"My name is Dustin Patzer and I'm an Ex Mormon." (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JciFDrhnVzs#ws)
"As an atheist, I would have to believe that: nothing produces everything; non-life produces life; randomness produces fine-tuning; chaos produces information; unconsciousness produces consciousness; non-reason produces reason. Based on this, I was forced to conclude that Darwinism would require a blind leap of faith that I was not willing to make. The central pillars of the evolutionary theory quickly rotted away when exposed to scrutiny."
-Lee Strobel, ex-atheist
You two just won't quit ._____..
Quote from: Xrow on February 20, 2011, 07:26:44 PM
"As an atheist, I would have to believe that: nothing produces everything; non-life produces life; randomness produces fine-tuning; chaos produces information; unconsciousness produces consciousness; non-reason produces reason. Based on this, I was forced to conclude that Darwinism would require a blind leap of faith that I was not willing to make. The central pillars of the evolutionary theory quickly rotted away when exposed to scrutiny."
-Lee Strobel, ex-atheist
Being that I am well versed in the tenants of the Biological Sciences, I have absolutely no clue where this man is heading with this statement. Within each of his "leaps", there is a finely documented continuum, which requires no leap of faith what-so-every. Can you be more specific? Did you even consider the video? It seems as if you just plug your ears and scream, "NANANANANANANANAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANANANA NANANANANANANAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA, I'M NOT LISTENING", each post I make with regard to the illogical nature of religions. Have you nothing to say specifically relating to the man's claims within the video itself? Nothing of substantial nature, I'm sure, as these are clearly discernible contradictions within any religion.
Jeff, get over it. Don't even enter these topics if they sicken you.
Quote from: Optimism on February 20, 2011, 11:16:47 PM
Quote from: Xrow on February 20, 2011, 07:26:44 PM
"As an atheist, I would have to believe that: nothing produces everything; non-life produces life; randomness produces fine-tuning; chaos produces information; unconsciousness produces consciousness; non-reason produces reason. Based on this, I was forced to conclude that Darwinism would require a blind leap of faith that I was not willing to make. The central pillars of the evolutionary theory quickly rotted away when exposed to scrutiny."
-Lee Strobel, ex-atheist
Being that I am well versed in the tenants of the Biological Sciences, I have absolutely no clue where this man is heading with this statement. Within each of his "leaps", there is a finely documented continuum, which requires no leap of faith what-so-every. Can you be more specific? Did you even consider the video? It seems as if you just plug your ears and scream, "NANANANANANANANAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANANANA NANANANANANANAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA, I'M NOT LISTENING", each post I make with regard to the illogical nature of religions. Have you nothing to say specifically relating to the man's claims within the video itself? Nothing of substantial nature, I'm sure, as these are clearly discernible contradictions within any religion.
Jeff, get over it. Don't even enter these topics if they sicken you.
All I said was a fact >_>.
Yeah you two kinda just need to go separate ways lmao.
Of course I listened, I just didn't really care, to be honest o.O.. I've heard it a thousand times. He is only partway to a logical conclusion - his loss.
If you do not understand to what ends Dr. Strobel is going with that statement, then maybe you should read up on atheism =)
My own statement: "To believe in atheism is to believe that the universe created itself and everything in it."
http://boutcheetah.zylongaming.com/index.php/topic,8945.0.html (http://boutcheetah.zylongaming.com/index.php/topic,8945.0.html)
How about you both believe what you want and not argue over it for now ? You two need a break lol.
This isn't even hard work >_>. No need for a break. I actually enjoy it, and I know Opti does.
I know but still you two are constantly arguing lol can't you all come to a truce or something.
IM A CHRISTIAN DEAL WITH IT!!!!! *cry*
Quote from: Xrow on February 21, 2011, 12:02:20 AM
Of course I listened, I just didn't really care, to be honest o.O.. I've heard it a thousand times. He is only partway to a logical conclusion - his loss.
If you do not understand to what ends Dr. Strobel is going with that statement, then maybe you should read up on atheism =)
My own statement: "To believe in atheism is to believe that the universe created itself and everything in it."
http://boutcheetah.zylongaming.com/index.php/topic,8945.0.html (http://boutcheetah.zylongaming.com/index.php/topic,8945.0.html)
For the last time, I'm an agnostic atheist humanist. If you want an explanation of what this means, ask, as it is apparent that you haven't the slightest idea.
