Zone1 atheists don't have proof of God... because they refuse to look at the proof

[Meriweather]

There is brainwashing, indoctrination, and blind faith. Blind in the sense that the faith contradicts modern science.

That is like saying a cook book contradicts a book on architecture. Science is a study of the objective. Religion/philosophy is a study of the subjective. Science and religion are two very different things, much like a rock and beauty are two different things.

 

[Meriweather]

And now the Catholic church needs to throw superstitious beliefs on 'creation' out the window, and then try to sneak it back in the back door to sit alongside of Darwinian evolution.

What people don't understand is that over a hundred years ago, the Catholic Church was fine with the theory of evolution. I know, because my grandmother went to a Catholic nursing school back in the day (mid 1920s), and that is where she learned it. It is (and has been) one of many things Catholics can decide individually. This always seems to shock non-Catholics, even Christian non-Catholics.

 

[Meriweather]

You're doing more harm than good here, by providing atheists an audience.

I am doing neither harm nor good. I am simply enjoying a discussion.

 

[Meriweather]

Yeah, we still have that problem with living 3 days in the big fish's belly!

Grin. You may have missed the point of the story.

 

[Meriweather]

You must be trying to manufacture something to take the place of the proof we know doesn't exist.

If I believe first, can you promise the proof will follow?

I am confused. What is there to manufacture?

Even more confusing....what proof? Perhaps you missed all the posts where I have asserted there is no proof?

 

[Grumblenuts]

my lack of knowledge of Hinduism or Taoism makes me ignorant, it doesn't mean I escaped being indoctrinated or brainwashed.

Correct, you were born an atheist like everyone else, then got indoctrinated and brainwashed.

If you truly studied religion/Bible/Koran, you would know that I am not only honest, but correct.

And humble. <= Btw, that's called satire.

 

[nomadic5]

I probably should have used the word Evidence, not proof but in a way i'm not sorry

To me there is ample proof there is a God. Just you sitting there using your modern keyboard in the comfort of your home is a form of proof IMO. I do realize,however, that I will never convince anyone who refuses to be convinced.

The earth is just the right distance from the sun so that we don't freeze to death or fry

The laws of nature are ubiquitous if you only study nature, and I don't mean formally studying.

There is logic there. Humans are the only ones who go against nature and then wonder what went wrong... blame God, etc..

 

[Hollie]

Think about that Judge's statement.

"I can't define pornography, but I know it when I see it."

Apply that.

Tell us about all the competing religions/ gods which contradict your religion / gods.

Apply the "reasoning" where those religions / gods are presumed true.

Which of those will you convert to?

 

[Meriweather]

Correct, you were born

Yes, I was born ignorant like everyone else, and then was educated.

 

[Blues Man]

Life, itself, for starters. No atheist has EVER given a good explanation as to how life came about. I've heard a few, very weak possibilities, but even those flimsy explanations can't explain how nothing produced something. The human body and all of its intricate parts and pieces are a work & result of pure design. All designs are produced by a designer.

So the lack of an explanation is proof that some god exists?

Humans have barely been around long enough to understand the entire universe and everything in it. In fact we really only barely understand about 5% of the known universe.

Seeing that we are so ignorant in regards to the universe why on earth would you think we should have an explanation for everything that has ever happened in the last 15 billion years?

To me it's pretty pathetic that people have to make up gods and magic to explain things

 

[Blues Man]

Yes, I was born ignorant like everyone else, and then was educated.

And like all people you are for more ignorant than you are educated as there will always be more things you do not know than you do know.

 

[Augustine_]

Until the end I thought you were going to say atheism.

 

[Augustine_]

So why don't you lay it out for us. Starting with step one all the way to the current status of life:

Step one:
Step two:
Step three:
Step four:

There ... I even provided a template for you.

Why do you assume there are multiple steps? Your belief system has a single magic step, and you have not provided any evidence for it that makes it any more valid than any other religious or nonreligious belief.

 

[mamooth]

I've heard a few, very weak possibilities, but even those flimsy explanations can't explain how nothing produced something.

So by that argument, God can't exist, because it couldn't have just popped out of nothing.

Thanks for playing.

No, you can't give God a special exception to your rules, not if you want to be taken seriously. No Special Pleading fallacies allowed.

 

[SaxonJackson]

Why do you assume there are multiple steps? Your belief system has a single magic step, and you have not provided any evidence for it that makes it any more valid than any other religious or nonreligious belief.

Just as suspected and anticipated. A total sidestep. You know what DIDN'T bring life into existence, but have no clue (whatsoever) what did. Just give us your best guess. It could be entertaining.

 

[Augustine_]

Just as suspected and anticipated. A total sidestep. You know what DIDN'T bring life into existence, but have no clue (whatsoever) what did. Just give us your best guess. It could be entertaining.

You are the one claiming to know the truth, yet you have nothing to support it with. What I know, is that forces in the universe interact in such a way as to create various structures. If it's because of a creator, there are countless to choose from, and the one you've made the choice to believe has no better argument for it than any of the others.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

The rubrics of proof differ for theists and atheists.

 

[SaxonJackson]

You are the one claiming to know the truth, yet you have nothing to support it with. What I know, is that forces in the universe interact in such a way as to create various structures. If it's because of a creator, there are countless to choose from, and the one you've made the choice to believe has no better argument for it than any of the others.

Aaannnndddd ... another fail. As the old saying goes ... "if at first you don't succeed, then try, try again." The clueless trying to educate others on how to be clueless.

 

[Augustine_]

Aaannnndddd ... another fail. As the old saying goes ... "if at first you don't succeed, then try, try again." The clueless trying to educate others on how to be clueless.

^ the irony

 

[Augustine_]

The rubrics of proof differ for theists and atheists.

Faith inherently rejects needing a rubric for proof at all. When pressed, atheists will admit to being agnostic, while theists will demand you adhere to whatever they've been indoctrinated to believe.