If God doesn't exist...

[zaangalewa]

I am only 50 or 80 precents atheist. Lutheran God doesn't help me with belief so I am atheist.

God is freedom - so you have a choice. You don't know the way - that's your problem.`

 

[ChrisL]

How is this supposed to convince me about an existence of a God? If you're arguing solely for an existence of a God but not stating the purpose of life, then is this a powerless God or some entity that created us for nothing?

I'm assuming you're Jewish, since you keep quoting scripture. From my perspective, Jews need American christians to remain religious as a means to ensure support for Israel. And if those Christians eventually went against that doctrine, you'd downplay religion and promote atheism.

Where did you get the notion that I mean to convince you "about an existence of a God?"

I've made the case that fake science...that which you believe, is a religion.

You're making a case for creationism, I never said I believe in 'fake science' or whatever that is. I don't subscribe to any theories, I don't believe a God exists. There is meaning or purpose to life.

No I'm not.

I'm simply revealing that what ever creationism is, what you believe is science is the same.

Creationism is a farce, science doesn't claim to understand purpose of life or get into matters of faith. I'm not sure where I claimed that. But, science has helped dispel creationism theories, such as the ones in Abrahamic faiths.

I don't know what "creationism" is - but the expression "creation" is not a farce. Darwin for example created the theory of evolution.

Darwin didn't "create" the theory. His theory was based on observations from a scientific viewpoint and the evolutionary changes he observed in animals that were isolated on an island. Lol. Silly!

 

[PoliticalChic]

Where did you get the notion that I mean to convince you "about an existence of a God?"

I've made the case that fake science...that which you believe, is a religion.

You're making a case for creationism, I never said I believe in 'fake science' or whatever that is. I don't subscribe to any theories, I don't believe a God exists. There is meaning or purpose to life.

No I'm not.

I'm simply revealing that what ever creationism is, what you believe is science is the same.

Creationism is a farce, science doesn't claim to understand purpose of life or get into matters of faith. I'm not sure where I claimed that. But, science has helped dispel creationism theories, such as the ones in Abrahamic faiths.

I don't know what "creationism" is - but the expression "creation" is not a farce. Darwin for example created the theory of evolution.

Darwin didn't "create" the theory. His theory was based on observations from a scientific viewpoint and the evolutionary changes he observed in animals that were isolated on an island. Lol. Silly!

Of course that is not true.

Nor has there been any....any ....new species observed in the century and a half since Darwin.

"And let us dispose of a common misconception. The complete transmutation of even one animal species into a different species has never been directly observed either in the laboratory or in the field."

Dean H. Kenyon (Professor of Biology, San Francisco State University), affidavit presented to the U.S. Supreme Court, No. 85-1513, Brief of Appellants, prepared under the direction of William J. Guste, Jr., Attorney General of the State of Louisiana, October 1985, p. A-16.

 

[james bond]

If God does not exist, then atheists do not exist.

Atheists do exist.

Atheists state God does not exist.

Thus, atheists are wrong about God's non-existence..

Thus, God exists.

Thus, it has to either be both God and atheists exist or neither exist.

Do you see any problems with the logic above?

Yes, drinking this early in the morning is your problem.

No drinking or smoking the funny sticks. Aren't atheists the champions of logic?

The assumption is an universe without God, If no God, then no atheists. (I suppose one can say If no belief in God, then no non-belief in His existence.) Can we agree on that?

I'm just trying to point out we cannot have a condition where atheists and no God or where God and no atheists exist.

So, logically is it possible to come up with yes atheist and no God?

If no god, then atheists are right. End of story.

God says there is no end of the story. See. Atheists are usually wrong.

 

[james bond]

If God does not exist, then atheists do not exist.

Atheists do exist.

Atheists state God does not exist.

Thus, atheists are wrong about God's non-existence..

Thus, God exists.

Thus, it has to either be both God and atheists exist or neither exist.

Do you see any problems with the logic above?

Do you speak with me? I asked someting completly different - In your way to think it is maybe: "Why is logic here?" Why are you able to write what you wrote - although it could be it is completly senseless to write or to think or to feel and to communicate? Are you able to believe: "Everything what I said never made any sense and never will make any sense."? If we say senseless things - lives not in this case in everyone of us the hope: "Senselessness is not everything!" and lives in us all not the hope that we will find a piece from this, what's all around and/or within us, so we are able to say: "Yes, it's worth to live for this piece, although I never will know what the complete picture will be!"?

We're assuming an universe with no God.

If what the OP stated is true, then there are no atheists. Who would say I believe in no no God? It would be silly.

That said, in this world we have atheists, so it means there is a God.

You can substitute a belief in God (God) or belief in no God (atheism) and that's fine.

I'm just saying that only the above two conditions can exist.