As I've stated previously, truth is relative. However, if we are to work towards humanity's benefit, then we, as a human race, must propose a platform on which to gauge "truth". This platform ultimately comes down to rational observation, experiment and conclusion -- all of which, is what atheism supports. The simple answer is, the human race, at this stage in its existence, cannot determine what was the causative incident for the Big Bang. However, this doesn't mean we simply stop searching for an answer and throw our hands up in the air and state that god did everything. If that were the case, then prayer healing (of which, countless lawsuits/imprisonments have been handed out) would be the only curative means for disease and the age of anti-viral and antibiotics would have never came to fruition.
http://i.imgur.com/En0Q3.jpg (http://i.imgur.com/En0Q3.jpg)
Thankfully, the aforementioned platform on which science gauges truth enables such progress. The same can't be said for religion. Let your fears go, King, and search for truth, rather than settling with something that was taught to you all of your life. You're absurd, my friend.
http://i.imgur.com/uDJhQ.jpg (http://i.imgur.com/uDJhQ.jpg)
You'll never explore your true potential, of which, I think is incredibly deep, if you do not release yourself from the ball and chain that has shackled your mind. Set yourself free.
http://tinypic.cc/6zxwh (http://tinypic.cc/6zxwh)
^tl;dr.
Whatever type of atheist you are, does that mean you never go "Thank God" or "Oh my God"? What do you do when you're in a real shit situation?
I don't see why atheist's care about showing off that they don't believe in god and when they die they are just dead. Why don't we believe what we want and just live and die. All this is about is to show who here is wrong. If you do this because you want to change Christan's then you are the same as them, and if you believe in no god why should you care if they "waste" their lives on Christianity.
OH MY GOD.
Why do you have to write walls of text with links upon links stapled onto them? Its obnoxious. You make it impossible to address any one subject at a time.
1. Truth is NOT relative. If truth was relative, then truth wouldn't really exist.
2. I have never heard you call yourself an agnostic atheist humanist. Tell me your beliefs. Please don't wall of text it.
3. Atheists have not discovered non-supernatural causation for the big bang because it does not exist. There is no other more plausible explanation.
4. Are you even being serious..? o.O.. The presence of a supernatural creator is no reason for progression to be thrown aside. Its not like atheism - or any other religion - created medication. It would have been created either way.
5. I HAVE set my prejudices aside in search of truth, Opti ;|. I have heard all the "truth" you have thus offered. Obviously there is some reason I am in disagreement of it. Either I am mentally blind, or you are.
In conclusion, for some reason you seem to believe that religion has rendered me blind to logic. Not your logic, mind you - your way is not the only way, and thus your logic is not the only logic. (By your thinking, truth is relative. This means that logic must also be relative ;) ).
Your stubborn :\
EDIT:
By the way, if I'm absurd, then your the friend of an absurd man!
YOUR ABSURD TOO ;D
Quote from: Xrow on February 21, 2011, 02:13:59 AM
OH MY GOD.
Why do you have to write walls of text with links upon links stapled onto them? Its obnoxious. You make it impossible to address any one subject at a time.
1. Truth is NOT relative. If truth was relative, then truth wouldn't really exist.
Does truth exist? Some forms of truth can be substantiated, however, certainly there are others which cannot (origin of the universe preceding the Big Bang).
QuoteWhether truth is relative or absolute is a matter of subjective opinions. I understand many truths are absolute, while others are relative. Given my educational level, you and I would disagree on matters as absolute or relative; however, remember, I have compounding, reproducible, stand-alone-evidence that gives validity to what I "believe" and claim to be absolute. Moreover, tangible results that enable benefit or harm could be demonstrated at numerous levels on a plethora of topics, substantiating the aforesaid statement.
The answer: truth is both or only one option depending on the individual. However, those that give advancement to society see many truths as absolute, and not relative (scientists). For instance, vaccinations, cancer treatment, surgical procedures that enable life-sustaining/saving methodologies to be repetitively implemented with success, etc., are considered absolute truths by those who perform the task to safe a life and by those saved.
If you can't get past the philosophy of the relativity of certain matters, then you will under-live your true potential and for this, I pitty you and wish you a great education that enables a revelation.
