|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
posted April 13, 2013 11:48 PM |
|
|
@artu
Quote:
@gnomes
Since I cant speak Hebrew I won't proclaim anything but a lot of those discovered "translation errors" seems like PR and a way to gently adapt the scriptures to our age. I mean think of it, The Genesis becomes a pretty weird text when you take out day and fill in undetermined allotment of time.
When you read the holy books (both Bible and Quran), Occham's Razor suggests that they are indeed filled with factual mistakes of the times they were written in and not some mistaken translation that contains timeless information. Which is only natural and would be nothing to be ashamed of if some people wouldn't hopelessly insist they are flawless and timeless.
Atheists can be such noobs. 
"Old Earth" creationists have been around since before Augustine. Augustine proposed his own ideas about evolution looooooong before Darwin came along.
The creation account itself should clue you in on the "days" not being 24 hour days when the entire 7 "days" is summed up as "day" in the creation account itself. And there are plenty of other instances of "day" plainly not meaning a 24 hour day.
Quote:
Gen 2:4 These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens,
We have been in the "Day of Salvation for 2000 years, since Christ began pouring out his Spirit after his resurrection. Some day will be the "Day of Judgement/Day of the Lord."
No one has been able to point out a single actual error in the Bible to me in all my years of making atheists look silly.  And it is certainly not for lack of trying on the part of atheists.
@Seraphim
Quote:
Turns out that Religion is like self-induced OCD + Autism.
I am wondering if there is anyway to communicate with theists because logic, a common language dont cut it. Perhaps sign language would work.
It seems like some of the atheists on this board have nothing to present but "religion bashing" and bashing specific religious people. That is pretty much the way almost every atheist in debates act when I see them debating some religious guy. Waving their hands, foaming at the mouth, spittle flying everything as they rail against religion and all of the evil that it supposedly is.
Just to clue you in throwing insults around is not "logic."
Quote:
The dilemma was:
Is it to God more important to safeguard the freewill or the will of the rapist to rape
Or
The womens freewill or will not to be raped. The inaction of god is siding with the rapists, which makes god malevolent. Again, this makes the belief in such a God redundant.
If God did not allow the rapist to rape there would be no free will. The rapist is allowed to rape but will be judged for it when he stands face to face with God. The rapist may escape human justice but there is nowhere to hide from God.
God did not make us robots. He made us personal beings.
The only malevolence I see are atheist rants against God and his people.
@JJ
Quote:
So? There is still no urge to do bad things.
Having worked in law enforcement for many years I can safely say you are clueless. There are people out there with all sorts of ideas of what they'd like to do to someone that could only be described as "bad things." We managed to catch some of them. After they'd already given in to those urges.
@JJ
Quote:
SCIENTIFIC FACT, however is, that it is IMPOSSIBLE - eve for God - to know two complementary attributes of a particle at the same time, for example, position and impulse, which means, that it's impossible to get ALL information. Secondly, there are quantum processes in the brain as well, which ultimately means, that human decisions cannot be predicted with 100% certainty either, and in this material universe, that's a fundamental characteristic of it - it's STRUCTURED that way.
What total, complete, utter crap. There has been no scientific experiment that has verified what God can and can't know.
God lives in every point in the space-time continuum and transcends it. God is "I AM", the eternal, ever present, all knowing, all powerful being who caused everything to exist.
Quote:
r how would you name a being that can do EVERYTHING that is possible. Would such a being NOT be all-powerful? So why do you define all-powerful as being able to do the IMpossible?
God can do anything that is intrinsically possible. He can't make a square circle because a square circle is not intrinsically possible.
Quote:
In short: religion is just the mortar we use to fill the gaps in insights about our existence and the world we live in.
Those gaps have become less through the millennia and centuries, but the biggest of them all are still yawning wide open.
