Christianity - A respectful dialogue

[thedistillers]

First I hope I'm welcomed here. I was banned from RD forum, and was informed that legal action would be taken against me if I would try to register again. All I did was challenging the positivist Calilasseia and her (or his?) vacuous slogans (e.g. If an entity X is postulated to exist, and there exists in turn no substantive evidence supporting the existence of entity X, then the default position is to regard entity x as non-existent until said substantive evidence materialises. ).

I would like to have a respectful dialogue with non-Christians, and challenge their worldview.

Here's a starter:

- Humans have a sensus divinitatis, which allow them to know that the proposition "God exists" is true,without any empirical evidence needed. Those who deny that the proposition "God exists" is true purposely reject the spirit in their wickedness.

Discuss.

[Feck]

Well I reject it and I havn't been wicked in ages .

[Ameri Boi]

"Humans have a sensus divinitatis"

...what?

[statichaos]

I'm not sure about that, but (with full respect) my sensus fimus is going off.

[statichaos]

"Humans have a sensus divinitatis"

...what?

I think that what' the poster is saying is that we have a natural sense of god, an inborn one, and that we are simply denying that sense out of our own wickedness when we choose not to believe.

That's a rhetorical "we", by the way, since I do believe. However, while I'm intrigued by the first part of the statement about the sense of God, I find the wickedness aspect to be harsh, overly broad, and without merit.

[Ameri Boi]

"Humans have a sensus divinitatis"

...what?

I think that what' the poster is saying is that we have a natural sense of god, an inborn one, and that we are simply denying that sense out of our own wickedness when we choose not to believe.

That's a rhetorical "we", by the way, since I do believe. However, while I'm intrigued by the first part of the statement about the sense of God, I find the wickedness aspect to be harsh, overly broad, and without merit.

I know what it meant. Perhaps I should have typed "WAT?!" to convey my opinion that it is shit....

[Azathoth]

Yay one of Calli's chew toys. He will be here soon to give you another chomping. Welcome brave one.

[Ayaan]

First I hope I'm welcomed here. I was banned from RD forum, and was informed that legal action would be taken against me if I would try to register again.......

You missed the part of the story where the legal action was mentioned only after you made multiple sock puppets in direct violation of RDF rules.

Oh, well. Different time, different place. Welcome to rationalia.

[virphen]

Evidence? (for the sense, not the sockpuppetry, sciwoman's word is good enough for me)

[thedistillers]

Evidence? (for the sense, not the sockpuppetry, sciwoman's word is good enough for me)

What evidence is there that the world exists and is not just an illusion?

I don't have any evidence that the world is not an illusion, I just trust my senses that the world is real. Why should it be different for God?

[thedistillers]

First I hope I'm welcomed here. I was banned from RD forum, and was informed that legal action would be taken against me if I would try to register again.......

You missed the part of the story where the legal action was mentioned only after you made multiple sock puppets in direct violation of RDF rules.

Oh, well. Different time, different place. Welcome to rationalia.

Thanks for the welcome.

[virphen]

Evidence? (for the sense, not the sockpuppetry, sciwoman's word is good enough for me)

What evidence is there that the world exists and is not just an illusion?

I don't have any evidence that the world is not an illusion, I just trust my senses that the world is real. Why should it be different for God?

You don't have any choice but to assume that the world your senses reveal to you is at least in some way real, or you wouldn't bother eating and drinking.

Regardless, I'm not interested in arguments, only in evidence. So if you have none, I'm not really interested in continuing to discuss the matter.

[statichaos]

Evidence? (for the sense, not the sockpuppetry, sciwoman's word is good enough for me)

What evidence is there that the world exists and is not just an illusion?

I don't have any evidence that the world is not an illusion, I just trust my senses that the world is real. Why should it be different for God?

Because we can generally agree on definitions for "real world" things, whether it is a shared illusion or not. If I say "desk", you are not automatically going to think of an ocean, or an elephant, or a red wagon. That significantly doesn't happen when I say "God".

[Feck]

Why not Gods ? Which of your senses tells you there is only one ?

[Mac_Guffin]

First I hope I'm welcomed here. I was banned from RD forum, and was informed that legal action would be taken against me if I would try to register again. All I did was challenging the positivist Calilasseia and her (or his?) vacuous slogans (e.g. If an entity X is postulated to exist, and there exists in turn no substantive evidence supporting the existence of entity X, then the default position is to regard entity x as non-existent until said substantive evidence materialises. ).

I would like to have a respectful dialogue with non-Christians, and challenge their worldview.

Here's a starter:

- Humans have a sensus divinitatis, which allow them to know that the proposition "God exists" is true,without any empirical evidence needed. Those who deny that the proposition "God exists" is true purposely reject the spirit in their wickedness.

Discuss.

I don't sense God. I would've accepted that feeling very quickly when I was struggling to keep my faith as a young teenager.

Your assuming way too much about what others sense.