As for the Big Bang theory, refer to the red text. Christianity is none of this and therefore, is not a valid belief. If you still disagree, I demand a full paper from you within 2 weeks explaining the big-bang (in paraphrase of course, of how it occurred and why scientists state they've detected remnants and how these remnants correlate to the Big Bang itself). Keep in mind, the writing of this paper must include references from reputable academic sources (peer-reviewed, which are validated through an objective means). Only then will you truly come to appreciate the red text listed previously. If you don't understand something written, then consult another source for clarity. Off you go.
Truth is absolute per individual and relative between individuals <<<<<<<<<<<<<
http://godisimaginary.com/ (http://godisimaginary.com/)
We've discussed this. I don't know how many times we have to go through this.
QuoteIn conclusion, for some reason you seem to believe that religion has rendered me blind to logic. Not your logic, mind you - your way is not the only way, and thus your logic is not the only logic. (By your thinking, truth is relative. This means that logic must also be relative ;) ).
Congratulations -- you understand the concept via this statement. Yes -- logic is relative; however, the extent to which logic benefits humanity and how it holds up within debate is how I and others determine it so.
2. I have never heard you call yourself an agnostic atheist humanist. Tell me your beliefs. Please don't wall of text it.
Sure. This term means the following: A disbelief in any god associated with any religion due to religious paradox/ambiguity. Meaning, one religion can't substantiate its truth over another given how each attempts to prove its validity. I do not, however, claim that a god does or does not exist with regard to the constructs of the universe, as this is unknowable and there is no evidence to propose otherwise (for or against -- which is your logical fallacy). As for humanist -- this simply entails a wanting to benefit all of humanity (the progression of human rights to all individuals).
Quote3. Atheists have not discovered non-supernatural causation for the big bang because it does not exist. There is no other more plausible explanation.
Do you understand and know all intricacies of every detail of mathematics, physics, biology, etc (knowledge)? No, so you can't possibly say there is no other plausible explanation. 2000 years ago, if I were to set a lap-top in-front of a cave man, he would have said god created it. God of the gaps in its truest form -- another substantial logical fallacy.
4. Are you even being serious..? o.O.. The presence of a supernatural creator is no reason for progression to be thrown aside. Its not like atheism - or any other religion - created medication. It would have been created either way.
This is true -- I didn't make myself clear enough within the initial post. Allow me to differentiate between the two existing facets of religious belief and how they relate to science. A-matter-of-fact, I'll let Neil handle that for me:
Neil DeGrass Tyson @ BYU - are you religious? (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_RWT3w_qPU#)
5. I HAVE set my prejudices aside in search of truth, Opti ;|. I have heard all the "truth" you have thus offered. Obviously there is some reason I am in disagreement of it. Either I am mentally blind, or you are.
If you imply god of the gaps within your logic, then you aren't setting aside bias. Quite the opposite.
In conclusion, for some reason you seem to believe that religion has rendered me blind to logic. Not your logic, mind you - your way is not the only way, and thus your logic is not the only logic. (By your thinking, truth is relative. This means that logic must also be relative ;) ).
Yay -- you're going somewhere here! :)
Your stubborn :\
EDIT:
By the way, if I'm absurd, then your the friend of an absurd man!
YOUR ABSURD TOO ;D
It seems as though you haven't learned a thing from our discussions.
Sigh.
Regardless of whether humans know the exact origins of the universe, truth still exists in regards to the subject. It is either absolutely true that the universe had a creator, or it is absolutely true that it did not.
Truth isn't relative, Opti :|.
Mr. Neil speaks truth, unfortunately. Many Christians do run to the Bible as a factual basis for knowledge - when it simply is not. However it is a method with which to form Christian beliefs. Scientific and historic evidence, as well as logic and reasoning, can then be used to substantiate the claims of the Bible.
Do you understand and know all intricacies of every detail of mathematics, physics, biology, etc (knowledge)? No, so you can't possibly say there is no other plausible explanation. 2000 years ago, if I were to set a lap-top in-front of a cave man, he would have said god created it. God of the gaps in its truest form -- another substantial logical fallacy.
*Sigh.
I don't use God of the gaps arguments. Thanks though.
I agree, I cannot prove that there is no other plausible explanation. But none has yet been presented. And logic actually supports a supernatural creator - logic you are pitifully blind to.