Perhaps that is true of your religion, but it is not true of religion in general. Theistic religions deal with man's relationship with God and with his fellow man and does not care so much for "what is the temperature of the sun" or "how long can a whale stay under before it must surface to breath?" Religion tends to delve into the "deeper", more meaningful matters that science has no tools for measuring.
A person who ignores the spiritual side of life is ignoring much of what it means to be human. I pity them. 
____________
Revelation
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted April 14, 2013 12:24 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 00:27, 14 Apr 2013.
|
As I mentioned to Gnomes, I don't specifically object to the word "day" and I have heard that argument before, it is even in the classic movie Inherit The Wind, Spencer Tracy comes with it. What I meant was, as you can see in the quote, this or that translation error put aside, the books are very much representative of their times, there is nothing in them that makes you say "this couldn't have been written on those ages", on the contrary, most of the time you just say, "well, that was the way folks used to look at things back then."
Quote:
"Old Earth" creationists have been around since before Augustine. Augustine proposed his own ideas about evolution looooooong before Darwin came along.
And Anaximander was born loooong before Augistine. The idea of evolution goes back to Ancient Greece as far as we can trace it. But those were intuitions. The importance of Darwin is he used the methods of positive science to test his ideas and he came up with the principle of natural selection, there's another guy (cant remember his name) just around the same time that comes up with it but he didn't publish a book like Darwin. (And up until 19th century they never involved humans, which is the part religious people are interested in, they don't give a squad if horses and zebras are relatives.) The recent shape the theory is in, it is not compatible with the story of Eden. It's as simple as that.
Quote:
No one has been able to point out a single actual error in the Bible to me in all my years of making atheists look silly. And it is certainly not for lack of trying on the part of atheists.
Well, that's only natural because you don't go from data to conclusion, you go from conclusion to data. Which means you will rationalize, bend, twist and if none of that works, ignore any data contradicting your faith. Ironically, it is the religious who are "blinded". I watch debates of people like Dawkins and Hitchens facing clergy and such, they ask some questions, corner the guys, get no valid, logically consistent answers, yet the religious guy sitting next to me, who's watching the same thing ends up saying, see how they replied to all the questions. It really is a form of delusion. Believing that more than 7/5 of world population will burn in hell (including tribe people who never got out of their village or jungle hence never even heard of jesus) because they are not the true sons and daughters of God and calling it timeless, flawless justice.. I can't come up with any other explanation.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted April 14, 2013 12:55 AM |
|
|
Quote:
The recent shape the theory is in, it is not compatible with the story of Eden. It's as simple as that.
Poppycock. But this thread is repeating itself. Go back and read starting on page 3 and you see me explain to people ignorant of the concept what theistic evolution is.
Below is a partial quote from one of my posts on page 6 that presents a scenario compatible with the Eden account.
Quote:
You are probably ignorant that there are several different models of evolution held by different theistic evolutionists/evolutionary creationists/progressive creationists. In fact I am certain of it since you asked the question about what theistic evolution is in an earlier post. You need to do some research beyond reading the rhetoric on some anti-theist site. Oh and you ignorantly claim a believer in theistic evolution can't believe in a literal Adam and Eve? Lolllllzzzzzzz. You are too ignorant of the theories to even discuss this with.
There are different models, like I said before. Let's say that God produced the singularity which produced the Big Bang, and the space time continuum thus came into being. Eventually planets formed around what became our star.
1) God created the heavens and the earth
2) The earth was without form and void until the Spirit of God began to move.
So there reached a point where God intervened directly into the affairs of earth and did whatever he did to shape it as he willed and to cause it to be suitable for life and produced life on it so it was no longer void. Over the course of whatever time frame God created things slowly or just caused a natural process that kicked things off. God allowed nature to do its work and at times intervened directly when the time was just right or causing new life forms to come into being or die out to keep life appropriate for the changing environment of the earth and for what he eventually wanted it to become.
