A question for theists

[Nioya]

I am no longer a Christian. But to answer this question, one either believes in a positive argument for one's religion or sees som major flaw in other religions. I.e. Christians cite the resurrection as an objective piece of evidence for the truth of the Christian Faith, Muslims cite the literary excellence of the Quran. Or, a Christian or a Jew might critique Islam as being morally abhorrent in some respects, as many modern Christians and secularists say (not that I agree with this opinion) . Judaism traditionally criitqued Christianity as being majorly flawed in it's trinitarianism, so that points to the idea that simply debunking other religions gives one's own religion strength.

[Nariterrr]

There is no evidence that suggests the Cargo Cults are true. There is no evidence that Christianity is true, in fact quite the opposite as the bible is very contradictory.

How is the Bible contradictory? Have you never heard of the Messiah nullifying the ceremonial laws of the Old Testament (NOT the moral laws, which are different and shall be kept in place)?

http://infidels.org/library/modern/dona ... tions.html

[Jumalariik]

Ok. I give up on this conversation. I give you evidence against Cargo Cults. You then continue to act as though they are equivalent to something that has no evidence against it, but all evidence that exists one way or another supports it. Yes, there is not enough evidence that Christianity is true to make it an open and shut case, but it is not disproven the way that cargo cults are.
You don't want this question answered, and you must admit this.
If you really want an answer, though tons of people have given them, you can tg me. It will be nice to see that you change your lack of desire for the conversation.

There is no evidence that suggests the Cargo Cults are true. There is no evidence that Christianity is true, in fact quite the opposite as the bible is very contradictory.

When will you actually listen to people? I gave you evidence against Cargo Cults. People gave you evidence for Christianity. If there is evidence for one thing and no evidence for another, that does not mean that there is no evidence for both of them.
What more do you need? Cargo Cults are proven ipso facto to be wrong. Christianity is not. By that fact alone, Christianity is more likely to be true than Cargo Cults. What else needs to be given to you? It seems that "there is no evidence for cargo cults or Christianity and they are equivalent" has become a religious mantra, though it has been proven wrong countless times on this thread. What proof do you need to stop repeating said mantra?

[Xelsis]

I was born Christian, but I recently converted to Norse Paganism. I did so not because I believe in Odin, but because it felt right. I believe we create our own heaven and hell. What we believe/follow is what we end up with. You would be gone when you die and I would go to Valhalla or Niflheim when I die.

Norse Paganism of all things though. Personally if I could /choose/ what reality was after death I'd be inclined toward self godhood after death. ;D

Honestly, kinda weirdly, an atheistic afterlife would be fine for me. Death would just be nonexistence, and I am happy with that. I was not unhappy before I was born.

[Razgriskm]

How is the Bible contradictory? Have you never heard of the Messiah nullifying the ceremonial laws of the Old Testament (NOT the moral laws, which are different and shall be kept in place)?

http://infidels.org/library/modern/dona ... tions.html

I've actually read through that entire thing before. It's mostly all just language-translation errors.

[Jumalariik]

How is the Bible contradictory? Have you never heard of the Messiah nullifying the ceremonial laws of the Old Testament (NOT the moral laws, which are different and shall be kept in place)?

http://infidels.org/library/modern/dona ... tions.html

Great argument, too bad you didn't make it.

[Washington Resistance Army]

http://infidels.org/library/modern/dona ... tions.html

Great argument, too bad you didn't make it.

What does that even mean?

[Xelsis]

How is the Bible contradictory? Have you never heard of the Messiah nullifying the ceremonial laws of the Old Testament (NOT the moral laws, which are different and shall be kept in place)?

http://infidels.org/library/modern/dona ... tions.html

http://www.setterfield.org/Morgan_Answered.html

[Jumalariik]

Great argument, too bad you didn't make it.

What does that even mean?

It means Nariterrr just pulled a link and didn't do any arguing.

[Nariterrr]

There is no evidence that suggests the Cargo Cults are true. There is no evidence that Christianity is true, in fact quite the opposite as the bible is very contradictory.

When will you actually listen to people? I gave you evidence against Cargo Cults. People gave you evidence for Christianity. If there is evidence for one thing and no evidence for another, that does not mean that there is no evidence for both of them.
What more do you need? Cargo Cults are proven ipso facto to be wrong. Christianity is not. By that fact alone, Christianity is more likely to be true than Cargo Cults. What else needs to be given to you? It seems that "there is no evidence for cargo cults or Christianity and they are equivalent" has become a religious mantra, though it has been proven wrong countless times on this thread. What proof do you need to stop repeating said mantra?