For the second time, Opti, why have you not swayed me with your "evidence?"
BECAUSE IT ISN'T LOGICAL.
I agree that microevolution exists. In fact, evolution as a whole is not an absurd notion (although there is no real evidence to support it - missing links, beneficial mutations, ect). What is impossible to believe is that all fine-tuned values necessary for life came into being by way of a random explosion.
I don't see how anyone can grasp that an extremely intricate design came from anything but a designer.
The notion is absurd to me.
Quote from: Xrow on February 21, 2011, 06:18:43 PM
It seems as though you haven't learned a thing from our discussions.
Sigh.
lol? I'm willing to empathize with all beliefs and understand that each maintains a truth to that individual and I wish them all the best -- even you. However, when you infringe on another's life-style because of your beliefs, that is where I'll step in and call you on it (gays, reproductive rights, etc.).
My philosophy: live and let live -- there are many "absolute truths" within this world. But if you attempt to throw your beliefs onto another's, degrading their humanity in the process, I'll smack you around verbally.
Moreover, I won't condemn you to eternal damnation in the process. I respect all ways-of-life. But, I expect the same respect in return.
It doesn't get anymore "open-minded" than this.
Read my edit
Quote from: Xrow on February 21, 2011, 06:18:43 PM
It seems as though you haven't learned a thing from our discussions.
Sigh.
Regardless of whether humans know the exact origins of the universe, truth still exists in regards to the subject. It is either absolutely true that the universe had a creator, or it is absolutely true that it did not.
Truth isn't relative, Opti :|.
Mr. Neil speaks truth, unfortunately. Many Christians do run to the Bible as a factual basis for knowledge - when it simply is not. However it is a method with which to form Christian beliefs. Scientific and historic evidence, as well as logic and reasoning, can then be used to substantiate the claims of the Bible.
Do you understand and know all intricacies of every detail of mathematics, physics, biology, etc (knowledge)? No, so you can't possibly say there is no other plausible explanation. 2000 years ago, if I were to set a lap-top in-front of a cave man, he would have said god created it. God of the gaps in its truest form -- another substantial logical fallacy.
*Sigh.
I don't use God of the gaps arguments. Thanks though.
I agree, I cannot prove that there is no other plausible explanation. But none has yet been presented. And logic actually supports a supernatural creator - logic you are pitifully blind to.
For the second time, Opti, why have you not swayed me with your "evidence?"
BECAUSE IT ISN'T LOGICAL.
I agree that microevolution exists. In fact, evolution as a whole is not an absurd notion (although there is no real evidence to support it - missing links, beneficial mutations, ect). What is impossible to believe is that all fine-tuned values necessary for life came into being by way of a random explosion.
I don't see how anyone can grasp that an extremely intricate design came from anything but a designer.
The notion is absurd to me.
@ the red -- how so?
As for microevolution -- you do realize, if you understand and accept this form of evolution, then you accept macroevolution? They are one in the same. lol? If a change in genetic structure, resulting in a new phenotypic structure occurs within several generations, then there is nothing from stopping even more substantial change from occurring over millions and millions of years...
Truth is absolute per individual and relative between individuals, as truth itself is defined by the individual.
You may be willing to submit that your way-of-life is incorrect and that another, absolute truth exists. However, many will not go this far, maintaining that their way-of-life is the way and the truth (absolute truth). You claiming an absolute truth is, in itself relative, when compared to what another will claim. Is there one truth? You can't say for certain. Ambiguity, my friend.