Eventually hominoids were formed. Human-like, but not human. Let's say at some point God, when they had advanced to some point where they would advance no further or maybe one particular hominoid had made an extraordinary evolutionary leap that left him "above" his peers; God took him from his group, placed it in a specially prepared garden which he named Eden and imparted a spiritual dimension to him so that now he had something mere animals don't have. He could be called "homo-divinus" as a "divine spark" had been added to him. God took of the man's genetic make up and made a mate for him. Adam and Eve. They sinned, the divine spark dimmed in man. We now have the Fall of Man in the garden of Eden.
Yes, a Christian can believe in evolution in a number of different forms. You were wrong for saying Dr Collins can't believe in evolution and be a Christian.
Quote:
No one has been able to point out a single actual error in the Bible to me in all my years of making atheists look silly. And it is certainly not for lack of trying on the part of atheists.
Well, that's only natural because you don't go from data to conclusion, you go from conclusion to data.
Nah, that is blatantly false. Atheists quite often make false statements that the Bibles says this or that and I quote what the Bible actually say. Atheists in general are quite ignorant of the Bible and I can handily "whip" any atheist (that I've ever had a discussion with" in any discussion about the Bible. Similarly most atheists are very poorly equipped to argue against religion on any other basis. Most have a poor knowledge of science and a lamentable knowledge of history. They are left with basically only their own anger and resentment of God and his people, which is not a good foundation for a debate.
Quote:
It really is a form of delusion.
Typical Dawkinite crap. 99% of all the people who ever lived have been delusional and atheists alone hold "the truth." Yeah, right.
____________
Revelation
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted April 14, 2013 01:13 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 01:37, 14 Apr 2013.
|
Quote:
Let's say at some point God, when they had advanced to some point where they would advance no further or maybe one particular hominoid had made an extraordinary evolutionary leap that left him "above" his peers; God took him from his group, placed it in a specially prepared garden which he named Eden and imparted a spiritual dimension to him so that now he had something mere animals don't have. He could be called "homo-divinus" as a "divine spark" had been added to him. God took of the man's genetic make up and made a mate for him. Adam and Eve. They sinned, the divine spark dimmed in man. We now have the Fall of Man in the garden of Eden.
A scenario indeed. It has been explained in this very thread by three people, including me, evolution contains no such leaps. It's not our personal opinion, it's how scientific method lays out the process. But I'm sure on planet Elodinia you can whip all of us.
Quote:
99% of all the people who ever lived have been delusional and atheists alone hold "the truth." Yeah, right.
99 percent of people are not theists, not all theists are monotheists, not all monotheists are Christians. All those religions don't sum up, they accuse each other of heresy and charlatanism. Even if they mattered, statistics are not your friend, 51 percent of the world don't believe in Jesus, and not everybody who says they are religious are devoted like you, they don't care enough to be qualified as delusional, it's just a family tradition to them.
|
|
Hobbit
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted April 14, 2013 01:38 AM |
|
|
Believing in "one soulmate" or not is like believing in God - can be really easy, still some can say it's stupid, and no one knows where the truth is - because there is probably no truth at all.
____________
Horn of the
Abyss on AcidCave
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted April 14, 2013 01:57 AM |
|
|
@Elodin
While at it, let me explain to you why that leap can't happen with a linguistic example.
This is Beowulf, a text in old English dated somewhere between 8th and 11th century:
Swa sceal geong guma gode gewyrcean,
fromum feohgiftum on fæder bearme,
þæt hine on ylde eft gewunigen
wilgesiþas, þonne wig cume,
leode gelæsten; lofdædum sceal
And this is a randomly picked writing from today's New York Times:
Secretary of State John Kerry offered to reduce American missile defenses in Asia if North Korea abandoned its nuclear arms program, an overture aimed at getting China’s help in easing tensions on the peninsula.