What do you expect from a post that starts out if no God? You can't expect much.

 

[ChrisL]

Believe me, not many people would like to believe in a "heaven" more than me. But . . . no. Just not plausible. Of course, like anyone, sometimes I do wonder, but then my logic takes over.

 

[ChrisL]

People used to believe in vampires and werewolves too. Lol. They actually thought they had evidence of vampires but they did not. The evidence they saw was a normal process of decay. The body gets bloated and sometimes blood will come out of the nose and mouth (of course this was before we did "preservation" techniques and drained the body of blood, etc.). So they would see corpses that looked "fat" and saw blood coming out of their mouths and thought they were awakening and sucking blood.

Let's not forget about the belief in "witches" too, where they killed many men and women for being "witches." Lol.

So to me, religious beliefs are not anymore believable and a god or gods are just another thing that ignorant people of the past attributed natural events to.

Does that make sense?

 

[Mudda]

If God does not exist, then atheists do not exist.

Atheists do exist.

Atheists state God does not exist.

Thus, atheists are wrong about God's non-existence..

Thus, God exists.

Thus, it has to either be both God and atheists exist or neither exist.

Do you see any problems with the logic above?

Yes, drinking this early in the morning is your problem.

No drinking or smoking the funny sticks. Aren't atheists the champions of logic?

The assumption is an universe without God, If no God, then no atheists. (I suppose one can say If no belief in God, then no non-belief in His existence.) Can we agree on that?

I'm just trying to point out we cannot have a condition where atheists and no God or where God and no atheists exist.

So, logically is it possible to come up with yes atheist and no God?

If no god, then atheists are right. End of story.

God says there is no end of the story. See. Atheists are usually wrong.

You got any proof of god saying anything or is this just more fartsmoke?

 

[ChrisL]

If God does not exist, then atheists do not exist.

Atheists do exist.

Atheists state God does not exist.

Thus, atheists are wrong about God's non-existence..

Thus, God exists.

Thus, it has to either be both God and atheists exist or neither exist.

Do you see any problems with the logic above?

Yes, drinking this early in the morning is your problem.

No drinking or smoking the funny sticks. Aren't atheists the champions of logic?

The assumption is an universe without God, If no God, then no atheists. (I suppose one can say If no belief in God, then no non-belief in His existence.) Can we agree on that?

I'm just trying to point out we cannot have a condition where atheists and no God or where God and no atheists exist.

So, logically is it possible to come up with yes atheist and no God?

If no god, then atheists are right. End of story.

God says there is no end of the story. See. Atheists are usually wrong.

You got any proof of god saying anything or is this just more fartsmoke?

I call fart smoke!

 

[Uncensored2008]

Darwin didn't "create" the theory. His theory was based on observations from a scientific viewpoint and the evolutionary changes he observed in animals that were isolated on an island. Lol. Silly!

More the diversity of the species on the Galapagos and Australia.

To this day there is no rational explanation of the platypus other than as a transitional species between mammal and reptile. It was this that really drove Darwin to recognize that species evolve from other or lower forms.

 

[forkup]

You're making a case for creationism, I never said I believe in 'fake science' or whatever that is. I don't subscribe to any theories, I don't believe a God exists. There is meaning or purpose to life.

No I'm not.

I'm simply revealing that what ever creationism is, what you believe is science is the same.

Creationism is a farce, science doesn't claim to understand purpose of life or get into matters of faith. I'm not sure where I claimed that. But, science has helped dispel creationism theories, such as the ones in Abrahamic faiths.

I don't know what "creationism" is - but the expression "creation" is not a farce. Darwin for example created the theory of evolution.

Darwin didn't "create" the theory. His theory was based on observations from a scientific viewpoint and the evolutionary changes he observed in animals that were isolated on an island. Lol. Silly!

Of course that is not true.

Nor has there been any....any ....new species observed in the century and a half since Darwin.

"And let us dispose of a common misconception. The complete transmutation of even one animal species into a different species has never been directly observed either in the laboratory or in the field."

Dean H. Kenyon (Professor of Biology, San Francisco State University), affidavit presented to the U.S. Supreme Court, No. 85-1513, Brief of Appellants, prepared under the direction of William J. Guste, Jr., Attorney General of the State of Louisiana, October 1985, p. A-16.

Tell me how do you think evolution work? One generation you have a ostrich the next generation a chicken? This process takes hundreds of tousands of years. Comes the question of classifacation of a new species. When is a species new.

are these new species?
As to your professor. First of all he is an extreme minority in the scientific world. Second as I was saying yesterday. Science doesn't deal in absolutes by its nature its fluid. Religion does deal in absolutes. Creatonism is a very absolute view of the bible. I don't need to prove evolution every time you find a dissenter. On the other hand if you come out with the extraordinary claim that an omnipotent being was directly responsible for creating every living thing on earth you need to come up with a stronger case then 'it sais so in the bible'.