This argument is useless. I am basing my opinions on what is tangible and what I can prove, not what has already been disproven. I am looking at it and comparing them through a religious lens. I have no proof of Cargo Cults being the true religion, I have no proof of Christianity, therefore, even if Cargo Cults can be disproven, they are still on the same level, no proof is no proof.

[Shonburg]

Peptides then form into proteins, and so on. Peptides are the foundation of life.

They are definitely a key ingredient but not the foundation of life.

Yes they are, more specifically, amino acids are.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amino_acid

[Washington Resistance Army]

What does that even mean?

It means Nariterrr just pulled a link and didn't do any arguing.

That's kinda how sources works, someone asked how is the Bible contradictory and he provided a link full of contradictions as far as I can tell.

[Nariterrr]

It means Nariterrr just pulled a link and didn't do any arguing.

That's kinda how sources works, someone asked how is the Bible contradictory and he provided a link full of contradictions as far as I can tell.

Contradictions are not contradictions

[Uxupox]

They are definitely a key ingredient but not the foundation of life.

Yes they are, more specifically, amino acids are.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amino_acid

Amino acids are definitely the foundation of life but peptides are not. Now if you have said polypeptides on the other hand.

[Xelsis]

When will you actually listen to people? I gave you evidence against Cargo Cults. People gave you evidence for Christianity. If there is evidence for one thing and no evidence for another, that does not mean that there is no evidence for both of them.
What more do you need? Cargo Cults are proven ipso facto to be wrong. Christianity is not. By that fact alone, Christianity is more likely to be true than Cargo Cults. What else needs to be given to you? It seems that "there is no evidence for cargo cults or Christianity and they are equivalent" has become a religious mantra, though it has been proven wrong countless times on this thread. What proof do you need to stop repeating said mantra?

This argument is useless. I am basing my opinions on what is tangible and what I can prove, not what has already been disproven. I am looking at it and comparing them through a religious lens. I have no proof of Cargo Cults being the true religion, I have no proof of Christianity, therefore, even if Cargo Cults can be disproven, they are still on the same level, no proof is no proof.

What, then, is your standard of proof? Something absolutely incontrovertible, like your own existence? Or something that surpasses reasonable doubt?

If your "proof" requires absolute certainty, you can prove nothing beyond "cogito ergo sum.", and it seems you are heading that way-which means you should not bother to argue with us, because you do not even know if we exist.

[New haven america]

What evidence? Beyond the fact that Jesus existed, which is not 'evidence.' Muhammad existed, does that mean Islam is right?

1. Well, how could the big bang work? I don't know much about it, but all I know is a dense spinny thing exploded and made the universe.
Like, what?2. And how could that position earth in the perfect spot in the solar system.3. And how are we evolved so fine tuned?4. How could've we evolved from fish? I don't get it! I just know that I'm Christian, and I'm proud to be one. And I know it's true.

1. Both scientists and religious scholars have trouble explaining how the Universe started, we have evidence that the Big Bang happened, and we know some of the events that took place during it, we just don't know what caused it to begin with.
2. Luck, really (Also, Mars in in the Habitable Zone too, but look at it), actually, if Earth didn't have a large moon and volcanism, it would look a lot like Mars right now. However, The Big Bang had no real bearing over the Solar Systems formation, The Big Bang happened 14 billion years ago, while the solar system started forming 4.6 billion years billion years ago (With Earth only being 4.5-3.8 billion years old).
3. Physically speaking, we aren't that fined tuned, we have numerous health disorders, diseases, and problems, along with being rather physically weak compared to other animals around us.
4. We didn't, we evolved from a common ancestor ape of humans and chimps, which evolved from another ancestor animal, and so on. Humans didn't automatically evolve from fish to humans, it took billion of years of adaptations for humans to come into existence.

[The Nexus of Man]

How is the Bible contradictory? Have you never heard of the Messiah nullifying the ceremonial laws of the Old Testament (NOT the moral laws, which are different and shall be kept in place)?

http://infidels.org/library/modern/dona ... tions.html

Apparently, this "Donald Morgan" doesn't know that all the light in Creation (i.e the Observable Universe) is not inherently the Sun, but rather also all of the astronomical phenomena in the Universe, and that the Sun is quite young in comparison to other stars, which is perfectly compatible with creational theology...