Your "from humanoid to Eden" leap is a guy whose parents talk like they did in Beowulf, but he talks like the 2013 New York Times.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted April 14, 2013 02:18 AM |
|
|
The difference between science and religion is that the former is always willing to reconsider any of its theories, laws and rules. The catch is that the longer a theory is supported by evidence, the stronger the evidence must be to disprove it. If we ask any religious person if they would accept any evidence disproving the existence of his god, the answer will always be "No". That is why religion can never be classified as science regardless of what name you give to it. Nothing in science is proven or disproved beyond a shadow of any possible doubt. In science, everything is "provisional". Being provisional is not a weakness or a sign that a conclusion is weak. Being provisional is a smart, pragmatic tactic because we can never be sure what we'll come across at next corner. This lack of absolute certainty is a window through which many religious theists try to slip their god, "you can't prove 100% god does not exist", but is a cheap move, as they don't have even 1% evidence for their claims.
Theists also believe that without religion, the planet would descend into immoral chaos. The reality is that a big part of heinous crimes committed against people on this planet across all of recorded history had their roots on religious beliefs, but the ability to distinguish right from wrong does not require any religious beliefs. Religion, throughout history, has been used to control the masses, rather than enlighten them, we have today a perfect example with suicide bombers, long ago crusades, is Islam so different from Christianity?
Another thing which bothers me is that during the experiences of so called near-death that many people have related, they never talk anything about heaven, god, angels or anything of the sort. Is there some counter used by God, something like "ok you are dead, but not enough dead to show you the goods", or?
I can admit that God is omnipotent but then the only conclusion I can find is that he is some sort of psychopath who enjoys watching our misery, he won't lift a finger to stop all the disasters, massacres, wars and Patenaude trolling HC. Doesn't tease me much to bow to such entity, real or not.
|
|
Seraphim
Supreme Hero
Knowledge Reaper
|
|
posted April 14, 2013 02:51 AM |
|
Edited by Seraphim at 03:23, 14 Apr 2013.
|
Quote:
Typical Dawkinite crap. 99% of all the people who ever lived have been delusional and atheists alone hold "the truth." Yeah, right.
Typical theist behavior. Dodging hard questions by presenting falacies.
In other words:
Quote:
In argumentation theory, an argumentum ad populum (Latin for "appeal to the people") is a fallacious argument that concludes a proposition to be true because many or most people believe it. In other words, the basic idea of the argument is: "If many believe so, it is so."
But thats not all:
Quote:
Nah, that is blatantly false. Atheists quite often make false statements that the Bibles says this or that and I quote what the Bible actually say. Atheists in general are quite ignorant of the Bible and I can handily "whip" any atheist (that I've ever had a discussion with" in any discussion about the Bible. Similarly most atheists are very poorly equipped to argue against religion on any other basis. Most have a poor knowledge of science and a lamentable knowledge of history. They are left with basically only their own anger and resentment of God and his people, which is not a good foundation for a debate.
and this constitutes a violation to logic by ad hominem, appeal to emotion, poisoning the well, and guilt by association.
These two links actually show that at least in a poll you are incorrect.
Atheists know more about religon and are better educated
Link 2
Quote:
This line of thought is closely related to the ad hominem, appeal to emotion, poisoning the well, and guilt by association fallacies given that it invokes a person's contempt for the general populace or something about the general populace in order to persuade them that most are wrong about X.
But you are incorrect because you assume without any evidence or at least reasoning.
Just straight up butt hurt, reverse everything atheists say about theists and then insult all atheists.
But then elodin, every atheist in this forum has beaten you in terms of arguments. In other words, no you cannot handle atheists and facts.
Well done elodin, you really deserve a prize for snowing up logic so well. Even OCD patients and Schizotypals cant do better.
Will you ever stop spewing snow about atheists without a shred of knowledge?
