defensive When Asked For Proof Of God?
Why do 'Believers' get so offended/defensive when asked for proof of God? And why does their ultimate response to an inquiry for proof of God always end up being some variation of, "I'll pray for you"? Prayers in place of proof? What's up with that? Oh, and by the way, using the Bible to prove God exists is like using 'Fantasia' to prove Mickey Mouse exists. Seriously. Because they don't like admitting that their beliefs are just that, beliefs. They insist their spiritual path is The Truth(TM). Asking to prove this truth annoys them because they know that no matter how fervently they believe they can't prove anything. Also -and I think this is important -a lot of people asking for proof, whether agnostic or atheist, are fucking rude and condescending about it. I should have probably stopped being surprised by how many conservative, sheltered, or otherwise closed-minded folks are on the Org by now, shouldn't I? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
chiltonmusic said: purplemansionFL said: Why Do So Many 'Believers' Get So Offended/Defensive When Asked For Proof Of God?
Why do 'Believers' get so offended/defensive when asked for proof of God? And why does their ultimate response to an inquiry for proof of God always end up being some variation of, "I'll pray for you"? Prayers in place of proof? What's up with that? Oh, and by the way, using the Bible to prove God exists is like using 'Fantasia' to prove Mickey Mouse exists. Seriously. Its not that I get angry, its that is a no win situation. If breathing and experiencing a life you could not possibly create on your own isn't proof enough that God exists what words can I say to you? You don't believe because you don't want to and even if Jesus himself came down before you, you still wouldn't believe. Its that simple. If Jesus himself actually literally came down, there's not a sane person who wouldn't believe. But the part of your post I bolded? That makes no sense. How can we logically assume that because we are incapable of creating something then that means a God or Gods has to have? I should have probably stopped being surprised by how many conservative, sheltered, or otherwise closed-minded folks are on the Org by now, shouldn't I? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
OnlyNDaUsa said: chiltonmusic said: Its not that I get angry, its that is a no win situation. If breathing and experiencing a life you could not possibly create on your own isn't proof enough that God exists what words can I say to you? You don't believe because you don't want to and even if Jesus himself came down before you, you still wouldn't believe. Its that simple. You are close to something I have been thinking. That some people argue about the things like creationism that assume that it is not true. That a hidden premises is that there is no NO God and that Creation is not true. They tip this off by saying things like there is NO EVIDENCE that there is a GOD. But there is! They just choose to dismiss it. That is not to say that evidence is proof or that that evidence is not being misinterpreted or that there is not some other explanation for it. Just that there is evidence. They also like to say things GOD's existence can not be proven. That assume there is NO GOD. That shows that their argument is circular in that it is inserting the conclusion as part of the argument. As if there was a GOD then he could certainly prove his own existence. The logical truth is: it is imposable to prove there is NO GOD. That is NO MATTER what, no one could ever prove there is NO GOD. So the statement there is a GOD is the safer assumption IF proving he existed had any reward. Er...back up the bus. What? Illogic, dude. You'd make a terrible Vulcan. I should have probably stopped being surprised by how many conservative, sheltered, or otherwise closed-minded folks are on the Org by now, shouldn't I? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Selfconsious life is a testament to the universe itself. Without it there would not even be a question about the existence of a god.
"Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence." - Carl Sagan | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
meow85 said: Er...back up the bus. What? Illogic, dude. You'd make a terrible Vulcan. I will simplify it. It is imposable to prove a negative. If there is a GOD then it is possible he could be proven to exist. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
OnlyNDaUsa said: meow85 said: Er...back up the bus. What? Illogic, dude. You'd make a terrible Vulcan. I will simplify it. It is imposable to prove a negative. If there is a GOD then it is possible he could be proven to exist. That's true. But that hinges on the presupposition there is a God to begin with. That a negative cannot be proven does not automatically mean there's a positive to look for. I should have probably stopped being surprised by how many conservative, sheltered, or otherwise closed-minded folks are on the Org by now, shouldn't I? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
meow85 said: That's true. But that hinges on the presupposition there is a God to begin with. That a negative cannot be proven does not automatically mean there's a positive to look for. Not at all. I used the world IF. IF GOD exists then his existence is provable. What the fallacy is when people say that "it is impossible to prove that GOD exists" as part of an argument on the existence of GOD. As the statement"it is impossible to prove that GOD exists" means "God dosn't exist." As the only way for the statement "it is impossible to prove that GOD exists" to be true is IF God doesn't exist. I will however, agree that when people say "you can not prove GOD exists" most of them mean "You have YET to prove that there is a GOD." Which is true. But just because we have not be successful at something yet doesn't make that thing imposable. I am sure most people in 1909 thought going to the moon was impossible. Some would argue that it was at the time. But that is not so either, as we did go to the moon. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
OnlyNDaUsa said: meow85 said: That's true. But that hinges on the presupposition there is a God to begin with. That a negative cannot be proven does not automatically mean there's a positive to look for. Not at all. I used the world IF. IF GOD exists then his existence is provable. What the fallacy is when people say that "it is impossible to prove that GOD exists" as part of an argument on the existence of GOD. As the statement"it is impossible to prove that GOD exists" means "God dosn't exist." As the only way for the statement "it is impossible to prove that GOD exists" to be true is IF God doesn't exist. I will however, agree that when people say "you can not prove GOD exists" most of them mean "You have YET to prove that there is a GOD." Which is true. But just because we have not be successful at something yet doesn't make that thing imposable. I am sure most people in 1909 thought going to the moon was impossible. Some would argue that it was at the time. But that is not so either, as we did go to the moon. Your logic doesn't work. I should have probably stopped being surprised by how many conservative, sheltered, or otherwise closed-minded folks are on the Org by now, shouldn't I? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
meow85 said: ]
Your logic doesn't work. You are mistaken. Go ask any Philosophy Prof. I will further say: to prove that God doesn't exist, you would first have to prove there was only one GOD and then prove that one did not exist. But I will ask you, what part of my logic is flawed? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
OnlyNDaUsa said: meow85 said: ]
Your logic doesn't work. You are mistaken. Go ask any Philosophy Prof. I will further say: to prove that God doesn't exist, you would first have to prove there was only one GOD and then prove that one did not exist. But I will ask you, what part of my logic is flawed? Your premise, for one thing: As the statement"it is impossible to prove that GOD exists" means "God dosn't exist." As the only way for the statement "it is impossible to prove that GOD exists" to be true is IF God doesn't exist. You're assuming that "it is impossible to prove that God exists" equates with "God does not exist", which is not the argument presented by at least half the people who say God's existence is unprovable. So right there you've begun your argument wrong by arguing against something not asserted to begin with. The question of proving there is only one God is moot, because this debate is occurring between people of Judeo-Christian faiths who believe in one Biblical God, and atheists and agnostics. Proving there is only one God rather than many is irrelevent to this particular debate. Not to mention: "...NO EVIDENCE that there is a GOD. But there is! They just choose to dismiss it. " That's one hefty assertion to make and then completely neglect to back up in any way. If there is evidence that flies in the face of everything atheists believe and agnostics guess at, where is it? I should have probably stopped being surprised by how many conservative, sheltered, or otherwise closed-minded folks are on the Org by now, shouldn't I? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
RodeoSchro said: I don't get offended because there's no way you can convince me that God does not exist.
I do get disappointed at those who use derision to try and make their point. Pretty immature, in my opinion. I totally agree. To the original poster's question about prayer being the ultimate act of believers in response, it may be that believers are praying that you will encounter the God of the Bible in a way that erases your doubts. And, it all gets back to the whole premise. Some people come to P&R to engage in discussion. Others come to mock folks who believe differently, particularly if those folks are adherents to the Christian faith. The Bible is recommended to those who disbelieve its claims and point often as an encouragement to read it with an open mind. Scientists disagree over each others' theories and studies all the time, yet as a field, science gets held up as an empirically certain and unquestionable thing. Undeniably answered prayers and astounding miracles are cited by believers as proof in the God of the Bible, and we're treated as irrational, weak-minded loons who couldn't possibly distinguish between cause, effect and coincidence. I always heartily encourage those who say they disbelieve the God of the Bible is real to pray to Him and sincerely challenge Him to show Himself real as their Creator. I challenge any nonbeliever here to do the same. I believe He shall. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Create new topic Printable version (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
