this is an issue many athiests have. even if you can explain the creation of the universe as happening via a big bang you cant even begin to explain what caused the big bang to happen in the first place. no one, and i mean no one, has even a partial clue how hte universe was created. any theoretical physicist that claims they do is selling snake oil. there are plenty of theories, even some credible, but they're far far far far far far from verifiable.



i drew zero false equivalences. all humans are equivalent in the respect that we have a "god hole" where u can't explain the creation of the universe with modern science. you can fill it with "i dont know, science hasn't told me, and i dont have any clue" or "god". there is no equivilency because both groups handle the same philosophical question exactly the opposite way. that's of course tho a false binary, as both the atheists and theists are constantly in flux about their beliefs.



you're just strawmanning at traditional religious people. i can theorize this is due to your real life experience, and/or the strain of Christians you argue in PARD, and/or the fact that the atheist lecturers you jack off to generally get softball questions at lectures from crazy hardcore religious people and/or go up against religious people in debates where one must take an extreme stance by the format of the conversation.

but the simple idea that the average christain inherently and consistently believes without their faith in constant flux is beyond silly. i wont even go down that rabbit hole because it's just bullshit from my perspective. my church openly talks about this and the church schools i went to growing up did to. could be just a Methodist thing but im not going to argue the most stringent baptist belief system because i find it as illogical as you do.

the real issue here is people want points in a debate rather than a real conversation.

im willing to lay my faith our for what it is, admit it's constantly in flux, and admit that i have real doubts about everything from the mechanisms of the faith as it was taught to me and even the scripture down to every single word being potentially wrong.

the truth is this is how most Christians think, we're constantly in doubt and constantly reaffirm our faith or go through periods of doubt. most people aren't willing to admit this and fear even pushback from other Christians. i don't at all, idgaf.

this constantly resolves in me being called "basically an atheist" or "watered down" or "not a real christian", as a result of people being upset they can't pin down my beliefs with fallacies of precanned youtube lectures they copy-pasta into this subforum.

the truth is you've all taken a look at the creation of the universe and you see it, you see a part that you can't even begin to explain. that could be just something science hasnt begun to understand or something our brainpower can't understand, with a natural explanation, but you feel it. that shadow you can't look directly at or it disappears, that feeling that there's someone behind you. i call that god, but fully admit it could just be my inability to process so many intangibles and so many crazy things happening on a molecular and smaller level many billions of years ago. you feel it too, but you'll flip a switch that says "i'm logical, i can't even entertain such an idea, without proof". that's cool, but let's be honest.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Dec 14 2018 09:52am

Saying we all have some sort of answer to the "where did it all come" is a much weaker statement than "we all have a place in us for an irrational god because we're all devoid of a rational explanation that we can verify".

We all are "irrational" in some sense, in that we must hinge on ultimately unverifiable assumptions, but it's very different to compare "I am making a minimum number of assumptions and actively looking to eliminate" and "I am adding assumptions until I get an answer that I like". I.E. the former has no place for inserting a god, the latter openly searches for places to put a god.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Dec 14 2018 09:54am

and how does this post apply to "Christian believers are constantly in flux about their own belief"?

what is an "answer", a temporary choice to a given question. not all answers are permanent. my answer to "will the vikings make the playoff this year" has changed 4 times this week.

to me the difference you're speaking of comes down to preference, not ability. meaning some people NEED to eliminate illogical coping mechanisms, some dont care as much. neither has to do with who's right factually.

It's not so much as "putting you in a box" so much as "If your beliefs are unique and snowflakey it doesn't do much good to open by calling yourself a Christian since your version varies so greatly from the commonly accepted definition."

We all use labels as shortcuts to explain what we believe. To make that communication effective you need to consider what others would typically call a Christian, and if your definition varies from that by a significant degree then don't use that label and instead just explain your beliefs at the onset.

Your beliefs are highly watered down from what a typical Christian would say their beliefs are. There's nothing wrong with that, most Christians are functionally atheist. I'd say most religious people in the world are functionally atheist. They actively partition their skepticism into "real world problems" and place a lower amount of skepticism on things they consider "religious".

I haven't had real doubts about my faith in years. I don't think your characterization of most Christians is accurate at all.

This post was edited by IceMage on Dec 14 2018 10:05am

If more Christians would admit to being constantly in flux about their beliefs then I would have a much greater respect for most Christians.



Aaaaaaaand yeah.

im calling into question the common definition as false due to pride of the Christians and fear of reprisal for "normal" doubt.

i thought that was painfully obvious



if most liberals admitted about half of what they want might not be best for the country i'd have more faith in them, and conservatives too. but we live in the world we live in.



most people are liars, you aren't. not calling into question your faith but i dont think most people have unwavering faith, far from it tbh.

Definitions arent false or true. You're just being silly now.

Also, the definition if Christian doesnt usually include if they doubt, but the bible containing Gods moral code is a belief held by almost every christian ive ever interacted with, thus the need for apologetics to reconcile it with modern times.

If I experienced doubt I wouldn't be afraid to tell you.



Well, I agree with you that most Christians probably experience doubt at times, but I don't believe the majority fall into your skeptical camp.

I think it's hard to be a liberal Christian with a rock solid faith.