____________
"Science is not fun without cyanide"
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted April 14, 2013 05:16 AM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 05:22, 14 Apr 2013.
|
@Elodin
Quote:
@JJ
Quote:
SCIENTIFIC FACT, however is, that it is IMPOSSIBLE - eve for God - to know two complementary attributes of a particle at the same time, for example, position and impulse, which means, that it's impossible to get ALL information. Secondly, there are quantum processes in the brain as well, which ultimately means, that human decisions cannot be predicted with 100% certainty either, and in this material universe, that's a fundamental characteristic of it - it's STRUCTURED that way.
What total, complete, utter crap. There has been no scientific experiment that has verified what God can and can't know.
No matter what you may think is possible or not possible for God, the question itself is not "total, complete, utter crap". It's a real philosophical problem that even Einstein and his contemporaries (many of them Christians) struggled with. The reality of quantum physics is that quantum-scale events are probabilistic in nature. The future cannot be known - it can only be predicted. That's not a limitation of measurement technology - it's a true, fundamental limitation imposed by the physics of the universe. This Copenhagen interpretation, as it is known now, was not agreeable to Einstein, who famously quipped that "[God] does not throw dice". (To which Neils Bohr supposedly admonished Einstein to not tell God what to do.)
Even if you ignore any implicatons of quantum theory to Christian doctrine (whatever they are), the philosophical implications of quantum theory in general are still a matter of much debate. Theologists, philosophers and scientists have pondered and argued over the implications of quantum mechanics for decades, and calling the problem "total, complete, utter crap" is an insult to them and everyone else who has ever wondered over the answer with a clear and open mind. For myself, I am humbled by the question, intriguing though it may be, and have thought about it quite a bit to no avail (other than some rather throbbing headaches).
That quantum theory is generally correct is in no doubt. But if the wisest scientists and philosophers over the last century have not come to an agreement over what it truly means about the universe's metaphysics, I laugh to think that Elodin imagines he has all the answers...
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
Seraphim
Supreme Hero
Knowledge Reaper
|
|
posted April 14, 2013 05:45 AM |
|
Edited by Seraphim at 06:03, 14 Apr 2013.
|
Quote:
(To which Neils Bohr supposedly admonished Einstein to not tell God what to do.)
To which he was right. If you gotta bring up god, quantum physics in a discussion then I am sure somebody got things wrong here.
Then let me ask, what is god? I know what quantum physics is but not god. God is loosely defined and most religions have an:
OmniEverything god:Knows, Can do, can be, everywhere,anywhere, know it all and everything.
Quote:
That quantum theory is generally correct is in no doubt.
Some interesting videos,They are idiot proof, no offense.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i1TVZIBj7UA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVO0HgMi6Lc
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3_RhISgoXUs
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7vc-Uvp3vwg
Quote:
But if the wisest scientists and philosophers over the last century have not come to an agreement over what it truly means about the universe's metaphysics, I laugh to think that Elodin imagines he has all the answers...
Oh, come on. Dont make an Argumentum ad populum regardless of context. Scientists can be wrong but established physical laws cannot and evidence does not lie.
____________
"Science is not fun without cyanide"
|
|
Drakon-Deus
Undefeatable Hero
Qapla'
|
|
posted April 14, 2013 08:54 AM |
|
|
Quote:
lol, fixed indeed. drakon, i hate to have to tell you, man, but soulmates don't exist. so if you're looking for(or holding out for) "the one", you're just wasting your time. trust me, i used to think the same way. soulmates, and such. ended up being depressed more often than not. you should listen to this song. (explicit lyrics) this song explains the way females actually work, when it comes to "soulmates".
Believe me, I know. I've had a few downers myself and I'm just 19.
But in theory, as in the Bible, it says that a woman must be to a man what the church is for Christ. But in practice, that's pretty nearing impossible, no matter if they're religious or not.
____________
Horses don't die on a dog's wish.
|
|
master_learn
Legendary Hero
walking to the library
|
|
posted April 14, 2013 09:05 AM |
|
|
You could believe that you will find your soulmate in the future,when you search her.