 

[ChrisL]

 

[zaangalewa]

Where did you get the notion that I mean to convince you "about an existence of a God?"

I've made the case that fake science...that which you believe, is a religion.

You're making a case for creationism, I never said I believe in 'fake science' or whatever that is. I don't subscribe to any theories, I don't believe a God exists. There is meaning or purpose to life.

No I'm not.

I'm simply revealing that what ever creationism is, what you believe is science is the same.

Creationism is a farce, science doesn't claim to understand purpose of life or get into matters of faith. I'm not sure where I claimed that. But, science has helped dispel creationism theories, such as the ones in Abrahamic faiths.

I don't know what "creationism" is - but the expression "creation" is not a farce. Darwin for example created the theory of evolution.

Darwin didn't "create" the theory.

I heard Darwin was only the first who published this theory - others had the same ideas. Whoelse did?

His theory was based on observations from a scientific viewpoint and the evolutionary changes he observed in animals that were isolated on an island. Lol. Silly!

So there was a plan (= a teleological structure) behind the creation of the theory of evolution. A plan follows in most cases inspirations. So maybe the community of the natural scientists created the theory of evolution with their inspirations.

 

[zaangalewa]

Dr. House is not real but a fiction only. What knows a fiction about reality?

 

[forkup]

Dr. House is not a real but a fiction only. What knows a fiction about reality?

My friend unless you can prove me wrong, i consider the christian bible just as fictional.

 

[zaangalewa]

Dr. House is not a real but a fiction only. What knows a fiction about reality?

My friend

¿friend? ... strange, very strange ...

unless you can prove me wrong, i consider the christian bible just as fictional.

Everyone is for everyone else always only a fiction of the own power of imaginations. You don't know anything about me. You "know" only what you think about me. Nevertheless I'm not a fiction. I say what I think and I don't think the fictional character "Dr. Gregory House" says, what the real existing actor "Mr. Hugh Laurie" thinks.

 

[forkup]

Dr. House is not a real but a fiction only. What knows a fiction about reality?

My friend

¿friend? ... strange, very strange ...

unless you can prove me wrong, i consider the christian bible just as fictional.

Everyone is for everyone else always only a fiction of the own imaginations. You don't know anything about me. You "know" only what you think about me. Nevertheless I'm not a fiction. I say what I think. I don't think the fictional character "Dr. Gregory House" says what the real existing actor "Mr. Hugh Laurie" thinks.

It's for me personaly by the way completly unimportant what you think about the bible. Why should anyone ask you anything in context with the bible?

Sorry for caling you friend,apperently it was offensive, anyways moving on. I kinda have a hard time understanding your posts. Just to give context to my post. I don't believe you are fictional and of course you give your opinion, after all this is a discussion board. You dismissed chrisl posts as something irrelevant because she used a quote of a fictional character. Nobody here thinks House is real but the quote does make sense. Me and Chris and all atheist believe that the only way you can be religious is that, at least as far as religion is concerned you have to stop thinking rationally. Not saying you are not rational but religion by definition, requires believing without having proof of your assumption ,namely that there is a god and more specifically that all he does is literally described in the bible. Hope this is helpfull.

 

[ChrisL]

Dr. House is not a real but a fiction only. What knows a fiction about reality?

My friend

¿friend? ... strange, very strange ...

unless you can prove me wrong, i consider the christian bible just as fictional.

Everyone is for everyone else always only a fiction of the own power of imaginations. You don't know anything about me. You "know" only what you think about me. Nevertheless I'm not a fiction. I say what I think and I don't think the fictional character "Dr. Gregory House" says, what the real existing actor "Mr. Hugh Laurie" thinks.

Typical phony "Christian." Lol. What would Jesus say?

 

[ChrisL]

I've known many, many people who claim to be "Christians." They are NOT good people. They prove it all the time! Hypocrites who talk a big talk but FAIL at walking the walk.

 

[forkup]

I've known many, many people who claim to be "Christians." They are NOT good people. They prove it all the time! Hypocrites who talk a big talk but FAIL at walking the walk.

I was raised Roman Catholic, I was baptised and confirmed and I'll go even further. I've found pieces of the new testament important in my morality. Then again I've also taken life lessons from fairy tales, my parents, friends and family, not to mention my own common sense. I will rarely call ppl names and altough my ego will compell me to try to convince other ppl of me being right. I think I show respect to ppl who do believe in other things then I do. I think that the most important lesson found in the NT is the story of the good samaritan, wich teaches us, and I'm simplifying here, that being a good person has little to do with being a religious person.