Do you have a better source that actually exposes contradictions, without hiccups in the first attempt to disprove in the actual source itself?

[Rannoria]

I think I know the answer.
This question, cannot be answered.
There is a reason you call it faith. Because you have faith in your religion.
I'm not going against my religion, but this is, what I believe, the answer to your question.
You just gotta believe.

[Nariterrr]

This argument is useless. I am basing my opinions on what is tangible and what I can prove, not what has already been disproven. I am looking at it and comparing them through a religious lens. I have no proof of Cargo Cults being the true religion, I have no proof of Christianity, therefore, even if Cargo Cults can be disproven, they are still on the same level, no proof is no proof.

What, then, is your standard of proof? Something absolutely incontrovertible, like your own existence? Or something that surpasses reasonable doubt?

If your "proof" requires absolute certainty, you can prove nothing beyond "cogito ergo sum.", and it seems you are heading that way-which means you should not bother to argue with us, because you do not even know if we exist.

I do not know how this universe came to be, I don't say I know, I don't pretend to know. I say 'I don't know and we will probably never know.' YOU on the other hand, do claim to know. As such, present your case, and prove it.

[Xelsis]

That's kinda how sources works, someone asked how is the Bible contradictory and he provided a link full of contradictions as far as I can tell.

Contradictions are not contradictions

Oh, look, you are literally denying a priori truths. You have officially rejected logic itself. I think I can understand why trying to make you see sense has been futile. I am out.

[Jumalariik]

When will you actually listen to people? I gave you evidence against Cargo Cults. People gave you evidence for Christianity. If there is evidence for one thing and no evidence for another, that does not mean that there is no evidence for both of them.
What more do you need? Cargo Cults are proven ipso facto to be wrong. Christianity is not. By that fact alone, Christianity is more likely to be true than Cargo Cults. What else needs to be given to you? It seems that "there is no evidence for cargo cults or Christianity and they are equivalent" has become a religious mantra, though it has been proven wrong countless times on this thread. What proof do you need to stop repeating said mantra?

This argument is useless. I am basing my opinions on what is tangible and what I can prove, not what has already been disproven. I am looking at it and comparing them through a religious lens. I have no proof of Cargo Cults being the true religion, I have no proof of Christianity, therefore, even if Cargo Cults can be disproven, they are still on the same level, no proof is no proof.

You're not actually saying anything here. You are saying "I look at this from a religious view and tangible elements." There are tangible elements saying that Cargo Cults are false. There are tangible reasons that Christianity is not untrue. (wether it is true is debatable though) Cargo Cults work under suppositions like that the island that it appeared on is the entire world, that John Frum was not just an American pilot, etc. We know they are false claims. Christianity's claims are all either proven or are not disproven. God's existence is not disproven. Jesus' existence is proven.

[Razgriskm]

It means Nariterrr just pulled a link and didn't do any arguing.

That's kinda how sources works, someone asked how is the Bible contradictory and he provided a link full of contradictions as far as I can tell.

The link itself is just playing on the english translations being lacking thanks to the source language having much different words and expressions. As well as contextual errors or misleading in making these contradictions. Quite a few of them are answered easily to the well educated of the source material (And even some are easy to answer or guess as a complete novice).

[Nariterrr]

I think I know the answer.
This question, cannot be answered.
There is a reason you call it faith. Because you have faith in your religion.
I'm not going against my religion, but this is, what I believe, the answer to your question.
You just gotta believe.

Believe that my religion, the one I happen to be born into, just so happens to be the right religion? I have a 4,199 of 4,200 probability of being wrong.

[Jumalariik]

It means Nariterrr just pulled a link and didn't do any arguing.

That's kinda how sources works, someone asked how is the Bible contradictory and he provided a link full of contradictions as far as I can tell.

He didn't make an argument. It's lazy and annoying if somebody just gives a link without any commentary, especially if the link sucks.

[Ifreann]

I think I know the answer.
This question, cannot be answered.
There is a reason you call it faith. Because you have faith in your religion.
I'm not going against my religion, but this is, what I believe, the answer to your question.
You just gotta believe.

Or not, if one prefers.