Putting things in persepctive,
http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.universetoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/PaleBlueDot.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.universetoday.com/49091/pale-blue-dot/&usg=__SxPQJ1JBK9gF7DSZiG_gdo05nl0=&h=895&w=792&sz=61&hl=en&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=TqtaEngUSQ8koM:&tbnh=133&tbnw=116&ei=zeViTaGpJ8L7lwe4qZjcCw&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dblue%2Bdot%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26biw%3D1112%26bih%3D692%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=299&vpy=202&dur=472&hovh=133&hovw=118&tx=122&ty=140&oei=zeViTaGpJ8L7lwe4qZjcCw&page=1&ndsp=18&ved=1t:429,r:1,s:0 (http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.universetoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/PaleBlueDot.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.universetoday.com/49091/pale-blue-dot/&usg=__SxPQJ1JBK9gF7DSZiG_gdo05nl0=&h=895&w=792&sz=61&hl=en&start=0&zoom=1&tbnid=TqtaEngUSQ8koM:&tbnh=133&tbnw=116&ei=zeViTaGpJ8L7lwe4qZjcCw&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dblue%2Bdot%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26biw%3D1112%26bih%3D692%26tbs%3Disch:1&um=1&itbs=1&iact=hc&vpx=299&vpy=202&dur=472&hovh=133&hovw=118&tx=122&ty=140&oei=zeViTaGpJ8L7lwe4qZjcCw&page=1&ndsp=18&ved=1t:429,r:1,s:0)
There is earth as viewed by voyager one. Not even this picture does the following concept justice. If you honestly think that this entire universe was created (and possibly an infinite amount of others) for the sole purpose of yourself and the 7 billion other individuals on this planet, then please, take a good hard look once again. Upend your centrist view that follows from your religious beliefs. You aren't that special.
Still want to make a claim on what you define as "absolute truth"? C'mon...really?
Red1:
History: Multiple outside sources, including non-Christian sources, agree with the claims of the Bible. None contradict it.
Science: The unbelievable intricacy of life alludes to a creator. The fine-tuning of the universe needed to support intelligent life alludes to a creator. The Cambrian Explosion (a massive explosion of intelligent and complex life in a short amount of time during the beginning of the middle Cambrian - fossil records) alludes to a creator. The intelligence of DNA alludes to a creator. To name a few.
Specifics with regard to "sources"; moreover, I can throw out any other religion along with "sources" validating that religion as well. It simply isn't a sufficient means to isolate any one religion from any other. And, as for alluding to a creator -- how? Just because something seems complex, doesn't mean there was a creator of divine origin. You are jumping a logical canyon and falling directly into it without reaching the other side. There is ZERO correlation to this proposition and the existence of a god associated with your religion. There is NO evidence of a creator. Absolutely none. Therefore, you cannot come to this conclusion in the slightest. You need evidence before you can substantiate a claim. This would be impossible, as again, there IS NO evidence.
I need far more specifics here. Far more.
Red2:
Simply put, evolution teaches that natural processes created everything. For one thing, nature cannot write DNA (an extremely intricate language). For another thing, nature did not exist until after the big bang, and therefore could not have created the big bang. So where did it come from? Finally, nothing can create itself - therefore there must have been a cause of all causes. This cause has to be timeless, otherwise it would have to have had a cause, and therefore would not be the cause of all causes. Understand? This is undeniable.
This, as well as the arguments stated in "Red1" allude to a creator.
Your knowledge of science and what is possible and what isn't is lacking undeniably from this paragraph -- laughably so, in fact. I'm assuming you've never taken a Biochemistry class, molecular genetics or a simply college chemistry class for that matter. If nothing can create itself, then what created god? If god is timeless and infinite, why can't the universe be? I think Carl Sagan puts it best:
Carl Sagan on "God" and "gods" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4E-_DdX8Ke0#)
You sad thing.. I fear your confusing truth with opinion. Opinion is relative per individual, truth is not. Whether you live in China or America, 2+2=4. If 1 in 6 billion believes otherwise, it is NOT true for him - he is merely incorrect.
To address another misconception: truth is defined by the proposition of a statement, not the statement itself. Ex: I say "Obama is president." And someone in Russia says "Thats true for you but not for me; he is not my president." What did the Russian get wrong?Heres what: I didn't really say "Obama is president.," I said "Obama is president of the United States on February 21, 2011." That is true for all people, in all places, no matter what someones opinion is. Truth is absolute.
Relative truth cannot exist. If it did, it wouldn't really be truth, now would it?
Relative truth is still truth; however, this truth takes on a subjective form. All truth is, subjective. All truth. If you don't understand this statement, then you don't understand the intricacies of the concepts of both objectivity and subjectivity.
As for "intelligent design":
Intelligent Design is Stupid: Neil deGrasse Tyson (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEl9kVl6KPc#)
C'mon man...open your eyes. Let us use some common sense here.
Edited your post.
An addition that you will find helpful:
http://www.christianforums.com/t7536666/ (http://www.christianforums.com/t7536666/)
Microevolution and its relation to the macroevolutionary theory, in a format the nearest red-neck can grasp entirely.