As is written-"Ask and it will be given to you; search, and you will find; knock, and the door will be opened for you."
Well,you could also just look for a woman to have a relationship with.Without very high expectations,you will be less disappointed and more accepting her real qualities.
And besides,you should be good enough for her too.
____________
"I heard the latest HD version disables playing Heroes. Please reconsider."-Salamandre
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted April 14, 2013 10:22 AM |
|
|
@Seraphim:
"God plays no dice with the universe" is only a metaphorical phrase objecting to the randomness in quantum physics. Turned out, Einstein was wrong on that one. But the phrase was never spoken in a theistic manner anyway. It's as theistic as me saying "God bless you" to you when you sneeze.
Einstein, at times, took some sort of a metaphysical stance between spiritualism and pantheism but never was he a theist and he wrote he found the idea of a personified, reward/punishment giving God very childish and could only be interested in him in terms of psychology and history.
I don't understand why people are so interested in Einstein's religious views anyway, guess cause he's one of the few scientists who's also a popular icon.
|
|
Elodin
Promising
Legendary Hero
Free Thinker
|
|
posted April 14, 2013 11:31 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Let's say at some point God, when they had advanced to some point where they would advance no further or maybe one particular hominoid had made an extraordinary evolutionary leap that left him "above" his peers; God took him from his group, placed it in a specially prepared garden which he named Eden and imparted a spiritual dimension to him so that now he had something mere animals don't have. He could be called "homo-divinus" as a "divine spark" had been added to him. God took of the man's genetic make up and made a mate for him. Adam and Eve. They sinned, the divine spark dimmed in man. We now have the Fall of Man in the garden of Eden.
A scenario indeed. It has been explained in this very thread by three people, including me, evolution contains no such leaps. It's not our personal opinion, it's how scientific method lays out the process. But I'm sure on planet Elodinia you can whip all of us.
Quite the load of crap again. Some atheists love to claim science has proved this or that when it has done no such thing. Anyone who says science has proved there could not have been any evolutionary "leaps" is lying or repeating a lie someone else told them. Anyone who says science has proved God could not have taken an existing hominid and added a spiritual dimension to him is simply straight up lying.
And you have deceitfully taken what I said out of context. Yes, in any discussion about the Bible I can whip you and any other atheists I've ever heard or had a discussion with. I've studied the Bible for longer than you've been alive, likely, I'm not sure how old you are.
Quote:
Quote:
99% of all the people who ever lived have been delusional and atheists alone hold "the truth." Yeah, right.
99 percent of people are not theists, not all theists are monotheists, not all monotheists are Christians. All those religions don't sum up, they accuse each other of heresy and charlatanism. Even if they mattered, statistics are not your friend, 51 percent of the world don't believe in Jesus, and not everybody who says they are religious are devoted like you, they don't care enough to be qualified as delusional, it's just a family tradition to them.
You calling the world's theists delusional is simply more Dawkinite crap. Sadly the "new atheists" have chose to sling crap instead of attempting to debate rationally. The world's theists far outnumber the tiny atheist cult and it is far more likely on numbers alone the theists are right and the atheists are delusional.
Further, saying "God does not exist" means the person himself is claiming divine attributes. To know for a fact that God does not exist you'll need to be able to simultaneously examine every point in the space-time continuum simultaneously and observe whatever lies outside of it. Observe it perfectly, able to see not only material beings but spiritual ones that science has no means of observing.
So "There is no God" certainly seems like a statement made by a delusional person.
Quote:
Theists also believe that without religion, the planet would descend into immoral chaos. The reality is that a big part of heinous crimes committed against people on this planet across all of recorded history had their roots on religious beliefs, but the ability to distinguish right from wrong does not require any religious beliefs. Religion, throughout history, has been used to control the masses, rather than enlighten them, we have today a perfect example with suicide bombers, long ago crusades, is Islam so different from Christianity?
