Regarding the Existence or Absence of God

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally posted by axeman
There is your problem.
Your logical is perfectly backwards.
Things dont need to be "dis-proven".
They must be PROVEN and then defended to
be rationally accepted as truth.

Simply because you CANT disprove something does
not make it real or give you an excuse to believe in it.
More...

On the former, that depends on what the assertion is!

On the latter, we often believe things socially about people that we can't absolutely prove. Sometimes we use deductive reasoning to make probability judgements, and sometimes we simply get a certain impression from someone and make judgements about that person that we can't really explain to others. Nothing wrong with that, up to a point.
 
Originally posted by I Missed Boat


What "evidence to the contrary?"
More...

That's just the problem with theists, 'Boat. They will not accept ANYTHING as "evidence to the contrary".
 
Originally posted by I Missed Boat

On the latter, we often believe things socially about people that we can't absolutely prove. Sometimes we use deductive reasoning to make probability judgements, and sometimes we simply get a certain impression from someone and make judgements about that person that we can't really explain to others. Nothing wrong with that, up to a point.
More...


when we are talking about the existance of god, surely you would think that we are well and truly beyond that "point" at which we can just use our "impressions".
 
Originally posted by daniel_m
when we are talking about the existence of god, surely you would think that we are well and truly beyond that "point" at which we can just use our "impressions".



when we are talking about the existence of god, surely you would think that we are well and truly beyond that "point" at which we can just use our "impressions".
More...

I wouldn't simply use my "impressions," but if it is one component of what someone else uses for their view, I wouldn't dictate to said person what he or she shouldn't believe spiritually. Questioning or challenging a person is one thing, but telling someone that they don't have an "excuse" to believe in something is overboard in my view.
 
Originally posted by stu



1. I think you are dead right with that one. I know I would

2. You experienced non existence before you were born. No Time no space, no concept of what no time and no space could be.

See ......you have experienced it !
More...

technically nobody "experienced" it. To experience something, you have to be alive. But everyone gets your point obviously.
 
Originally posted by axeman
"Science facts are things that can be observed, tested, and demonstrated."

Evolution has been observed. The kind that happens
between species, obviously, can never be observed
because of the time involved.

But like a river which cuts a canyon through stone, this
still can be proven scientifically.

Creationists must think that canyons are NOT cut from rivers.
You could show them 10 pictures of 10 different stages
of a river cutting through a canyon, and they would say, IT CANT
BE TRUE!! There's a gap between pic 3 and 4!!!!

Then you would fill this gap with 4 more evenly spaced
pics and they would say: IT CANT BE TRUE!!! There is
a gap between pics 3.4.1 and 3.4.4!!!

You could show them mini versions of the same process
that occurs in their own backyard after a rain, and they
still would deny it. The process has been observed.
It has been observed on many scales, and the evidence
exists that it has occured on scales beyond our
human lifetimes. The evidence is overwhelming.
This is why the scientific community considers
evolution FACT. Ask any real scientist.

Creationists simply cannot accept this on ANY grounds
because it contradicts their belief systems. Simple as that.
They are being completely irrational and blind to reality.


peace

axeman
More...

There have been absolutely NO skeletal remains found that indicate one species evolves into another. Give up, you have no proof. God made us, and not we ourselves.
 
I wouldn't simply use my "impressions," but if it is one component of what someone else uses for their view, I wouldn't dictate to said person what he or she shouldn't believe spiritually.

Strawman fallacy. We are NOT debating what people should
or should not believe spiritually.

This is not a touchy feel good discussion on what people
should believe spirtually.

We are debating the existence of god here.
A binary thing. There is no room for "impressions" in
a debate. "Impressions" carry no weight.

Proving to someone they have no rational reason to believe
in a myth is core to this debate. It is not overboard.

What is this? PC-ism on crack or something?

You have theists making outrageous claims.
The atheists are doing a great job of destroying all their
old and weak arugments.

The atheists still believe they have a right to their
bogus beliefs.

However, if they catch the theists trying to offer their
faith based beliefs as fact, they are going to get shot down.

Again and again and again... :D

peace

axeman

Originally posted by I Missed Boat


I wouldn't simply use my "impressions," but if it is one component of what someone else uses for their view, I wouldn't dictate to said person what he or she shouldn't believe spiritually. Questioning or challenging a person is one thing, but telling someone that they don't have an "excuse" to believe in something is overboard in my view.
More...
 
Originally posted by thunderbolt


There have been absolutely NO skeletal remains found that indicate one species evolves into another. Give up, you have no proof. God made us, and not we ourselves.
More...

Buddy, ever heard of the skeleton "Lucy", or, in scientific terms, Australopithecus afarensis? If you don't accept THAT as transitional evidence, then WHAT WOULD you accept?


Anyway, there is no point bringing up evolution. Whether or not you accept evolution as a valid scientific theory has nothing to do with whether or not man should accept christianity, and very little do with whether man should believe in a generic "god" (since a definition, even a loose one, of this "god" seems unable to be produced.)

 
Thunderbolt,

You dont understand the simplest logic.

Lets say evolution is complete bullshit ok?
Lets get evolution out of the picture completely.

There *STILL* would be NO rational reason to belive in god.
Evolution is not relevant.

You have failed to prove the existence of your god.
You have been shot down in a million ways.
You have put forth NO rational argument.
When you ARE shot down, you ignore the post and
never attempt to reply to it. Because you cant.

Any unbiased third party person would review this thread
and agree that you have no ground to stand on.

Until you prove the existence of your god, he, she, it,
is simply a MYTH.

As for creationism and evolution.
Creationism provides us with ZERO evidence.
Evolution provides us with a ton of evidence.
ANY theory which provides us with ANY evidence at all
is better than a theory which is nothing more than a story
with NO evidence.


You STILL have failed to solve the puzzle of who
created your complex creator! You are lost in this debate.

peace

axeman


Originally posted by thunderbolt


There have been absolutely NO skeletal remains found that indicate one species evolves into another. Give up, you have no proof. God made us, and not we ourselves.
More...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top