" If nothing can create itself, then what created god? If god is timeless and infinite, why can't the universe be?"
Sigh, we've been over this.
The Law of Causality states that all that is finite must have a cause.
The Creator of the universe must be infinite for a couple reasons:
1. Because every finite thing needs a cause (see Law of Causality and Infinite Regression), and because nothing can create itself, something timeless must be the cause of all causes. This is undeniable logic. (LOL)
2. Because in order to have created time, He must have been outside of time - and thus timeless (otherwise He would not have created it).
The universe can't be timeless and infinite for one obvious reason: it is losing energy (see the Second Law of Thermodynamics). This is because it is an open system (and therefore cannot be infinite). If the universe was timeless, it would have run out of energy quite a while ago, don't you think? =)
You speak of these laws as if they were created by god itself. These laws have origins within the human population, which is innately flawed. You are attempting to apply these laws to something that is far beyond any individual's understanding, which is absurd. These laws are inapplicable in this regard, as we don't understand in the slightest the very founding principles on which this universe was created. It is impossible.
As for the universe not being infinite -- the collapse/expand theory refutes this claim. I could go on and on regarding propositions claiming it to be infinite; however, this doesn't substantiate truth. You can't make a claim regarding this issue, yet you are. Truth claims in the absence of evidence=laughable. Stop.
Edited your post.
Overlooked the following:
http://www.christianforums.com/t7536666/ (http://www.christianforums.com/t7536666/)
Red Herring and Straw Man.
Pitiful.
Fortunately, this argument will remain true regardless:
Nothing can create itself, therefore a timeless creator must have been the cause of all causes.
Using cognitive certainty and logic, this statement is true.
By the way, if truth is absolute per individual.. Why are you still debating with me? Not to persuade me of an absolute truth I have yet to grasp, I dare say. ::)
Quote from: Xrow on February 21, 2011, 11:38:41 PM
Red Herring and Straw Man.
Pitiful.
Fortunately, this argument will remain true regardless:
Nothing can create itself, therefore a timeless creator must have been the cause of all causes.
Using cognitive certainty and logic, this statement is true.
Cognitive certainty is grounded in the observable and tangible, of which, your propositions are neither. In other words, your usage of these terms are completely inapplicable.
http://www.christianforums.com/t7536666/ (http://www.christianforums.com/t7536666/) (read it already).
I got tired of reading your posts.
Just don't break rules in em, kay?
:)
Quote from: Allie on February 21, 2011, 11:42:56 PM
I got tired of reading your posts.
Just don't break rules in em, kay?
:)
*Pst* you guys can now break the rules without getting caught. /not directed at Allie.
Quote from: Allie on February 21, 2011, 11:42:56 PM
I got tired of reading your posts.
Just don't break rules in em, kay?
:)
I will smite thee with my rod of divine epidermis.
You have no rod.
;D.
Anyways, you disagree with the statement that nothing can create itself?
Quote from: Xrow on February 22, 2011, 12:23:38 AM
You have no rod.
;D.
Anyways, you disagree with the statement that nothing can create itself?
Did nothing ever exist?
:)
You can't make claims unfounded on evidence. I'm sorry bro, but you're drawing inferences. Not wise.
http://boutcheetah.zylongaming.com/index.php/topic,8981.0.html (http://boutcheetah.zylongaming.com/index.php/topic,8981.0.html)
I read it already.
Of course nothing existed. What else proceeds that which is finite?
Quote from: Xrow on February 22, 2011, 12:34:05 AM
I read it already.
Of course nothing existed. What else proceeds that which is finite?
lol @ you making a claim you think to be accurate regarding a matter that requires infinitesimal knowledge. Really, a pathetic site to see.
"Infinitesimal knowledge"...? Its called philosophical certitude, thank you very much.
And don't make fun of me for making a logical conclusion. At least I'm thinking.
What else can precede something, if not nothing?
I guarantee you don't have a more logical answer >_> I've looked into it.
Xrow, you stated that you have "proof" that god exists.
May I see this, "proof".
Quote from: Lyric_ on February 22, 2011, 12:50:09 AM
Xrow, you stated that you have "proof" that god exists.
May I see this, "proof".
Prove he doesn't.
^ <3.