Don't forget the reality is that atheist tyrants have been responsible for the deaths of over 250 million people in the past 100 years. Far more than all other religions combined for all of recorded history. "Good/moral" and "evil/immoral" simply don't exist rationally in an atheist world view and so any actions can be "justified."
Christianity teaches for one to love and do go to everyone. And the New Testament scriptures plainly state that anyone who claims to know God but who hates or murders is a liar. No Christian has ever murdered anyone. There have been "wolves in sheeps clothing," as Jesus warned there would be, who have done so, but no Christian has done so.
Yes, Islam is very different from Christianity. At least the initial crusades were a response to Islamic invasion of and conquest of lands. Though I'm not Catholic and would not presume to justify every action the Catholic church has carried out as some actions were in contradiction to the teachings of Christ.
@Salamandre
Quote:
Another thing which bothers me is that during the experiences of so called near-death that many people have related, they never talk anything about heaven, god, angels or anything of the sort. Is there some counter used by God, something like "ok you are dead, but not enough dead to show you the goods", or?
Actually, there are accounts of people talking about those things after a near death experience.
The result of my search in google (near death hell) yeilded this as the first result:
Clicky
Quote:
Typical theist behavior. Dodging hard questions by presenting falacies.
It is false to say I have ever dodged anything. If you feel I did not address any question in the post repeat the question. Your claim that theists are delusional is bigoted crap.
Quote:
But then elodin, every atheist in this forum has beaten you in terms of arguments. In other words, no you cannot handle atheists and facts.
Well done elodin, you really deserve a prize for snowing up logic so well. Even OCD patients and Schizotypals cant do better.
Will you ever stop spewing snow about atheists without a shred of knowledge?
Actually, most atheists on this forum thrown out numerous personal insults and continually slander religion and make numerous false statements about the Bible. Those statements are easily shown as false and I have done so quite often.
@Corribus
Quote:
Quote:
SCIENTIFIC FACT, however is, that it is IMPOSSIBLE - eve for God - to know two complementary attributes of a particle at the same time, for example, position and impulse, which means, that it's impossible to get ALL information. Secondly, there are quantum processes in the brain as well, which ultimately means, that human decisions cannot be predicted with 100% certainty either, and in this material universe, that's a fundamental characteristic of it - it's STRUCTURED that way.
Quote:
What total, complete, utter crap. There has been no scientific experiment that has verified what God can and can't know.
No matter what you may think is possible or not possible for God, the question itself is not "total, complete, utter crap".
What is complete crap is claiming it is a scientific fact that God can't know anything as science has established no such thing. Time and time again on the boards I see atheists making claims that science has proved this or that when in fact no such thing has been proved at all.
The original poster did not ask a question or say he was speculating this or that. He stated that it is scientific fact that God can't know....that is what I called complete crap.
____________
Revelation
|
|
Drakon-Deus
Undefeatable Hero
Qapla'
|
|
posted April 14, 2013 11:32 AM |
|
|
Of course we're interested, it was part of his life. And he is an icon.
____________
Horses don't die on a dog's wish.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted April 14, 2013 12:37 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Anyone who says science has proved God could not have taken an existing hominid and added a spiritual dimension to him is simply straight up lying.
Elodin, it is NOT science's job to prove miracles did not happen, miracles by category are unscientific. Put aside evolution, any form of miraculous after-life notion after the brain is decomposed is unscientific. But since your knowledge of methodology is non-existent, we again toss into the the wall of ignorance, an ignorance so dense it presents itself in the form of arrogance. It is not anybody's responsibility to look through every inch of the universe with a torchlight looking for YOUR God. It is YOU in the first place, who proclaims something super-natural exists. Burden of proof is on YOU. Atheism means I have no valid reason to assume God, it does not mean I checked around every corner.
Quote:
Further, saying "God does not exist" means the person himself is claiming divine attributes. To know for a fact that God does not exist you'll need to be able to simultaneously examine every point in the space-time continuum simultaneously and observe whatever lies outside of it. Observe it perfectly, able to see not only material beings but spiritual ones that science has no means of observing.