@Lyrie: Can you quote it? I don't recall using the word proof. I believe I used evidence.
The bible is bullshit, any fool who falls for even one word of thing should set themselves on fire.
Have you even read it? ::)
Another Completely Irrational Justification For God - Atheist Experience 439 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SbUyfaZz3w#)
Well, the caller was a bit slow.
SOOO have you read the Bible?
"Something cannot come from nothing" - The Atheist Experience #675 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXkc7ToYsTI#ws)
This is a better one.
Also, no. I was very into religion as a child, and due to common sense grew out of it.
Quote from: Lyric_ on February 22, 2011, 12:54:07 AM
The bible is bullshit, any fool who falls for even one word of thing should set themselves on fire.
That is such blasphemy <_<. I think you kinda just crossed lines; I doubt that Tyler would say that, it makes you seem incompetent.
Quote from: Jeffalo13 on February 22, 2011, 01:18:33 AM
Quote from: Lyric_ on February 22, 2011, 12:54:07 AM
The bible is bullshit, any fool who falls for even one word of thing should set themselves on fire.
That is such blasphemy <_<. I think you kinda just crossed lines; I doubt that Tyler would say that, it makes you seem incompetent.
Tyler wouldn't have.
Quote from: Lyric_ on February 22, 2011, 01:18:19 AM
Also, no. I was very into religion as a child, and due to common sense grew out of it.
He
IS incompetent - he hasn't even read the Bible, yet he can somehow make such a statement.
Pathetic, Kelvin.
Quote from: Lyric_ on February 22, 2011, 01:18:19 AM
"Something cannot come from nothing" - The Atheist Experience #675 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXkc7ToYsTI#ws)
This is a better one.
Also, no. I was very into religion as a child, and due to common sense grew out of it.
That guy sounds like xrow.
He's owned yet he's like 'no look, im going to ignore your evidence, this is right because god is on my side'.
Kelvin is completely justified in his response. Those who have formerly experienced religion, then realize the extent of its ignorance at a later period look onto those who continue the belief in an obvious lie in disgust.
I view those who are religious as cowardice, ignorant children who can't differentiate between the story of Santa Claus and the story that is running and ruining their lives and other's lives in the process.
There is no evidence for god, Xrow. Honestly, stop fibbing to yourself. You looking up into the cosmos, and believing that because you can't understand how something so magnificent came to be without a god is ****ing disgusting. In the words of Xrow and his subjectivity, "undeniable logic". LOL.
Creationists simply get smashed with logic on a daily basis, thus the magnificent diversity of videos being posted here.
The fact is, I could understand if you were a deist; however, you select one religion of tens of thousands in the world and claim truth within that sole way of life. Its disgusting. Why? Because you can't assert anymore "evidence" than someone claiming to be Hindu or Buddhist. And that my friend, is undeniable logic. You're religion is no more valid than the next and thus, cannot be absolute truth. Of course, you'll dodge this statement on your response, as you dodge all my responses with your own in near entirety.
I suggest you watch the above video. Take it all in -- this is exactly your argument and it falls apart under scrutiny when pushed for "evidence". lol.
Here is one more regarding, "you can't disprove god". You can't disprove a negative; moreover, the burden of proof will always remain on those who make extraordinary claims in the absence of evidence. If you can't provide evidence, then I can smack it aside and continue on with my life:
Proof and evidence that atheism is accurate and correct - The Atheist Experience #682 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbxqvugoJuw#ws)
^Religions are mutually exclusive you retard. I can't believe that the only way to Heaven is through Jesus while still believing that good works alone will get me to Heaven.
I don't think you even know what logic is >_> And if you do, you obviously have no clue how to apply it.
By the way, truth is
discovered, not
invented. Gravity existed before Newton had any idea of it.
In the same way, the truth about the beginnings of the universe exists regardless of whether humans have found it. It doesn't matter what you believe, the universe was either created or magically exploded (or whatever else). Your beliefs change nothing about it.
And another thing, you say that truth is absolute per individual on the basis that if a person believes something, it is absolutely true for them.
Consider this:
I believe you are going to hell.
Quote from: Allie on February 22, 2011, 02:57:49 AM
That guy sounds like xrow.
He's owned yet he's like 'no look, im going to ignore your evidence, this is right because god is on my side'.
When have I ever even implied that simply having God on my side makes me right?