Look above.
Quote:
Don't forget the reality is that atheist tyrants have been responsible for the deaths of over 250 million people in the past 100 years. Far more than all other religions combined for all of recorded history. "Good/moral" and "evil/immoral" simply don't exist rationally in an atheist world view and so any actions can be "justified."
You can factually see that is BS by looking at the people. Dictators doing this or that has no categorical relevance to atheism. Saying moral values are established by humans, and they have their roots in in the evolutionary process and our intelligence, not a divine force, does not make them less valuable, well maybe in the eyes of a religious fanatic it does.
Quote:
No Christian has ever murdered anyone
Ever heard of the crusades? But never mind, this is too "I come from Neverland" to even answer to.
Quote:
The world's theists far outnumber the tiny atheist cult and it is far more likely on numbers alone the theists are right and the atheists are delusional.
Again, ignoring statistic data that has been linked here showing it's nowhere near a tiny cult and applying to argumentum ad populum in vain.
Quote:
And you have deceitfully taken what I said out of context. Yes, in any discussion about the Bible I can whip you and any other atheists I've ever heard or had a discussion with. I've studied the Bible for longer than you've been alive, likely, I'm not sure how old you are.
No, I only made fun of your whipping fantasy. I couldn't care less about your Biblemania, I've seen people who memorized their holy books completely, so what? As long as you read them guided by blind faith, it means nothing in terms of actually analyzing them.
Your whole post consist of arguments that has been answered time after time, your whole reasoning has been collapsed over and over again, yet you simply dodge all of this by simply pretending the posts do not exist: By pure denial. You do it with a manner as if you proved everything by your self-fulfilling prophecies while in fact all and I mean ALL you do is dodge logic and any valid question or reply. And then you cry out personal attacks, no, personal attacks when people lose their temper. Actually it is not us atheists doing harm to your religion, it is you. Because anybody reading your posts with an open-mind will probably think the effects of Christianity on man is corruptive and degrading.
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted April 14, 2013 01:27 PM |
|
Edited by xerox at 13:27, 14 Apr 2013.
|
As a national socialist, people tell me all the time that the Nazis killed millions of people. But that's not true! Actually, no nazi has ever killed any person! Because when a person who calls himself a nazi kills a person, he is no longer an actual nazi. Genius!
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
|
Drakon-Deus
Undefeatable Hero
Qapla'
|
|
posted April 14, 2013 01:43 PM |
|
|
By that reasoning, neither did the Catholics with inquisition. If a Christian kills a person, he can no longer be called a Christian.
____________
Horses don't die on a dog's wish.
|
|
Salamandre
Admirable
Omnipresent Hero
Wog refugee
|
|
posted April 14, 2013 01:58 PM |
|
|
The question is to which point Elodin considers the church to be the root and the regulator of religion. As it is for now, if you claim being christian and had sin, church will offer absolution after confession. You will not find a single priest arrogantly retort "you sinned, leave this holy ground!" because their "Hippocratyc" rules of conduct praise the forgiveness above all, not punishment. Faith means faith in humanity, not faith in only those who joined your tiny group. But when you believe "shoot then talk" as Elodin so proudly does, it is natural to dismiss anything which may overload you with responsibilities or put you in front if though choices, as forgive or condemn. Condemn is easy, forgiving makes you greater and shows others why faith is a noble way. No need to read the bible to know such basic things.
____________
Era II mods and utilities
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted April 14, 2013 02:04 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 14:06, 14 Apr 2013.
|
|
The problem is Elodin does not say "Christians who killed have sinned." He says, they categorically can not kill. That's like saying Christians do not sin because it is forbidden to sin in Christianity. Which is of course another paradox because then what do you need forgiveness for?
|
| |
|
|
This thread is pages long: 