Hell, I haven't even referenced the Bible!
If your going to be an a** hole, at least make it justifiable. >_>.
Quote from: Xrow on February 22, 2011, 09:52:35 PM
^Religions are mutually exclusive you retard. I can't believe that the only way to Heaven is through Jesus while still believing that good works alone will get me to Heaven.
I don't think you even know what logic is >_> And if you do, you obviously have no clue how to apply it.
By the way, truth is discovered, not invented. Gravity existed before Newton had any idea of it.
In the same way, the truth about the beginnings of the universe exists regardless of whether humans have found it. It doesn't matter what you believe, the universe was either created or magically exploded (or whatever else). Your beliefs change nothing about it.
And another thing, you say that truth is absolute per individual on the basis that if a person believes something, it is absolutely true for them.
Consider this:
I believe you are going to hell.
Quote from: Allie on February 22, 2011, 02:57:49 AM
That guy sounds like xrow.
He's owned yet he's like 'no look, im going to ignore your evidence, this is right because god is on my side'.
When have I ever even implied that simply having God on my side makes me right?
Hell, I haven't even referenced the Bible!
If your going to be an a** hole, at least make it justifiable. >_>.
You believe I'm going to hell. If you believe this to be true per yourself, then it is so. However, when I come into the situation, that truth then becomes relative due to a conflicting "absolute truth". Its an easy concept that you've yet to grasp.
So you believe all religions give a pathway to heaven? Awesome stuff. Far better than what you were formerly (exclusively Christian). Yay!
^It seems as though you are growing more and more foolish as we progress.
So your saying that
1. Its absolutely true that your going to hell - because I believe it, and
2. Its absolutely true that your not going to hell - because you don't believe it exists.
How can this be?
Quote from: Optimism on February 23, 2011, 12:08:23 AM
So you believe all religions give a pathway to heaven? Awesome stuff. Far better than what you were formerly (exclusively Christian). Yay!
wtf..?
Do you know what mutually exclusive means? o.O..
By your "logic," there is no absolute truth to progress towards - so how have I become better?
"Logically" speaking, you have no reason to attend college. I mean, the professor doesn't have the absolute truth, so what do you intend to discover by listening to him?
Quote from: Xrow on February 23, 2011, 12:16:58 AM
^It seems as though you are growing more and more foolish as we progress.
So your saying that
1. Its absolutely true that your going to hell - because I believe it, and
2. Its absolutely true that your not going to hell - because you don't believe it exists.
How can this be?
Quote from: Optimism on February 23, 2011, 12:08:23 AM
So you believe all religions give a pathway to heaven? Awesome stuff. Far better than what you were formerly (exclusively Christian). Yay!
wtf..?
Do you know what mutually exclusive means? o.O..
By your "logic," there is no absolute truth to progress towards - so how have I become better?
"Logically" speaking, you have no reason to attend college. I mean, the professor doesn't have the absolute truth, so what do you intend to discover by listening to him?
Honestly, we are on two very different levels here. Be sure, that I stand far above you. Firstly, I can't even grasp what you are attempting to convey because of the shear logical inconsistencies within each of your statements. I have to honestly re-read each sentence you write at least twice before understanding the context and how it evenly minutely relates to the conversation at hand.
QuoteSo your saying that
1. Its absolutely true that your going to hell - because I believe it, and
2. Its absolutely true that your not going to hell - because you don't believe it exists.
I'm calling you on this right now. You have no ****ing clue regarding my proposition of truth and its relativity and absoluteness as evidence by your response. The two numbered events are stand alone, BOTH STRICTLY RELATING TO THE ****ING INDIVIDUAL ONLY. Yes, to you, it is absolute truth that I am going to hell because YOU believe it. It is also absolute truth that I am NOT going to hell BECAUSE I DON'T BELIEVE IT. Due to their conflicting nature, these two truths are LABELED AS RELATIVE. The reason they are labeled AS RELATIVE is because BOTH are unsubstantiated claims with regard to the opposing belief. This is simply a case of subjectivity vs. objectivity (another concept you are far from grasping).
As for mutually exclusivity, I understand this term and its implications completely. However, what I do not understand is the context in which you apply it. I still don't, as you are that logically UNSOUND.
Locked. This goes nowhere. Hey, at least you believe in evolution now :).